DeMint to Newbie Fiscal Conservatives: Gird Your Loins


so frugal he doesn't even have a desk

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal today, exhorting last night's victorious Tea Party candidate(s?) to hike up their pants, gird their loins, or otherwise prepare the lower halves of their bodies for a fight—and go boldly to Washington with their fiscal conservative mandate in mind. They're going to need fortifying because, as DeMint notes:

Many of the people who will be welcoming the new class of Senate conservatives to Washington never wanted you here in the first place. The establishment is much more likely to try to buy off your votes than to buy into your limited-government philosophy. Consider what former GOP senator-turned-lobbyist Trent Lott told the Washington Post earlier this year: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them."

Here's how he characterizes the stakes:

Congress will never fix entitlements, simplify the tax code or balance the budget as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests.

As pleased as I am to see Rand Paul rolling up those Capitol steps, I fear DeMint could have stopped after the word budget.

More DeMinty freshness here.

NEXT: Anti-Health Insurance Mandate Passes in Oklahoma, Arizona, Fails in Colorado

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Congress will never fix entitlements, simplify the tax code or balance the budget as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests.”

    As long as Congress critters view stealing for their districts as their top priority, nothing will get fixed. Why should he have stopped at budget?

    1. Those if us down here in the Norfolk area of Virginia have no idea what you’re talking about.

      1. Especially since the military seems to own the entire Hampton Roads area lock and key!

        No politician on the Virgina coast can so much as dig in her butt without the Navy’s say so!

    2. I think he just meant that finishing the sentence with “as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests” was unnecessary since that will always be true.

    3. Congress will never fix entitlements, simplify the tax code or balance the budget as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests.


  2. The first order of business for John Boehner will be to make sure Rand Paul isn’t assigned to the Senate Banking Committeee. *pets tin foil hat*

    1. No doubt using the super secret communications tunnel between the House and Senate chambers.

      1. Alex Jones confessed to me it was built by Jewish bankers.

    2. Might be hard considering Boehner’s in the House and Rand Paul’s in the Senate

  3. Congress will never fix entitlements, simplify the tax code or balance the budget. Full stop.
    Sounds right.
    I’m happy Rand Paul got elected. Heck, even the election of Kaisch in Ohio is something I don’t hate. But I really don’t have much hope anything changes. Perhaps they’ll prove me wrong.

    1. I don’t know dick about Kasich, but I’m very happy to see Strickland lose. Too bad the forest elf Kucinich won, though.

      1. I actually like Kucinich.

        I know, I know, he’s an idiot, but I think he’s an honest idiot – the only honest man on the left in Congress. I figure they should have at least one, as a mascot.

        1. I like his wife better.

        2. Me too, but c’mon. The guy needs to be frolicking in an enchanted forest somewhere.

          1. That’s why he has the politics he does – he’s waiting for his unicorn to return and bring him back to the magic land he left so long ago.

        3. Well, we do need someone as our ambassador when the ETs land.

      2. Show me where on the doll Ted Strickland touched you, Warty. But seriously, has he been that bad (for a Democrat)?

        1. This. I voted against Strickland in 2006, and I”m glad Kasich won, but Strickland wasn’t horrible for a Democrat. He was pleasantly pro-gun.

        2. Not particularly bad, no. But when in doubt, be glad when the incumbent loses.

    2. Yeah, despite all of the Dem handwringing, I don’t expect the new House to do anything aside from gridlock. Our biggest fiscal problems that are looming will continue to be unaddressed, and it’s not like a Republican House can do more damage to civil rights than the Obama and Bush administrations have already done.

  4. candidate(s?)

    If Rubio counts, there are two.

    He’ll probably suck.

    1. He’ll probably suck.

      Yup. That’s why I voted for Snitker, who, in great Libertarian tradition, got .5% of the vote.

      Of course, according to the media, he didn’t exist, so perhaps that’s not surprising.

      1. What do you expect in Floriduh. Here in Libertopian State of Georgia our LP candidates pull at least 3-4% in state-wide races.

        1. You don’t have the AARP nation in your backyard.

  5. It’s good to see Rand Paul won his senate seat. That’s the only race that gave me any hope at all this cycle.

    1. Yes. And Prop 19 is final proof, as if anymore were needed, that California has no redeeming qualities.

  6. Something like 113 out of 129 Tea Party candidates won last night, for what it’s worth.

    1. Angle was a disappointment. I really wanted her to win for the lulz. I’m actually glad that O’Donnell got the Team Red nod in Delaware. Even though she lost the general election, it’s better to have a bearded Marxist in the Senate than the scumbag Castle.
      McMahon had no chance and the Murkowski machine in Alaska was just too much apparently for even Palin to overcome, but that’s still a bit up in the air.

      With the # of House seats TP candidates won, I still think this election gives us the opportunity to convert more big-gov teat-suckers to our fiscal views.

      1. Yeah, what’s up in AK? Is there a recount or something?

        1. They count the write-in votes, but not who they’re for. If someone wins by more votes than there are write-ins, they can’t change the outcome so they go straight into the incinerator without even being looked at. Since there are more write-ins than votes for 2nd or 3rd place, now we sort out who they are for and start counting.

          MURKowski will probably win, but it’s still not a sure thing. Last Wednesday or Thursday, a local talk show host convinced 160 people to run down to the election office and register as write-in candidates. MURKowski’s people almost had a huge collective aneurysm.

          Remember: You can’t spell “Murkowski”, without “murk”!

  7. The usual song-and-dance will occur. The Republicans will “cut” some agency’s budget, meaning that instead of a 20% increase they “only” get 19.999%. The Repubs will do a big endzone dance about how much they’re “cutting spending”, and the Dems will wail that the agency’s budget was “cut to the bone by those heartless teabaggers”. And people will be dumb enough to believe it all.

  8. Patton: Major, are you the executive officer here?

    Major: Yes Sir!

    Patton: You’ve got four hours to break through to that beach or I’ll fire your ass too!

    Newly elected fuck-tard members of Congress: Take heed. Cut. Cut in the sense that it means to real people, not your dip shit inside the beltway, or at every fucking state capitol in the nation, manner of thinking. Else, we’ll fire your asses in 2 years, along with those that were spared this time around.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.