July 27, 2011
— DrewM First, let me say I like this back and forth stuff.
Second, let me also stipulate that Gabe and I (and everyone at the HQ) want the same thing...massive cuts in spending and the scope of government. The question on the table isn't the end goal, it's how do we get there and how much can we get at a time when there are people running most of the political branches who vehemently oppose us. This isn't a fight between enemies or sellouts (even with all the RINO/purity jokes), it's a debate between people of goodwill trying to find the right tactic.
With that said, let me trash Gabe (I kid).
A vote against Boehner's plan is a vote for Reid's plan.
This I was not aware of. Personally, I thought a vote against Boehner's plan is...a vote against Boehner's plan. More to the point, there's no evidence that Reid's plan is going to get out of the Senate. The GOP can filibuster it there. Is a vote against Reid a vote for Boehner? If not, why not? If Boehner's plan can't pass the House, why in the world would you think Reid's can?
FTR- I didn't say I'd vote against if I had a vote, I said I'd wait until the new plan and score came out. Boehner 1.0 is as dead as Cap, Cut and Balance. I didn't do that. Boehner did.
The reality is the House can pass Boehner and the Senate can pass Reid and then they will conference. It's not a binary choice as Gabe would have it seem. That's why I want Boehner to come in as big and front loaded as possible so that when we cut the deal, we negotiate from a big number. Where do you negotiate from when you start with $1 Billion? $133 million, some National's tickets and a pack of gum?
Even Drew admits that Cut, Cap, and Balance isn't happening while Democrats control the Senate (although he strangely then takes Boehner to task for not cutting as much as the Ryan budget, which also got shot down by the Democrats in the Senate). So what's the alternative?
I know and I addressed this. There's no rule that says the debt ceiling hike has to be offset by cuts. In fact, I don't think it ever has been. The point of linking them was using the leverage caused by the debt limit hike to get something for going along with what is normally done for free.
Personally, I think the something we get should be something we couldn't otherwise win...cuts the Democrats wouldn't normally go for. The whole point of this exercise should be to screw the Democrats into doing what they don't want to. As someone once said, "never let a crisis go to waste." Make no mistake, this is a "crisis" of the GOP's making. We could have just done what was always done and raised the ceiling. If we didn't want to force a showdown and walk away with something tangible for having played the game, we shouldn't have sat down at the table. Sure, at some point you can push to hard and they just say no. That's why $1 trillion in FY12 is folly. The number should be somewhere between $30 billion and the amount of the debt ceiling increase.
Again, when you negotiate, you state a maximum position knowing you'll come off it. Boehner 1.0 came in with our worst offer and that we'd give up from there. Why not just do a clean hike then? In essence that's what it was, at least in terms of real deficit reduction.
I'm not going to get into Gabe's scenarios about what happens if we hit the ceiling with no deal because I agree it's bad and doesn't enhance our leverage after it happens (something I covered in my post). But let's not pretend there aren't other alternatives. A week or two extension while there are negotiations between Boehner 2.0 and Reid (likely 2.0). Obama will sign it because he's a coward.
I'm also not going to get into whether or not this is an exercise in futility or not since we covered this in the comments of my original post.
I imagine this is about it from me on this. At least until we get the scoring for Boehner 2.0.
Posted by: DrewM at
09:48 AM
| Comments (189)
Post contains 739 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Recording with his cell. at July 27, 2011 09:53 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: cthulhu at July 27, 2011 09:54 AM (kaalw)
Political reality: Obozo has a veto pen and the R's do not control the senate.
If the d's still had the house - we'd be looking at economic rape.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 27, 2011 09:55 AM (0fzsA)
i was hoping for slightly more profanity.
Also, I didn't see Gabe address the fact that Reid's plan has more cuts than Boehners did
Posted by: Ben at July 27, 2011 09:56 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences at July 27, 2011 09:57 AM (1+CnU)
So whats the end game? I mean a year or two from now, when it finally sinks in that we'll never pay our debt, and intrest on it continues to grow?
I mean its got to be some kind of global war, maybe some kind of mass die off, zombies etc. Can anyone give some historical context?
Posted by: Max Power at July 27, 2011 09:57 AM (q177U)
Posted by: Blog President Ace O'Spada at July 27, 2011 09:58 AM (nj1bB)
Let's settle this once and for all.
Knife fight, West Side Story rules.
Each person get's a knife and has their hand tied to their adversary's hand.
Whoever survives wins...something..
Posted by: Ben at July 27, 2011 10:00 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Rich at July 27, 2011 10:00 AM (wnGI4)
Posted by: yinzer at July 27, 2011 10:00 AM (/Mla1)
Posted by: dfbaskwill at July 27, 2011 10:00 AM (71LDo)
Posted by: Mathematics at July 27, 2011 10:00 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Rich at July 27, 2011 10:01 AM (wnGI4)
So whats the end game? I mean a year or two from now, when it finally sinks in that we'll never pay our debt, and intrest on it continues to grow?
