Rand Paul calls out Republicans for "completely irresponsible" budget

"The hypocrisy hangs in the air and chokes anyone with a sense of decency or intellectual honesty."

Is it safe to say that—by now—Americans are completely fed up with the Kabuki Theater that is politics? Republicans blame Democrats for job-killing policies. Democrats blame Republicans for elderly and child killing policies (because, as we all know, Republicans have a secret desire to kill children and old people).

Here we are, once again, with yet another budget “crisis,” and we faced yet another government “shutdown” mere weeks after the last one. One marvels at the tone-deafness of those in D.C., and how they don’t seem to understand that most Americans are so “over it.”

But, hey, happy days are here again, right? By the skin of our teeth those courageous, hard working public servants in Washington worked and worked so very hard and came up with a magical budget that is oh-so responsible. Well, of course it is, right? The Republicans are in charge of the Legislative and Executive branches, and they are forever complaining about debts and deficits and warning us about how much our children and grandchildren will owe as we kick the can of responsible budgeting down the road. Right?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I’m afraid you’d be wrong. Just like when Republicans controlled those branches during the first years of the George W. Bush administration, they don’t appear to have any inclination toward being responsible.

Don’t get me wrong—tax cuts, particularly the recent Capital Gains tax cuts—are great and spur the economy (as we’ve seen by the myriad companies raising their employees’ salaries and giving them bonuses). But if tax cuts aren’t accompanied by spending cuts (particularly when our spending has been out of control for decades), that is irresponsibility, plain and simple.

Enter Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on the Senate Floor Thursday night.

While I don’t agree with Sen. Paul on everything, he is consistent on the budget and, for that, I am grateful. I can imagine many of his colleagues grimacing as he began to speak—and for good reason.

The senator from Kentucky railed against Republicans and their hypocrisy in putting forth a budget as bloated as a dead whale washing up on the beach. And he is right.

"The reason I'm here tonight is to put people on the spot," Paul said. "I want people to feel uncomfortable. I want them to have to answer people at home who said, 'How come you were against President Obama's deficits, and then how come you're for Republican deficits?'"

In his hour-plus long remarks, Paul noted a few staggering numbers:

  • The budget is 700 pages long. And they got it
    the night before.
  • We borrow nearly $2 million/minute
  • It increases spending 21%!

Twenty-one percent?? What would it be like for you to have an increase in your pay, immediately, of 21 percent? Most of us will never know, since we can’t simply print extra money like they do in D.C.

He shared this anecdote discovered from a recent Department of Defense audit: Last year, you were nice enough to pay $45 million for a natural gas gas station in Afghanistan (which was originally projected to cost $500,000, but, hey, that’s only 9,000% over budget, so, no big deal). Why were American taxpayers forced to pay for this gas station? To reduce their carbon footprint, of course! But guess what? The Afghanis (like most Americans) don’t have natural gas cars. So, you bought some for them! But they also don’t have money to buy the gas. So you are paying for credit cards for them to use to buy the gas from the gas station you bought for them to put in the cars you also bought for them.

But, man, there is absolutely no place to cut!

Indeed, Rand Paul is not the only member of Congress who is opposed to the reckless, dangerous, and I’ll even say delusional spending in Washington. But I’m grateful he took to the Senate Floor to point out the hypocrisy we’re all witnessing.

As the senator neared the end of his remarks, he noted, “no American family lives the way your government does. It’s completely and utterly irresponsible.”

That is completely and utterly true. The question remains: will Americans continue to elect the same people who, year after year, spend us closer to oblivion? Will we still allow ourselves to be made fools of by our “public servants” who come home to you and tout the goodies they’ve brought to your district, assuming that will buy you off so they can continue to live high on the hog with their lobbyist buddies in D.C.?

Will we ever see through it? Will we take our place as the adults in the room, since they are behaving like children in need of discipline? History doesn’t encourage me, but perhaps our increasingly desperate situation will at last cause more people to pay attention and to hold their elected officials accountable. We only have ourselves to blame if we don’t.

At least Ted Cruz held the line and didn't vote for this turd. Oh wait...

The funny thing is the second the democrats get back in power these same people will decry the deficit and start printing charts of the national debt.
Maybe they’ll even revive the Tea party… for a few years. Until they get back into power.

There is no national will to rein in profligate government spending. Everyone wants to protect his space at the trough and make sure the slops keep coming. So politicians fear the political backlash associated with spending cuts and cancelling entitlement programs. It will take an existential crisis on the level of another Great Depression to do anything about it--and even then the historical impulse was for MORE government and MORE spending, not less.


Dueteronomy 28:12 The Lord shall open unto thee his good treasure, the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the work of thine hand: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow.

Read the entire about blessings and cursings.

I cannot agree more. I was STUNNED to see Ted Cruz had voted for this bill. His was the first (and probably last) campaign that I ever donated money to, and I won't be making that mistake again. He should have been standing alongside Rand Paul last night. Instead he was probably crafting his excuse for his intended AYE vote. What a shame.

Albert Einstein had an excellent definition for the behavior of the political class as well as the voter who consistently engage in the same behavior each and every time expecting a different result but each and every time getting the exact same result. That behavior is INSANE. Are they and We ever going tolerant the lesson?

In government at all levels, it is easier to spend than to cut spending. Politicians take the easy way most of the time. I did not hear nor read any discussion about a much more worthy discussion regarding entitlement spending. Or about the non-budgeted spending. It seems the really big spenders come in two flavors; elephants and donkeys share the same stable!

Unless you get more conservative Republicans it is impossible to get a responsible budget passed without a government shutdown. The democrats will always hold the line. People want something for nothing and the democrats and the RINOs will give that to them for votes.

