Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) compared House conservatives to a flea Friday as rhetoric in the spending fight intensified.
Schumer, who has been criticizing Republicans all day, said in a floor speech Friday that conservatives were the flea controlling the dog, which he said in this case is a federal government that could shut down at midnight.
“What we have here is a flea, wagging a tail, wagging a dog,” said Schumer, chairman of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee.
“The flea are the minority of House Republicans who are hard right, the tail is the House Republican caucus, and the dog is the government,” Schumer explained. “That flea is influencing what the dog does ... and it is sad.”
Schumer for more than a week has been arguing that Tea Party conservatives will be to blame if there is a shutdown.
“When either party goes to the extreme they don’t do the right thing,” said Schumer. “My experience is they lose politically, but much more importantly they do what is wrong for the country substantively."
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, said he doesn't regret reporters overhearing him telling Democratic colleagues that Republican budget cuts should be painted as "extreme."
Schumer and Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., sparred on just where the Tea Party political movement stood in relationship to the American people, in an exclusive political debate on "This Week."
Schumer stood by the remarks he made when he was apparently unaware his microphone was open to reporters.
"I have no problem with reporters hearing that," Schumer told anchor Christiane Amanpour. "I said a few hours before [the call] on the floor of the Senate. I've said it on this show. The Tea Party is the group standing in the way. They are extreme," he insisted.
Schumer and the Dems are a joke.
I think when they trash conservatives it only serves to energize them.
REP. THADDEUS McCOTTER: I'd like to start, Mr. Speaker, by thanking my Democratic colleagues this morning for disabusing me of an affliction.
When I woke up, I found that I had a hankering to listen to Led Zeppelin, and I couldn't figure out why. This has happened before, usually when I leave the TV on at night and they run one of them Rolling Stones, '70s, 'buy it now before it's more expensive or in the dustbin' ads.
So, I was walking over here and I'm like, 'Wow, is it because there's been a communication breakdown between the parties?'
It's possible. It's possible.
I said, 'Is it because one of the nice senators is wearing a cashmere sweater?'
It's possible.
But no, it was sitting here today that I realized why I wanted to listen to the melodious strains of Page and Plant, Jones and John Bonham. It's because for the Democratic Party the song remains the same.
Once again, seniors and children wake to the hysterical, frightening visage of specters of gloom and doom - Democrats.
Once again, we are regaled with the Democrats' entitlement reform plan. It is called 'Do nothing, spend everything, go bankrupt, benefits - bye-bye.'
We continue to see a party that does not understand you cannot lift an economy when it is crushed beneath the weight of big government.
We continue to see a party ideologically zealous in spending your tax dollars on Planned Parenthood to the point where they would shutdown the federal government to do it.
And we continue to hear the fundamental crux of the issue of a potential government shutdown:
The Democratic Party will shut down the government so they can spend more of your money. The Republican Party is committed to keeping the government open and spending less of your money.
In fairness, it is not just Led Zeppelin they remind me of, because the reason we stand here today on the precipice of a government shutdown is because they did not do their work when they had total control of the United States Congress last year. They could not even pass a budget, let alone finish these appropriations which we are still dealing with well into April, let alone lay out a coherent strategy to do so when the parties changed power in this House.
No, the song remains the same, but the American people recognize the song and dance. They will not be fooled. They know that the major change that we see before us today in the fight over government spending is a very simple one, and a very simple choice.
It is the difference between bankruptcy and solvency. And the Republican Party stands for solvency and for liberty.
It’s alarming that a bill that funds our troops and could likely pass both the House and the Senate has been termed as a “distraction” by the White House. No one wants to see the government shut down, but Republicans are committed to ensuring that our men and women in uniform serving in Afghanistan, Iraq, and around the world will be paid if that happens. The White House is directly jeopardizing that.
It's obscene that Democrats would be willing to play politics with our troops serving around the world, fighting and dying.
Obama vows to veto H.R. 1363 – Department of Defense and Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011.
The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 1363, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes. As the President stated on April 5, 2011, if negotiations are making significant progress, the Administration would support a short-term, clean Continuing Resolution to allow for enactment of a final bill.
For the past several weeks, the Administration has worked diligently and in good faith to find common ground on the shared goal of cutting spending. After giving the Congress more time by signing short-term extensions into law, the President believes that we need to put politics aside and work out our differences for a bill that covers the rest of the fiscal year. This bill is a distraction from the real work that would bring us closer to a reasonable compromise for funding the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011 and avert a disruptive Federal Government shutdown that would put the Nation’s economic recovery in jeopardy.
...It is critical that the Congress send a final bill to the President’s desk that provides certainty to our men and women in military uniform, their families, small businesses, homeowners, taxpayers, and all Americans. H.R. 1363 simply delays that critical final outcome.
If presented with this bill, the President will veto it.
It's ridiculous for Obama to talk about "distractions" when he failed to pass a budget last year.
What "distracted" him and his Dem comrades then?
Obama and the Dems need to take responsibility for their failure instead of engaging in fearmongering and silly whining.
Forget all this talk about giant “spending cuts” of $6.2 trillion in Congressman Ryan’s budget plan. That’s music to my ears, but it’s also based on Washington’s bizarre budget math – i.e., the screwy system where politicians can increase spending but say they’re cutting spending because the budget could have grown even faster.
What really matters is how much money government is spending this year compared to how much money will be spent in subsequent years. Using this common-sense benchmark, let’s look at two competing proposals.
According to the new numbers released today, Congressman Ryan’s budget plan will result in government growing, on average, by almost 2.8 percent annually over the next 10 years.
President Obama’s budget plan, by contrast, would increase the burden of government spending by an average of nearly 4.7 percent each year.
This chart compares the two budget plans. Because Chairman Ryan does not let spending grow as rapidly, cumulative spending over that period will be $6.2 billion less than it would be based on the President’s plan. That’s an impressive amount of money that taxpayers will save if Ryan is successful, but it’s not a spending cut.
I'd like those Leftists insisting that Ryan's plan contains "spending cuts" that are harsh and extreme to explain what's so harsh and extreme about a plan that allows the "budget to grow faster than inflation, which is projected to average less than 2.1 percent annually over the 10-year period."
Being responsible should not be labeled "extreme."
