As ThinkProgress has been documenting, a number of Republican lawmakers are risking financial calamity by threatening to vote against raising the debt ceiling unless certain demands are met. Now, at a town hall event last week in Georgia, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) had a particularly absurd ransom to demand for raising the debt limit. In an exchange recorded by True South Radio and uploaded on YouTube, Broun said that he wouldn’t vote to hike the ceiling without major cuts. When asked what those cuts would be, Broun said he wants to see the Departments of Education and Energy abolished:

BROUN: I want to make this clear. I will not vote to raise the debt ceiling unless we have major cuts in the size and scope of the federal government.

MULTIPLE CONSTITUENTS: Can you define major?

BROUN: I propose getting rid of the Department of Education. I’d like to get rid of the Department of Energy as well.

Watch it:

The U.S. has already hit its debt limit, but the Treasury Department is taking extraordinary steps to stave off default until early August. So Broun is demanding these departments be abolished within the span of less than three months. At the same town hall, Broun defended his vote to preserve subsidies for big oil companies, saying that while he believes we should “stop all subsidies,” the special tax breaks and expenditures for oil companies don’t really qualify as subsidies.

As ThinkProgress previously reported, the GOP-controlled House of Representatives voted last month to end all federal funding to National Public Radio (NPR), the same day that it rejected an effort to call for an end to the Afghan war, which would save taxpayers 40,000 times more.

Yet despite this GOP assault on public broadcasting, the public is not going along. Only a quarter of Americans support cuts to public broadcasting. This morning, during an appearance on CNN, GOP Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) offered a new justification for cutting grant funding to NPR as well as Planned Parenthood — saying that it is unconstitutional to fund them:

HOST: Defunding Planned Parenthood and defunding NPR and PBS, some might say the Republicans are doing the same thing, telling people what to do with their lives.

BROUN: No, ma’am, absolutely not. In fact, the thing is, we don’t have constitutional authority under the original intent of the Constitution to fund Planned Parenthood or NPR. A lot of things that we’re doing. In fact, Article 1, Section 8 lists or enumerates the powers of Congress to act, and it’s only 18. We should be dealing with national security, national defense, foreign affairs and very little else. We’ve got to find bridges to send those powers back to the states and people as our Founding Fathers meant for them to.

Watch it:

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which Broun cites, says that “Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States.” It is the wording about “general welfare” under which grant funding to organizations like NPR and Planned Parenthood is authorized.

This past Tuesday Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) held a town hall meeting in Oglethorpe County, Georgia. During the question and answer session, one constituent asked a particularly outlandish question. As the Athens Banner Herald reports, the questioner asked, “Who’s going to shoot Obama?” The question apparently evoked laughter from the town hall meeting.

Rather than outright condemning the suggestion of violence, Broun tried to show empathy for the questioner by saying that he knows “there’s a lot of frustration with this president” and that he hopes we can “elect somebody who’s going to be a conservative” next year:

The thing is, I know there’s a lot of frustration with this president. We’re going to have an election next year. Hopefully, we’ll elect somebody that’s going to be a conservative, limited-government president that will take a smaller, who will sign a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.

Out of all of the members Congress, Broun has used perhaps the most vitriolic rhetoric to describe his political opponents, including Obama. He has previously said that Democrats want to take over “all of society,” that the president was spewing “venom” at the State of the Union, that the stimulus and health care laws were going to “kill” the elderly, that clean energy legislation would make southerners die from hyperthermia, and has compared Obama to Hitler, complete with a claim that the president is secretly assembling a version of the Hitler Youth.

In a statement provided to the Athens Banner Herald, a Broun spokesman said, “Obviously, the question was inappropriate, so Congressman Broun moved on.” Yet until Broun stops telling his constituents that all of his political opponents are plotting to kill Americans with diabolical fascist plots, he should expect more and more of them to think violence is justified.

Last week, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) said he wouldn’t participate in the bipartisan seating intermingling at President Obama’s State of the Union yesterday. “Sitting together being kissy kissy is just another way to try to silence Republicans,” Broun complained, warning that Obama would “spew” his rhetorical “venom” at members.

