1 Yup. 

2 Quit whining. 

3 JEF is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure.

4

Cut 5% per year until the federal budget is balanced.

NO exceptions.

5
hahaha @ "If you haven't read Gabe's piece in support of the Boehner Plan, it's well worth your time."

Not a chance. And I'm not even reading the rest of this post.

6 There will never be any serious cuts. There will never be a balanced budget so why should I give a shit?

7 @4
And start doing Zero-Based Budgeting. 

8 off Eric Cantor sock!

9 I wish they'd settle this. All this math-y stuff is giving me a headache.

10 I'm confused. It's my understanding that we are not going to default. There is enough revenue coming in each day to at least service our debt and meet our credit obligations. The issue isn't so much the debt ceiling as it is the debt we have incurred and the continued spending of money that we do not have in the first place. That is the reason that Moody's et al are threatening to lower our credit rating. In fact, if we had the will to actually LOWER our debt ceiling and cut spending to at least 2006 levels, then the markets would go nuts (and the statists for the exact opposite reason). And yes, Boehner's plan is a complete non-starter. We have got to get a handle on spending and it begins with entitlement reform. It is time to pay the piper and endure a bit of pain, or else the consequences are going to be unimaginably unbearable.

11 @9
Apparently, math gives Boehner's budget staffers a headache, too. 

12 7 @4
And start doing Zero-Based Budgeting. 

Posted by: Eric Cantor at July 27, 2011 11:12 AM (5H6zj)

Absolutely Positively Yes!

13 Repost from other thread:
Any "cut" that does not decrease the spending in the 2011 budget below that of the 2010 budget is a lie.
Any "cut" that does not decrease the spending in the 2012 budget below that of the 2011 budget is a lie.
Any "cut" that is scheduled to occur in any of the 2013-2021 budgets is a lie.
Any "revenue enhancement/tax increase" that  occurs in the 2011 budget is a betrayal of the American people!

14 Why can't we just load the front years with the biggest cuts instead of putting them all in the out years?

15

See Drew? You can write well and come up with a logical piece when you put your mind to it. I agree with you here completely. If we don't stand up now, when? Our situation gets more dire each and every day.

16

FOLDAPALOOZA coming to a GOP near you!!

But wait! There's more!! King Putt will bring us Utopia with QE III and QE IV! All will be well with America because there'll be cash for all. Just in time for Election Day 2012 we'll all be rolling in dough. College professors KNOW that FDR just didn't do it BIG ENOUGH. King Barry the Worst is going to fix that.[disclaimer: your mileage may vary]

17 You know, I have to confess that I'm confused as well.

Why roll out 10 year plans when we know the Dems will never agree to anything meaningful?  Why not focus on getting real cuts one year at a time and just keep holding the line on taxes? 

Is there even a budget at this point? 

18 Sorry for the OT, but the right side of the blogsphere is warming up the Fast and Furious story.

19 Apparently, math gives Boehner's budget staffers a headache, too. 


Hey! Maybe I should apply for a job with his staff.

QUALIFICATIONS: I have only a cursory understanding of economics and I really, really suck at math.

20 QUALIFICATIONS: I have only a cursory understanding of economics and I really, really suck at math

But you have great taste in POTUS candidates!  ;-)

21 Bigger cuts now mean bigger savings over term.  Anyone with a mortgage understands that.

But this whole thing's just a dog-and-pony show between two sides of the same political class, and I don't think we're going to be measurably better off after it's done.  We might stave off default, just, but it will be as minimal a change from the status quo as possible.

22 Who's to say that the Congress and Oval office of 2013 and beyond is going to actually enact the cuts that we bargained for now? This is a total sham. Fuck it; front load the entire $1 trillion in cuts NOW. If we do default, guess what; cuts are going to happen automatically. SSI, Medicare and other things will still get paid. But the feeding tube that runs from our wallets to the maw of the federal behemoth will be significantly pinched off. I look forward to that.

23 The revision must cut more from outlays and spendin authority while reducing the deficit, and those cuts should be made upfront. Cutting $13B from outlays and reducing the deficit by $1B makes the Rs look fundamentally unserious. Also anticipate the use of the January baseline as the primary one this time.

24 I think the first year cuts have to be in the $50 billion range. 

The problem with pursuing bigger cuts is that the government is contract based for a lot of payouts - for example, if you look at the Army Corp of Engineer projects, those are multi year contracts.  Breaking them early actually costs more money.  There are a lot of examples of multi year contracts out there.

So the first year might be tough.

But there should be a bulge in the middle years.  That is where th ebulk of the cuts should be.

25 Rule #1: Obama wants to pin the crappy economy on the GOP's plan, if passed
Rule #2: see rule 1

We should forget Boehner's plan and pass Reid's plan.  Pin this thing on the Dems.

None of these plans will cut anything in the next 15 months anyway. None.

I'm willing to ride underneath the Purity Train for 15 months when we can control all 3 branches.

26 Let the Debt Ceiling do the heavy lifting.

27 Last time.  Promise.

We are being played with this whole Broadway show.

28 Shorter DrewM. "I finally found my calculator, but I still can't pass up the chance to condescend to all you dumb fuckers that read this blog and support it with comments, ad clicks and real money."

29 I still don't see why it's not possible to get four Senate Ds to vote for some version of CCB.  I would work on incremental adjustments to that until you grab the 4 Dems you need (and insist all the Rs actually vote this time). 

30

"Why roll out 10 year plans ..." - Y-not at July 27, 2011 11:16 AM

It's pure Kabuki for the cheap seats. If they had to say exactly what will happen this year and next year and just that then everyone would know it's all BS. You front load the spending and promise to cut in later years. I have two metaphors for ya:

Charlie Brown, Lucy, foot ball.
"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today." - Whimpy of Popeye

31 But you have great taste in POTUS candidates!  ;-)

Yeah, if he'll ever shit or get off the pot. Now they're saying it may be late August before he announces.

A PAC has started airing radio ads in Iowa urging a write in vote for Perry in the straw poll.

I can see the strategy in waiting to announce, but, come all, already! Eventually anticipation turns into frustration.

32

I supported Boehner's original plan, before it was shivved by The Firm and left for dead.

Boehner is trying something, anything, in a desperate attempt to resolve this issue and losing his confidence in the process. He's now running the gauntlet and that is not a good thing.

He needs to get up, dust himself off, and start kicking some teeth in.

 

33 Apparently, math gives Boehner's budget staffers a headache, too. 

Posted by: Y-not at July 27, 2011 11:15 AM (5H6zj)

Sometimes I wonder if there aren't some embedded moles in the staffers.  Yeah I know that it sounds paranoid but either Boehner was completely plastered when he gave them instructions or they're dumber than planks.

34 I'm willing to ride underneath the Purity Train for 15 months when we can control all 3 branches.

We have not have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate since Hawaii was admitted as a state.

35 I think it was said but this point is worth repeating. The cuts are based on post-Porkulus levels. So all we're doing is just slightly slowing the rate of unstoppable growth. To paraphrase Woody Allen, this is a mockery of a sham of two shams of a mockery.

36 We should forget Boehner's plan and pass Reid's plan.  Pin this thing on the Dems.

That's tempting, but isn't there some sort of carte blanche for the POTUS in his plan?  Also, I'm now loathe to go for any long-term plan.  I'd go for two years at the most. 


One question about the Reid plan.  Did the CBO score that one, too, and, if so, how did it score in terms of real cuts?  Did they call Reid out on the fake war savings? 

37 QUALIFICATIONS: I have only a cursory understanding of economics and I really, really suck at math Have you considered writing for this blog?

38 11 @9 Apparently, math gives Boehner's budget staffers a headache, too.

The use of the different baselines and the fact that someone tried to slip-in extra money for SS and Pell Grants changed the CBO score, but they should have anticipated all possibilities for the first and known the second. It's almost like they didn't communicate at all.

39
Just tell me which side Ed "In Fairness" Morrissey is on. Then I'll know I'm on the right side.

40 Drew, can't agree with you on accepting such tiny spending cuts. "The best we can do" doesn't mean anything when we can't do anything other than enact drastic cuts. No matter how you wishcast it, the numbers aren't there for any wiggle room. It has to be shut down, cut, eliminate and wipe out if the nation is to survive as anything more than a bigger Kenya with more flat-screen TVs.

Osama Obama, Boner, Reid and the rest of the idiotocracy in D.C. need to be put some learnin' on basic math: when you got zero, you got nothin'. Talk won't change that. Ed Morrissey would disagree with me, but that just shows how clueless Mr "In Fairness" is about anything but political game-playing.

Cut off spending, and then cut off every slimy sonofabitch who wants to piss away what's left of our money.

There are two ways for the D.C. crowd to learn the truth about having no fuckin' money: the ugly way and the really ugly way.

41 Just lay the damn baton in it.

I have something kinda like a baton.

42 We have not have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate since Hawaii was admitted as a state.


And, man, if we could have filibustered that decision, it sure would've saved us some heartache today.

43 5% across the board federal spending cuts, except for defense, and 25% for the EPA.

Eliminate the dept of energy.   

44 So, how do I a RINO sellout square the circle with my sudden brush with PURITY?

How was your first hit? Come down yet. We'll have you mainlining Purity in no time.

45 I still don't see why it's not possible to get four Senate Ds to vote for some version of CCB. 
Posted by: Y-not at July 27, 2011 11:22 AM (5H6zj)

It's not just 4 Dems.

Reid killed it by tabling it which only required a majority vote.

To actually pass it, you have to get to 60. That means with the 46 yes votes we have (assuming the Nos to table would vote yes on the bill itself), you need 14 more yes votes. Not happening. It's dead.

46 Yeah, if he'll ever shit or get off the pot. Now they're saying it may be late August before he announces

I loved the August 4th announcement date idea that someone here floated.  Bambi's birthday (and my 27th wedding anniversary). 

Then again, my birthday is in late August so that would work, too.

47 Who is JEF and why do I care?

48 Not a chance. And I'm not even reading the rest of this post.

/high five

49 Have you considered writing for this blog?


I read this blog, where do you think I got my qualifications?

50 38 QUALIFICATIONS: I have only a cursory understanding of economics and I really, really suck at math

Have you considered writing for this blog?

This blog?  Hell, son, you've got the qualifications necessary to advise the current administration.

51 And I'm simply not willing to risk default on the magical thinking that somehow that will only put pressure on Obama and Senate Democrats and they will suddenly embrace the tea party fiscal platform.

Does this mean that, come August 2nd, I won't have to pay any taxes? If not, then where does that money go?

There WILL be NO default. Stop falling for that lie. Stop repeating that lie.

Sorry but that was always a fundamentally unserious position.

Why? I think it is very serious. No more additional debt means an immediate balanced budget.

52 Jef = Jug Eared F---

53 Reid killed it by tabling it which only required a majority vote.

It bears repeating...

54 Maybe there should be an AoSHQ glossary some where.

55 To actually pass it, you have to get to 60. That means with the 46 yes votes we have (assuming the Nos to table would vote yes on the bill itself), you need 14 more yes votes. Not happening. It's dead.

How about a new version of it passed in the House?  IIRC it (CCB, right?) wasn't the perfect bill to begin with as it lacked some specificity.  At least, that's the criticism I read at Chaffetz's page by his commenters. 

How about the House says - no more legislation moves forward until we come up with a version of CCB that we can get passed in the Senate?  What's more important than this stuff, anyway? 

56

Say it, SAY IT!

DEFAULT IS A CHOICE, NOT A MANDATE.

57 I loved the August 4th announcement date idea that someone here floated.  Bambi's birthday (and my 27th wedding anniversary). 


It would be totally awesome if a Perry announcement on Obumble's birthday distracted the MFM  just long enough that they couldn't achieve orgasm.

58 The problem with pursuing bigger cuts is that the government is contract based for a lot of payouts - for example, if you look at the Army Corp of Engineer projects, those are multi year contracts.  Breaking them early actually costs more money.

Didn't this administration already set the precedent that unilaterally changing the terms of contracts are acceptable?

Not saying I agree with the principle, just saying that it's not like worse hasn't been already done for much worse reasons.

59

 it needs to be big and real. THAT would be a real victory. Let's see if that's what they come back with that in Bowhner 2.0. If so, I'm back on Team RINO. If not, book me a seat on the Purity Express.

 

Seat 36B.  Middle seat, non exit row.

60 26Let the Debt Ceiling do the heavy lifting.

Posted by: toby928™ at July 27, 2011 11:20 AM (GTbGH)

 

 

 

exactly!

61 OT:  I'll be in my bunk.

"t's been clear for a long time now that Maine Republicans want to swap out Olympia Snowe for someone more conservative. Our newest poll in the state finds that hasn't changed: only 33% of primary voters in the state say they would support Snowe next year to 58% who prefer a generic 'more conservative candidate.'

