Rachel Maddow Supports 'Shrinking and Streamlining Government' - Who Knew?!
By Jack Coleman | January 18, 2012 | 13:51
I haven't been this surprised since that gal turned out to be a guy in "The Crying Game."
MSNBC resident schoolsmarm Rachel Maddow is full of surprises, isn't she? Just the other night, she said something that surely had Americans across the nation spitting out burgers, beverages and baby food (video clip after page break)
Maddow was describing President Obama's proposal to consolidate the Commerce Department and five other bureaucracies to eliminate -- ready for this? -- 1,000 jobs over the next decade through attrition. That's a whopping total of one hundred jobs a year, folks -- out of a federal workforce of 2.1 million employees.
After telling her audience how she has "a crush on NOAA" -- I kid you not -- along with the postal service, NYC subway system and -- again, no kidding -- Amtrak (Maddow and Michael Dukakis comprising the sole members of its fan club), Maddow said this about Obama's apparently not-so-obvious election year ploy --
Now, I don't know how the people at NOAA feel about potentially moving. I don't know about how all those various offices and their public servants feel about being reorganized like this. But from the outside looking in, this sort of reorganization does seem rational. At least the idea is, right? Shrinking and streamlining government to make it make more sense to the people who need to use it to get stuff done.
Yikes, what a mouthful. Wouldn't it be easier to say shrinking government makes sense? Especially now when it takes fully a quarter of our GDP to feed it, nearly that much in percentage terms above its pre-crash norm of 20-21 percent going back three decades.
OK, so it isn't quite Maddow parroting Reagan from his '81 inaugural -- "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem." Even so, it's a start. As the old Jedi saying goes, every journey of a thousand light years begins with a baby step.
Predictably, Maddow could not accurately describe how GOP leaders responded to Obama's bold plan to whittle government --
Republicans, naturally, have no idea what to do with this development. Republicans have been so busy screaming that President Obama must shrink government, so busy alleging that he's maniacally devoted to growing government whenever he can, that now that he is trying to shrink government, they've reacted by being sort of suspicious and not happy but they're not sure why they're not happy.
House Speaker John Boehner's spokesman released a statement today saying, "Given the president's record of growing government (Maddow adds here, "Not sure what he means there, they just use this as an epithet"), we're interested to learn whether this proposal represents actual relief for American businesses or just the appearance of it."
Sorry, Rach -- that wasn't an "epithet," this is indisputable fact. Uh, weren't you just saying that streamlining government makes sense? Maddow then cited Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's reaction through a spokesman -- " ... after presiding over one of the largest expansions of government in history, and a year after raising the issue in his last State of the Union, it's interesting to see the president finally acknowledge that Washington is out of control."
Here's Maddow on McConnell's response --
Mitch McConnell's spokesman put out a statement calling this development "interesting" but still accusing President Obama of growing government -- while he's proposing shrinking it!
Once again, Maddow confuses accusation with actual fact. All in dutiful service of a president who considers Maddow a soulmate, schmoozing with her more often than any other left-winger in media, The Daily Caller reports.
- Jack Coleman's blog
- Login or register to post comments



















Comments
So far the only evidence of
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 1:57pm.
So far the only evidence of 'shrinking government' is Boy Blunders talk of downsizing a business-oriented agency, and, of course, what he is doing to the military. Don't look for too much in the way of 'savings', however - I'm sure that he will take the money and put it into some 'civilian corps', or some government-sponsered 'business', or maybe just into another slush fund.
And I don't see ol' Purple Lips going after the EPA, or TSA, or IRS, and any of these other behemoths............
Killa
Submitted by rockyracoon on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 2:04pm.
You stole my thunder. I was thinking the same thing. Butch would certainly support cutting our Armed Forces.
Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.
That would be "civilian corpse," Killa.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:09pm.
Only a liberal would call reducing the number of federal employees in six behemoth agencies by 1000 over 10 freaking years, a huge cost saving reduction in government expense!
I'm not great in math but I think that comes out to 100 employees a year over the next 10 years.
The only thing that the RBFSOB is going to reduce, and is in the process already, is the US military, and the US congress. He will do away with congress, just as he is now, by just ignoring them, doing what he pleases, and counting on them not to have the balls to do Shiite about it. During his next four year reign, he will simply dismiss most of them and send them home if they are lucky.
He is in the process of reducing the military already by forcing senior officers who don't much care for him to retire over administrative trivia.. What do you want to bet, the guys getting promoted are more, shall we say, predisposed to do as the RBFSOB commands.
We are in serious trouble, folks, if this RBFSOB gets four more years to complete his takeover of the country.
Don't ever think that it can't happen here, because it is already in motion.
Bubba
Submitted by Model850 on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 4:24pm.
He will do away with congress, just as he is now, by just ignoring them, doing what he pleases, and counting on them not to have the balls to do Shiite about it.
Not that anything will come of it but I emailed one of my senators, Democrat Mark Warner, and challenged him on his silence over the recent "recess" appointment. I didn't send the same to Jim Webb because he's retiring anyway, and I hope the Republicans will gain his seat.
Here is what I wrote to Warner:
Sir:
As President Obama has the all-important (to you) (D) after his name I am not surprised that you have remained silent regarding his recent recess appointment, despite the fact that the Senate was not in recess. Need I remind you that the pro forma sessions being called during that time is a tactic used by your majority leader, Harry Reid, during the Bush administration. The difference being President Bush actually respected those sessions and did not unilaterally decide when the Senate is or is not in session.
