Brain Dead Dem Congressman Thinks Spending is Too Low

In case you were wondering why we are doing nothing to slow our inexorable march towards Greek-style insolvency, look no further than those who are vested with the power of the purse string.  Yesterday, Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ) suggested that we are not spending enough “to invest in research and development, education and infrastructure that would allow America to compete in this increasingly global economy.”  He proved his assertion by comparing our deficits to….the WWII era!

According to the Office of Management and Budget, America’s deficits were more than twice as large in the 1940s as they are today. In 1943, the deficit was 30 percent of our economy’s size; in 1944, it was 23 percent. Today, it is less than 9 percent. As for publicly held debt, it was significantly larger as a share of our economy in 1944 than it is today.

Hmmm, what do you think was going on during 1943-1944?  Oh yes, that WWII thing.

Obviously, we had a massive military buildup – the most unprecedented in world history – which was very costly at the height of the war.  But those were temporary annual deficits.  Immediately after the war, our deficits returned to historical lows.  Consequently, our total gross debt dipped well below 60% of GDP during the next decade, and eventually, under 35% of GDP.  Just three years after the war ended, total federal outlays were just 11.6% of GDP; today’s outlays are 24.5% of our economy.  Even in 1944, at the height of the biggest war on world history, our total debt was 97.6% of GDP, lower than our current 100.5% debt-to-GDP ratio.

Now if Rep. Holt wants to compare our spending levels to the WWII era, let’s take defense and war spending out of the equation for a moment.  In 1944, defense spending accounted for an astounding 86.6% ($79.1 billion) of total federal outlays ($91.3 billion), while non-defense spending accounted for just 13.4% ($12.2 billion) of the budget.  In other words, non-defense spending in 1944 was pegged at 5.5% of GDP ($219.7 billion).

In 2012, total defense and war spending will check in at $662.4 billion, or roughly 18% of our estimated $3.7 billion budget.  That means that our non-defense spending will come in at 20% of our GDP (roughly $15.092 trillion), compared to 5.5% in 1944.  This year, our defense spending will account for 4.4% of GDP compared to 36% in 1944.  So if we want to engage in absurdity and use WWII spending as an accurate yardstick, why not reduce our non-defense spending to WWII levels, and cut spending by over $2 trillion?
The irony is that the military is the only expenditure that Democrats want to cut, yet they are using WWII – when defense consumed almost our entire budget – as a paradigm for auspicious government “investments.”

It’s a shame we can’t ship these loons off to Greece.

Cross-posted to RedState.com

The Chickens of Debt Ceiling Deal Have Come Home to Roost

Today, the Treasury Department announced that Obama will ask for another $1.2 trillion increase in the debt ceiling, carrying our national debt to $16.394 trillion by next year.  This will bring Obama’s total share of the debt to $5.77 trillion by the end of his tenure, far more than any other president.  Unfortunately, there is not a darn thing we can do about it.  Yet, it didn’t have to be this way.

Looking back at this year of legislative battles, there is no doubt that the debt ceiling deal wins the award for the most insane capitulation of the year.  In July, Obama, who had already accrued $3.6 trillion in debt, was faced with the embarrassing prospect of asking for yet another increase in the debt limit.  That was our opportunity to extract transformational concessions from Obama in return for the ability to issue more debt.  That was our time to push for Cut, Cap, Balance, or at the very least, a plain balanced budget amendment.

Not only did GOP leaders strike out and squander the entire opportunity, they ground into a double play.  They gave Obama the ability to raise the debt ceiling another $2.1 trillion, just enough to spare him from another embarrassing debt increase right before the 2012 election.  What did we get in return?  Our reward for giving him the increase was, in fact, a twofer gift to Obama.  We were “rewarded” with the creation of the 18th debt commission and the Budget Control Act, which completely abrogated the Republicans budget, thereby obviating any leverage we would have during the remaining budget battles of the year.  After all, how could we go back on our word?

At a time when many “prominent” conservative publications were blithely cheering on this disaster, we detailed nine reasons to oppose the deal.  Among other things, we noted that the deal would encourage notional spending cuts, preserve Obamacare, destroy the Ryan budget, engender deep cuts in defense, and grant Obama a lifeline, all the while, failing to prevent a credit downgrade.

