Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
The theme of the Sunday News shows this week was fiscal policy--especially that of the tea party.
On This Week, Christiane Amanpour hosted Rand Paul. Amanpour hounded—even bullied—Paul on the specifics of how he plans to cut government spending and the debt when he gets to Washington next year.
Have you noticed that now that tea party favorites are heading to Washington to govern, the mainstream media is changing its attack on the tea party? Rather than deride the tea partiers as radicals, the likes of Amanpour claim, as she did today on This Week, that tea partiers like Paul paint their fiscal policy in broad strokes, and do not give “specifics.”
Well, Paul did give some specifics on This Week, but very cautiously. When pressed by Amanpour on some spending cut areas, he often modified his responses with a variation of “we need to have a discussion of that,” or he gave that line alone as his answer.
But some of the specific proposals he did give were: ban earmarks, freeze federal hiring, cut federal jobs by 10%, and cut the income of federal workers—he noted that he wouldn’t cut pay for soldiers.
However, he did talk about cutting defense spending. “We need a compromise on where to cut spending,” he said, noting that Republicans usually harp on cutting domestic spending and not military spending, while Dems always want to cut defense, but not domestic spending.
Paul indicated that he would cut both—military and domestic. “You have to look at entitlements…you may have to raise the retirement age….You have to ask of every program, can it be downsized, can it be cut, can it be privatized?…National defense is the most important thing we do in Washington,” but there is waste in the Pentagon that must be addressed, he said.
He also said that there needs to be a debate over the question of: "Is our national security still threatened by Afghanistan? Do we need to be there in a large ground war, or could we be there on a smaller basis?”
Amanpour rather unfairly concluded the segment saying, “We hope to have you back and we’ll get more details from you next time.”
**
Chris Christie appeared on Meet the Press and had quite a testy exchange with host David Gregory about extending the Bush tax cuts.
The backdrop of the Bush tax cuts conversation was a discussion about fiscal conservatism, which Christie says was affirmed in the recent election. Republicans were elected to shrink the size of government, he said. If they don’t deliver on that promise, they’ll be “sent out into the wilderness for a long time” and will “deserve it.”
Gregory asked Christie if it’s feasible for the nation to have tax cuts when Republicans want to balance the budget.
In his response, Christie called Gregory out on his biased coverage of the issue. Go Christie!
I’ve been watching you for weeks talking about extending the Bush tax cuts and it drives me crazy…we are talking about maintaining the current tax system for a couple of years…I’m walking the walk in New Jersey, when I said I vetoed the millionaire's tax, I found spending cuts to make up for it….you’re not characterizing this fairly David… [politicians] are not voting for tax cuts, [they’re] voting to maintain the current tax system.
During the panel discussion—during which Gregory interestingly implied that health care was a “war of choice, not a war of necessity”—Ricochet’s very own Mike Murphy appeared. By one turn, he said “I have a bone to pick with Jim DeMint...There has to be some level of pragmatism inside the party leadership,” referring to the lost Senate opportunity in Delaware. DeMint endorsed O'Donnell there.
By another turn, Murphy praised the bold fiscal conservatism of the tea party.
Christie, during the earlier segment, in part agreed with Murphy, saying this of the Delaware Senate race: “I think Delaware was a missed opportunity to have a really great Senator in the Senate and that’s why I supported Mike Castle.”
Gregory wanted to know whether there will be a “showdown” between the tea party and the GOP establishment in the coming months. Watching the Sunday news shows, you get the sense that there shouldn't be. There’s agreement on the critical ends—limited government, fiscal conservatism—and reasonable disagreement on the means used to achieve those ends. That spells debate and, with it, hopefully compromise--not showdown and war.
- Comment (17)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Personally, I'd rather the Republicans stay MUM on what they plan to do to actually cut the budget.
Why on earth give the Drive By Media something to engage in a mantra to prevent what they are planning for 60 days before they take office and are able to start their side of the debate?
You know that's why the Drive By Media really want the specifics now. So they can frame the upcoming cuts in the worst light possible.
Just look at how they refer to Maintaining The Current Level of Taxation as a Cut, with an Inherent Cost.
I'm sorry, but when you Don't Take Something From Someone, you Are NOT Giving Said Item to them!
