Posts tagged deal
Lobbyists Cheer Boehner and Ryan for Expanding Government in Deal
There is a clear line which has been drawn in the dirt of Washington DC. On one side there are the lobbyists, the #oldmedia, and the establishment political machines. On the other side are the people calling for a truly smaller government.
The thought that government would shrink, even a government which is as bloated and debt ridden as our own, is beyond the pale for those whose business it is to extract wealth from taxpayers. That’s why the lobbyists in Downtown DC have cheered the budget deal.
Think about it. A large part of K Street has built a career on buying the GOP, and now the Tea Party is just going to take over the place? Who do these small government people think they are anyway? This is “our town.” This is our party, and frankly the party has been rocking for decades. So long as government grows everyone can get a piece for themselves–everyone in Washington DC anyway. Why would anyone want to stop this? Principals are great and all, but we are here to get paid! Principals are for poor people.
And that is what they think.
Grassroots conservative groups have fired back. Club for Growth has responded by pointing out, “Corporations are some of the biggest seekers of welfare in this country.” Heritage Action for America, meanwhile, has commented, “The fact that K Street is applauding confirms that the deal was bad, and Speaker Boehner’s comments confirm conservatives’ worst suspicions about Washington — that the game is rigged.”
Image credit: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org
About Nick Sorrentino
Nick Sorrentino is the co-founder and editor of AgainstCronyCapitalism.org. A political and communications consultant with clients across the political spectrum, he lives just outside of Washington DC where he can keep an eye on Leviathan.
The White House artfully pushed back Thursday on a report in an Israeli newspaper that claimed the U.S. offered Israel high-tech weaponry like bunker-busting bombs and refueling planes in exchange for a pledge to hold off on attacking Iran until 2013.
Press Secretary Jay Carney, asked about the article at the daily briefing, said “there was no such agreement proposed or reached” in meetings President Obama held — without appearing to comment on what other officials might have discussed.
“We have … high-level cooperation between the Israeli military and the U.S. military, at other levels with other agencies in their government and our government, but that was not a subject of discussion in the president’s meetings,” Carney said.
Defense officials, though, told Fox News that no “sweeteners” were offered to the Israelis during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit this past week.
One senior Pentagon official said “no promises were made, no deals were struck, but weapons were discussed — as you would expect in a meeting with the defense secretary.”
The report in the Israeli paper Maariv came as Iran’s nuclear program and the possibility of a strike by Israel dominate the discussion in Washington and Jerusalem. Obama earlier in the week used a press conference to urge the international community to allow more time for sanctions to work — he repeatedly has cautioned against the “loose talk of war” in Washington.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said in an interview Thursday, though, that the Pentagon “absolutely” is preparing possible military options for a strike on Iran, in a rare public acknowledgment shortly after Obama met with Netanyahu.
He also noted that a U.S. strike would be more effective than an Israeli one.
Lawmakers are making a last-ditch effort to put together $3 trillion to $4 trillion in deficit reductions to clear the way to raise the debt limit, a congressional Republican leadership aide told Reuters.
The aide also said leaders want to be able to “show progress” toward a deal by 4 p.m. EDT on Sunday, which would be before Asian financial markets open.
The aide said negotiators are looking at a “two step process” for the deal, but the aide would not provide details other than to say that no revenues would be part of the package.