In reading the comments here I sadly see the idea that somehow this travesty can be fixed somehow by the federal government. If only we had "more conservative Republicans", or "politicians take the easy way", or disappointment in Ted Cruz. All of that may be true, but so what? What does that fix? The obvious and clear truth is that the big government problem will never be fixed by big government. The swamp will never be drained by the swamp monsters.

But our brilliant Founders KNEW this would be the case, and they gave us the solution in the Constitution. Article V provides for the STATES to gather in convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. those proposals would then have to be ratified by 38 states, just like every other amendment. So the STATES can propose amendments that the federal government NEVER will. How about term limits for Congress AND for Supreme Court justices? How about REAL and MEANINGFUL spending restraints on the feds? How about anything that reduces the size, scope and power of the federal government? Ideas that the big government will NEVER, EVER consider, no matter who is elected or who is President. Cancerdoc said, " There is no national will to rein in profligate government spending." Oh, but there is doc. The Convention of States project is over 3 million strong and growing very rapidly. 12 states have completely passed our resolution. Legislation has been filed in a total of 48 states. Several more states (including my beloved NC) are set to grow that number this year. So do you want to keep complaining about the problem, or do you want to fix it? its up to us.
www.conventionofstates dot com

The only way that anything will change is for the American people to stand up together in protest over how and on what our "EMPLOYEES" (who seem to think they know best) are spending our money and our freedoms. That could happen if every disenchanted person, no matter what side of the political aisle they are on, put their political leaning aside and stand up together to let our ire be known. But how do you put something like that into motion, especially given the deepening political divide and almost fanatic party loyalty on both sides? If all of us who are fed up with the way our country and our finances are being handled by both political parties would put our differences aside and stand together we CAN make a change. How can we do this? By choosing one day and one time period (of one or two hours co-ordinated to time zones) when every fed up American will stand along our streets and roads, even in the country. They can stand either in their own neighborhoods or (preferably) along major streets holding a flag or placard in one demonstration of solidarity of the American people. We need to demand that those who represent us, regardless of party, listen to US. Large gatherings of people in Washing D.C. etc. are quickly forgotten, but millions of American people standing together at the same time (co-ordinated to time zones) regardless of political affiliation would be tough to dismiss. I don't know how to get something like this started, but I am sure that someone reading this would know how to get it done. Imagine the entire country covered in flags and/or placards all at one time, and how difficult it would be to continue to ignore us.

The best way to get the attention of the people who represent us, and to encourage others to join in what you are trying to do, is to have a nationwide rally against government,government waste, and more and more laws that are either bad for the people or are meaningles yet have negative impact on the people. See my post re a nationwide non-partisan rally that could be a huge wake-up call to those we elect.

My two senators and rep are often in the minority, as they have high conservative ratings. We need to go toward a zero based budgeting process. That would mean some programs would be eliminated. There are fixes meant to be temporary still on the books. There is room to improve in most states, but states with low taxes and surplus balances, make the Convention of States less attractive. The small population states can't afford to give up the electoral college. This year we have to vote out as many Democrats and RINOs as possible.

Balance the budget by cutting spending not raising taxes. Listen to the GAO and inspector generals when money is not being spent as congress intended. Limit the time and money for special prosecutors. Have monetary items of treaties, deals and trade agreements go through the House. Part of the retirement money can pay for restitution or incarceration when convicted of a federal crime. Have steep penalties for those who are filing for false tax refunds. Let some organizations be funded as charities and out of services rendered, but not out of the government. Make companies go through a bidding process, then negotiate. Come up with a plan for those who do not get forty-quarters before retirement or disability. Cut support for countries thas stab us in the back. Put Americans first.

It worked, for a while. That's similar to the Tea Party. It was soon taken over by opportunistic carpetbaggers who used it to make a buck. Then the GOP took Congress and big givernment ceased to be a problem anymore for most center-right people. I like the idea, but we need to realize it's a counter-offensive designed to buy some more time. We simply don't have the troops to win the war.

None of the proposed solutions address the underlying problem. The American voter doesn't want a smaller government. Maybe in theory, but not in practice. I rail on politicians too, but at the end of the day they increase spending because that's what the voters want. If a majority of voters wanted it cut, eventually it would get done. The cycle would break our way and it would happen. Big spenders get rewarded for "bringing home the bacon" by being reelected. New Congressmen, even conservative ones, soon learn that money is the fuel that makes politucs work. You spend money that helps donors, donors fund reeelection and the cycle repeats. A good example of this is Mo Brooks, in Alabama's 5th District. The 5th includes a massive private-federal industry with NASA, Redstone Arsenal, Boeing, and numerous military and tech companies that do big business with the federal government. Brooks is one of the better ones on spending. He was targeted for elimination in the primary, it is rumored because of his failure to get and be gotten for this industry. (He was viewed as vulnerable due to spending most of his campaign funds on the special Senate primary in 2017.) His big name opponent has since backed out, which I assume is because the polls showed Brooks whipping his tail. The point still remains that they go after these guys. I think it's why Cruz voted for it. He wants to stay in with big donors, Trump Administration and stay less hostile to the GOP leadership to position himself for a future Presidential run (my opinion). I think it's a mistake because he's ruining his brand. Without that, he's a less attractive, less likable Marco Rubio. But I thought Trump's candidacy was an actual joke, so what do I know.

Hmmm... Then maybe he shouldn't have supported the re-election of Senate Majority Leader B!tch McCONnell? Just sayin'...

Whatever happened to the "Mac Penny Plan" repeated ad nauseam by Sean Hannity during the Obama Administration? Is elimination of baseline budgeting and a 1% across-the-board budget cut per year until the national debt is paid off really that difficult?!

All of these federal agencies need to be put under Lean 6 Sigma Master Black Belt engineer administrators. That would fix their wagon...