By James Kwak
Eric Cantor, House Republican Majority Leader, said the Republicans will demand spending cuts in exchange for the votes necessary to raise the debt ceiling.
Eric Cantor, member of Congress, voted for:
- The 2001 tax cut
- The 2003 tax cut
- The 2003 Medicare prescription drug benefit
- The 2010 tax cut
In other words, of the big five budget-busting measures of the past decade, the only one he didn’t vote for was the 2009 stimulus. In other words, he had the opportunity to vote for $3.1 trillion of the 2011 debt, and he voted for 75 percent, or $2.3 trillion — just like most Republicans who were in Congress for those five votes.
For explanation and sources, see this post.
The Baseline Scenario 
How would you expect someone to vote who believed in cutting taxes and cutting spending?
Would that pattern of votes make them a “Deficit Hawkoprite”?
Of course, Rep Cantor can always argue that his prior indiscretion shouldn’t stop him from doing the “right” thing now . . .
“cantor…oh cantor, this paroxysm off-key cantor
this diatribe lapping at his own saliva awash in undidactic aphrodisiac revenge
as this ambidextrous `right, writes off in ambiguity settling upon the crossroads of fermented discourse
sipping the bloodthirst of injustice for all
intoxicating what parasitic instincts sober yet of humanities shallow republican virtues
this cantor”
You said a lot with just a few sentences and four short points. And 75% is such an easy number to remember…
I’m starting a 3rd party that doesn’t rely on taxes to run things, it just borrows the money. Oh wait…they already do that. Damn.
A hypocritical politician? In the Republican party? No WAY! Stop the press!
They should call the Republicans the Goucho Marxist Party. The party of “No” which if you are old enough remember Groucho’s show ,where he always began the show by saying “Say the magic word and win $100.” The magic word for the Republicans is no and when they say no, the contributions start pouring in from corporate interests.
The trillions in socialized debt will have to be paid from the backs of the poor and middle-class, to preserve the kleptocracy.
short, right to the point, very forceful.
Eric Cantor is just doing his job. His job is to misgovern, just like his 434 compatriots on the Hill. It is certain that whatever happens regarding raising the debt limit, it won’t serve the taxpayer, whether it is Cantor, Behner, Pillosi, or anyone else working on it.
Conservatives like Eric Cantor don’t conserve anything, and they aren’t hypocrites. “Conservative” is a word used to describe adherents of the “strict father morality,” as discussed by George Lakoff in his book, “Moral Politics”. It is an Old Testament philosophy most recently promulgated by Dr. James Dobson (of Focus on the Family fame):
1) The father alone is a moral authority who knows right from wrong, and is strong enough to enforce it.
2) The child is required to be obedient to the father.
3) Physical punishment for disobedience will result in the child learning internal discipline.
4) Internal discipline will lead to self-reliance and success.
5) Those people who are not self-reliant and or successful are bad, and should be punished.
6) Those who are successful are good, and should be rewarded.
Thus, those individuals (and corporations) who are financially successful are good, and deserve to keep all of their wealth.
The punishment for the bad comes in next: the conservative “fiscal hawks” use the increased budget deficit to reduce all social funding for those who are not successful – Medicaid and other health care, local school funding, unemployment and retraining expenses; it really doesn’t matter because all of these expenses are “nurturant” (the opposite of strict father morality) and a high priority to Democrats. Cutting social programs will put Democrats on the defensive, and make it easier for Republicans to pass other legislation important to their donors – rich individuals and large corporations eager to increase their share of wealth and power.
winningprogressive.com
. . do you mean “hawkocrite” ?
I would expect such to vote against war and general Pentagon spending. Against the energy and farm bills too. (Also against the recent FDA expansion bill.) That’s just for starters on all the corporate welfare and parasitic statism which anyone who believed in cutting spending and smaller government would vote against.
Wow — Political Polemic in Poetry.
I am duly impressed!
Cheers!
JzB
Wrongo, Bayward. And let’s just skip the false equivalence — OK? As bad as Dems are, Rethugs are infinitely worse, and have been since Nixon.
Nobody’s job is to misgovern. Each of them has a master to serve.
Cantor’s job – like that of almost all modern Rethugs – is to serve his trans-national corporatist masters.
Cheers!
JzB
Mark –
While that is all true, it doesn’t prevent Cantor from being a hypocrite.
Cheers!
JzB
nope I bet he means hawkophite which rhymes with coprophite. As in ‘corporation’ …
Our “representatives” in both houses of congress serve their corporate donors, not the people of the land.
Go ahead rookie cynic make my day! Just what we need a third party of the misinformed. You should try reading recent American history more carefully, crosscheck your sources or both. The G.W. Bush administration borrowed the money for their two tax cuts (1.3 trillion and 356 million) which they lavished disproportionately on the favored richest Americans – Bush’s friends. They also fought the war in Iraq on the cheap with funds borrowed from China and other European countries. Moreover,if you took the time to become better informed and check the facts, you would also find that those administrations that ran up the largest deficits by far since Jimmy Carter was president include none other than Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W.Bush – not one Democrat among the lot – just the facts – read em and weep! Things ain’t always what they may seem,especially for those who are easily impressed and buy into the conventional wisdom.
Sandi,
Your point is well taken, but don’t you think you’re over generalizing a bit. I hope I’m not presuming too much about your political leanings but I have a few thoughts on this matter coming from my perspective as a staunch liberal – a label I am proud to wear.
A number of the most progressive members of Congress who strongly supported the public option during health care reform, who also supported strong regulation of the derivatives market and downsizing banks that were considered “too big to fail” admirably,stood their ground against the intense pressure of Wall Street lobbyists who spent millions on this battle. Although they did not win this time, they laid the groundwork and made some inroads among their colleagues that may well pay off in the near future.
One of the Senators I find most admirable, a man who is as open, direct and as straightforward a man as I know of is Vermont;s Senator Bernie Sanders. He is widely known for his honesty integrity and for always being on the side of the American people. To me, Bernie Sanders epitomizes what a U.S. Senator should be – he has always been a courageous advocate on behalf of the people he represents. You may recall, he was the lone Senator to filibuster in opposition to extending Bush’s tax cuts for the rich; he refused to accept what he knew would open the door to the Republican assault on Social Security,Medicare and Medicaid. Ohio Senator Sherrod Browne and Delaware’s Senator Ted Kaufman are two more representatives that come to mind who do stand up against the special interests and are high on my list. Congressman Anthony Weiner of New York is another admirable and eloquent voice of the people. If you follow politics closely like I do, you will find that there are a number of others. Like you I’m very skeptical, but that alone won’t get us very far in addressing what is wrong in this country or in curbing special interests and restoring our democracy. In all likelihood, I think it will take several decades of persistent dogged determination and dedicated effort by activists, as it did during the progressive era, to turn the tide in favor of truly democratic reform. We all have to get busy and pitch in, its the only way it will happen and I have no doubt that it will – too many Americans have had it with business as usual.
You’ve got me all wrong. You’ve painted me as a rah-rah Republican. I am not.
The Democrats and Republicans are both big tax and deficit spenders. I was just pointing that out in a sarcastic way. I dislike Bush. I dislike Obama. The Rubin-ites have run the show behind the scenes for the last 20 years. The party in power doesn’t matter. Things stay the same other that a few paltry changes here and there.
I’m saying that both parties a deficit spenders, despite what they say on camera.
You need to learn to take a joke.