Democrat Senator Harry Reid Won’t Let the Senate That He Controls Vote on Democrat President Barack Obama’s Fiscal Cliff Offer
December 5, 2012 - 9:01 pm
President Obama sent Treasury Secretary Tim “Turbo Tax” Geithner to the Hill to pitch a fiscal cliff deal to Republican leaders. The offer consisted of $1.6 trillion in tax hikes, more federal spending under the president’s sole control, and unilateral authority granted to the president to raise the debt ceiling whenever he wants. He wishes to spend our money at will, without the “drama” of consulting Congress as the Constitution requires. Actually, according to the Constitution, spending begins with Congress.
Republicans rejected the president’s offer. Actually, they laughed out loud at it. Because it was asinine. The United States is running massive deficits and needs to cut spending dramatically. Obama’s offer was not serious. It was a poke in the eye to Republicans, intended to make them walk away from the fiscal cliff negotiations in a rage.
Today, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell proposed that the Senate should vote on Obama’s offer. It is, after all, said to be Obama’s serious position. The Democrats control the Senate. A vote should be a slam dunk for them.
A fair, factual and honest media that is interested in informing the public would run this story non-stop, and grill White House spokesman Jay Carney about it at the next press briefing.
We’ll see if any of that happens.
Sen. McConnell noted what Reid’s blocking action means.
If the President’s proposal was made in good faith, Democrats should be eager to vote for it. So I’m surprised the Majority Leader just declined the chance for them to support it with their votes.
I guess we’re left to conclude that it couldn’t even pass by a bare majority of votes, and that they’d rather take the country off the cliff than actually work out a good-faith agreement that reflects tough choices on both sides.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we had a mainstream media that was interested in doing its actual job, not constantly covering for the malignancy that the Democratic Party has become?