Though not surprised by your silence I am nonetheless disappointed that you can so easily abrogate your responsibility to "advise and consent" based solely on the party affiliation of the current occupant of the White House. I can only imagine the criticisms and complaints we would be hearing from you if a Republican had done this. It is sad to see my elected representative so willingly put party above country and his duty to obey and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Now that the precedent has been set -- the president arbitrarily can decide when the Senate is in recess -- it will be interesting to see your reaction when a Republican president cavalierly sidesteps Congress to suit their agenda. Before you argue the move was necessary due to the "do nothing obstructionist" Republicans in the Senate let me remind you that despite years of Democrat control that body still has not produced a budget, perhaps its most important responsibility. I would argue it is the Senate Democrats who are "doing nothing."
As I said I expect nothing to come of it.
You're right.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 8:09pm.
You won't get an answer, but God bless you for taking it to them.
We all need to do the same, and more.
You think I'll get any
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 8:28pm.
You think I'll get any results if I write a letter like that - living over here in the People's Republic of Hawaii, which is part of Asia?? The 'birthplace' of the Messiah??? We've got Daniel Inouye - who will have to DIE before his seat opens up (a la Ted Kennedy) and Dan Akaka - who I think is going to retire this term, but there isn't a chance in hell that any Republican or Conservative will take his seat - in the Senate. And we've got a couple of idiotic morons in the House too........including our ex Lt. Governor, who may be stupider than Doobie Whatsername Schitz OR Mika Bratkowski. Hell, our current Governor is that sawed-off little cretin Neil Uber-Commie..........who was good friends with Boy Barry's parents
Plus, I wouldn't want them to know my email address - I'm THAT paranoid these days!!!
Whenever I hear Maddow's voice I shrink.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 2:08pm.
I believe the medical term is 'retractile testicles.'
That unfortunate young man is
Submitted by eolon on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 2:16pm.
That unfortunate young man is never going to find a wife with an attitude like that.
.::.
Oh well...
Submitted by chuckshick on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 2:20pm.
I suspect that no one heard her say this, other than shut ins and those sitting in the MSNBC lobby who can't change the channel on the tv hanging on the wall.
Maybe my inverted namesake
Submitted by poseA on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 2:29pm.
Maybe my inverted namesake can clarify the GOP's suspicious hesitance.
http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop1.cgi?4&TheScorpionandtheFrog
Madcow
Submitted by mmilesll on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 2:43pm.
This woman needs to get a job on Current TV-she would have more viewers
If the Emperor Of Waffles
Submitted by celator on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 2:57pm.
If the Emperor Of Waffles wants "shrinking government", then Maddow wants that also. If the EOW wants huge, gigantic, megasized, instrusive government, that's what Maddow wants, too. If the EOW wants Maddow to shave her head and bay at the moon at midnight in the middle of Times Square, that's what Maddow will do, and she'll do it with a smile.
That's how to read her remarks.
Who'da thunk it?
Submitted by KyWriter on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 2:57pm.
Madcow is all for shrinking government, just like Obama. Exactly what is the White House serving when Rachel drops by for tea and snark?
"I don't know how the people
Submitted by kg on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:22pm.
"I don't know how the people at NOAA feel about potentially moving"
I do. They have always hated falling under the Dept of Commerce. It never made any sense.
"DumbAssity of Dope"
Really??!!!
Submitted by c5then on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:21pm.
eliminating 100 jobs a year out of 2.1 million can really be considered shrinking government???!!! That's a rounding error.
But in the next 3 years the monstrosity known as Obamacare is slated to create 17,000 jobs in the same government, although different agencies.
Part time Congress with term limits! - No more professional politicians. Let's start rebuilding the Republic!
Obama's foreign and domestic policy is run by liberal pundits
Submitted by OxyCon on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:37pm.
Fareed Zakaria is his de facto Secretary of State and Maddow is his domestic policy czar.
I'd actually be less surprised if Maddow WAS a guy.
Submitted by gopcongress on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:37pm.
RE: "I haven't been this surprised since that gal turned out to be a guy in "The Crying Game."
I'd actually be less surprised if Maddow WAS a guy than if she truly believed in smaller government.
Follow me on the silly bird thing-a-ma-jig: http://twitter.com/gopcongress
Madcow Maddow
Submitted by NVRAT on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 4:48pm.
Probably wants a smaller govt because Obama said he wanted to combine some agency's. But, every one should make sure that what ever Obama wants is NOT a Mission to consolidate power of the Government such as combining the Dept of Interior with the Dept of Commerce. Our founding fathers were concerned with the Power of Commerce within the states and the Obama salmon statement is a innocent statement that carry`s very dire warnings. Beware of anything Obama wants.
13k new gov't jobs under Obama
Submitted by Phryj1 on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 7:39pm.
According to the Chris Matthews show, I might add.
Epithet indeed. And they claim Maddow is super smart? I've yet to see any proof of that.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
According to Chris Matthews....
Submitted by almostacowboy77 on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 8:39pm.
1000 people would constitute a 25% reduction in the number of federal employees! He said there's only 4K not that rediculous "millions" mentioned in the article. [sarc]
Liberals admit the truth...finally
Submitted by Kawliga on Thu, 01/19/2012 - 12:15pm.
Yesterday, along with R "Madcow" Maddox being in favor with shrinking government, Bob Beckel on "The Five" admitted that liberals goofed years ago when they installed welfare programs...and Lawrence O'Donnell admitted on "The Last Word" that the Willie Horton ad was first put out by Al Gore......Its a miracle!