The gripe with Snowe is pretty straight forward. 58% of primary voters think she's too liberal to 37% who think she's ideologically where she should be. Most GOP voters don't really think Snowe belongs in their party- 34% think she ought to be an independent, 33% think she should be a Democrat, and only 27% feel that the GOP is indeed her rightful place."

Sonwjob's husband has been caught with his hand in the federal education fund's cookie jar.  Could be that she will be the next Arlen Spectre.

62 Boner will not come back with what you want, Gabe.  This is the RINO's attempt at destroying the Tea Party.  If the TP forces the bill to not pass, and O'Dipshit shuts down the govt., EVERY fucking finger will point undeserving at the TPers, including the fingers of the RINOs in an attempt to get the general public to turn against them.  Boner is in on this, BTW.  So is Cantor.  The only one who might NOT be in on this is Ryan.

63

god you rethugican'ts suck

here's a quick cut worth more

kill the 2.5 billion the feds are giving hawaii for high speed rail, we haven't started it yet and we (the voters) don't want it!!

that's how you do it

64 Thanks for explaining JEF! Anyway, it's not RINO to be willing to wheel and deal. The Boehner plan turned out to be horrible. It illustrates that maybe he's just not that serious. BUT, if we could cut a real number from this year's budget, like $500billion, and raise the debt limit $500bln, then win win, the dems get their precious debt and we cut spending and the dems get to shriek bloody murder. They'll shriek bloody murder no matter what, so we may as well embrace our innate evil and cut cut cut. And do it this way: Cut everything by a set percentage. All those GS14s out there had better figure out how to make it work.

65 Sorry, I meant DrewM not Gabe.

66

The big danger right now is that Obamamba and Dirty Weed come out and say "We surrender! We'll accept the Boehner Plan." 

Then they could schedule a quickie vote in the Senate by attaching it some other piece of legislation (assuming there even is another piece of legislation in the do-nothing Senate), and passing it as-is.

That would force the House to potentially vote against a GOP package, cooked up by the Speaker himself, and show the country a really desperate spectacle of the leadership whipping votes from Republicans.  Talk about a political disaster.

Boehner better get his re-write done and introduced, but quick.

67
The media will be celebrating Obama's milestone b-day for at least a week.

He is the dear leader, after all.

68 59The problem with pursuing bigger cuts is that the government is contract based for a lot of payouts - for example, if you look at the Army Corp of Engineer projects, those are multi year contracts. Breaking them early actually costs more money.

Didn't this administration already set the precedent that unilaterally changing the terms of contracts are acceptable?

Not saying I agree with the principle, just saying that it's not like worse hasn't been already done for much worse reasons.

Posted by: krakatoa at July 27, 2011 11:29 AM (bbJJG)

 

right on

69

I will have you know that that $1 billion cut represents an overall budget reduction of 0.07%.

It sounds as though you dont believe this sounds like a serious first step in restoring fiscal sanity.

70 Last time.  Promise. We are being played with this whole Broadway show. It is a function of your feelings of powerlessness that you cling to this belief that some shadowy Other is secretly manipulating events, and that they are unfolding precisely as they've planned. It also implies that if Someone could only Stop Them, then everything would be okay. Not so. Some of our politicians hate what America is and are bent on its destruction, but most are simply conforming to basic human nature: greed and following the path of least resistance. You can't change or control that. What you CAN do is get your personal finances under control so that you may better weather the coming storm. I say this in friendship and respect.

71 OK, we see where all this is going.  Mei Ling, bring the lube and help me get my pants down.  Better take yours off too.  We are going to get screwed so hard....

just remember, the American tax payer is going to get it dry.

72 kill the 2.5 billion the feds are giving hawaii for high speed rail, we haven't started it yet and we (the voters) don't want it!!


High speed rail to where?

I mean, wouldn't a little kiddie theme park train be able to go round and round in a big circle?

73 And start doing Zero-Based Budgeting. 

Posted by: Eric Cantor at July 27, 2011 11:12 AM (5H6zj)

Yeah, zero for Corporation for Public Broadcasting, zero for Acorn clones, zero for EPA, zero for Dep't of ED, zero for Dep't of Energy  . . . .

74 37 That's tempting, but isn't there some sort of carte blanche for the POTUS in his plan?  Also, I'm now loathe to go for any long-term plan.  I'd go for two years at the most. 


One question about the Reid plan.  Did the CBO score that one, too, and, if so, how did it score in terms of real cuts?  Did they call Reid out on the fake war savings?


Reid's plan is gimmicky on its face, gets Obama through the next election, and would likely make Boehner's score look wonderful. $1.7T of is plan is supposedly spending cuts, but we don't know what those would be or when they would occur. Boehner's proposal had more info, even if his staffers failed miserably at the execution of the same.

75
Have the cable news channels begun their 'countdown to default' clocks, yet?

76 'I'll never vote for a hike in the debt ceiling!". Sorry but that was always a fundamentally unserious position.

I disagree. That is the only serious position. Otherwise we will just continue spending until we collapse.

Out year cuts are as you note a joke. And cutting the budget by anything less then the *T* range is not enough.

Out of all the plans floated so fay, only leaving the cap where it is accomplishes that.

77 Not a chance. And I'm not even reading the rest of this post.

I concur.  Anytime Drew M is posting something like this the whole comment section becomes a nasty food fight.  I'm staying out of it.

78

Memo to House GOP:

Come back to me when you get to $1.2T in cuts for FY 2011.  That's a number we can start with on our way to $1.8T.

79 I'm Barack Obama, bitches!

80 and yeah, cut the silly shit programs that haven't started yet, like high speed rail. and ACORN and Larasa, et al. Accepting the reality that we need to compromise at some point isn't RINO, right? But starting the negotiations at the democrat's door is fucking stupid.

81
the big word this week is: looming

Rush ought to do a montage on looming.

82
for now, we wait

waitageddon

83 >Why can't we just load the front years with the biggest cuts instead of putting them all in the out years?

Because then the cuts might actually happen, and God knows we don't want that to happen.

84 How about a new version of it passed in the House?  IIRC it (CCB, right?) wasn't the perfect bill to begin with as it lacked some specificity.
Posted by: Y-not at July 27, 2011 11:29 AM (5H6zj)

The simple fact is we're not going to get a Democratic controlled Senate to sign onto the tea party economic agenda. You can tweak it all you want, they aren't going to pass it anymore than the House is going to pass a Senate plan if it had another trillion dollars in stimulus.

We simply don't have the governmental power to force our will upon them, nor they us. It's a stalemate. We need another election to break the tie and pick a course.

85 kill the 2.5 billion the feds are giving hawaii for high speed rail

Are you serious? Hawaii was given high-speed rail money? To connect Honolulu with what?

86 Here's the thing, Boner's plan should have NOTHING in the out years. He's just playing into Obama's hands if he keeps that shit. DO NOT HELP OBAMA.

87

Gay History is to be taught in California.

Area teens respond, "history is already gay, man."

88
I'm staying out of it.


Jump in; the water is warm.

89

74  basically

and yeah, i'm about to go there

maybe its time to put a chick with hot legs in charge for once

hmmmmmm, who? i wonder

90 kill the 2.5 billion the feds are giving hawaii for high speed rail, we haven't started it yet and we (the voters) don't want it!!

Why does Hawaii have 3 Interstate Highways?

91 17
Why roll out 10 year plans when we know the Dems will never agree to anything meaningful?  Why not focus on getting real cuts one year at a time and just keep holding the line on taxes? 
Is there even a budget at this point? 
Posted by: Y-not at July 27, 2011 11:16 AM (5H6zj)

Any plan that speaks of cuts occurring within a window of more than two years is simply not serious. Any Congress is incapable of having implemented plans they adopt over a longer time frame because the next truckload of clowns can discard or modify them to be completely meaningless.

Cut often, cut hard, and cut now ... or get the eff out of Dodge and we'll find adults who can carry the load.

92
"If you haven't read Gabe's piece in support of the Boehner Plan, it's well worth your time."


Not a chance. And I'm not even reading the rest of this post.
Posted by: soothsayer





Well I'll be. I actually did laugh out loud....

93

The simple fact is we're not going to get a Democratic controlled Senate to sign onto the tea party economic agenda. You can tweak it all you want, they aren't going to pass it anymore than the House is going to pass a Senate plan if it had another trillion dollars in stimulus.

Exactly.  Just don't raise the debt limit, and we'll see what happens in 2013.

94
I'm just rambling to myself while I wait for the looming deadline to depression.

95 Here's my new plan that solves all this and places all the blame if it fails on the Dems while reserving any positives for the GOP:
Option 1: An across-the-board 5% reduction for $.5trillion in debt limit.
Option 2: An across-the-board 10% reduction for $1trillion in debt limit.
Option 3: An across-the-board 15% reduction for $1.5trillion in debt limit.

And call the Dems bluff and let them poll it--say the GOP will support which ever option gets the highest aggregate support of at least 5 different polls. Fuck 'em with their own stick because psychologically and instinctively, the average person will always go with the middle option. With poll after poll showing the American people want a 10% reduction, force the Dems to argue against it.

96

Why does Hawaii have 3 Interstate Highways?

I think they're going to connect them to California eventually

97 88  6 malls

98 We simply don't have the governmental power to force our will upon them, nor they us.

I do, because I.AM.THE.JUGGERNAUT!

99

For most of the day yesterday I was right there with Gabe. I thought Boehner's plan was the best we could do economically and politically. Cap, Cut and Balance wasn't resting, it wasn't pining for the fjords, it was and is...DEAD. We should congratulate the GOP for passing it, bank it as a campaign point and then face facts and move on.

Then the CBO score on Boehner appeared and I really regretted any support I offered.

My advice: follow George Costanza's opposite method.

The idea that we can't cut at least $500 billion right away is silly. To say we can't is accepting that the porkulus and TARP level of funding should be a permanent component of the budget going forward. Eliminate the remaining porkulus funds, eliminate TARP, go back to the 2007 or 2008 budget levels as a good start, and next budget we use that as our baseline and start cutting from there. This really isn't complicated.

100 Boehner is out 21/24 votes that he can afford to lose, so his staffers will have to do a superb job in order for this to pass. His job just might depend on it. 

101 77, CNN has one of course

102 Drew, I'm with you on the front loaded aspect of the deal.100 billion does not seem like a serious number, it won't for instance prevent a credit downgrade IMHO. But say we go with that number and the Democrats accept it and then the unidentified party known as Obama accepts it.My question is not about next year but the two years after, debt ceiling is reached again, I mean we are on that trajectory,are we not, this debt increase is a quick fix that compounds the problems for the next quick fix that is already two or three years out. I would accept your number of 100 billion for one waaayyyy outside chance that it would give us time to get the right people put in the right places to effect the change needed to make the cuts that we really have no choice in making for the survival of the country as we know it. By the time the right people get to those right places it will ironically be just in time for them to be faced with the next debt ceiling on money already owed and will they hammer out a proper and yet painful plan on how to deal with it? My last question to you would be, do you really think that will happen given the fact that over the decades the people who got us to this point all had R's and D's behind their names............All of them. My feeling is this, a third party sends people like you and me into the abyss of third worldom but a different animal needs to be inserted into the party we have to bring us back to who we are as Americans as far as hard work and just rewards.I probably will fear this animal, I will probably not like this animal very much but this animal cannot be as scary and hated as he animals we have running around now.

103 Do you think the Senate is unbreakable? At some point, there could be a squishy democrat to break for fiscal sanity. It's happened in the past, eh? So, if the House passes a real bill with actual spending cuts, then who knows... Or, maybe the Senate could pass a bill for the House to consider, but that's silly to expect democrats to do anything on their own.

104 Are you serious? Hawaii was given high-speed rail money? To connect Honolulu with what?
Posted by: Waterhouse at July 27, 2011 11:35 AM

The beach.

105 The problem with pursuing bigger cuts is that the government is contract based for a lot of payouts - for example, if you look at the Army Corp of Engineer projects, those are multi year contracts.  Breaking them early actually costs more money.

Then let government special interests fight over it. The government is taking in significantly more money then it needs - but there is no incentive to remove programs that it does not.

Let Congressman John Doe explain why we funded Cowboy Poetry slams instead of finishing some long term public works project.

Because right now, he'll pay for both, and a bunch of other unneeded programs until we collapse...

106

I don't see it so much as the purity express...I see it as the sanity express.

This crap has to stop somewhere.

107

In 1974, while Nixon was weakened from the Watergate scandals and the Dems controlled Congress, they passed a law saying that, from now on, all budgets would START with the PROJECTED cost in all of the various give-away programs (wlfare, SS, Medicare, etc.) for the next 3 years and go up from there. That budgeting criteria is still in effect.

