Don’t you just love it when one of the honorables on Capitol Hill steps down off his or her pedestal to lecture us on how THEY are right and WE are stupid?
Our soon-to-be senior senator Thom Tilli$$$ took to the in-state airwaves today to lecture those of us who still cling to that *sillly* conservative stuff.
The host quizzed Thommy on his vote for the budget-busting scam known in the drive-by media as “The Infrastructure Bill”:
[…] “If you’re upset with me for doing that, you are with the liberal progressives that came to my yard, camped out and opposed the bill because they understood it preserved the filibuster and ends the opportunity for the Green New Deal.
First off, it’s a $550 billion dollar package, what the folks who are opposed to it need to
know is that every 5 years we have to reauthorize the surface transportation plan.
If we don’t do that, then our current spending rate every 5 years goes away.
That’s half of it. The other half of it is $550 billion dollars, that is paid for, that carves out
from the three and a half trillion the Democrats want to pass true infrastructure.
So if you want $9 Billion Dollars of infrastructure flooding in to this state to help us with
roads and bridges, if you want our ports to be upfit, if you want our shorelines to be more resilient for the next storm, then you should like this bill.
But let’s say you don’t like that, you should like the fact that we were willing to vote on a
compromise bill to save the filibuster. If you want us to vote against it, then you
own, what would likely be the nuclear option on the filibuster, federalizations of elections,
the Green New Deal and every other bad policy that Nancy Pelosi would love
Chuck Shumer to pass without a single Republican vote. This is bigger than the
Infrastructure Bill. This is about the institution of the Senate and keeping Democrats
on board with respecting the institution of the Senate.” […]
The long list of scoundrels who have passed through the Senate since its founding have already done quite a number on “respect” for “the institution” of the Senate. Why not make the other side eat the budget-busting and the pork? Why give them “bi-partisan” cover to dig us into a deeper hole?
But Thommy wasn’t done:
[…]”You want to take it in pieces, that’s fine. I don’t have the luxury of doing that. That’s why I stand by the vote and I think over time, it’s a vote that’s going to age well.
It’s this simple. If I listen to my friends who say you gotta vote no against everything, then the Democratic conference, the people that are standing with us to hold the filibuster, are going to say “Guys, you’re not working with us at all.I’m getting hammered from my left and even my center left over time because you won’t demonstrate any willingness to work with a government that is led by the Democrats. ”[…]
Gee, I wonder how many good, honest conservative Republicans are worried about being “hammered” from the left (or even center-left)? That’s why we send Republicans to DC — to fight tooth and nail against statist nonsense. Not hug up to Monty Hall and play ‘Let’s Make A Deal.’
[…] WE LOST LAST YEAR. THEY OWN THE WHITE HOUSE, THEY OWN THE
SENATE, THEY OWN THE HOUSE.
At some point, if we don’t demonstrate to Democrats that will we settle for something less
than we would ever pass than if we were in the majority, then just think through the logic of
that over the next two years. Does anybody honestly believe that even those who are
holding firm on the filibuster right now, if we continue to say no to them, those who
are willing to preserve the filibuster, over the next two years, what would you do? […]
It sounds like Thommy is talking about other people when he references defender of the filibuster. Our founders wanted the filibuster to protect minority rights within Capitol Hill’s upper chamber. Contrary to Thommy’s delusions, they never never never wanted it to be easy to “get something done” on The Hill.
More from Susie’s guy:
[…] We’ve got people that are willing to preserve the filibuster, willing to do the work
to get 60 votes. If we just go and continue to say NO, they’re ultimately going
to say NO to preserving a 60 vote threshold in the US Senate.
That would be devastating and would do irreparable harm.
Kinda like expanding the social welfare “safety net” and the national debt, or busting a bigger hole in the federal budget?
That’s why, as far as I’m concerned, the criticism can come, but it falls on deaf ears. There are bigger issues at play that are more important in the long term for the American People and people in North Carolina.
Right now, we are trying to do everything we can make that three and a Half Trillion dollar
package half of what it is. To make the taxes Half or More. They’re going to pass
something. But we think it creates downward pressure on whatever they will do
with 51 votes. Whatever they do, they can no longer say it’s a Infrastructure Bill because
we passed an Infrastructure bill. Remember, they were calling it human infrastructure
and they wanted to weave in roads and bridges? That ship has sailed.
We actually carved out the segment of what would have been a three and a half trillion dollar spending bill that’s really focused on Infrastructure.
I’ve said to the press, I understand if you’re only thinking about this transaction,
why you’d be opposed to it. If I thought that’s all that it was, I would be
opposed to it. But this is about the future of the Senate.
The Senate. NOT the country. Got that?
The host asked Thommy about criticism he is getting from Rand Paul and other conservatives about his work with Democrats:
I’d ask Rand Paul what his batting average is in the US Senate. Passing legislation to the President’s desk, during a Democrat majority, with a Democrat President. What’s his batting average?
When I was speaker of the House, we overrode a Democrat governor with Democrat votes eleven times. I would be criticized of going short by my friends in my Party of where they wanted to go, but you go find another Legislature that accomplished that in the same period of time. It didn’t happen.
We don’t actually recognize that the numbers are against us.
Look, Rand Paul is a friend of mine. But you know me, I’m a pretty plain spoken person.
Name one major piece of legislation that Rand Paul has gotten passed in his entire tenure in the Congress. Because he’s swinging for the fences.[…]
Thommy also offered up his two cents on the per-mile-driven gas tax contained in the bill:
[…] It’s a component of the bill, that would take 4 to 5 years to implement, when hopefully
we recognize, if we don’t fix this and figure out a way to capture revenue for
electric vehicles, that the federal government is giving $7500 in tax credits to
people who on average make $75,000. We’re going to have millions of electric vehicles,
that are 25% heavier than their combustion engine counterpart,
think Mach E versus the Mustang GT, we’re gonna give a free ride to RICH People
getting tax credits. We’ve gotta figure out a way, it’s not an immediate.
Everybody should read the bill and at least not spend just 30 minutes trying to
understand the technicalities of the bill. It’s a 2 year process to study how to do it.
It’s a 3 to 5 year process to implement it for cars for which the technology would fit.
It’s not like you’re going to be a truck driver and keep an odometer log.
That’s what I mean. People are cherry picking things, if they want any details on this,
Call my office and we’ll read out the details. If you just rely on what you hear on the
Internet, or on the news, you’re not getting the full story.
That’s why I think it’s very important to speak plainly about it.[…]