Debt ceiling debate: van Hollen overmatched against Jordan

This video of Chris Wallace’s interview of Rep. Jim Jordan, (R-OH), and Rep. Chris van Hollen, (D-MD), shows how overmatched Democrats are in the debt ceiling debate. This is the partial transcript of the key portion of the interview:

JORDAN: A couple of things. Think about what the President’s framework is because there’s no specificity to his proposal. Think about his framework. Here’s what he’s saying: All the spending that the Democrats did in the last Congress, the stimulus, Obamacare, their budget, all the spending they did, that we all voted against and that the American people didn’t like, as evidenced by last November’s elections, the President is now asking us ‘Hey, Republicans, vote for a debt ceiling increase even though you campaigned against it and the voters elected you to be against it, vote for a debt ceiling increase, and just to add insult to injury, vote for a tax increase too.

Wallace then asks if he’d vote for the plan if they could get the specificity Rep. Jordan wants. Here’s Rep. Jordan’s response:

REP. JORDAN: First, all the spending cuts happen in the out years. He never gives us any details on what’s going to happen the first year, which is the only year we can make law on. The tax increases are going to happen soon. This is the old Lucy and Charlie Brown with the football. The American people said ‘We’re not falling for that trick again. We’re not going to let you promise spending cuts in the out years and raise taxes now. If these tax things were so bad, well the Democrats controlled the government just 8 months ago, why didn’t they end them then?

That’s the bottom line. Promised spending cuts years from now don’t mean a thing. It says that we’ll raise the ceiling and go on spending happily ever after. That isn’t acceptable.

In November, 2010, voters rejected politicians that wanted to spend too much while simultaneously telling people that platitude-filled speeches just didn’t work. Whether it’s one of President Obama’s platitude-filled speeches or it’s Rep. van Hollen defending one of President Obama’s platitude-filled speeches, they just aren’t what voters are looking for.

President Obama’s platitude-filled are like getting invited to a 3 course gourmet meal, only to find out that the first course is soup, the second course is gravy and desert is jello. While all three things may taste ok, it won’t do more than wake up your appetite. After that type of experience, most people will find a real restaurant where their needs get met.

The entire interview lasts 15:40. Still, I strongly recommend everyone watch it from beginning to end. It’s that much fun watching Rep. Jordan demolishing van Hollen’s talking points arguments.

Technorati: Debt Ceiling, Jim Jordan, RSC, Spending Cuts, FY11, Debate, Republicans, Interview, Chris Wallace, Chris van Hollen, President Obama, Democrats, Election 2010

Authored By Gary Gross Let Freedom Ring Blog

Authored By Gary Gross Let Freedom Ring Blog