Therefore, regardless of what the politicos are arguing about, the budget will INCREASE over the next ten years by something north of 9 TRILLION bucks, IN THE BASELINE. The only cuts any of them can guarantee are those that are passed and controlled by this sitting Congress. Therefore, unless they are talking about an immediate 10 trillion dollar cut, its all smoke and mirrors.

The better battle is for a zero-based budgeting law that starts this year with the last budget prior to Obumble coming into office. That would have a real effect, not the least of which would be a start on controlling SS, Medicare, etc.

108 Let the purges commence!

109 All your missing is the DOOM and you'll be ready to join team purity.

110

Why can't all Federal Departments with unspent budget money be told to return those funds to the Treasury. With the budget year drawing to a close there are many that have those funds.  Too simple?  I often hear about  unspent stimulus money too - in the billions I believe.   Where is that money in this equation.  I'm sure that would qualify as a cut for Mr. Boehner.  

111 Hmm, kind of puts that whole six percent approval rating^* of Congress in perspective doesn't it?

_{*yes, six percent}

112
Depending on how you look at it wouldn't it be funny if Boehner's plan passes/fails by one vote?

David Wu's (D-Rapist) vote.

113

I think the Boehner bill is good, but for the first year.  I agree with you all the new scoring should be fiscal 2012.  I would like to seem them make symbolic cuts, I could live with 10 billion in the fiscal year we are CURRENTLY in.  There has been no budget for Fiscal 2011, so why not just stop spending something, anything.  Surely, they must feel some program is in immediate need of a cut of some type.

As for zero based budgeting, it would be too complicated to do every year, unfortunately.  I do think every four years, every agency, department, program has to justify its continued existence and subsidy.  This way every President in each term will have a real opportunity to get rid of things. 

114 One question about the Reid plan.  Did the CBO score that one, too, and, if so, how did it score in terms of real cuts?  Did they call Reid out on the fake war savings?

Yes, they did, and yes, he made the same mistake using the earlier baseline.  He will now have to modify his plan with more cuts.

I have a question.  I keep hearing that the outyear cuts are meaningless, which is probably true.  But that then implies that if we accept a flawed plan now, and get the Senate and presidency in '12, as seems increasingly likely unless we throw it away on a bitter split, why can't we modify the terms then to be more to our liking? 

Eyes on the prize.

115 94 17 Any plan that speaks of cuts occurring within a window of more than two years is simply not serious. Any Congress is incapable of having implemented plans they adopt over a longer time frame because the next truckload of clowns can discard or modify them to be completely meaningless...

Budgetary law says the window is 10yrs. I agree, Congress needs to change it.

116 Why can't all Federal Departments with unspent budget money be told to return those funds to the Treasury. With the budget year drawing to a close there are many that have those funds.  Too simple?  I often hear about  unspent stimulus money too - in the billions I believe.   Where is that money in this equation.  I'm sure that would qualify as a cut for Mr. Boehner.  


When I worked for the state, we had a use it or lose it budget. The net effect was to spend it all as fast as you can before the legislature takes it away.

117 Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 27, 2011 11:19 AM (UlUS4)

Well, I've read in some places that a credit rating downgrade will add about $100B to interest payments.  The Republicans ought to at least cut 2/12ths of that much this year ($16B) and add in that $100B to any previous target thought about for the 2012 budget. (As an aside, a 5% across the board cut for the remainder of this year would be about $32B [$3.8T x 2/12ths x 0.05 = $32B] which could be taken care of with a combination of cuts and pretty much a government wide furlough of one day a week for the rest of the year.)

As for front loading, or more accurately, current year loading, why don't they pass a bill to get us to October and then provide both a 2012 budget and a concurrent debt limit increase and leave it at that regardless of eventual revenues.  This would also reduce the game playing with revenue projections -- too high a projection and they'll have to tighten belts as the year progresses; too low a projection and there'll be pressure to reduce the budget to shrink the deficit.

118

lets try some more

release all the tarp and stimulus funds not used and send them back to the treasury...there's several hundred billion right there

this isn't that hard rethugican'ts

119 His job just might depend on it.

Commence the whining.

120

The last time the government shut down, the Republicans picked up 3 Senate seats.

Let's try that again.

121

 Drew, I'm with you on the front loaded aspect of the deal.100 billion does not seem like a serious number, it won't for instance prevent a credit downgrade IMHO.

Drider-- the front end was ONE billion.  Not 100.

122 87How about a new version of it passed in the House? IIRC it (CCB, right?) wasn't the perfect bill to begin with as it lacked some specificity.
Posted by: Y-not at July 27, 2011 11:29 AM (5H6zj)

The simple fact is we're not going to get a Democratic controlled Senate to sign onto the tea party economic agenda. You can tweak it all you want, they aren't going to pass it anymore than the House is going to pass a Senate plan if it had another trillion dollars in stimulus.

We simply don't have the governmental power to force our will upon them, nor they us. It's a stalemate. We need another election to break the tie and pick a course.

Posted by: DrewM. at July 27, 2011 11:35 AM (y07gN)

 

agreed, but i would put the focus on the GOP primaries, that's where the real battle is going to be, there are a number of long-serving GOP elders who need to be primaried out of office, and if you don't get them in the primaries you don't get them at all.

 

123

oh, and you are all fucking RINOs

ready for my money bomb?

124 Who here really believes Boner wants to cut spending?  I don't.  He likes big government as much as the rest of them.  He is trying to cover his ass.

125 Exactly.  Just don't raise the debt limit, and we'll see what happens in 2013.

Posted by: Truman North at July 27, 2011 11:36 AM (G5JPI)

That''s the only way I see us getting any significant cuts. If it costs us seats, it is worth it. If it gains us seats, all the better.

We spent the Bush years slightly watering down the leftwing agenda - but still pursuing it - and all we got for it was Barack Obama. Why on earth should we try something different this time - like actually fighting for our principles?

126 if we accept a flawed plan now, and get the Senate and presidency in '12, as seems increasingly likely unless we throw it away on a bitter split, why can't we modify the terms then to be more to our liking? 

*cough*

127 Are you serious? Hawaii was given high-speed rail money? To connect Honolulu with what?

Posted by: Waterhouse at July 27, 2011 11:35 AM (2sn+p)

The way things are going, the nearest volcano would not be a bad idea, high speed rail to DOOM!

128

So survival is now purity?

Its over. Plan for the Rebuild. Note well which jurisdictions, parties and "leaders" can do nothing but spend and borrow.  And exclude them from your Rebuild Plan.

129
Are you serious? Hawaii was given high-speed rail money? To connect Honolulu with what?
Posted by: Waterhouse





R'lyeh, where Cthulhu sleeps....

130
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix
Posted by: Charlie Brown's Dildo

Have you two met?

131 "The rest, the so called "out years" are promises and projects this Congress can't commit to delivering."

But my mama said a commission would make all those cuts!

132 Drew how many times must it be said that this is not a purity issue. It should not even be a political issue at all. We are truly on the cusp of total collapse.

The default is also not an issue, even the rating agencies have continually say the total debt and the deficit is the biggest problem, it is just that the MFM, including Fox, always leaves that out.

The problem is that we must do something to restore confidence in our T-Bills. Nobody is buying them right now so any new debt requires us to borrow money from our selves. IOW roll the printing presses.

And that is the real danger, not default, not the ceiling. It is runaway inflation.

133 oh, and you are all fucking RINOs

I wish I was fucking a RINO. Martha MacCallum, fer instance.

134

Just imagine how interesting this all gets when some new calamity, (oh, lets say a mushroom cloud appearing over the desert at some test site in Iran), occurs.  Of course we will just have to raise the debt ceiling clean without any cumbersome spending cuts to deal with the "New Crisis".

135

It seems to me that you don't need high speed rail in Hawaii.

2 supersized roller coasters ought to be able to do the trick.

136 Let's remember - current spending is at 4 BILLION per day.  So, with Drew's plan (100 Billion cut), after 25 days into the fiscal year, we're back to pure deficit spending.  That's not a cut.......it's just a scratch.

137 If you're expecting elections to fix this, I am duty bound to point out that you're expecting to make your stand on a hill your maps place in that gaping chasm dead ahead.

The good options expired years ago, maybe decades.  Now it's down to acceptable ones, and those are running out. Before long it'll be long pig or rat farming.  (I have the options to stay off the menu, thankfully.)

We have met the enemy, and Pogo understated the problem.

138 Gabe's analysis is stupid because he is gay and I have been here longer than anyone.

I have seniority!

139
Have you two met?
Posted by: soothsayer




Think we ran into each other at last month's Esoteric Order of Dagon Beer and Brats party....

140 @130 Which we also currently enjoy. Sauce for the goose....

141 Gridlock is our friend.  Looking forward to his highness ignoring the debt ceiling.  I just wish there was a non-liberal opposition party in government that could make political hay out of the situation.

142 64 Boner will not come back with what you want, Gabe.  This is the RINO's attempt at destroying the Tea Party.  If the TP forces the bill to not pass, and O'Dipshit shuts down the govt., EVERY fucking finger will point undeserving at the TPers, including the fingers of the RINOs in an attempt to get the general public to turn against them.  Boner is in on this, BTW.  So is Cantor.  The only one who might NOT be in on this is Ryan.
Ryan always disappears at crunchtime, or at least he did in the TARP Panic. No way he stands up to Cryin John and Eric the Wuss.

143 138
Of course we will just have to raise the debt ceiling clean without any cumbersome spending cuts to deal with the "New Crisis".
Posted by: Hammer at July 27, 2011 11:48 AM (hVGDL)

The standard operating practice of the addicted: "I'd have been completely off the stuff had it not been for { * insert name of a current and convenient "crisis" du jour here *}.

144
in b4 someone jumps right into this thread with a straw man before reading a single comment!

145 Because then the cuts might actually happen, and God knows we don't want that to happen.

Posted by: DanInMN at July 27, 2011 11:35 AM (XqeyF)

This.  I don't think any of them want *real* cuts; the closest it would be would be decreases in the rate of growth.  As I said yesterday, even under Reagan the government still grew.  Conservatives have never had anybody in the White House willing and able to make cuts in the spending; I assume Reagan wanted to but couldn't get Congress to go along.

146 118 Yes, they did, and yes, he made the same mistake using the earlier baseline.  He will now have to modify his plan with more cuts...

His mistake was admitting $1T of his cuts were meaningless, then pointing fingers at the Rs for cheating when they have proof they did not cheat.

CBO apparently just scored the Reid plan. Didn't know that but it makes sense. Anyway, Reid is short $500B and that does not include war savings.

147 R'lyeh, where Cthulhu sleeps.... Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at July 27, 2011 11:44 AM (EeYDk) IA! IA!

148 Posted by: Drider at July 27, 2011 11:38 AM (HaJD9)

I'm with you on what the size should be but the reality is: Democratic Senate and Obama in the White House.

Lots of people here are screaming "1 Trillion next year!". This is simply not in the realm of reality. Even the Ryan Plan doesn't get anywhere near that. If screaming, "I want to screw a supermodel" were all it took, I wouldn't be hear, I'd be...screwing a supermodel. Screaming doesn't change reality.

I said it last week on Twitter...we're likely to get down graded either way. If/when that happens, all the money Boehner's plan presumes to save from lower debt service on a smaller budget disappear anyway.

The whole thing is a sham. All we can do is embrace the DOOM.

149 Think we ran into each other at last month's Esoteric Order of Dagon Beer and Brats party.... Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at July 27, 2011 11:49 AM (EeYDk) I was busy starving Ukrainians. Was there a virgin?

150 I haven't read all the comments but, has anyone noted that Barry is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure yet?

151 let me put my spending cuts in you

152 All we can do is embrace the DOOM.

In Soviet Russia, DOOM embraces you.

153 Great post, would read again!

154

Lots of people here are screaming "1 Trillion next year!". This is simply not in the realm of reality. Even the Ryan Plan doesn't get anywhere near that. If screaming, "I want to screw a supermodel" were all it took, I wouldn't be hear, I'd be...screwing a supermodel. Screaming doesn't change reality.

Don't raise the debt limit.  That would cut spending 1.4-1.8 Trillion next year.  You'd be up to your ass in supermodels.

155 Truman North, I must have misread what Drew was saying then, I thought the number was 100 billion, realized and cut as such. It really wouldn't matter, it's in my mind, a gambit whether it is 1 or 100 billion against super high odds of buying time to get people replaced in Congress with more people who are grounded in reality. That being said, front loaded is the only way to go being it seems there is no confidence in any of them but hey, chalk me up as the one who found some of that long last pride the last couple of weeks about the people I helped get to Congress who, righteously held there ground.Now it looks like I can go back to keeping my eyes peeled for many of their replacements and yes, I'm just that fickle.

156 The problem is that we must do something to restore confidence in our T-Bills. Nobody is buying them right now so any new debt requires us to borrow money from our selves. IOW roll the printing presses.
Posted by: Vic at July 27, 2011 11:47 AM (M9Ie6)

Yeah, I was talking to someone about that either via email or on Twitter.

