When 'change' means everything stays the same

[redcliffsw]

-Mychal Massie

Yes, we witnessed a dramatic congressional upheaval November past with Republicans reclaiming the House and the majority of Democrats who did win having done so by running on right-of-center platforms.

But what has really changed? And pursuant to Republican promises of change, I am not remotely comfortable with what I see. There's certainly enough reason not to trust them. Additionally, I'm uncomfortable because the same players with abysmal track records are still in charge on both sides of the aisle.

For all the spittle-sprayed pontification (most notably by Republicans) following the November elections, one of the first acts of business was to pass a trillion dollar spending bill called a tax-cut compromise.

Granted, I may be looking at things simplistically, but why does it cost a trillion dollars to extend tax cuts that were already in place? It's because, just as the bill was labeled, it was about compromise, i.e., we'll give you the tax cut but it will cost the American people a trillion dollars – and those on our side said OK. They compromised, and we got the short end of the stick.

The first Republican act of business after the November elections was a dramatic fanfare aimed at ending earmarks. But included in the tax-cut bill were approximately 6,000 earmarks, many of them added by members (and senior members at that) of the same party calling for an end to them.

Now the 112th Congress is about to be seated, and I ask again, what has changed? How are the interests of the people going to be served? My feeling, until proven otherwise, is that they won't be. We still have Republican Party elites and pundits blaming the tea party for Republicans not taking control of the Senate. I heard Dana Perino, on "Fox and Friends," call Sen. Lisa Murkowsky, R-Alaska, a good conservative. Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer championed uber liberal Mike Castle, R-Del., even as G.W. Bush championed Arlen Specter, as they continue in their attempt to marginalize Sarah Palin.


Read more:  http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=247061#ixzz1ABNaexPK

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=247061