Edited on Nov 7, 2010 at 8:50amMay '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Yknow, this isn't especially complicated. Just go to 2007 levels of spending and Avada Kedavra, you balance the budget. At which point we can rely on growth to pay off the debt. The citizenry is resourceful and productive.
You'll notice I'm squishier than Rob here (who wants to cut it to 2005). But has the population grown significantly since 2005? No, it has not. Have the wars gotten fiercer or more expensive? No they haven't. Will anyone miss government employees? Government employees, mainly.
The problem is to somehow pass a budget over the veto, as noted.
May '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
David Gregory would love nothing more than a "showdown" between folks at different points on the conservative spectrum. You get the sense that even the densest media figures realize Obama's majestic sheen has faded, so they'd like to talk about GOP squabbling constantly if possible.
All the more reason to cheer for Governor Christie - if conservatism still has to brave enemy waters to spread its message, I can't think of many spokesmen I'd prefer!
Sep '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
I'm a fan of picking a budget from a past year and re-passing it for 2012.(Personally I like 2005 as the starting point because it gives the House some wiggle room to negotiate with the Senate and BO for the 2012 budget.) The House Republicans should say that the 2012 budget is the down payment on their promise to shrink gov't expenditures, etc.Picking a particular past year is the best way for the House to negotiate the Scylla of various Washington Monument-type demagogueries and the Charybdis of "you're not being specific".I saw Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan this morning. Cantor wasn't very impressive; nothing but talking points. Ryan sounded a lot better.
Aug '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Amanpour and Gregory just want someone to show them a bloody axe. Well, they'll have to wait for that a little while. Christie and Paul have the guts to go and play that crooked ball with those chatterers, but you know they are looking for the "cut social security" soundbite. These people are busily camouflaging the third rail and hoping to trip somebody, anybody up get them to acknowledge what we all know. It's going to be bloody and it's going to be deep and it's going to be unpopular. How unpopular is the question and they're sharpening their knives to see just how unpopular they can make it.
Christie should have smacked that smartaleck Gregory right in the hair !
It's starting and the MSM will curiously pick up the skirts of the tea party to check out their privates whenever possible. Hopefully, a modicum of modesty and a good deal of humility will deny them the peek they desire.
Jul '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Who is it that twists Republican arms to make them appear on such clearly biased programs as anything hosted by Amanpour? Governor Rick Perry has got the right idea. He refused to visit any newspaper editorial boards to solicit their endorsements in his last election campaign, seeing it as a waste of time. In light of the invariable hostility of the left wing media, I don't see what the point is of providing them with content for their programs. Perry is promoting a book right now, so he went on the CNN program with Black Socks Spitzer and the RINO woman who poses as a conservative. Did very well indeed. The point is to pick your shots, not go slavering after every invitation the way John McCain does. Now that all hope of advancement are gone, he's back to being the MSM's favorite go-to guy on what Republicans think.
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Kennedy Smith: Yknow, this isn't especially complicated. Just go to 2007 levels of spending and Avada Kedavra, you balance the budget. At which point we can rely on growth to pay off the debt. The citizenry is resourceful and productive.
You'll notice I'm squishier than Rob here (who wants to cut it to 2005). But has the population grown significantly since 2005? No, it has not. Have the wars gotten fiercer or more expensive? No they haven't. Will anyone miss government employees? Government employees, mainly.
The problem is to somehow pass a budget over the veto, as noted. · Nov 7 at 8:48am
Well, 2005 was a good year for me. I'd like, if possible, to repeat it. Although I'll take any budget from 1995-2005, if it comes to that.
But we'd still need to figure out entitlements. The worst, most evil kind of math is actuarial math.
Jul '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Nice article about Rand Paul (and Roy Blunt) in Saturday's WSJ.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704353504575596591626268782.html?KEYWORDS=Rand+Paul
Oct '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
“I have a bone to pick with Jim DeMint...There has to be some level of pragmatism inside the party leadership,” referring to the lost Senate opportunity in Delaware. DeMint endorsed O'Donnell there.
I never followed the Castle campaign that closely, but it seems to be that maybe Castle should have showed some "pragmatism". How pragmatic is it to alienate primary voters? I think Pat Caddell pointed out that Castle completely misread the primary electorate, even saying that he should have "thrown himself" at the tea party over the summer.