Who exactly is going to buy this $1 trillion in new debt? Teh Ben Bernak, that's who.

Can I interest you in a nice cup of DOOM?

157 anyone watching the theater on CNBC....chuckie shoomer is now speaking telling Reid that his deal is a non starter.

Where are the republicans?  again?

158 I quit.

159
Lots of people here are screaming "1 Trillion next year!". This is simply not in the realm of reality.

How much is spending cut if we don't up the debt limit?

160

The ship of drunken sailors (no offense to sailors intended, just a metaphor) was docked in Washington D.C. - by the American voters - in November 2006.  Another shipload was dropped off in 11/08.  We managed to get a few of them back onto their ships in 2010, but drunken sailors still outnumber our MPs by 2-1 now.  Like it or not, we are getting what the American people asked for in 2006 and 2008 and we cannot change that simply by holding our breath until we turn blue (well, maybe red).  Two years ago all the talk was about how much money we should spend and how big the government giveaways should be; today we're talking about how big the spending cuts should be.  That may be as far as we can go until 11/12 rolls around, but it's not nothing. 

161

Our elected political leaders have several priorities as they wrestle with this debt crisis issue:

1) protecting their personal seat in Congress

2) blaming the other side

 

I couldn't think of any others

nothing will be accomplished. we're doomed, boned, screwed, hosed, jacked, etc

_{I hate all politicians with the burning white hot intensity of a thousand suns}

162  kill the 2.5 billion the feds are giving hawaii for high speed rail, we haven't started it yet and we (the voters) don't want it!!

Not to mention that it would probably need to circle the island about 3 times just to get up to speed. 

163 We need another election to break the tie and pick a course.

Posted by: DrewM. at July 27, 2011 11:35 AM (y07gN)

No, we need a strategy to continue to show the American people that it is the failed policies of the current administration that is causing this catastrophe.

Keep them on their heels until November, 2012.

164 We simply don't have the governmental power to force our will upon them, nor they us. It's a stalemate. We need another election to break the tie and pick a course. Wrong. We have the only governmental power that matters: We control ALL the money. You want this money, Barry? Then get down on your knees and suck my dick in front of all these people. There will be no default. Shut the fuck up with that, already. We hold the purse strings until January 2013. Obama cannot survive that long without money. But like a politician, you think that what's right for your political fortunes = what's good for America. We. Don't. Need. To. Pass. A. Fucking. Thing. If nothing is passed, we win. Instant balanced budget. And when I say "we" I mean Americans, not Republicans, RINO-boy. But I know I'm talking to a fence post. You seem to think there is some political maneuver that will make everything okay. I repeat, with the exception of Monty, those who post here suck at math. You're living in your own fantasy world where increasing debt and spending year-over-year don't lead to a massive correction, complete with misery and deprivation. You're so in love with the political process that you sneer at those who can add and subtract. How's that working out for you?

165 Don't raise the debt limit.  That would cut spending 1.4-1.8 Trillion next year.  You'd be up to your ass in supermodels
Posted by: Truman North at July 27, 2011 11:55 AM (G5JPI)

It's a pretty picture you paint. Were but that it were true.

Alas, you seem to have left out the ensuing economic panic and accompanying depression that would follow. Otherwise, a great plan.

166

kill the 2.5 billion the feds are giving hawaii for high speed rail, we haven't started it yet and we (the voters) don't want it!!

High speed rail for Hawaii?  Is this a joke?  That would be like spending money on sand for Alaska's beaches.  Or maybe more appropriately, money to build a port in Wyoming.

167 137  HA!  good thing i'mgiving this laptop to my crazy sister, let her clean the coffee

168 But seriously, the 'Pubs are just looking to restrain the rate of growth and not actually cut a blasted thing.

Sure, it's better than the Dems plan  to piss all the country's money away on hookers and blow at the earliest available opportunity, but only moderately so.

Personally I'm getting to the place where the only acceptable solution is the bill that requires DC to be burned to cinders before salting the earth so that nothing ever grows there again as a warning to future generations to not fuck up so badly.

169 Drew heard the footsteps.  Maybe Boner will too. Gabe is deaf.

170

I'm in a healthy position between purity and RINO, but if my options are a deal that cuts 1 billion dollars from next years budget or just letting this thing playout without raising the debt ceiling, I'm going with the latter.

I'm sick of these gimmicks.

I can't play along anymore. I've done to much for the Republican party to be shit on everytime it comes to getting what I want.

Spending cuts, that's it. That's what 2010 was about. Getting government under control.

And that sucker of cock Boehner actually puts out a bill that has less spending cuts next year than the democrats plan. What, did he think no one would fucking notice?

Boehner and McConnell either need to be primaries or at the very least be stripped of their leadership position. 

Thank god for the freshman republican congressmen/women who are holding this up. At least they know why they were sent to Washington.

I'm more angry at Boehner than Obama right now.

171 "If you haven't read Gabe's piece in support of the Boehner Plan... 'Support' doesn't change the numbers.

172 Chucke started to talk about very violent imagery and CNBC pulled the plug, anyone else hear what he said?

173 Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) has told The Hill that 'nobody I know' has seen Reid plan. So they haven't seen it but CBO somehow scored it (and released the score this morning) despite the fact that it lacks details. Harry also used gimmicks to get a higher score in some areas.

174

Lots of people here are screaming "1 Trillion next year!". This is simply not in the realm of reality.

 

political reality is not reality, it is the reality that politicians want you to accept because it's the reality they want but that doesn't make it real.

 

i'll tell you what is going to be real though, the misery and suffering caused by a government taking in only 2 trillion but spending near 4 trillion.

the damage caused by that brand of madness will be very,  very real and it's coming soon.

175 4

Cut 5% per year until the federal budget is balanced.

NO exceptions.

 

Okay. But remember we are now spending 25% of GDP from a 20% base from 2007. The Dems are saying 25% is the new paradigm, the pubbies are nibbling at the edges. You can't grow out of this paradigm since it is the projected baseline that future years budgets will accept as baseline. The real question is what is this new 5% of GDP buying and who is getting it? I am pretty sure this new 5% of annual consumption contributes directly to our subpar economic performance. 5% of GDP is serious money and removing it from private consumption by definition means no real recovery and brings the specter of double dip into real focus. Ask yourself how do you stop the slide in home prices if 5% of GDP was removed from the housing market? You already have 3-4 year backlog in housing, so can you spark a housing recovery when there is even less money in circulation than in 2007? Dittos every industry.

176 So, does everybody see why I'm inquiring about home wine-making kits?

177 "Not to mention that it would probably need to circle the island about 3 times just to get up to speed. 

Posted by: Dilligas at July 27, 2011 11:57 AM (HhjUQ)"

Obviously then we need a real straight bridge to California!  Think of the union jobs!

178 Alas, you seem to have left out the ensuing economic panic and accompanying depression that would follow. Otherwise, a great plan.

I have already make my travel arrangements.  The game is over.

179 176 "If you haven't read Gabe's piece in support of the Boehner Plan...

'Support' doesn't change the numbers.


If Boehner's staffers had been honest, it would have been a pretty good plan.

180

174  Spending cuts, that's it. That's what 2010 was about

to quote the next president (the one with the hot legs):  you ignored us in 2010, you can't ignore us in 2012

181 I'm looking for an Empire of Jeff enlistment center.

182 Why are no Republicans using a little rhetorical judo and turning Emmanuel's "never let a crisis go to waste" comment back on the Dems? Since CNN has been blaring "debt ceiling crisis" all friggin' week this would seem to be the one time that the GOP could actually embrace Emmanuel's concept.

183 Yeah progressoverpeace, my front loaded cuts, if I had the power would be to do away with any government job that had a Czar heading it.The only thing that would be realized if they dropped off the planet tomorrow is a great sum of money.

184 Alas, you seem to have left out the ensuing economic panic and accompanying depression that would follow. Otherwise, a great plan.

Posted by: DrewM. at July 27, 2011 11:59 AM (y07gN)

Really? So by ending the destructive spiral of never-ending budget deficits and borrowing we would instantly be thrown into depression? Care to explain the mechanism? And please explain how it will be worse than the fast-approaching alternative.

185

190  softball question

because they like the power and money

and they have no spines

186 Drew how many times must it be said that this is not a purity issue. It should not even be a political issue at all. We are truly on the cusp of total collapse.
Posted by: Vic at July 27, 2011 11:47 AM (M9Ie6)

This.

Whining about purity tests is just a passive-aggressive deflection of the fundamental flaw in one's own ideological underpinnings.

Purity is my way, 100% of the time. Most of the people who get called "purists" are anything but. Most are willing to negotiate on all manner of things.

But to be a true fiscal conservative, there is one hard and inflexible rule: You cannot spend more than you take in.

If this single principle is a step too far, than you are indeed working at odds with the foundations and future of this nation. Or any nation you happen to be in for that matter.

Welcome aboard the "Purity" train, Drew, for however long you choose to stay. I suggest you get to know your fellow-travelers a little better, and listen to the reasoning behind their ideas. They were right about Boehnor's Folly. This wasn't a one-off occurrence.

See, that's the handy thing about having, and living by, principles. Yes, the other "P" word that is so often derided.

When you have Principles, and when you exercise them, there is no need for worrying about whether the word "should" could possibly be construed or spun negatively. At the end of the day, your body of work will reflect the intent of your speech.

We are past worrying about whether we can win the next election. Within our lifetimes, we are facing financial ruin.

This is the hill on which we must make our stand. This has always been the hill. We can argue until we are blue in our collective faces over specific and foreign policies, and more power to those that wish to.

But unless our financial policies grant us sustainability, all those other arguments will become instantly moot.

This will always be the hill.

And if we cannot convince the majority, then we all deserve what is coming to us.

187 Don't raise the bridge, lower the river.

188 should read "specific domestic and foreign policies."

189 For all of you who think control of the House* gives you control of the government...

Remember when winning the mid-terms would mean the end of the war in Iraq? The Democrats were going to cut funding! Bush would get his comeuppance!

How'd that work out for them?

Votes matter.


*The Democrats also had control of the Senate.

190 what I cannot wrap my mind around is Why our chosen leaders seem unserious?

Do we have a financial problem or not?

What magic do they think America will be able to pull off next year or the year after?

forgetfullness? as forgetful as the american people are What will change ? employment numbers?  Jobs, what?

191 How do you see the financial markets crumbling if the US doesn't raise the debt limit? 

I'm still grappling with the idea that borrowing less causes our credit rating to drop.

192 I'm with you Drew

193
In retrospect, Boehner should've called it quits after CCB passed the House.

All the while repeating: We did our job and passed a debt limit hike; look to Sen Reid when a default occurs.

194 "...those who post here suck at math."

Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST at July 27, 2011 11:58 AM (lbo6/)

Not true. And besides, why would I listen to you, who want a blow-job from Obama!

"Then get down on your knees and suck my dick in front of all these people"

Although...he might be quite good.

195 Alas, you seem to have left out the ensuing economic panic and accompanying depression that would follow.

When more than half of us are convinced those are unavoidable anyway, that argument kinda loses its potency.

Let's make this clear:  The panic and pain are unavoidable.  They are coming.

The only debate to have is whether we've laid the groundwork to rebuild.  Washington's planting landmines instead.

196

I've heard it said that politics is the art of what is possible(or something to that effect).

Our financial situation transcends politics.

Are you a Republican? Great, we have a 1.4 Trillion dollar deficit this year, 14 Trillion in national debt and tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities.

Are you a Democrat? Great, we have a 1.4 Trillion dollar deficit this year, 14 Trillion in national debt and tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities.

Are you an Independent? Great, we have a 1.4 Trillion dollar deficit this year, 14 Trillion in national debt and tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities.

Our debt is objective. It exists regardless of your view of government or whether you acknowledge its existence.

It cannot be sustained and that which cannot last forever simply won't.

197 182 So, does everybody see why I'm inquiring about home wine-making kits?

Posted by: joncelli at July 27, 2011 12:02 PM (RD7QR)

I was thinking it was for hobo bait

198 Drew, it's like I don't even know you anymore.

199

This is fucking stupid. It's as if people completely ignored what Reid and the Obama admin said yesterday. The Boehner plan, the one that sucked so much because it cut so little, WAS DEAD ON FREAKING ARRIVAL. Yet here we are, talking about cutting even more and acting like that will pass, as opposed to the dreaded CCB that will have no shot. It's just funny to me how Gabe and now Drew keep reminding us that CCB is DOA, while totally missing that the Boehner has been hit with the same label. They are pretending that somehow THAT bill passes, even though Reid and Obama have said no. Wishcasting of the highest order.

Folks, we are either going to hit August 2nd or we are going to pass a plan that honest-to-god raises taxes. There are no other options.

And with that, bring on August 2nd.