I mean its got to be some kind of global war, maybe some kind of mass die off, zombies etc. Can anyone give some historical context?
Closest recent history is probably the German hyper-inflation caused by losing WWI to a bunch of nations that had pauperized themselves to win it. Starvation, radical politics and coups, and a re-ignition of a war that everybody had thought was over. Good times, good times. Sigh.Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences at July 27, 2011 10:02 AM (1+CnU)
I suspect this is a typo but hey, I like the cut of your jib if 14.3 trillion in cuts this year is within the Overton Window.
Posted by: Bob Saget at July 27, 2011 10:02 AM (F/4zf)
Posted by: joncelli at July 27, 2011 10:02 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: cherry π at July 27, 2011 10:03 AM (OhYCU)
Knife fight, West Side Story rules.
Each person get's a knife and has their hand tied to their adversary's hand.
And they all dance around like Barney Frank's boyfriend's hairdresser?
Posted by: WalrusRex at July 27, 2011 10:03 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Rich at July 27, 2011 10:03 AM (wnGI4)
So whats the end game? I mean a year or two from now, when it finally sinks in that we'll never pay our debt, and intrest on it continues to grow?
I mean its got to be some kind of global war, maybe some kind of mass die off, zombies etc. Can anyone give some historical context?
Posted by: Max Power at July 27, 2011 01:57 PM (q177U)
The end game is going to be when we raise taxes and make massive cuts. There is no other way out and these plans are just whistling past the grave yard.
I am talking massive cuts too, about 400 billion a year for the next 3 years and raise taxes on everyone, including the 50% that don't pay taxes 1% which would bring in about $100 billion.
That would eliminate the deficit in 3 years after that they could start whittling down the debt.
It won't happen though, no one wants to pay for what we have already borrowed and no one wants to cut what we already gave away.
Posted by: robtr at July 27, 2011 10:03 AM (MtwBb)
Posted by: Robin at July 27, 2011 10:03 AM (25gwB)
Posted by: yinzer at July 27, 2011 02:00 PM (/Mla1)
Not really a failure. The SOB is doing his damnest to destroy the country as best he can.
Posted by: TheQuietMan at July 27, 2011 10:04 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: Sub-Tard at July 27, 2011 10:04 AM (0M3AQ)
If Obama doesn't own the final plan, we will be anally rape-raped in 2012
------------
/facepalm
Give me the scenario in which Obama owns the plan. C'mon big guy....
Posted by: Rich at July 27, 2011 10:04 AM (wnGI4)
Posted by: Robin at July 27, 2011 10:06 AM (25gwB)
Posted by: t-bird at July 27, 2011 10:06 AM (FcR7P)
/ sorta
Posted by: cherry π at July 27, 2011 10:07 AM (OhYCU)
We're arguing over $1B in cuts for Boehner and nobody knows because it isn't down on paper for Reid.
But
Neither of these are real cuts!!!
Because of the screwy accounting tricks they use in Washington,
If we locked in the budget numbers from FY 2010
The CBO would score it as a $9.5T cut in the budget.
So our real target is any number north of $9.5.
Until they get there, we're still fucked by both sides.
And we're not getting there this year.
So we do nothing.
It's the only rational plan.
Posted by: Truman North at July 27, 2011 10:07 AM (K2wpv)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST at July 27, 2011 10:07 AM (lbo6/)
I think all of this was lost the moment that The JEF was elected. A majority of your countrymen looked at the radical, unprincipled, and dishonarable scum from Chicago and said; "yes we can!"
Most of the people on this blog are of the productive class who love this country and actually want to strengthen American for future generations. We are in the minority now. It sucks, for sure, but that is where we are.
All of this theater, and that's all it is. None of these "plans" does anything but make things worse. It just puts the pain off for a bit. They are playing a game of musical chairs, and one guess who won't have a seat when the music stops.
Posted by: Sgt. Fury at July 27, 2011 10:07 AM (+avak)
Then I beheld a fifth horse and that horse was red as ink. And on that horse rode an African-American in finely creased trousers.
Posted by: WalrusRex at July 27, 2011 10:07 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Bob Saget at July 27, 2011 10:07 AM (F/4zf)
Posted by: Anonymoose at July 27, 2011 10:07 AM (ZgvjV)
Reid's plan. Now bow before me.
Posted by: cherry π at July 27, 2011 10:07 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: db at July 27, 2011 10:08 AM (/1Al9)
If the d's still had the house - we'd be looking at economic rape."
Reality reality: Not that long ago, the Rs had the White House, Senate, and House. They cut nothing and grew the gummint. Who controls what is effectively irrelevant. Cuts - massive ones - are coming whether the political will for them exists or not. The *only* question is whether the cuts will be made voluntarily (and thus with limited pain), or forced by outside factor (and thus with bonus pain).