Sadly, my premonition has come to fruition.  After enjoying a free ride on the first $900 billion of debt, Obama now has the authority to issue another $1.2 trillion of debt.  He has blown through the first ‘tranche’ of the debt ceiling increase at a rate of almost $6 billion per day.  Now, pursuant to the debt deal, only a resolution of disapproval from two-thirds of both houses of Congress can preempt such an increase.

Those who promoted this debt ceiling scheme last July with oleaginous columns and speeches, while denouncing its critics as “intransigent,”  should hang their heads in shame.

What Does $40,000 Mean to You?

Obama's pathetic $40 Social security tax cut is nothing compared to his $40,000 debt increase


Obama has been running around all day making a fool of himself as he promotes his $40 Social Security tax cut.  Yes, the tax plan that will create a new class warfare Social Security Taxable Wage limit in order to accommodate his totally unworkable two-month extension.  Obama has even set up a new web page asking people “what $40 per paycheck would mean to you.”

Republicans should respond by setting up a web page asking every taxpayer to explain how a $40,000 increase in their share of debt will affect their finances and those of their grandchildren.

You see, while the media has been focusing on Obama’s two-month Social Security tax cut, they have ignored another big story.  Our national debt has surpassed 100% of GDP.  With Q3 GDP revised downward, our economy now stands at $15.081 trillion.  Our total federal debt is over $15.14 trillion.

How much of that debt is Obama responsible for?

When Obama took office, the total federal debt stood at $10.6 trillion.  Obama’s share of the debt increase is roughly $4.5 trillion.  There are approximately $112.7 million taxpayers.  That means that the individual share of the Obama debt is about $40,000.

So while Obama is bragging about his $40 tax cut, he is obfuscating the fact that he is increasing more entitlement spending along with the package.  This will only increase the $40,000 share of debt for every taxpayer.

We know that $40,000 is not much for the commander-in-chief of all class warfare, but what does it mean for you?

Annual Deficit Will Absolutely Top $1 Trillion in 2012

“It's going to take a lot more than a few accounting gimmicks and unrealistic assumptions to cure our budget ailment”

Yesterday, the media was agog with glee over reports that CBO is projecting an annual deficit "below $1 trillion for the first time in four years."

How did they arrive at that conclusion?

This projection was extrapolated from the Treasury Department's report of the first two months of the fiscal year budget, which, as explained by the CBO's monthly budget review, pegs the current deficit at $236 billion — $55 billion less than at this time last year.  The media is conflating this monthly report with an outdated long-term CBO budget outlook, which projects only a $973 billion deficit for FY 2012.

You might be wondering how we can achieve such a reduction when there are little or no spending cuts.  After all, even the infinitesimal $6.6 billion in discretionary cuts will be cancelled out by additional emergency spending.  Additionally, mandatory spending programs will only continue to grow this year.  Yes – revenues are expected to climb; they have increased 7.1% from last year, but that would only reduce the deficit by $163 billion, when extrapolated on an annual basis.

Well, like most optimistic economic and budget projections, this one is garbage in, garbage out.  It also involves shoddy work on the part of the media.

Republicans Throw Their ‘Pledge To America’ Under the OmniBus

This afternoon, the House passed Harry Reid’s first minibus appropriations bill (Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, Transportation-HUD), which contains record levels of spending for Food Stamps, WIC, and international food aid.  It also contains $2.3 billion for disaster spending, which is excluded from the budget caps.  Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers promised today on the House floor that spending will not exceed the $1.043 trillion spending cap.  Well, the extra $2.3 billion in disaster spending allowed him to do just that.  Moreover, if they continue to adopt the higher spending levels of the Democrats, the only way to stay below the cap will be to cut defense appropriations.  Worse, this bill has a provision, which was inserted into the conference report, to expand the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Last year, as part of their ‘Pledge To America,‘ Republicans promised to downsize Freddie/Fannie.  They also promised to end the practice of minibus bills.  Today, they violated both pledges.  Yes, we know that mantra; it’s a minibus bill; not an omnibus.  But the reality is that House Republicans never had an opportunity to vote and amend two-thirds of the bill.