200 So CCB is dead but it is the only thing that has passed even one house of Congress.  In fact it is the only plan in existence and the only one being contemplated that even comes close to solving the problem.

I am good with saying CCB is our plan and calling it a day.  If Obama wants to tell everyone their Social Security checks aren't going out because he wants a new train set or because  ACORN can't be defunded then let him.

We either need to get a balanced budget amendment or a repeal of Obamacare or we haven't accomplished a damn thing that won't be undone as soon as they think we aren't looking.

All that it would take to pass CCB would be to convince JEF that his career is over otherwise and he will find 4-5 votes in the Senate.  It's a long shot but it is the only shot we have right now.  Everything else is just the proverbial deck chair rearrangement.

201 189 Analysts: Senate Democratic plan saves $2.2 trillion http://tinyurl.com/DemsBeSlashin Thank God Dingy Harry is stepping up. Tho, I’m fearful these “analysts” are really “analists”.


Remove the war savings and it's down to $1.2T. Another thing-- are they scoring from the January or April baseline? We don't even know exactly what they're scoring outside the war funding.

202
oh, I forgot the ninnies in the Gang of Six

they screwed Boehner out the aforementioned option

203 I was thinking it was for hobo bait Posted by: Red Shirt at July 27, 2011 12:09 PM (FIDMq) Naw, you fill empty Thunderbird bottles with water for that. Much more economical.

204 This is the hill on which we must make our stand. This has always been the hill.

No, '12 is.  We all agree on the goal.  The only difference between the purists and the RINOs is tactics.  Which is more effective, taking half a loaf now and probably the whole thing in '12, or reaching for it all now, and maybe failing completely. 

Could we all just knock off the demonization for awhile.  That's Harry and Barry's goal.  Why play that game?

205 If nothing is passed, we win. Instant balanced budget. And when I say "we" I mean Americans, not Republicans, RINO-boy.

I no longer think that will work. Otrama with his back to the wall will embrace the phony 14th amendment crap and issue new debt (QE-III etc) based on that. He can do that because he knows he will NEVER be impeached no matter what illegal stuff he does.

During the election I said that Republicans could show him eating a live puppy with a dull spoon and he would still get votes from the Democrats.

That has not changed.

In short I think we are at the cusp of doom now and there is no success route.

206

Alas, you seem to have left out the ensuing economic panic and accompanying depression that would follow. Otherwise, a great plan.
Yeah, that's totally not going to happen anyway. I mean if we just let them win this with some minor cuts and win back the senate and presidency, the Republicans will totally fix all our problems.

I'm in the mindset that only the market is willing or capable of fixing our financial problems, and the sooner the better. The longer we put it off the more painful the correction will be.

207 If nothing is passed, we win. Instant balanced budget. And when I say "we" I mean Americans, not Republicans, RINO-boy.

But I know I'm talking to a fence post. You seem to think there is some political maneuver that will make everything okay.

I repeat, with the exception of Monty, those who post here suck at math. You're living in your own fantasy world where increasing debt and spending year-over-year don't lead to a massive correction, complete with misery and deprivation.

You're so in love with the political process that you sneer at those who can add and subtract. How's that working out for you?

Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST

 

I third this motion.

Drew himself gives the game away. he noted that we'll probably see a downgrading anyway. Therefore, it's even more important that don't do anything else that's stupid politically and do the right thing fiscally.

1. The House has led, but the horse will not drink. it won't even commit pen to paper.

2. Several plans were presented and all were rejected for purely poitical reasons, and the desire for more power and taxes.

3. Anyone on the Republican side that uses the words "revenue enhancements" is fired. Instantly.

4. Reserve an office with room for the public and the media and invite the President to show up with spending priorities on 8/03. He gets to announce on camera what his objections are as to what will contniue to be funded, shared sacrifices, don't ya know.

208 DrewM has become a hard core conservative knuckledragger out of touch with reality , while I was asleep

209 Drew btw that was my attempt at snark.

210

Alas, you seem to have left out the ensuing economic panic and accompanying depression that would follow. Otherwise, a great plan.

--------

The hell is this? This is worse than the Obama rhetoric. Honest to god, why are so many on my side buying into this armageddon bullshit? Depression...from what will amount to a government shutdown? Good lord.

211 Which is more effective, taking half a loaf now and probably the whole thing in '12, or reaching for it all now, and maybe failing completely. 

Have we been offered half a loaf?  I haven't seen even a crumb being tossed our way.  And after the next election, the Democrats in the Senate will still have the filibuster to prevent undoing the time-bomb that is ObamaCare.

The bone is being prepared.  Let the Debt Ceiling crash the status quo or buy some lube.

212 Ben, what we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, a spending machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this machine does is tax and spend and borrow us into oblivion, and that's all.

(apologies to Peter Benchley)

213 How can we POSSIBLY make any cuts? Easy. Get an old budget. Find the year and do a "Replace All". No arguments from me if you go back to 2005. "Oh, but we'll lose all the progress since then!". Yeah, that's kind of the point.

214 217 DrewM has become a hard core conservative knuckledragger out of touch with reality , while I was asleep Posted by: willow at July 27, 2011 12:13 PM (h+qn [sniffff] They grow up so fast....

215 So CCB is dead but it is the only thing that has passed even one house of Congress.  In fact it is the only plan in existence and the only one being contemplated that even comes close to solving the problem.

I am good with saying CCB is our plan and calling it a day. 
Posted by: Voluble
................

Not quite..  The Republicans in the House also passed a budget for 2012 (Ryan's budget) that was rejected by the Senate.

The problem with our leadership is that we need to tell Obama to stuff it.  We sent you plans and you guys reject them.  Come up with something better that isn't just some savings ten years out.

216 Which is more effective, taking half a loaf now and probably the whole thing in '12, or reaching for it all now, and maybe failing completely. A billion dollars is 1/14000th of a loaf.

217 Really? So by ending the destructive spiral of never-ending budget deficits and borrowing we would instantly be thrown into depression? Care to explain the mechanism? And please explain how it will be worse than the fast-approaching alternative. Don't worry about Drew. He'll be just fine. Smugness is totally underrated as a survival skill.

218 186176"If you haven't read Gabe's piece in support of the Boehner Plan...

'Support' doesn't change the numbers.


If Boehner's staffers had been honest, it would have been a pretty good plan.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 27, 2011 12:03 PM (o2lIv)

 

if his staffers are to blame for all his mistakes why doesn't he get new staffers?

 

face it, his staffers do as they are directed and he does the directing.

 

none of the Old Guard want to really cut anything, they can't, they are addicts and just like any addict they will claim up, down and all over the place that they simply MUST have their drug of choice or the sky will fall.

addicts do whatever they have to do to get what they want - how is that different than the behavior displayed by the congressional leadership?

 

219

Will it be worse than the depression and economic panic that this insane spending will bring on us and the perversion of America that comes with an overspending federal government?

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 27, 2011 12:06 PM (G/MYk)

I for one welcome the perversion of America.

220 if 2012 is our stand why not just let the Dems do as they desire?

i like this except for the whate ifs. I'm actually afraid we cannot hang on for very long at this rate, and many people are already suffering out there.

i'd really like this train to be stopped

221
Relax, everyone. There is still one last hope.





Green jobs.

222 I am simply baffled how anyone can look at the numbers and believe that there is a political way out of this situation.

Prediction: Pain.

223 Posted by: Ben at July 27, 2011 12:12 PM (wuv1c)

We may well be past the point of no-return. We likely are.

At this point our only hope is sustained and robust economic growth WHILE significantly cutting back the cost and scope of government.

We simply aren't going to get those things with Democrats running the Senate and Obama in the White House.

I don't know that we can put off the moment of DOOM long enough to give us a chance to get to those places but I'd like to try and do everything that's practical to give us a shot.

224 Alas, you seem to have left out the ensuing economic panic and accompanying depression that would follow. Otherwise, a great plan.

Posted by: DrewM. at July 27, 2011 11:59 AM (y07gN)

We are giving away almost twice as much as we are taking in. How could there not be pain in stopping.

But the problem is reality intrudes. It will stop. The only question is how much damage will we do to ourselves before stopping?

It is very much like drug addiction. Withdrawal sucks. But it sure beats choking to death on your own vomit at 27.

225 I just can't wrap my mind around the idea that CCB, which came up a few votes short in the Senate is dead, but Boehner's plan, the one that hasn't even made it out of the House and has been declared DOA in the Senate and had a veto threatened by the Obam admin..THATS ALIVE AND WELL. Needs to be explained asap or it needs to stop being argued.

226 RINOS blinking faster than Pelosi's botoxed lids.

227

Posted by Drew at 11:37 (# 87):

The simple fact is we're not going to get a Democratic controlled Senate to sign onto the tea party economic agenda. You can tweak it all you want, they aren't going to pass it anymore than the House is going to pass a Senate plan if it had another trillion dollars in stimulus.

We simply don't have the governmental power to force our will upon them, nor they us. It's a stalemate. We need another election to break the tie and pick a course.

But Drew, there is simplicity in this whole issue - the "do-nothing" approach.  If nothing is passed, then there is no debt ceiling increase.  The only bills that can be paid are those they actually have the revenues for.  IF they choose to spend it on items other than debt service and choose the option of default, it will be the executive branch's choice to default. 

Again, simply stated - nothing needs to be passed for what amounts to a $1.5 trillion dollar budget cut to occur.  To me, that is the starting point of negotiations - numbers that start with a T on a first year basis and definitely not some number that only starts with a B. 

The house needs to pass a spending prioritization bill.  One that lays out certain minimum items that the revenue must be used for first.  Hit up all the major items - servicing the debt, SS, medicare, and military to take away 'talking points'.  Then allow executive discrection for any additional revenue that is left over after paying those bills in order.

Once they pass this bill and send it to the senate, they speak into any microphone that they can and note that they have offered plans to avoid default and to assure that SS and medicare recipients will get 'their' checks - but, the senate won't even allow a vote on it.  Force the democrats to explain why it's a bad idea to allow CCB to be voted on, why the prioritization bill shouldn't be voted on, etc.

228 Green jobs.

White roofs!

229 If nothing is passed, we win.

If nothing is passed, we get 4 more years of Obama.

Pass me the Purity Bong.

230 Smugness is totally underrated as a survival skill.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST at July 27, 2011 12:15 PM (lbo6/)

And sucking off the butcher for some meat trimmings. If he gets his way, he be doing both, but mostly the "sucking off" part.

231

Ben, what we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, a spending machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this machine does is tax and spend and borrow us into oblivion, and that's all.

I agree, that's why I've come to the conclusion that only the market will correct this. It's become clear that the political parties won't/can't do anything about it.

We're arguing about a few billion dollars on this message board.

A. Few. Billion. Dollars.

That's like arguing over a few thousand dollars when buying a several hundred thousand dollar house.

I understand that the correction is going to be terrible. People will be broke, homeless, lose everything, maybe even starve in some situations, there will be violence, etc etc.

I get it. It's terrible. I wish we weren't at this point, but we are.  If we let this continue  the correction will only be worse.

Consider how many people are dependent on government largess now versus 10-20 years ago, now imagine 10-20 years into the future. Do you think it will be easier to have it taken away from them now or in 10-20 years.

232 green jobs, start growing your own food fast!

233 Yes ...? The Constitution is pretty clear about this point.

Too bad nobody in Washington cares anymore.  As Nicholson's Joker would say, 'This town needs an enema!'

234
I am agreeing with Drew M. Dear God, this must be the Rapture.

235

OT - China says rebuilt aircraft carrier for research

Here is another reason we have to get out proflagate spending ways under control - all that interest we pay on the debt China lends us helps them do this kind of "research".

Do we want to fund a blue-water fleet for the Chi-Coms?

236
Ben, you're responding to a scene in Jaws.

The least you could do is sockpuppet 'Hooper.'

237 Remove the war savings and it's down to $1.2T. Another thing-- are they scoring from the January or April baseline? We don't even know exactly what they're scoring outside the war funding. And I have a 14-inch penis. If you measure from the far rim of my asshole. It. Doesn't. Matter. What baseline they use. Look at the year-over-year increases in spending and borrowing. It's fucking simple - none of these plans cut ANYTHING.

238 but I'd like to try and do everything that's practical to give us a shot.

By continuing the status quo, and admit it, one billion or 100 billion in cuts, the status quo continues.  The Plans don't do the job. 

It will not work.

At worst, we could just send up a clean 500B DC increase and say That's it for the next 12 months, live with that.

239 Your problem is not with the control that the House clearly has over the budgetary process but with the fact that you would shit yourself over even the idea that the debt limit might not be raised.  If that is what the Senate and Precedent decide to bring things to, then that is what we must face.  That is the control that THEY have.  The House intitiates budgetary matters. 
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 27, 2011 12:16 PM (G/MYk)

Good lord, it's not that your opinions are so stupid (though they certainly are) it's all the facts you think you know.

