NH House Leaders Respond to Attack by Senator Shaheen

House Leaders Respond to Attack by Senator Shaheen on Speaker’s Efforts to

Bring Fiscal Responsibility to New Hampshire

CONCORD – House Speaker William O’Brien (R-Mont Vernon) and House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt (R-Salem) today responded to attacks by U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen against Speaker O’Brien and his efforts to bring fiscal responsibility to New Hampshire.  Shaheen made the remarks at Saturday’s Jefferson Jackson Dinner in Windham, a fundraiser for the Democrat Party.  A report of the speech can be seen here.

 House Speaker William O’Brien

 “As Governor, Senator Shaheen supported a statewide sales tax, passed laws that forced health insurance companies out of the state, signed huge, job-killing business tax hikes and implemented a legal strategy that led to the Claremont II decision, which has undercut local control of education.  She even managed to double state spending in just six years.  In Washington, Senator Shaheen’s record has been equally abysmal.  The non-partisan Citizens Against Government Waste gave her just a 7% rating, and the National Taxpayers Union rated her at 8% – a total and abject failure by any measure.”

 “Given Jeanne Shaheen’s big government, tax-and-spend record, being attacked by her is a badge of honor.  However, what really has caused her to act in such an offensive manner is that fact that we are working to restore the New Hampshire Advantage by getting the budget that she exploded back under control, cutting taxes to grow our economy and to create jobs and working to resolve the school funding problems that she created.  We will continue to bring fiscal responsibility to Concord, even as she continues to work to bankrupt the federal budget in Congress.”

 House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt

 “Jeanne Shaheen should not only apologize to the Speaker,  but to the 57% of the hard-working, productive New Hampshire residents who were not born here but have added to the great quality of life that we all enjoy.  Instead of discussing substantive issues, Jeanne Shaheen has fallen into the same attack mentality that President Barack Obama uses. Her offensive remarks show that Jeanne Shaheen has been ‘occupied’ by the left wing. Gone are the days when Democrats would talk openly and respectfully to the voters about their philosophies, instead they’d rather defer to the politics of personal destruction.  It's understandable that the left doesn’t want to discuss their tax and spend, big government policies because Granite Staters know we can no longer afford to advance the Obama Administration’s agenda, of which Jeanne Shaheen remains in lockstep. Further, Speaker O’Brien was in fact not born in Massachusetts but at Fort Dix while his father was fighting to defend America’s freedom in the Korean War.”

Comments

[C. dog]

Don't forget she also rigged the save PSNH-posterior program.

Please, make her go away.
– C. dog laments what could have been

[dave]

The GOP would have more time to focus on the economy if the Demoncrats had not spent their first several months in power in Concord rewriting the social fabric of our state. The GOP is now faced with undoing the destructive social engineering of the Demoncrats. Familes are the bedrock of the economy and the Demoncrats are hell-bent on implementing the Marx-Engels plan to destroy family, faith, and freedom.

[Troll]

“What is really getting old is Speaker O’Brien ignoring the needs of this state in order to pursue an extreme right-wing agenda,” Shaheen said Saturday at the Jefferson Jackson Celebration in Windham."
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111108/NEWS06/711089969&template=mobileart

"By voting to attach the marital masters amendment to SB 198 (259-111), Republicans may well have guaranteed the state will lose $2 million in the next three months. Without the amendment, the bill could immediately have become law. Now, the Senate needs to concur, and President Peter Bragdon has said repeatedly he will not call Senators back into session."

"In the most shameful display of strong-handed tactics I've witnessed in this my eighth term in the House, Speaker O'Brien refused to allow a recorded vote on the amendment. In fact, he ignored a final speech (parliamentary inquiry) from someone who had signed up earlier in the day--the evidence is on the clerk's copy of the bill and in a memo sent to the clerk from the Democratic office earlier in the day."
http://www.nhinsider.com/rep-steve-vaillancourt/2011/10/12/reps-give-herman-cain-standing-ovation-speaker-opts-for-tyra.html

I think this is the type of baloney she is talking about. I'd love to see how the Republican yes-men can defend this BS move on O'Briens part. When you waste 2 MILLION dollars of state money to try and enact your social agenda even though you were warned what would happen by the Senate President, you are on some kind of power trip and certainly do not have the best interests of the state in mind.

[Ed Naile]

Good old Jeanee Shaheenie, skreechy as ever.

And the isolate and destroy Bill O'Brien ploy is soooooo boring and lost in the eighties.

Its like something out of a Raybo playbook.

[C. dog]

Hey Troll –
How much did the Dumbocrats spend to enact their social agenda? Or is that o.k. because it was in the best interests of the State? Or because it was done by kind-heated souls with a "D" attached to their name? Or because it was a left social agenda?

Dare you speak out against the priesthood?
– C. dog keepin' his facts from his figures

[Troll]

"you did it too" is not a reason, it's an excuse. Also, most Democrats didn't run on the promise to fix the ecomomy and create jobs. How does this do either? In fact, it looks like some people are LOSING their jobs so I guess that answers that question. I'm not sure where you got the impression that I'm married to the left. I've said it before, left or right doesn't matter, they are all scumbags. It's just more fun to poke fun of the right on this website!

[C. dog]

Troll –
Now we're getting somewhere. That was the point of my post: they both make attempts at social engineering, which is why I advocate that the cuffs and shackles of marriage be left out of their collective control, among other things. Of course, this will mean that State hacks will inevitably lose their "jobs" which were created from the apron strings of Nanny – the sooner, the better. These "jobs" create no wealth, only misery. Therefore, our collective misery index will necessarily go down as they migrate to occupations that actually make something, or MA-MA Land; the great invisible hand at work ... and play in the fields of the humans.
– C. dog loves a happy ending

[Eureka]

I don't believe the Democrats ran on changing the definition of marriage, but they did. If they had gone door to door and ran on that platform do you think they would had a chance of getting elected? I think not!! So what your saying is the Democrats don't have to tell us what their platform is when they are running for office and pass anything they want, but Republicans who campaigned on jobs and the economy are required to work only on the narrow scope of bills that effect jobs and the economy. Lets just get rid of all the committees except Finance and Ways and Means!!!

[C. dog]

Eureka!
What is the proper definition of marriage?
– C. dog inquires above

[Troll]

C. dog,

I completely agree. I think marriage should be the purview of the church (or what have you). If you want the government to recognize that you and your spouse are a family unit, fill out a form and have it notarized. If you want a marriage then go to church (or what have you) and get married. These should be two SEPERATE procedures. However, as long as governments insists on issuing "marriage certificates", then I feel it should be an option for EVERYONE not just those chosen few who think that a work of fiction written 2000 years ago should still be followed as literal gospel today.

[C. dog]

Why the form, the certificate, and the licensing that goes with it? Sounds like more make work –not wealth – bureaucrazy. The Grate State of NH has moved its BFA in exactly the wrong direction. Republicans and Democrats alike should be shouting from the rooftops to remove this function from Nanny's purview post haste, understandably for very different reasons. So be it.

Move forward, oh grate parties, on those things you actually find common ground. In fact, rather than endlessly squabble and nitpick at each other, you guys/gals should be horse-trading for less Nanny, not more. Do I here a bid of legalizing pot in exchange for school vouchers?
– C. dog's Freedom X-change, just in time for the Holiday Season