Fortunately, more and more members are hearing the voice of the grassroots.  Even though the ‘don’t call it an Omnibus’ bill passed 298-121, it was opposed by 101 Republicans, and only passed with the help of Democrats.  In the Senate, Jim DeMint and David Vitter have already blocked Harry Reid from passing a second minibus bill.  So what is the response of the political appropriations establishment?
This, from CQ:

The Supercommittee of Super Insanity

As the tumultuous year of 2011 winds down, Congress will be facing a number of crucial budget deadlines.  Aside for the supercommittee deadline to find $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction (over ten years), they must contend with the December 31 expiration of three provisions of the 2010 tax extenders deal; payroll tax cuts, unemployment benefits, and ethanol subsidies.  Now the Washington Post is reporting that the supercomittee might attempt to extend unemployment benefits and payroll tax cuts as part of the final deal.  The rubber is meeting the road, and conservatives need to mobilize rapidly.

By my count, the supercommittee's final report gives us five issues to deal with; oppose the three extensions, fight tax hikes, and push for real spending cuts (cuts that will make 2013 spending levels below 2012 levels).  Over the past year, the GOP has caved on virtually every budget battle.  They are now slated to pass every one of Harry Reid's appropriations bills – bills that allocate more funds for programs than requested by Obama; that jettison all Republican policy provisions; that expand the role of Freddie/Fannie.  Is there a single issue where GOP leaders will hold the line and coalesce around a coherent conservative policy?

Thanks to the inane and insane debt ceiling deal, which many other conservative outlets supported wholeheartedly, we are confronted with a double-edged sword.  We must either accept tax increases and nebulous spending cuts as part of the supercommittee report, or we face sequestration – a process that will kill the military and cut funding to healthcare providers, as well as the border patrol.  And guess which programs are exempt from the automatic cuts?  Yup – Social Security, Medicaid, S-Chip, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), public housing, Food Stamps, SSI, Child Nutrition, refundable tax credits, Pell Grants, and federal employees' retirement.  Those programs easily amount to over $1.4 trillion, and when coupled (as it should be) with the inviolable veterans’ programs (roughly $140 billion), we have about 55% of the non-defense budget (roughly $2.85 trillion) off limits.

Now Boehner is offering to compound the problem by passing an extension of the payroll tax cut and 151 weeks of unpaid unemployment compensation.  How do they plan to pay for that?  With $700 billion in phony war savings, of course.

Stop Harry Reid's Egregious Budget Power Grab

Don't let the fox guard the hen house

Senate Democrats (and all other Democrats, for that matter) have not passed a budget for over 900 days, yet they are planning to come late to the game and commandeer the appropriations process.  After delaying the process for over two years, Harry Reid, with the help of some Senate Republicans, is planning to expedite appropriations bills in a way that disavows standard procedures of transparency.  House Republicans must rebuff this insidious plan.

When Republicans assumed control of the House earlier this year, they completed the job that Democrats refused to do regarding the FY 2011 budget.  Additionally, they passed a concurrent budget resolution for FY 2012, and proceeded to complete half of the 12 annual appropriations bills.  When it became clear that Senate Democrats were dithering with roll call votes and speeches, and had no intention of even passing a budget resolution, Republicans held back the remaining approps bills, in an effort to wait for the Senate to get its act together.

Now, instead of coming to the table and passing the 12 individual appropriations bills along with a budget resolution, Harry Reid is seeking to circumvent the process by using “Minibus” bills.  He rightfully perceives that a 12-bill omnibus package would be politically unpopular, so he is planning to bundle the 12 appropriations bill into four minibus bills, containing three spending bills apiece.

Why does Reid want to use this awkward and obscure process for appropriations bills?

Obama's Government Behemoth

This chart detailing the trend-line of growth in government workers speaks for itself.

(Courtesy of Veronique de Rugby of the Mercatus Center)

A Conservative Look at Perry's Economic Plan

When Herman Cain proposed his 9-9-9 plan, many conservatives became energized, despite their misgivings with the fine print of the plan.  It wasn’t so much the details of the proposal that excited the base, as most conservatives intuitively recoiled from a consumption tax; it was the boldness of the plan that resonated with them.  Cain’s 9-9-9 brought some excitement to a race that was defined by a frontrunner who offered 160 pages of banal fluff.  Nevertheless, his plan was too flawed to be utilized as a viable rallying cry in the general election.  Perry appears to have proposed both a viable and bold economic plan, albeit with some inevitable flaws.

Here is a synopsis of all of the major components.