Let's compare the parts of your comment that I bolded with the actual words of the Constitution, shall we?

Article 1, Section 7:

All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.

Bills for raising revenues, not spending, must start in the House.

240 Details from GOP Conference meeting


Jim Jordan apologized after one of his staffers was caught sending emails to primary some of his colleagues. Some lawmakers might quit RSC because of it.

241 S&P sez the US need to cut four billion in order to avoid a downgrade. If they're serious, then neither party in D.C. is offering a serious proposal.

242
Didn't you hear? Republicans don't want safe food, clean water, and clean air.

243

And I have a 14-inch penis. If you measure from the far rim of my asshole.

We need leadership that is willing to drive this point home.

244

release all the tarp and stimulus funds not used and send them back to the treasury...there's several hundred billion right there

this isn't that hard rethugican'ts

Posted by: navycopjoe

navy , why that's way wrong, I'm sure those funds are gonna be used for something waaaay more important and stuff.

245

I don't know that we can put off the moment of DOOM long enough to give us a chance to get to those places but I'd like to try and do everything that's practical to give us a shot.

I can respect that, but given what we've seen, I'm beginning to think that if we take all three branches of government in 2012 that the Republicans won't reduce the size of government at all.  I think their actions over the past few decades have shown that to be true.

I am starting to agree with Andy and Monty that the governments growth is unstoppable whether run by democrats or republicans.

I'm not optimistic that things get considerably better in the Republicans win.

I don't think they will repeal Obamacare, I don't think they will reform or cut SS or Medicare.

I simply don't see it.

 

246
Four billion per what, Warren Bonesteal? Per day? Minute?

247

The Federales can do a whole lot of things to increase revenue without increasing taxes.

1. Open Alaska to oil production (even Jimmy Carter did this) sparks productive use of things and people and reduces cost of fuel which lowers the cost of manufacturing and transportation.

2. Build Something (hotwire Nuclear Power Plant construction with tax gimmes and mandates; push offshore drilling, there be a whole lot of jobs involved building rigs)

3. Sell something (i.e., SSA sells Treasuries - lowers debt limit and pays beneficiearies; Dept of Interior sells Fed Lands raises revenue to pay down debt)

4. Cut something (slash the EPA, do away with Commerce Department, close military bases in Europe - WTF is NATO for?; oh yeah, kill Obamacare - who runs up the credit cards when they face loosing their job - Obama thats who)

5. Establish Merit Metrics for all entitlement programs (student loans only for proven academic performance and only for critical skills; who needs womyn studies professors?; public work requirements for all welfare checks - yeah the unions will whine but who needs to pay union wages to clean grafitti off of public buildings - its a twofer - clean building and a citizenry who shame grafitti?)

 Simple steps that result in less spending, more revenue and less debt. Oh yeah, you get a market rally as soon as you do these things. Funny how real leadership working with free markets can turn things around fast.

248

Consider how many people are dependent on government largess now versus 10-20 years ago, now imagine 10-20 years into the future. Do you think it will be easier to have it taken away from them now or in 10-20 years.

There's a step before "a government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it all away", and that step is that the government is big enough to "bless" it's faithful with nearly everything they desire but isn't yet big enough to take it from them (i.e. deprive them).

Greece...and the US are at this point.

/Apologies to Mark Steyn, from whom I stole this thought from, . 

249 Green jobs
 air up your tires, that should take at least You and one union member

250 That's like arguing over a few DOLLARS when buying a several hundred thousand dollar house. FIFY

251
How did that story leak to the friggin Politico?

Gee, I wonder...

252

Ben, you're responding to a scene in Jaws.

The least you could do is sockpuppet 'Hooper.'

the government will catch that shark for you, it'll cost you 10 billion dollars, but they'll get it alright

253

 Simple steps that result in less spending, more revenue and less debt. Oh yeah, you get a market rally as soon as you do these things. Funny how real leadership working with free markets can turn things around fast.

Posted by: Sub-Tard

All excellent suggestions all, but the key is that we have to run out of money first.  As long as the Feds can borrow, they will not consider any alternatives.

Crash the status quo and an entire world of options becomes viable.

254

Boner made a tactical error with his 2 tier plan.  The 2 tier concept was fine.  The details stink.  By putting his cuts in Tier 1 on the backend, where a future Congress could ignore them, he created an unserious plan.  A plan sure to lead to a credit downgrade.  If by some miracle this plan did make it to ObamaÂ’s desk, and he signed it – downgrade.  GOPÂ’s fault.  See, the intransigent GOP held the Dims hostage, but “for the good of the country”, the Dims “compromised” Â…Â…Â….

 

Maybe the GOP could “compromise”, “for the good of the country”, and let ReidÂ’s bill pass.  Downgrade.  DimsÂ’ fault.

255

Four billion per what, Warren Bonesteal? Per day? Minute?

i think he meant trillion

256
hey, this would be a great time to air our dirty laundry

257 I don't know that we can put off the moment of DOOM long enough to give us a chance to get to those places but I'd like to try and do everything that's practical to give us a shot.

This is really the crux of the matter isn't it. Do we have time to get the commies out of power AND will be able to get Republicans who will actually cut?

My thought is that if we continue printing money under what ever new name they have for it we will not. We already have real inflation at 10% by the end of QE-III it would probably be at 25% and QE-IV 70% (expotential rise).

At that point, or most likely before, we will go to a barter economy. That is otherwise know as collapse.

258

I'm with Empire of Jeff on his last comments.

It isn't a cut unless it gets us below the amount of money we take in.

 

 

259
nood post

but it kinda sucks

260 Drunken sailors spend their own money.

261 A hard freeze on total spending would balance the budget in like 4 years. If the Feds simply commit to not increasing spending we would be OK. The problem is the Dems and the Repubs both think increasing spending at a lower rate is a cut.

262 WAF

263

You have now cut 135 billion...........leaving you 1.265 Trillion short.

So, where is the rest coming from?

 

The real question I posed in an earlier post is where is the 5% of GDP increase in spending from 2007 to today going? Answer that and then you will know what to cut. Dems want a Fedzilla that consumes 25% of GDP. The old time tested number was 18% of GDP. So where is this 5% going?

264 253 Details from GOP Conference meeting

Edit-- It reads like "primary" but what Jordan did was ask outside conservative groups to pressure those in RSC who are leaning towards supporting the Boehner rewrite. It's his job to pressure his own people.

265 I'm beginning to think that if we take all three branches of government in 2012 that the Republicans won't reduce the size of government at all.  I think their actions over the past few decades have shown that to be true.
Posted by: Ben at July 27, 2011 12:24 PM (wuv1c)

You'll be happy to know I've been working on a post about that very subject.

And yeah, I agree.

266 Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 27, 2011 12:28 PM (G/MYk)

No, it's not "mis-wording' your entire premise falls apart because you envisioned an imaginary power in the Constitution.

267 If nothing is passed, we win.

If nothing is passed, we get 4 more years of Obama.

Pass me the Purity Bong.

Posted by: cherry ð

 

Really? Prove it. My take on it for the poli-sci groupies is this:

1. One of these pieces of crap does nothing other than provide political CYA.

2. We still take the downgrade hit and Obama and the MFM use the plan as a weapon (it failed, it didn't do what they said it would do, if only they had listened to us)

3. A piece of crap passes, for some reason we don't get hit with a downgrade and Obama takes the credit).

4. We refuse to take the bait. And we formally cannot borrow any more. In practice, we already are running out of buyers for our debt. At that time, SS and the military are getting paid. Obama is still defending Obamacare. Reid is still defending coked up cowboy monkey poets. And the Tea Party still exists.

268 So the Boehner Plan represents a surrender on what already got passed the House.

That's not true AT ALL. THE CBO scoring started with the April deal as a baseline. So the cuts are over and above what was agreed to previously.

Krauthammer has an excellent point on this:

Right now Obama and the Democrats own this economy lock, stock and barrel. Look at the polling on who voters trust on the most important issues of the day: economy, spending, debt. Republicans are walking away with it.

If we default or there are consequences to taking this too far, then Obama and the Democrats will be able to claim that Republicans killed their recovery with their refusal to compromise on the debt ceiling.

Like it or not, we DON'T control the House and the White House and there's NOTHING we can do to change that until November 2012. Even if we got Democrats to agree to bigger cuts, that's chump change compared to what can be done if we retake the Senate and the White House.

So, quit looking at the short run, and look at the long run. Which is more important? Making Obama bite on a couple billion of dollars today while letting him keep his job in 2012, or giving up a rounding error in spending to retire him?

I understand the impulse. I really do. But there comes a point where you say "We have gotten as much as we can REALISTICALLY expect to get given the current political environment and without damaging our brand by pushing too far.

It's akin to Ace's argument about trying to flip from blue to red. First, you have to accept that that everybody that DOESN'T ALREADY AGREE WITH YOU is going to have to adjust to purple first.

Arguing for purity has its time and place. That place is where that fight for purity doesn't hurt the larger fight for your greater principles.

The pragmatist has to look at the latest Boehner deal (after he adjusts it for the CBO scoring) and say: we have reached the absolute farthest point at which we can pass a bill with Republican support. Democrats will NOT support anything more conservative to this. Anything more conservative WILL NOT PASS no matter how hard you might wish that it would.

Get what you can. Get out before you make the Republican brand toxic with the moderate Democrats and Independents you will need to retire Obama.

Use your heads. No, not the one where you whip it out and try to compete to see which of you is the biggest, baddest conservative. The one that actually understands reality and ACTUALLY wants to beat Obama and the Democrats in 2012 rather than wind up crying on election night because we made the mistake of not declaring victory and moving on when we had the chance.

269 Jim Jordan apologized after one of his staffers was caught sending emails to primary some of his colleagues. Some lawmakers might quit RSC because of it.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 27, 2011 12:22 PM (o2lIv)

So fucking what?  Do they really think it's essential to the country that they stay in their jobs thanks to running as unopposed as possible?  And that they need to air their outrage at a time like this?  What a bunch of fucking twats; they deserve to be primaried based on that alone.

270

You'll be happy to know I've been working on a post about that very subject.

And yeah, I agree

I look forward to reading it.

I've been thinking about the subject for some time now.

 

271 Update on rewrite:

"House Republican leaders are looking for deeper cuts rather than a reduction in new debt authority as they rewrite Speaker John BoehnerÂ’s (R-Ohio) debt ceiling bill, the partyÂ’s top vote-counter, Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), told The Hill on Wednesday."

Better, but let's see it first. 

272 Interest payments are over 200 billion (or over 400 billion, depending on how you count it); that should be our starting point for negotiations. At least cut current spending by the amount weÂ’re paying in interest! Remember what weÂ’ve learned from the DOOM posts: if we donÂ’t solve this problem before the economy recovers weÂ’re fucked, because interest rates will rise and weÂ’ll end up with interest payments that swamp revenue. Start negotiations at the interest payment level; settle for $100 billion+ if necessary.

273 40 billion for EPA,

Not your point I know, but how much economic activity is that $40B restricting right now?

274

god you rethugican'ts suck

here's a quick cut worth more

kill the 2.5 billion the feds are giving hawaii for high speed rail, we haven't started it yet and we (the voters) don't want it!!

-----

Your governor could reject it.  But if Hawaiians are too sucky to elect a governor who will do that (which puts them below New Jerseyas, btw), then that's your problem.

275 Maybe we could have a bake sale to raise money to reduce the debt. Oh yeah, Michelle is against bake sales. Damn.

276 Alas, you seem to have left out the ensuing economic panic and accompanying depression that would follow. Otherwise, a great plan.

Posted by: DrewM. at July 27, 2011 11:59 AM (y07gN)

As opposed to the larger economic panic and accompanying depression that will come later, when there is nobody to loan any more money?  At some point, we are going to have to dramatically cut entitlement spending by 20% or more, might as well be this week.

277 Not your point I know, but how much economic activity is that $40B restricting right now?

Posted by: 18-1 at July 27, 2011 12:39 PM (7BU4a)

I tried to make that point last night; 40B is a drop in the bucket compared to how they've shackled the economy and benign acts of private citizens on their own property.

278 Remember what weÂ’ve learned from the DOOM posts: if we donÂ’t solve this problem before the economy recovers weÂ’re fucked, because interest rates will rise and weÂ’ll end up with interest payments that swamp revenue.

Remember "interest rates" on T-Bills are not really tied to the "economy". In theory they are tied to what buyers at the auction are willing to pay. Currently the federal government is unwilling for any short term T-Bills to have much above zero. (because of the debt)

That is the whole problem. NOBODY will buy them at zero now.  That is nobody but Taxcheat Timmy and the printing presses.

279 You'll be happy to know I've been working on a post about that very subject.
And yeah, I agree

And if they don't cut then, then all aboard!