I don't know what the strategy should have been, but it seems to me the problem was at least a two way street. Maybe Castle deserves blame for running a terrible campaign.
As for Mr. Murphy, I hope he and his buddies are enjoying the fortune he made spending all of Meg Whitman's money.
Oct '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Everyone keeps focusing on the fact that the tea party Senate candidates fared poorly on Tuesday night. That is not exactly true considering what happened in Wisconcin, Florida and Kentucky.
But what is a clearer pattern is that self funded billionaires and hundred-millionaires all lost. We need to realize that these people may be very rich, but they don't necessarily make good candidates.
I realize that the political consultants can't get as rich off of candidates like Scott Brown, but as Mike Murphy says, let's be pragmatic and nominate candidates that may have a chance to win, not just candidates that can afford high priced political consultants.
Jul '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
tms:
I don't know what the strategy should have been, but it seems to me the problem was at least a two way street. Maybe Castle deserves blame for running a terrible campaign.
As for Mr. Murphy, I hope he and his buddies are enjoying the fortune he made spending all of Meg Whitman's money. · Nov 7 at 11:30am
One factor that hasn't been much discussed about the Delaware primary is that O'Donnell base included a large contingent of single-issue folks who passionately supported her because she was "pro-life", while Castle was "pro-choice".
One might go so far as to say that she wasn't a new-style Tea Party candidate so much as she was an old-style social-issues candidate. But she rode the Tea Party wave because Castle represented so much that the Tea Party loathes.
Edited on Nov 7, 2010 at 11:54amOct '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Kenneth
tms:
I don't know what the strategy should have been, but it seems to me the problem was at least a two way street. Maybe Castle deserves blame for running a terrible campaign.
As for Mr. Murphy, I hope he and his buddies are enjoying the fortune he made spending all of Meg Whitman's money. · Nov 7 at 11:30am
One factor that hasn't been much discussed about the Delaware primary is that O'Donnell base included a large contingent of single-issue folks who passionately supported her because she was "pro-life", while Castle was "pro-choice".
One might go so far as to say that she wasn't a new-style Tea Party candidate so much as she was an old-style social-issues candidate. But she rode the Tea Party wave because Castle represented so much that the Tea Party loathes. · Nov 7 at 11:51am
Edited on Nov 07 at 11:54 am
Yes, but IMO, if there was any year when a pro-choice candidate could win in a Republican primary, it was this year. The candidate just needed to show some interest in making some serious spending cuts.
Edited on Nov 7, 2010 at 12:07pmSep '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
"As for Mr. Murphy, I hope he and his buddies are enjoying the fortune he made spending all of Meg Whitman's money."
That draws the Glenn Reynolds triple: Heh. Ouch. Indeed.
May '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Well, it is California, man, the felicitously named Craig.
Anyway, we have officially found Rob's hot button. Entitlements. Use it carefully, all you children out there.
Oct '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Craig McLaughlin: "As for Mr. Murphy, I hope he and his buddies are enjoying the fortune he made spending all of Meg Whitman's money."
That draws the Glenn Reynolds triple: Heh. Ouch. Indeed. · Nov 7 at 1:32pm
I am feeling bad for making that comment and fear I may have violated Ricochet standards. I am just reacting to something Pat Caddel said on the podcast last month about that campaign. He said Whitman was overexposed, and the campaign was designed to get consultants rich and not necessarily get her elected.
I do think that the issue of incentives in a political campaign is an important one.
May '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Amanpour was brutal this morning. She seems both completely biased and totally inept in this role. Every Sunday morning I watch This Week solely to hear the roundtable with George Will and I find it increasingly difficult - to the point of almost turning off the TV - to put up with Amanpour for the rest of the program. I never thought I would want to bring back the glory years of George Stephanopoulos.
Aug '10
Re: Sunday News Shows Focus on National Debt and Spending Cuts
Amanpour is living out some twisted Oriana Fallaci fantasy where she is Oriana and she's really tough and insightful and probing. Trouble is that when she thinks she's interviewing Saddam Hussein or someone equally odious, she puts the American Center and Right in their place.
Get her to the Paris Match, tout suite !