GOP House Leader Blames Democrats for Deficit, Clinton for Energy Policy

[Rose Siding]

"...So far this year, Appropriations Committee Democrats have now requested $26.1 billion in new spending above and the levels outlined in the FY 2007 appropriations bills thus far. For the American people, it provides a clear choice between Republicans' focus on lower taxes and fiscal responsibility and Democrats who are once again proposing tax hikes and more spending."

"Later this week, the House will consider ANWR legislation which will create American jobs by authorizing environmentally safe energy production on just 2,000 of ANWR's 20 million acres. Using 21st Century technology that is environmentally safe, we can create more than a million American jobs, strengthen American energy security, and increase our energy independence. Had President Clinton not vetoed ANWR in 1995, the U.S. could be getting nearly 1.5 million barrels of oil per day from the arctic - an amount equal to the daily production lost in the Gulf after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita."

"While Republicans offer solutions, the Democrats' chronic negligence on energy solutions continues to impact working Americans every day. The Democrats have shown that their energy policy runs on nothing but hot air. They are on the wrong side of the issue of American energy independence with regards to the policy AND politics. Even their supporters in the labor movement recognize that Democrats are standing in the way of increased American energy production."

Hotline

http://www.topsecret.co.il.nyud.net:8090/images/polygraph.jpg

[saltpoint]

1. Let's blame the Democrats for killer bees and malaria, too.

And leprosy. I'm pretty sure Bill Clinton was responsible for that.

[babylonsister]

2. And don't forget bird flu and Poland!

:patriot: :spray:

[saltpoint]

4. LOL!! Hey good morning, babylonsister. Yep. Those damn

Democrats are the root of all evil, that's for sure!

[babylonsister]

9. Yo, Old Crusoe! Their mantra is old and getting tired.

But they beat up on foes so well, and it's a darn good thing it's not transparent!
:hi:

[yellowcanine]

8. Hurrican Katrina also. If Clinton had not allowed global warming....

[redqueen]

3. Accountability? Responsibility?

:rofl:

Not for THEM, silly!

[jedicord]

5. And if God hadn't been so mad at those black people in Louisiana

we wouldn't have lost oil production in the Gulf due to the hurricanes.

Same friggin' logic.

[gratuitous]

6. Wow, does the Bush presidency never start?

But this Republican bullshit must work with some people, I guess.

[GOTV]

11. Yes it does....

... so how do we counter this? What do we tell someone who's heard this talking point? Calling it bullshit doesn't work because, of course we'd call it bullshit.

What's the truth on this issue?

The best I can think of is just to point out that the Republicans control everything and ask how the minority party can force the Republicans to do anything.

[gratuitous]

13. How do we counter it?

Part of the problem is, where do you start? There are so many falsehoods crammed into the space, that's it's hard to know which one to take on first. Fiscal responsibility? The Republicans, in sole charge of the nation's purse strings for the last five years, have run up unprecedented deficits thanks to their irresponsible ways.

Energy dependence? Instead of drilling in ANWR, why don't we simply pass a law that says everything currently coming out of the south end of the Alaska pipeline has to go to the United States, instead of being sold for the highest profit by the oil companies to our competitors (Japan) and enemies (China)? If we're really at war, it's reasonable to ask the oil companies, which have lately posted the greatest profits ever recorded by any commercial enterprise, should be asked to take on a little of the burden in service of the war. Slightly lower profits to enhance our energy security.

No plan from the Democrats? We've got plenty of plans; just no way to enact them through a Republican-controlled Congress where the elephant flies above the eagle. That is, political considerations trump what's best for the country every time.

Study the issues; prepare talking points; use them at every opportunity. Let's face it, given what the GOP has to talk up (an unbroken string of disasters for the country) and what the Democrats have to talk up (practically anything else), whose side would you rather take?

[GOTV]

19. But specifically...

... what about this $26.1 billion?

That's exactly the kind of thing someone will point to to say "See? The Democrats are no better!"

> Study the issues; prepare talking points

That's what I'm trying to do here but what's the quick, pithy response to the $26 billion?

[gratuitous]

25. It's spending on port security

Something that in five years since the September 11 attacks, the GOP has consistently failed and refused to fund. As it is, hundreds of thousands of cargo containers come through our ports every week, and we don't even give them so much as a dog sniff. For $26.1 billion, the Democrats are trying to plug this gaping hole in our security system -- a sum that is less than what has gone unaccounted for in the Iraq war.

If the GOP was as on top of fiscal matters as they say they are, this added security wouldn't cost a dime over what has already been wasted in Iraq.

[GOTV]

26. Awesome! Thank you!

[Qutzupalotl]

15. Here's how to counter it.

Use similar wording back at them, only back it up with specifics and references. PROVE they're hypocrites.