Tax Plan

The centerpiece of the plan is a flat individual income tax of 20%.  This would serve as a vehicle for massive economic growth, as it offers a huge tax cut for job-creators who currently pay as much as 35%.  However, unlike the traditional Steve Forbes flat tax, this proposal would keep the deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions, and state and local taxes for those earning less than $500,000 (over 99% of taxpayers).  It would also offer a standard deduction of $12,500 per household members.  Consequently, a family of four earning $50,000 would have a zero tax liability.  Update: Phillip Klein reports that the employer tax exclusion for healthcare would remain until Obamacare is repealed.

Moreover, the entire system would preserve the option to remain under the current tax code.  As such, the 47% who have zero tax liability and the 29% who have a positive tax liability (as a result of the EITC and Additional Child Tax Credit), would have no incentive to move to the flat tax.  Accordingly, there would be two shortcomings to this plan:

Barack the $15 Trillion Man

A truly historic presidency

Amidst the hype concerning the so-called era of austerity and budget cuts, the national debt is rapidly marching towards the $15 trillion milestone.  As of late last week, the national debt stood at $14.94 trillion.  For those of you keeping score, that number has grown by $646 billion since the debt ceiling was raised on August 2, as part of the great bipartisan Budget Control Act of 2011.  In other words, the debt has increased by over $8 billion per day during the past 11 weeks.

Let's put these numbers in historical perspective.

Barack Obama likes to blame all of our economic woes on his predecessor.  The burgeoning national debt is no different, as he blames its precipitous rise on the Bush tax cuts.  Well, President Bush and his merry band of big-government conservatives were anything but budget hawks; nonetheless, it took them 92 months – almost the entire 8-year tenure – to accrue $4.3 trillion in debt.  Obama has accumulated that much debt in just 33 months.  Put another way, it wasn't until 1997 that we amassed as much debt as Obama has in 2.5 years.

There is also another grim, but often overlooked statistic of Obama's empire of debt.

The national debt consists of two components; debt held by the public and intra-government debt.  The debt held by the public is the sum of the treasury securities held by those outside the federal government, with the lion's share owned by foreign countries.  The debt held by the public currently stands at $10.2 trillion.  The other component, the intra-governmental share, is owed to other federal agencies and accounts, most prominently, the non-existent Social Security Trust Fund, as well as accounts holding pensions for military veterans and government workers.  That share of the debt currently stands at $4.73 trillion.

The Handouts in the Tax Code that Nobody Wants to Discuss

The forgotten "30% club" that makes money off the tax system

For years, Democrats (and Republicans) have surreptitiously created dependency by manipulating the tax code.  Liberals often refer to handouts as tax cuts, and tax cuts as handouts to the rich.  To that end, they have perpetuated a travesty in which millions of people are able to obtain welfare payouts without ever applying for them.  Most people don’t even realize that they are receiving handouts because they view them as “tax credits.”  Accordingly, all efforts to eliminate these handouts are viewed as insidious tax increases.
These handouts are better known as refundable tax credits.

While most (conservative) commentators focus on the fact that 51% of tax filers paid no income taxes in 2009, the more egregious fact is that 30% of filers had a negative income tax liability.  Over 95% of these handouts came from the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC).  As part of the Stimulus, Obama created a third refundable credit; the Making Work Pay Tax Credit.

Here are the relevant statistics for those refundable tax credits in 2009 (CRS report):

Republicans Should Stop Reauthorizing Stuff they Denounced

There is an old adage that defines insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results.”  What’s worse than insanity is hypocritical insanity, which may be defined as doing the same thing that your opponent did over and over again, while expecting different results.  Unfortunately, that is an apt description of the House GOP leadership of late.

During the 2010 elections, Republicans railed against profligate spending, Obamacare, and growing dependency from things like the Stimulus.  Now, they are extending and reauthorizing many of those offensive policies.  Last April, they continued the entire Democrat 2010 budget with a CR for FY2011 that cut outlays by a miniscule $352 million.  This week, they plan to pass a continuing resolution for FY2012 that will authorize more discretionary spending than their own “Ryan budget” by $24 billion.  This will pave the road for passage of an omnibus mega-bill in November – the very sort of reckless budgeting that they lampooned throughout the Pelosi years.

