Quote Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter View Post
That's a load of equine manure. The "radical" Tea Party faction has been pushing the House and Senate to do the jobs they are assigned under Article II of the Constitution. Their agenda is quite simply to restore a balanced financial picture and planning to the federal government. The Republicans are certainly horrible at messaging; part of the reason for that is that most of the people good at spinning senseless crap with no basis in reality are liberals. Republicans are certainly going to get the blame for any downside but they've taken that for the last 50 years even when the pain was caused by Democrats.

The worst thing that could happen is continuing to cave to the demands of the toddlers following Obama and Reid.
The second sentence of my post is what is repeated everywhere, thats why it went in. That is the message and point that this is reinforcing.

If the goal is really smaller, lower budget government then a budget that has any hope of becoming law has to actually be passed. Everybody with half a brain knows that a bill with "defund the president's signature bill, the bill he'll be remembered for" Will Not Pass. Even if somehow it had enough sweetener to pass the Senate the president will veto any repeal of his signature bill. Even getting the government shut down didn't stop it as it is classed non-discretionary.
Put it in the first version to make a political point, fine. But when it comes back with that section removed send back something loaded with other cuts everywhere. Score a second round of points with all the other cuts. Beating the same dead horse doesn't reinforce your point.
You may well be right that nobody up there wants smaller government. The (R) side sure didn't when Bush was in office and they held the reins, they could have made a difference then. Nobody is willing to to deal with the fact that either there are going to be massive cuts to the entitlement side or massive hikes on the middle class to balance things out.