"Republicans have already run up our grandchildren's credit cards, and now they want our great-grandchildren's. The Democratic solution is cutting spending and balancing the budget, something these pork-barrel Republicans don't want to hear."
(We'd get out of Iraq, not start a war with Iran unless necessary, cancel no-bid contracts and generally prevent the handing-over of the treasury to private interests. That's why we're all in the hole we are today.)

"While Republicans offer empty rhetoric, the Democrats offer an Apollo Energy Initiative to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and make us truly energy independent, while reducing payments to hostile countries. The Republicans are on the wrong side of the issue of technological innovations in energy, and continue to support big polluters and the anti-U.S. madrassas. They aren't part of the solution, they're part of the problem. The Republicans' endless spewing of hot air is a major cause of global warming."

[GOTV]

20. But that doesn't address the $26 bil....

Also I don't even think it's accurate. I don't think the Democrats are promising to either cut spending or get out of Iraq for example. I'm going from:

http://democrats.org/agenda.html

[Qutzupalotl]

27. We don't all have to toe the line from democrats.org.

Some prominent Democrats have called for reductions in spending and troop levels in Iraq. During the 2004 campaign, Gen. Wesley Clark proposed cutting the Pentagon budget 25% if elected. He could have done it, too. We certainly could promise these things if we wanted to. It seems like we don't make any promises on things that aren't going to happen anyway, and that's part of the problem. We could be bolder, with new direction, controlling the debate. Instead, we play the Republicans' game on their terms. They say the immigrants are coming, and suddenly we have to respond.

The way out is to offer more solutions, not just spin the same old ideas. Since we are at our debt ceiling, we really have no choice but to cut spending and at least reduce our presence in Iraq.

The $26 billion response: The president launched an unnecessary multi-billion war which has no end in sight. The Republican-controlled congress won't even include the war costs in their bugets, because the figures are so staggering. The Democrats call for a sensible foreign policy. The party that profits most from war is most likely to start one.


On edit: I see you were asking for a quick response, but I was trying to come up with a long-term strategy.

[louis-t]

7. Needs stronger meds

There is no way ANWR would "provide the U.S. with 1.5 million barrels of oil a day." Even if production did get that high, U.S. would only see a fraction of that. What he meant to say is his oil buddies would "receive the profit from" 1.5 million barrels a day.

[Stinky The Clown]

10. I am SOOOOOO embarassed to be a Democrat

Its all **our fault**

Everything wrong with the world is the fault of Democrats.

John Boner is soooooooo right. After all, **he's** a Republican.

[driver8]

12. This is the most ridiculous crap I have read in awhile.

We don't control the House, Senate, Supreme Court, or the WhiteHouse...but somehow everything is the fault of the Dems.

Our "chronic negligence on energy solutions"? That must be because we don't want them turning ANWR into oil fields.

Fiscal responsibility?? Is this article really from The Onion?

[liberal N proud]

14. Even if it was Clinton's fault, why couldn't these magicians turn it around

It has been 6 years, Clinton did it no longer is valid.

[Vickers]

16. "we can create more than a million American jobs"

I thought everybody had a job now? :shrug:

[Golden Raisin]

17. I'm not particularly a fan of Clinton or the Democrats

but when exactly does the statute of limitations for blaming EVERYTHING on Clinton and the Democrats expire? There was a hailstorm yesterday in East Cupcake, Nebraska --- its that spawn of Satan Bill Clinton's fault! My cable conked out --- it's those damn Democrats!

Let's see. The last 5 years the Republicans have had total control of the White House, the Congress and the Supreme Court. ENERGY: Gas at U.S. pumps is at an all-time high. So are Big Oil's profits. That's the Democrats fault of course. NATIONAL DEBT: Clinton left office with a surplus. BushCo has spent money like the proverbial drunken sailor and our national deficit is now so insanely high that it is almost incomprehensible. It will take generations to start paying even a tiny portion of it down. That's the Democrat's fault too.

[zbdent]

18. "Had Clinton not ... 1995" - how about this?

Had Reagan not eliminated funding for alternative fuel research in 1981 so that all his rich buddies could get tax cuts, maybe we would be the ones Japan would be copying, not the other way around . . .

[Sapere aude]

21. Where is the official Dem responce to this?

Has anyone seen it? In this election year are we going to be swift boated without a reply again?

[GOTV]

22. That's what I'm asking...

... we can't snooze here

[Rose Siding]

24. It's a pre-release- He hasn't said it yet. He's the one responding to dems

and their blistering attack-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2642568&mesg_id=2642568

[Norquist Nemesis]

23. I didn't realize the Dems have been in charge for so long! n/t