Last week, Republicans passed the 22nd short-term extension of surface transportation funding and the 8th stop-gap FAA reauthorization bill.  Their tepidness to pick a fight over their own transportation bills has led them to reauthorize Pelosi-era spending levels, along with wasteful public transit and beautification projects that are forced upon the states.  Additionally, they are on the cusp of paying Obama ransom for holding three free trade agreements hostage, by reauthorizing the Trade Adjustment Assistance – a superfluous unemployment handout to Big Labor.  We must also be vigilant of attempts by leadership to pass parts of Obama’s Stimulus 2.0.

On Wednesday, Republicans will be confronted with another opportunity to reauthorize a welfare program at current levels.  Sadly, it appears that leadership will pass it under suspension – without firing a shot.

Obama’s Fuzzy Stimulus Math

Obama proposes 36% cut to Social Security revenue

Let’s forget the fact that Obama’s entire Stimulus 10.0 is a counterintuitive proposal that doubles down on the very failures that precipitated this speech.  Let’s also disregard the fact that enshrining unemployment insurance as a permanent handout will perpetuate unemployment.  And more union-induced, short-term money drops on infrastructure will do nothing but stimulate traffic jams.  Let’s focus purely on the very numbers that the administration has offered –numbers that would undoubtedly be revised upward, if the plan is passed.

Total package – $447 billion


- 50% payroll tax cut for every employee, dropping the rate from 6.2% to 3.1%= $175 billion
-Obama also proposed cutting the employer payroll tax in half on the first $5 million of a firm’s payroll in 2012. About 98% of firms have payrolls of $5 million or less.= $70 billion
-National infrastructure bank = $10 billion
- Pork project handouts to unions for roads, rails and bridges= $50 billion
-An unprecedented extension of unemployment insurance benefits to be extended for another year, beyond the 99 weeks= $62 billion.
-Handouts to public school teacher unions, even though we already spend more per capita on education than any other country=$35 billion
-Refurbishing schools, a responsibility of local government=$25 billion
-Handouts to community colleges=$5 billion
-Rehabilitate vacant property=$15 billion


Despite the steep cost, Obama claims that it will all be paid for.  How will he pay for it?

Total Federal, State, and Local Spending Higher than Ever

The Mercatus Center at George Mason University has a great chart showing how all government spending is at a record high.  It has topped 35% of GDP:

They are Mortgaging our Future

So how much indebtedness has each household incurred as a result of the career politicians?  The Heritage Foundation has the answer in their weekly chart:

OK, Obama, Repeal the Entire Payroll Tax..But Save Social Security

After Labor Day, Obama plans to unveil his highly unanticipated jobs plan.  Much like his first jobs plan, this one will include massive stimulus handouts to special interests, prodigal infrastructure spending (as much as $556 billion), unprecedented extensions of unemployment benefits, and more welfare transfer payments.  Concurrently, he will inveigh against "rich" job creators and offer a healthy dose of vapid rhetoric regarding regulatory reform.  However, there will be something new – something more appealing to the skeptical electorate; extending the one-year cut in payroll taxes.

Obama intuitively knows that his failed Keynesian policies have been checkmated, and will no longer resonate with the public.  Accordingly, he plans to one-up Republicans in their own playbook, by offering a tax cut.  He will request that Congress renew the payroll tax cut for another year, keeping the employee's share of the tax at 4.2%.

While conservatives support any and every tax cut they can achieve, Obama knows that they are tepid regarding the payroll tax holiday.  Unlike most other broad-based, universal taxes, the payroll tax is used to fund a specific expenditure, and perhaps, the most important one – Social Security.  As Congressman Jeb Hensarling observes, “not all tax relief is created equal.” If we fail to collect such a whopping sum of the tax that purveys the trust fund, won't we bankrupt Social Security even further?  At a time when Social Security Disability Insurance is already running dry, Obama plans to bankrupt the old age trust fund by another $120 billion.

Oh, whoops, I forgot; there is no trust fund.  It has been run like a Ponzi scheme all along.

CBO’s Latest Budget and Economic Outlook is Unrealistic

 If Obama's policies are the baseline, this outlook is way off line

The latest CBO budget and economic outlook is using baseline assumptions that are as realistic as flying unicorns.  Although they project a decade of mediocre growth and moderate deficits, even such a dismal projection is a pretentious view of reality.