Except during the speech, it was Broun spewing venom, tweeting, “Mr. President, you don’t believe in the Constitution. You believe in socialism.” And on a right-wing radio show this afternoon, Broun upped the ante:

BROUN: The Republican Party is the party of K-N-O-W. We know how to lower the cost of health care. We know how to take care of the uninsurable. We know how to put patients in charge of their health care and have a market-based, patient centered health care system that’s not going to kill jobs like ObamaCare is going to do. And we know how to stimulate the economy. We know how to create jobs in the private sector. We know how to prevent this huge government take over of health care as well as all of society.

But we are the party of N-O against socialism and that’s what Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama have been proposing is a greater take over of everything in human endeavor in America.

Listen here:

Ironically, seconds after Broun claimed the GOP is “The Party of Know,” Broun reiterated two well-worn falsehoods Republicans have been spreading around since the health care debate began in 2009. PolitiFact.com recently reported that Broun’s claim that the new health care law is “job killing” just isn’t true:

Republicans have used the “job-killing” claim hundreds of times — so often that they used the phrase in the name of the [repeal] bill. It implies that job losses will be one of the most significant effects of the law. But they have flimsy evidence to back it up.

The phrase suggests a massive decline in employment, but the data doesn’t support that. The Republican evidence is extrapolated from a report that was talking about a reduction in the labor supply rather than the loss of jobs, or based on measures that weren’t included in the final health care law. We rate the statement False.

Broun also said that the new health reform law is a “huge government take over of health care.” PolitiFact gave that whopper its “Lie of the Year” award for 2010. It seems like Broun needs to work on a new name for his party.

Yesterday, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) joined conservative radio host Scott Hennen and discussed a variety of topics, including the GOP’s push to repeal the recently-passed health care law.

At one point during the show, a listener called in and asked Broun about the plans of some Members of Congress to sit with opposition party legislators during the State of the Union. The caller explained that she wants the Republicans in the Senate and House to “not take the bait” and sit with Democrats during the speech. Broun replied that he agrees “wholeheartedly” and said that he doesn’t want to sit together “being kissy kissy” with the opposition party because that’s just a “way to try to silence Republicans.”

He also said it would hamper the ability of Republicans to “stand up to what the Democrats are doing” when Obama “spews his venom.” Remarkably, Broun then went on to say that it’s actually “the liberals who are promoting this kind of venom [of uncivility], it’s not the conservatives, it’s the liberals”:

CALLER: Thank you Dr. Broun it’s an honor to talk to you. I would just like to ask if you would do me a favor, this one little constituent from north Dakota, if you would ask the Republicans in the Senate and House to not take the bait and sit with the Democrats in the State of the Union speech. The reason I ask is that it is a slap in the face to people across the country, who made a serious effort to bring Republicans into both houses of Congress and to have them just throw that away that was something I personally looked forward to watching the State of the Union and seeing the number of Republicans.

BROUN: I agree with you wholeheartedly. I’m talking to Members of Congress. Our leadership said you could do whatever you wantd to do. Sit with a Democrat, you can, sit with a Republican, you can. We’re goin to have a conference next week and I’m going to bring that up there. I believe very firmly that it is a trap and a ruse that the Democrats are proposing; they don’t want civility, they want silence from the Republicans. And sitting together being kissy kissy is just another way to try to silence Republicans and also to show, to keep the American people from seeing how few of them there are in the US House now, and when people stand up to what the Democrats are doing when Barack Obama spews his venom, then if they’re scattered throughout the Republicans, it won’t be as noticeable if the Republicans sit apart. So I’m not in favor, and I’m talking about it. And I hope other members of Republicans don’t take the bait. [...] Right after the Tuscon tragedy there was an article blaming Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and me for what happened. It’s the liberals who are promoting this kind of venom, it’s not the conservatives, it’s the liberals.

Listen to it:

Needless to say, it is odd for Broun to be using such hostile rhetoric about Obama and claiming that an idea like sitting together with opposition party members is actually a plot to silence his party while simultaneously claiming that it’s liberals, and not conservatives, who are to blame for incivility in American politics.

Well-versed in obstructing help to the hungry, House Republicans first blocked, then voted against the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act yesterday, a bill that “would give more needy children the opportunity to eat free lunches at school and make those lunches healthier.” The Senate passed this bill by unanimous consent in August — essentially a 100-0 vote in favor of providing school meals to the nation’s 17 million hungry kids.

But 157 House Republicans had a different message for hungry children: get in line. During the House’s first attempt to pass the bill yesterday, Republicans “used a procedural maneuver” to add an amendment requiring background checks for child care workers. Recognizing it as a poison pill, House Democrats delayed the final vote till today rather than allow an amendment to “kill the bill.” The main champion of this tactic Rep. John Kline (R-MN) decried the Hunger-Free Act as a Democratic ploy to increase government spending. On the House floor yesterday, Kline insisted the bill was massive “deficit spending,” dismissing the bill’s offsets as a “stalling tactic that obscures government expansion”:

KLINE: The people are telling us, stop spending money we don’t have…this bill spends another $4.5 billion on various programs and initiatives and creates or expands 17, 17 separate federal programs…The majority claims this bill is paid for. They want us to believe we can grow government with no cost or consequences, but the American people know that’s just not true. More spending is more spending. Whether or not those dollars are offset elsewhere in the massive federal budget, but one offset is particularly questionable. The truth is that, at least some portion of the billions of new program costs is deficit spending. This money was borrowed from our children and grandchildren in 2009 when it was put in the stimulus. That borrowed money is simply being redirected today. It was borrowed then and its borrowed now. This bill with its so-called pay for is merely a stalling tactic. It obscures government expansion in the short-term so this bill can become law and its spending can become permanent.

Watch it:

An equally indignant Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) called the pay-for “a farce!” “It’s a farce, it’s a lie. And it’s borrowing more from our children and this kind of idiocy just has to stop,” he added.

The only “lie” emanating from the House floor yesterday came directly from Kline and Broun. The bill is indeed paid for, unfortunately with offsets from food stamp benefits included in the Recovery Act. Because of the Congressional pay-as-you-go rules that prohibits deficit spending on non-emergency measures, Democrats reluctantly raided much-needed food stamp funds — again — to pay for the Hunger-Free Act. Kline and Broun’s outrage at such a strategy is curious, considering Republicans have pushed the same exact strategy in the past.

Not only is their “deficit spending” cry hypocritical, it is also a downright lie. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the offsets in the Senate bill will actually generate “total savings that effectively meet or exceed costs” while simultaneously providing meals to hungry children. Essentially, 157 Republicans voted to block the holy grail of legislation. The House did, however, pass the bill today and it will now go to the President for signature.

The GOP’s continuing callous treatment of those in need was not lost on Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH). “If cutting off unemployment insurance for out-of-work Americans wasn’t enough, House Republicans are now blocking critical legislation to help schools feed thousands of hungry children,” he told ThinkProgress. “Childhood nutrition shouldn’t be a partisan issue. But Congressional Republicans – intent on blocking any progress while President Obama is in office – are willing to put hungry children in the partisan crosshairs.”

In an interview with Univision last week, President Obama said: “If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s going to be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”

Many conservatives took great issue with Obama’s use of the word “enemies” to describe political opponents. Tonight in Cincinnati, Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) will give a major “closing argument” speech in which he will attack Obama for the comment:

“Ladies and gentlemen, we have a president in the White House who referred to Americans who disagree with him as ‘our enemies.’ Think about that. He actually used that word. When Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush used the word ‘enemy,’ they reserved it for global terrorists and foreign dictators — enemies of the United States. Enemies of freedom. Enemies of our country. Today, sadly, we have president who uses the word ‘enemy’ for fellow Americans — fellow citizens. He uses it for people who disagree with his agenda of bigger government — people speaking out for a smaller, more accountable government that respects freedom and allows small businesses to create jobs. Mr. President, there’s a word for people who have the audacity to speak up in defense of freedom, the Constitution, and the values of limited government that made our country great. We don’t call them ‘enemies.’ We call them ‘patriots.’”

Boehner’s sanctimony is truly stunning, considering that since the start of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign and through his time as President of the United States, an office for which Boehner professes much reverence in his speech, Republicans have directly attacked Obama as everything from a “gangster” to Adolf Hitler, and suggested in myriad ways that Obama is an enemy to America, or perhaps not even actually an American.

A limited collection of the worst things Republicans have said about Obama:

– Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) was forced to apologize for “calling President-elect Barack Obama a ‘Marxist’ and comparing him to Adolf Hitler.” [11/12/08]

– Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) also compared Obama not only to Hitler, but also Hugo Chavez. [07/09/09]

– Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) questioned whether President Obama was an American, saying: “Well, his father was Kenyan and they said he was born in Hawaii, but I haven’t seen any birth certificate. You have to be born in America to be president.” [02/23/09]

– Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) also questioned Obama’s citizenship, saying birthers “have a point” and that “I don’t discourage it.” [07/29/09]

– Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) said she was “very concerned that [Obama] may have anti-American views.” [10/17/08]

– Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) called Obama “an enemy of humanity” for his pro-choice views. [09/26/09]

– Former Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) called Obama “a more serious threat to America than al Qaeda,” and said he was “a dedicated enemy of the Constitution.” [07/22/10]

– Rep. Steve King (R-IA) said that the Obama administration was a “gangster government.” [11/12/09]

– Bachmann, too, accuses Obama of heading a “gangster government.” [06/10/09]

– As Republican vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin famously said Obama is “palling around with terrorists.” [10/04/10]

– Palin also said the president was being advised by “thugs” from Chicago. [06/10/10]

Boehner did not repudiate a single one of these comments, but has suddenly found a sense of political decorum. Perhaps the next time an elected Republican accuses Obama of trying to destroy America, Boehner can give another speech.

Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) has been touring his northeast Georgia district as part of the Republican Party’s “America Speaking Out” tour, discussing his ideas with his constituents. During a stop in Athens, Georgia, the congressman revealed some of his more radical ideas about where he wants to take the country. At one point, Broun told a constituent that Teddy Roosvelt and Woodrow Wilson “started this process of socializing America” by passing the 16th and 17th amendments and endorsed repealing both of them:

BROUN: Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson started this process of socializing America, and they did it with the, Woodrow Wilson, particularly, pushes the 16th amendment that taxes income directly, and the 17th amendment that allows the direct elect of US senators, because the US senators intially were supposed to represent the states. [...] I’d like to see the 16th amendment and the 17th amendment to be repealed finally, and that’s going to be a long process.

Watch it:

In addition to his endorsements of eliminating the income tax and ending direct election of U.S. senators, Broun also called for ending birthright citizenship, endorsed making English the official language of the country to stop Georgia from being “invaded,” advocated for completely de-funding the Department of Education, and suggested he’s unsure about whether or not Obama purposely inhibited the government’s response to the oil spill so he could push an “energy tax.” (HT: Georgia Liberal)

Speaking on the floor of the House of Representatives yesterday, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) strained to try to explain the deficit, correctly noting that most of it came from reckless spending during the Bush administration era. Exhibiting his partisan colors, Broun tried to reconcile Bush’s Troubled Asset Relief Program by falsely claiming that Bush administration Treasury Secretary was a “Democrat”:

BROUN: I wanted to put some perspective on 2008, too. That’s when the President’s chief economic adviser — I guess the Treasury Secretary — told him that the sky was falling and that we needed to pass the Toxic Asset Relief Program, or TARP, which many Republicans voted against. I didn’t buy the Democratic Treasury Secretary under a Republican President because that’s exactly what Hank Paulson is. He’s a Wall Street insider, a Wall Street banker. Wall Street believes in big government.

Watch it:

Paulson is a Republican, and was still a Republican when TARP was passed. Broun’s fib is the latest in a long line of conservatives desperately flailing to make up excuses for the Republican-led bank bailout. Glenn Beck, who supported the bank bailout when it was passed, now says he “hated” Bush for enacting the bailout. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who suspended his campaign to go to Washington and negotiate the bailout, says he was misled in voting for it, claiming now that he did not know that it was intended to help financial institutions.