280 286 So fucking what?  Do they really think it's essential to the country that they stay in their jobs thanks to running as unopposed as possible?  And that they need to air their outrage at a time like this?  What a bunch of fucking twats; they deserve to be primaried based on that alone.

I misread it the first time since it reads like primary, wic was my mistake. What he asked these outside groups to do is pressure is colleagues to vote no. The point is that, as head of RSC, it is Jordan's job to talk to his people and apply pressure to them that way instead of demanding outside help to twist arms. He and his deputies need to do that themselves, if that's the way they feel. Being head of RSC gives him certain responsibilities.

281 63 Not happening. It's dead.
Posted by: DrewM. at July 27, 2011 11:26 AM

You know, it's not really dead as long as we remember it

282 As for zero based budgeting, it would be too complicated to do every year, unfortunately.  I do think every four years, every agency, department, program has to justify its continued existence and subsidy.  This way every President in each term will have a real opportunity to get rid of things.

Why, because it's "too big?" 

To do a big budget each project manager budgets from zero, moves that up to the next level manager, and so on and so on.  If they can do it every four years, they can do it every single year. 

283 288Update on rewrite:

"House Republican leaders are looking for deeper cuts rather than a reduction in new debt authority as they rewrite Speaker John BoehnerÂ’s (R-Ohio) debt ceiling bill, the partyÂ’s top vote-counter, Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), told The Hill on Wednesday."

Better, but let's see it first.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 27, 2011 12:38 PM (o2lIv)

 

and they'll look and look, then throw their hands up and say "There's nothing left to cut, everything we are doing now is so important, so nescessary, has so much progressivey goodness we just can't stop doing it"

why? because that's what addicts do - justify their behavior.

284 "I see a hand, reaching out from the heavens. It is your hand. And I hear a voice, a million people crying out."

"My followers?"

"Your creditors."

285

"Jordan has come under pressure from leadership because RSC staff has been found pushing a no vote on the Boehner plan via email to outside groups.

Jordan said he has apologized to fellow members and did not know RSC staff was sending the emails."

_{/The Hill}

286 Let me get this straight. A huge group of us voted for, and won, Tea Party seats in the House. We won the House. It was a mandate. They pass CCB. They did their job. Now, suddenly, just like TARP and the endless other bullsh*t, WE are now the bad guys because Boehner doesn't have the guts to walk away from total crap. We are suppose to "get our asses in line" according to Boehner. Um, how about this, take your fake August 2nd date, take your fake Armageddon, take your fake "NEXT YEAR WE'LL GET'M!" and SHOVE IT. I think the Tea Party Reps in the House shouldn't sign ANYTHING that Boehner throws at them. Hell, let's just take whatever Reid has cooked up and sign off on it. Do you really think Reid's plan at this point will be ANY better than Boehner's? Seriously? If this is about who is going to get blamed, the American public, many too dumb to know a Liar when they see it, already are going to blame Republicans, regardless, so WHO F'ING CARES. Have a backbone.

287 How many times do the conservatives have to be correct before the RINO squishes get their asses in line?

288 Being head of RSC gives him certain responsibilities.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 27, 2011 12:45 PM (o2lIv)

Thanks for the correction which I noted after you previously mentioned it but it was after what I posted.  Still I'm not as upset as you are by what Jordan did and don't have that much of a problem with  him urging others to pressure them.  Even if your opinion is correct on that, I still think the members cause more damage to the party as a whole by whining about it to outsiders.  Whatever happened to the concept of suffering in silence?

289

Introduce a new term to the fight.

FREEZE.

Freeze spending at 2008 levels and pass it. That is the last budget, and the Dems loved it so much, they didn't bother to pass another one.

I don't know how much it 'saves' but its gotta be more than 1 freaking billion.

290

Folks, we are either going to hit August 2nd or we are going to pass a plan that honest-to-god raises taxes. There are no other options.

And with that, bring on August 2nd.

Posted by: Rich at July 27, 2011 12:10 PM (wnGI4)

-----

Blood. Turnip. Assembly. 

291 Ah, so the argument is that, since 60% of people want cuts, 70% of people don't want the cap increased, and 80% of people want a balanced budget by law, we have to not cut anything, increase the cap and not balance the budget so we will get the majority of the votes. No wonder we've been getting boned regularly since 1988, we're fucking idiots.

292 When the end comes I'm gong to live at the Empire of Jeff Compound and Country Club.

293 The funniest part is that the commentariat is arguing the political-class line form the standpoint of maintaining a majority, and they're mad because the majority disagrees with them. Trying to look at it as if I wasn't a boned participant, it's actually quite amusing.

294 312 When the end comes I'm gong to live at the Empire of Jeff Compound and Country Club.

Posted by: mpfs at July 27, 2011 12:56 PM (iYbLN)

I dont know...the 'vacation' that Monty was on was rumored to be a big renovation at DOOM mountain hide-away

295 306 Thanks for the correction which I noted after you previously mentioned it but it was after what I posted.  Still I'm not as upset as you are by what Jordan did and don't have that much of a problem with  him urging others to pressure them.  Even if your opinion is correct on that, I still think the members cause more damage to the party as a whole by whining about it to outsiders.  Whatever happened to the concept of suffering in silence?


I'm not sure who told and they also should have kept it in the room. But this stunt by this RSC staffer apparently had the opposite effect and some members are rethinking their positions. Furthermore, while I understand Jordan's position, he-- like Boehner-- has an obligation to do his job. He needs to talk to his people and convince them as to why his position is the right one.

296 #304 - The Reid plan guts defense. Plain and simple. The alternative to the Boehner plan is the Reid plan.

It isn't the Boehner plan vs. some imaginary conservative's "wet dream" bill.

It's a binary choice. One or the other.

If you're against the Boehner plan, then by default you're for the Reid plan. Because that's what going to pass if the Boehner plan passes. There are enough Democrats and Republicans from blue/swing districts that will vote for the Reid bill rather than be held responsible for a default or financial crisis.

Those are your choices.

It really is that simple. Do you want the Boehner plan which doesn't go far enough, or do you want the Reid plan which guts defense?

Make a choice. It really is that simple.

297 FY 2008 budget was a total of 2.902 Trillion. Estimated Government (Federal ) receipt for 2011 is 2.173 Trillion (per usgovernmentrevenue.com) Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at July 27, 2011 01:01 PM (OWjjx) So that would cut more than half this year's projected deficit. More than any of the "insider" "plans."

298 FOUR TRILLION.

 Sorry about the typo. I never claimed to be a typist.

299 307 Introduce a new term to the fight.

FREEZE.

Freeze spending at 2008 levels and pass it. That is the last budget, and the Dems loved it so much, they didn't bother to pass another one.

I don't know how much it 'saves' but its gotta be more than 1 freaking billion.

The "Ryan" budget does that before lowering spending to '06 levels. Why Boehner doesn't try using those numbers is beyond me.

300 I gotta be honest, the JB "get in line" story is really tickling my funny bone. It is a massive tell in showing that he is caving to the Democrats but it also shows that the people we sent there are having great effect. Take comfort in the fact that the sun will shine tomorrow and that if JB botches this, after his next election he will be viewing that sun from a rocker....On his front porch......With a glass of iced tea.....And tears in his eyes.

301 Mike Pence is leaning yes. 

302 #324 -

Ok. So you want the Reid plan to pass instead.

Gotcha.

Thanks for clearing that up.

303 Rep. Joe Walsh (R., Ill.) still a firm no, but super warm & fuzzy for leadership on his way out of conf. meeting. "I love John Boehner."

_{/Andrew Stiles}

304 I don't think it is helpful for Drew or anyone else to adopt the extremist rhetoric of the press that CCB is the Tea Party agenda.  Just because the press say stupid things and tries to demonize CCB or the Tea Party doesn't mean we have to adopt the same speech patterns.  CCB is just a rational plan that addresses our problems.  The Tea Party is the only adult group looking at the situation so it makes sense that they would support it. 

If we apply that standard then everything else that is being proposed is radical in that it only makes the problem worse or kicks the can down the road... which effectively makes things worse since it is like your ass being on fire and you decide to try to fan it for a little while longer instead of dousing it with water.

Everyone thought the world would come to an end when we laid off the air traffic controllers or when we did welfare reform.  Both were painless in the end.  This will be a little tougher but it is inevitable.

BTW, I am certain Obama is innumerate.  He NEVER gets anything right if it involves numbers and that includes his own birth date.  We got a real winner in this one folks.

305 Hey, speaking of Obamacare, does anyone know how much of the "already spent money" that has us pushed up against the debt ceiling is for Obamacare?

306

FY 2008 budget was a total of 2.902 Trillion.

 

Estimated Government (Federal ) receipt for 2011 is 2.173 Trillion (per usgovernmentrevenue.com)

Well thats a good start. Start the FREEZE campaign now. Rename the bill Freeze, Cap, and balance and let the Dems try to explain their stupid accounting gimmicks. When they say cut, just say no we are FREEZING, no cuts.

307 Make a choice. It really is that simple. Posted by: Jim B at July 27, 2011 01:04 PM (QD3//) You're offering a choice between dogshit on a shingle and pig vomit a la carte. We're saying we're brown-bagging it.

308 Dammit Mallamutt!!! Lemme dream!

309

O.K., let me know when Obama agrees to defund Obama care as part of a deal. Let me know when the Senate Democrats agree to do that.

 

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at July 27, 2011 01:04 PM (OWjjx)

The second part of that might come to pass; and it might depend on how this whole debt ceiling thing plays out.  I'll state again that the fact that neither the Maine twins, Scott Brown, Lugar, Graham nor McCain broke with the party is a clear sign of how this issue is being regarded even in liberal states.  Sooner or later, the Senate dems will be concerned about their political future; and the ones up for election in 11/12 will be the soonest.  Obamacare has consistently polled very poorly and the longer the economy stays in the toilet, the longer the attitude will persist or grow.

310 #334 - Except that brown-bagging isn't on the table.

Either you will be forced to eat the dogshit, or you will be forced to pig vomit a la carte.

There are no brown bags. There is no "kiddie menu."

Two plans are on the table: Boehner's and Reid's.

Democrats WILL vote for Reid's which means it WILL pass the Senate. They will ALSO vote for it in the House and ENOUGH Republicans WILL vote for it in the House because they represent blue/swing districts. That means it WILL pass. That means the president WILL sign it.

Game over.

You lose.

You could have at least gotten what Boehner was offering. But you were too pure, too good, so much better than everyone else.

And you lost.

Congratulations.

311 The old time tested number was 18% of GDP. So where is this 5% going? Posted by: Sub-Tard

Ever thought of doing your own homework? Great, here ya go.

Second, you realize that GDP isn't a constant, right?

312 Breaking News - Boner may have the votes.  Dims have "compromised" by allowing it to go to Senate floor if passed.

313 #339 Jim B, great Jim, you just pointed out the losers in a very clear manner.The Republicans who voted with the Democrats to pass Reid's plan lose as well as the voters who put those particular Republicans in office and yes, as well as all the rest of us.

314 You could have at least gotten what Boehner was offering. But you were too pure, too good, so much better than everyone else. And you lost. Congratulations. Posted by: Jim B at July 27, 2011 01:15 PM (QD3//) We are saying the choice is not acceptable because it is NOT. It does nothing to solve the goddamned problem. You are ACTIVELY helping avoid the solution by defending the false choice. You *COULD* be pushing the GOP to push for a better deal, but instead you're saying "you'll eat shit and like it!" You and others like you are why we are not only boned, but we WILL NOT solve the problem, default and go bankrupt, interest rates will skyrocket, and we'll end up "going Greek" but with no one to bail us out. Because of YOU. YOU got us here and YOU are fighting against any solutions. YOU are the one who is making this happen and desperately looking for someone to blame. No dice, it's all on you, baby.

315 When the end comes I'm gong to live at the Empire of Jeff Compound and Country Club.

Posted by: mpfs at July 27, 2011 12:56 PM (iYbLN)

ack, Hell He will make us pop out kids like a Pez dispenser!

316 Vote for the Reid plan, we win 2012.  They own it.

Why are we talking about anything else?

317 #343 - Those Republicans represent blue/swing districts. You want to primary them with your red-on-red candidate of choice? Fine. You're welcome to it.

But it doesn't change the FACTS. The FACTS are that they WILL vote for Reid's bill. I'm telling you that now. You threatening Boehner or all the other Republicans is ludicrous.

Boehner is the one who knows the vote counts. He knows what the most liberal members of his caucus are going to do. You evidently are living in a world of denial if you think any differently.

You don't control the Senate. You don't control the White House. You want a big win? Then win the Senate and the White House. But killing yourself arguing over a rounding error in multi-trillion dollar budgets is ludicrous when you put it up against the possibility of losing wide open opportunities to win control over everything and creating REAL change.

I'll make you a promise: If the Republicans have control of everything, and they STILL won't give conservatives what they want, then I'll be calling for their heads too. But acting like a rabid attack dog mindlessly lashing out at your allies for doing the best they can do under the circumstances isn't helping YOU get what you REALLY want.

Seriously. We're on the same side here. I'm not happy about the Boehner deal either. CCB was a GREAT solution, and I WISH we had the votes to pass it and sign it into law. But WE DON'T.

Take a deep breath and step back from the tree to look at the forest. There's a bigger war than this battle, and the same guys that you're threatening and slamming today are going to be your biggest allies in the next 16 months.

If you make it clear to them that they can't count on you (even if you make it clear that you want more along the way), then you know what happens? They say screw it and start cutting easy compromise deals. Because if you're going to slam them ANYWAY even when they've done their best, why bother listening to you at all?

Step away from this from a second, and hopefully you'll decide to save some of that obvious passion and energy for the next battle. There are going to be lots of them, and we need to keep pulling Republicans as far right as POSSIBLE at every opportunity. We wouldn't have even gotten the Boehner plan if we weren't.

But, all that being said, we can't toss away our credibility and common sense in a futile effort to get something which we never had a chance of getting in first place.

318 You will be primaried.

319 #348 - If you fail to see a difference, then it's only because you're not looking. I'll say it again:

The Reid plan guts defense. Guts it.

That's how he got his savings.

Is that what you want? What sort of topping would you like on your pig vomit?

320 Have you seen my mastery of the milonguero lately?  Now, John is coming along nicely if not a little bit forced. Frankly, he needs to work on his flexibility.

321 #353 - Yeah. That worked out pretty well for Republicans in 1995 when there was a president who looked like he might vulnerable in 1996.

Remind me again what President Dole's biggest accomplishments in office were?

322 1) Boehnor's bill, unless the rewrite is radical (and probably not in favor of cuts) is DOA. You know Obama won't go for it, and Reid has as much as said so. 2) Why in the Hell would I take a promise that has been broken every budget in my lifetime seriously if the people involved won't even make *noise* in the right direction? 3) Credibility comes from doing what you said you were going to do, not from quitting every single time the going looks like it *might* start to get rough. It's obvious the problem is not going to be solved this year, anyone who promised that would be damaging their own credibility. But the process needs to *start*, and promising to maybe someday start cutting something is not a start. Offering people shit sandwiches and telling them they have no other choices doesn't exactly win friends either. "Maybe next year" has been a losing strategy since Reagan, some people just do not learn.

323 Jim B, I'll make you a promise: If the Republicans have control of everything, and they STILL won't give conservatives what they want, then I'll be calling for their heads too. But acting like a rabid attack dog mindlessly lashing out at your allies for doing the best they can do under the circumstances isn't helping YOU get what you REALLY want. You said that and I'll call it a date because this is exactly my fear.If the Republicans control the house, the Senate and the WH and fail to do what is honestly needed then me and you meet at a bar (you make the drive) and have a beer, maybe for entertainment we can hire a guy named Nero to fiddle for us. And after that takes place we can talk about if there are any real differences between red states/blue states purists or RINO's and watch the country do the slow burn.

324 Remind me again what President Dole's biggest accomplishments in office were? Posted by: Jim B at July 27, 2011 01:39 PM (QD3//) Not diving into an undeclared war in Europe, not getting impeached (but not convicted) for suborning perjury, not erecting intelligence walls that helped Bin Laden avoid attention while plotting 9/11, and not selling vital defense secrets to China, for starters.

325 The funniest part being that Dole represents what I'm arguing *against* here. So, kind of proving the point that squish/establishment isn't quite the selling point it's made out to be. Compromise for the sake of power doesn't make much sense since it often doesn't get you the power anyway (Dole, McCain, etc.).

326 #356 - Then it's within your power to stop that. Keep on supporting the most consertive ELECTABLE candidate in EVERY election possible: from school board to president.

Those Republicans that you're so down on have gone from going along with more and more spending increases to at least cutting. It's a step. It's not enough. But it's a start. You don't get from 0-60 in a heartbeat. Even in Bughatti.

You keep going. You keep making your case to the public and convincing THEM to go along with you.

But you're TRYING to die on a cross here when you don't have to. And what happens after you give up? The other guy wins because you've abandoned the field - which is exactly what you're advocating doing here by giving up on a very winnable opportunity to retire Obama and make Reid the minority leader. (And he probably wouldn't even be that as Democrats would likely elect Schumer as Minority Leader instead.)

327 #359 - You can't repeal ObamaCare without a Republican president. You can't cut spending significantly without a Republican president. You can't get serious entitlement reform without a Republican president. You can't roll back the EPA without a Republican president. You can't expand domestic energy production without a Republican president. You can't put an end to every-increasing "green energy" subsidies without a Republican president.

Should I keep going?

You want the country to burn down around you so you can claim moral superiority for having died on this hill? Fine. Then keep on going and torpedo any chance at a Republican becoming president in 2012.

You go ahead and try to get those things done with Obama still in office.

Let me know how that works out for you.

328 You have now cut 135 billion...........leaving you 1.265 Trillion short.

Well, if it is done on the same basis as these plans being put forth now... that is to say it is multiplied over ten years...  then you are at $1.35 trillion and you have done it painlessly.  See how easy that was?  Plus you have saved the country all of the job killing side effects that those programs cause and deprived the enemy of one of their prime propaganda arms.  This is the difference between cutting entire programs or departments and just kind of wink, wink, nudge, nudge cutting.

Even just looking at the savings this year it is a good start on getting us where we need to be.  Eliminating the EPA would really be a money maker since it is responsible for a good portion of the sluggishness and uncertainty in the economy now but you would have more of a political fight over that.

329 #358 - Dole was a sacrificial lamb because NO ONE was going to beat Clinton after he won public opinion during the government shutdown. The rest of the field pretty much said "let him run, and then we can move on to the next generation."

The same is true in 2008. If not for Palin exciting the base, it would have been a runaway almost no matter who ran for Republicans. So McCain ended up winning in a weak field. Our best potential candidates said "No thanks. I'm not going to take one for the team."

So you're arguing a nullity. That's not a real argument.

330

Okay... let's forget deficit cutting talks.  Lets get to the real meat of the situation - lets talk debt cutting.  Any takers?

It appears to me that, until there is a plan to start eliminating the debt, the credit rating of the US will be in jeopardy of being downgraded. 

Any thoughts on how to reduce the debt without eliminating the deficit?

331 Jim B, sir. As I said, the D's and R's got us here. Should the R's get and retain control of the House, the Senate and the Whitehouse and do not roll back, using a viable "trust and verify" plan to get this country out of the quagmire that it is currently in.Then we meet and you buy the beer. You do realize that because of the red state/blue state green eggs and ham game, that you will be buying me a beer don't you? Regardless, the sun will shine tomorrow.

332 You want the country to burn down around you so you can claim moral superiority for having died on this hill? Fine. Then keep on going and torpedo any chance at a Republican becoming president in 2012. Posted by: Jim B at July 27, 2011 01:53 PM (QD3//) No, dumbass, YOUR strategy keeps us losing. Dole and McCain anyone? Losing the Housa *and* senate in 2006 after cutting 2/3s off the deficit during TWO WARS? How do you fuck that up? By QUITTING. I want to WIN and people like YOU keep surrendering in my name. Fucking lead or fucking get out of the way. Your problem is you CAN'T, and THAT'S why we keep getting boned. You absolutely HAVE to stick your nose in the process and no matter how many times you fail, THIS time it will work! You keep trying to kick the damned football.

333 So you're arguing a nullity. That's not a real argument. Posted by: Jim B at July 27, 2011 01:57 PM (QD3//) And your argument is that we have to lose every year so that we can win next year. That doesn't even rise to a nullity, it's actively insane.

334 New Gabe post up

335 #366 - I agree that conservatives will never get EVERYTHING they want. Unless the country goes pure red, that can't happen.

But I'm assuming we're talking about doable things here like ObamaCare repeal, rolling back regulatory overreach, cutting spending, reforming entitements, etc. which can be done and a victorious Republican presidential candidate could legitimately argue that he had a mandate to implement.

But hey, I'm always up for a beer, and we can always switch to Valu-Rite later in the evening before the mandatory hobo hunt.

336 #368 - Show me where I said that. You can't.

What I DID argue is that you've won AS MUCH AS YOU CAN this round.

You're not going to KO a federal system that has been decades in the making with a single bill. Especially when you don't have the votes in the Senate or the presidency.

Winning a boxing match is one round at a time. You judge who won by seeing who is left standing after 15 rounds. 2010 was round one. 2012 will be round two.

You want to throw in the towel after only one round has been fought because you didn't knock your opponent out. I'm saying we have a long fight left to go and we haven't even had the chance to start landing body blows yet.

337 You want to throw in the towel after only one round has been fought because you didn't knock your opponent out. I'm saying we have a long fight left to go and we haven't even had the chance to start landing body blows yet. Posted by: Jim B at July 27, 2011 02:05 PM (QD3//) And that's the opposite of what I actually said, in simple terms that anyone ELSE could understand. Thanks for wasting my time. The strategy you follow has not succeeded, ever. You make excuses for every failure, but they're still failures. The "small success" you're talking about now is literally spending even MORE money after we're broke. We're still going to wrong direction. Seriously, it's not the best we can do. Not only did I not ask for a knockout, I explicitly pointed out we're not going to solve this right away, but just that we get STARTED. Connect one punch this round, that's all I'm asking, but then you have to run your fingers off with your strawman bullshit. Which is all you do, invent a hypothetical opponent, ignore what people ACTUALLY say, then declare victory. Hell, don't even read this post, just respond to the strawman in your head. It's what you're going to do anyway.

338

We actually GAINED 2 senate seats in 1996, though we lost 8 in the house, we kept control of it and Dole lost the presidency to Perot and Clintern.

Point is, it was not the huge armageddon that the media tries to remember it being. In fact it could be a win since 8/435 is less than 2/100.

339 Jim B, I'm ALWAYS up for a hobo hunt, do we have to wait for the big betrayal before we meet! But I feel I must point out that I am not a pure "red" person.I'm a simple guy who uses logic and common sense to guide me in everyday life. I'm the guy who read about a story that happened the other day in RI that had to do with the Bigtell. The Bigtell was when state officials called up a meeting for state retiree's and explained to them that they needed to give up half of their pensions or, as bad as a position that RI is apparently in, get a fraction of that should the state take a more drastic action.I literally teared up a smidge, all of those old folks who did their jobs, who we're promised by politico's that they had earned their pensions, now off with you to retirement.And then could not back up their side of the deal to irresponsible spending and/or proper management. I see that going country wide, one community at a time but it's coming if things aren't properly addressed That being said, there are people all over the country who have been sold a bag of goods, a huge bag of entitlements that we cannot possibly pay for using simple math. Now like I said, I'm a simple guy, I don't have the heart to do what needs to be done, to do the things that very well may effect both me and you.There are some who would call that voting against my own benefit, well that may be the case since I have been hit pretty hard over the past couple of years but I refuse to vote for insanity no matter how hard it gets, it isn't just about me and you. The men and women I helped put in office are not "pure red" people, they are sane people who see the problem not as a game but as the detriment to all in this country.They also have the guts, unlike me, to make the balls to the walls tough decisions that would haunt me the rest of my life. Jim, I'm just a simple guy who is hoping beyond hope that the day will never come, that you will buy me a beer because those who we, me and you put into office failed us.

340 Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 27, 2011 12:41 PM (G/MYk)

So you don't know the difference between a revenue raising bill and a spending bill?

You may have missed it but the GOP has been pretty clear that this bill DOES NOT RAISE REVENUE, therefore Reid's plan (which is all cuts) can start in the Senate.

This is why I generally ignore you.

341 So you're arguing a nullity. That's not a real argument.
Posted by: Jim B

Dude, in one breath you fear a government shutdown will destroy the Republicans (presumably just like it did in 1996 when they gained 3 Senate seats) and prevented Dole from defeating Clinton, and then in the next breath you say squishy Dole would have lost no matter what.

Quit digging.

342 Jeez, you guys act like we have 17 months left to solve this problem.

343 For The Sake Of Popularity, We Must Do The Unpopular Thing. For The Sake Of Wisdom, We Must Do The Unwise Thing. It Will Work This Time, Pinky Swear.

344

377

 

Try telling that you Congress.  Somehow they won't accept and never have accepted your interpretation.  Both plans are something Elmer Gantry would be proud of.  But only the feeble minded believe in magic beans. 

 

The debt would be about (if projections are accurate) 23 billion as opposed to Obama's claimed 24 billion in ten years.

 

That's why you are generally ignored.

 

345

"Out Years Are For Suckers"...

Drew, I love this... Can I steal it?  It would make a great title for a journal article I'm working on