On the budget side, CBO’s baseline outlook portends a $1.284 trillion deficit this year, and $3.487 worth of deficits over the ten-year budget frame, from 2012-2021.  The ten-year deficit predictions assume that the annual deficit will dramatically drop to $265 billion in just two years, and remain below $300 billion for the rest of the decade!  The previous baseline outlook in March foresaw a $1.4 trillion deficit in 2011 and $6.7 trillion in deficits for the subsequent ten years.  Even the March outlook was a lowball figure because the report presumed an unrealistic improvement in economic output, dramatic spikes in revenue, long-term record low interest rates, while obfuscating the costs of Obamacare all along.  The updated baseline outlook makes those assumptions on steroids.

The CBO gets their unrealistic budget estimates from predictions of economic growth that run counter to all of the current economic reports.  In turn, the robust unicorn economy will rapidly increase revenue, while decreasing spending on anti-poverty and unemployment programs.  CBO is predicting GDP growth of 2.3% this year, even though it has only grown by 0.8% for the first half of the year.  Additionally, they are predicting 8.5% unemployment by 2012.  Then, from 2013-2016, CBO is predicting an average of 3.6% GDP growth and 5.3% unemployment!  No wonder they predict revenues to rise to 20.2% of GDP – near historic records – by 2014.

For some perspective, compare those numbers to the estimates by other economists.  JP Morgan is predicting 1.3% GDP growth and 9.5% unemployment by the end of next year, while Goldman Sachs is predicting 2.1% GDP growth and 9.25% unemployment.

$500,000 of Green for Green Jobs, Red for the Rest of Us

It certainly pays to go green.  Well, at least until the greenbacks stop flowing – and bankruptcy kicks in.

Last year, the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Chris Horner estimated that the $30 billion green handout in the stimulus bill cost taxpayers roughly $475,000 per job created.  According to the Wall Street Journal, that’s quadruple the cost of creating a job in a nonsubsidized private firm.  It turns out that Horner was right on the money, even for non-energy related “green” jobs.

Yesterday, Fox News reported on the results of a tree planting stimulus program in Nevada – and it’s not pretty:

In 2009, the U.S. Forest Service awarded $490,000 of stimulus money to Nevada’s Clark County Urban Forestry Revitalization Project, aimed at revitalizing urban neighborhoods in the county with trees, plants, and green-industry training.
According to Recovery.gov, the U.S. government’s official website related to Recovery Act spending, the project created 1.72 permanent jobs.  In addition, the Nevada state Division of Forestry reported the federal grant generated one full-time temporary job and 11 short-term project-oriented jobs.

Supporters of the program claim that there was an unspecified amount of jobs created from “Spanish-language training for Hispanics in the landscaping and tree care industry.”  After all, these are probably jobs that Americans won’t do anyway.

The Entitlement Leviathan in Numbers

We need bold free-market, liberty-promoting solutions from our POTUS candidates.

Immediately prior to breaking for the August recess, Congress passed a bipartisan agreement to cut spending.  Well, sort of.

Leaders in both parties got together to do something evil and stupid; they agreed to the largest increase in the debt ceiling, without solving our debt problem.  They cut discretionary spending by $6.67 billion for FY 2012, from $1.0497 trillion to $1.043 trillion.  That's a bit more than half a percentage point.  Worse, discretionary spending (budget authority) only accounts for roughly 28% of our projected $3.7 trillion in outlays for FY 2011.  So we cut about 0.6% of 28% of our federal budget for next year!

But, fear not; the best is yet to come.  The mandatory entitlement spending reforms will be tackled by the super committee.  The only problem is that a committee with such luminaries as John Kerry, Patty Murray, and James Clyburn – will never cut a dime from mandatory spending.

Where does this leave us?

Here is a brief overview of our giant entitlement/dependency/welfare state, which if left unreformed, will lead to insolvency, engendering public riots to the degree that we have seen in Europe this year.

Conservative Confronts McCain for Attacks on Tea Party

Remember when John McCain read a Wall Street Journal op-ed on the Senate floor impugning the motives of tea partiers who opposed the Boehner debt plan.  Yes, the same debt plan that failed to preclude a credit downgrade, while punting all of the major cuts to a committee that will never cut anything - except defense.  Well, he is now taking some heat for those remarks at home.  Here is what a tea partier had to say to him at a town hall meeting: