Tag: McCotter

You can view it here....

Should it hang until the next election is over? Should we update with fresh scarlet letters from even more recent miserable failures of those who are hanging patiently for all this time? Should we offer a positive spin on their recent accomplishments and then sigh, noting how they really screwed up before, and then point again to the left?

While waiting for some discussion on this, it should be noted that our concern about the debt ceiling being increased has been vindicated.  We were right, and those guys on the left were not. The trillions they added to the burden our children must carry, cannot be voted away as easily as their tenure in congress.  Experience DOES account for something, but it is not an excuse for repeatedly ducking responsibility, and they are indeed responsible for that fact.

Good men who screw up need to admit and own up to it, and offer their mistakes as lessons.  Personally, I see genuine contrition as a character building exercise.

What an opportunity.   While Michelle Bachmann and Herman Cain get to answer questions about whether we should have seen a debt increase. Thad in New Hampshire doing the T-McC streaming not-the-debate show (I have already lost the link.) missing all the fun.

Of course it was a good way to avoid that question:

"WHY did you vote for the debt increase Congressman McCotter?"

If you are from Michigan, have a desire to meet a lot of new people and serve your country, NOW is the time.  A few hard workers with soul are needed in the following districts ... uh  well ALL of the following districts except Congressional District #3 which is occupied by Justin Amash:

"The Budget Control Act trades $21 billion in cuts next year for a debt ceiling increase of $2.1 trillion. That's one penny in cuts for each dollar of new debt. The bill does not seriously address the drivers of the federal government's fiscal crisis. It does not improve entitlement programs.

"It does not include a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. I cannot in good conscience vote for so little reform when so much is at stake.

Again, the Michigan Republican delegation sans one, failed to perform its duty on the most important vote of their lifetimes.  They missed an opportunity to stand for a permanence of fiscal prudence.

MICHIGAN DELEGATION VOTE The complete list here

Democrats
Clarke, N; Conyers, N; Dingell, Y; Kildee, Y; Levin, Y; Peters, N.

Republicans
Amash, N; Benishek, Y; Camp, Y; Huizenga, Y; McCotter, Y; Miller, Y; Rogers, Y; Upton, Y; Walberg, Y.

As for those Democrats who voted no, they wanted even more from Boehner.  However, this president will take whatever rope he has been given and run with it.

The President's unilateral decision to all-but nationalize one of the state's largest companies, brooming its CEO while giving a free pass to other far worse players (who happened to be special interest supporters) doesn't sit particularly well the good people who value things like, oh, freedom, free markets, Capitalism, equality, the absence of double standards and hypocrisy... I could go on.  

You don't like Rick Wagoner?  Fine.  Sell your stock.  Or buy up a bunch of it (its awfully cheap these days) and exert a little shareholder control.  Its up to you because this is still America (though what it will look like three years from now at this rate...).  That's the way our market system works, or did, until late this weekend.

Our own RightMacomb was discussing the President's unprecedented intrusion into Michigan's business Sunday afternoon and by this morning Daniel Howes at the Detroit News has put pen to paper (or finger to keyboard) as well with another MUST READ:

Not since World War II, with the arguable exception of President Harry S. Truman's brief control of the steel industry, has a president exercised such forceful unilateral control over firms in the private sector. And the double-standards? Towering, as if that makes any difference.

What does it say that on the same day President Obama made nice at the White House with the nation's leading bank CEOs -- none of whom have lost their jobs despite sitting on vastly larger sums of taxpayer dough -- the head of the president's auto task force was urging Wagoner to "step aside?"

"There is no standard," Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Livonia, told me. "You cannot look at what happened to Rick Wagoner and draw any policy certitude about what happened to the Wall Street CEOs. How do you reconcile the two images on Friday?"

That's a good question, but if the Congressman is looking for any sort of affirmative response I'm afraid all we'll be able to offer is the sound of crickets chirping.  Crickets and Michigan's freshman Democratic Congressman Mark Schauer who broke with even his own party boss, Jennifer Granholm (a woman whose half-hearted water-carrying for the administration on the issue wound up doing little more than make everyone her look all wet) by sounding his approval of the President's shocking behavior.

The Jackson Citizen Patriot reports:

U.S. Rep. Mark Schauer said today he respects President Obama's decision to oust General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner as a condition to receive more federal aid.

"My top priority is that the president and federal government don't give up on the domestic auto industry," the Battle Creek Democrat said.

Really?  So, if the President moved to void all union contracts and force the UAW to sign a new offer sheet at 40% of the pay and benefits that'd be cool with you too, Congressman?  20%?  Hey, he wouldn't be "giving up" on the industry, right?

And if the President were to come into the 7th District and started firing small business owners who'd been forced to layoff employees because he didn't like the job they'd been doing?

Appreciate you selling your constituents out to satisfy your partisan political interest, though, Congressman.  Swell of you.