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 27, 2011 10:08 AM (xy9wk)
Posted by: lions at July 27, 2011 10:08 AM (Mp19R)
Posted by: Bannor at July 27, 2011 10:08 AM (6AXh/)
Personally, any plan that contains the words "commision" or "out years" should be an automatic no.
Define the cuts, front load the cuts, make the cuts.
Posted by: Ben at July 27, 2011 10:09 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: WalrusRex at July 27, 2011 02:07 PM (Hx5uv)
FIFY
Posted by: yinzer at July 27, 2011 10:09 AM (/Mla1)
Reid's plan. Now bow before me.
---------
And then the Rs get fucking rolled by their base for simply voting for it.
Posted by: Rich at July 27, 2011 10:09 AM (wnGI4)
@53: bingo, esp the last point you make
Also, it took me like a year to realize what your commentor name was really saying.
It's genius
Posted by: Truman North at July 27, 2011 10:10 AM (K2wpv)
Posted by: Rich at July 27, 2011 02:03 PM (wnGI4)
No--you don't understand. If we used terms that you understood correctly, you might really get mad at us. If we redefine the terms so they're meaningless in helping you understand what we're actually doing to retain our ruling class status and screwing you over, then we are being just being professional politicians.
Posted by: Congressinal Budgeteer at July 27, 2011 10:10 AM (Qp5Ml)
If you think you always have to raise it, and that actually matters(which is does not) then why not raise it to 1 quadrillion dollars and be done with it? We will lose our AAA rating not because of the fictitious debt limit, but because we will have a debt to GDP ratio that is too high. We already do, in fact, and it will just get worse as long as you allow big-government types like Boner to propose and pass legislation that cuts NOTHING.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Posted by: cranky-d at July 27, 2011 10:10 AM (nRliU)
Posted by: Boehner at July 27, 2011 10:10 AM (FcR7P)
Political reality: Obozo has a veto pen and the R's do not control the senate.
I agree, but if something gets on his desk that means it got bi-partisan support(as it would need it to pass the senate), and Obama would never ever ever veto something that got to his desk, because the alternative would be so damaging to him politically. If he vetoes whatever makes it to his desk, he will then take full political ownership of what comes next.
Posted by: Ben at July 27, 2011 10:10 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: cthulhu at July 27, 2011 01:54 PM (kaalw)
I wouldn't assume a fucking bit. I'd drag every deadbeat hippie geezer out of BammyCare holding tanks and sell them as target practice and dog food before I'd prolong their useless lives one goddamn second.
Posted by: Captain Hate at July 27, 2011 10:12 AM (zsvKP)
Rino Thunderdome - two moderates enter, one moderate leaves.
Well, OK -- let's compromise. Two moderates can leave, but we need to see $2 billion more for high-speed rail.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at July 27, 2011 10:12 AM (EeYDk)
Posted by: joncelli at July 27, 2011 10:12 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: The Hamburglar
Fuck you Meryl Streep!
Posted by: apple farmer who got screwed byt the wicked witch of alar at July 27, 2011 10:12 AM (6rX0K)
Posted by: Truman North at July 27, 2011 10:12 AM (K2wpv)
I'm thinking that "not raising the debt limit for ten or more years" is the the better option.
Posted by: cthulhu at July 27, 2011 10:13 AM (kaalw)
Posted by: Hrothgar at July 27, 2011 10:13 AM (Qp5Ml)
Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences at July 27, 2011 01:57 PM (1+CnU)
we are spending over the debt limit as we speak, but nobody talks about that, that would bring up a Constitutional question, and we know that talking about that filthy old rag is a pointless waste of time because dead guys with wigs wrote it or something.
Posted by: Shoey at July 27, 2011 10:14 AM (jdOk/)
Posted by: joncelli at July 27, 2011 10:14 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Red Shirt at July 27, 2011 10:15 AM (FIDMq)
So whats the end game? I mean a year or two from now, when it finally sinks in that we'll never pay our debt, and intrest on it continues to grow?
I mean its got to be some kind of global war, maybe some kind of mass die off, zombies etc. Can anyone give some historical context?
Remember WWII and how it pulled us out of the great depression? Ok same war only the nukes are there at the start of it and it is the muzzies vs the rest of the world. The muzzies are nuked out of existence early on - we lose N.Y. city, Washington D.C. and California drops into the ocean during the nuclear exchange. So basically it is a win - win - win for the US.
The remaining parts of the US party like its 1999 after a cockroach from the middle east drags a crippled leg across the armistice papers - thus signing the muzzie surrender.
With most of this country's assholes dead - the remaining population reestablishes the gold standard and the US has another prosperous 200 years.
Posted by: An Observation at July 27, 2011 10:15 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: yinzer at July 27, 2011 10:15 AM (/Mla1)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 27, 2011 10:15 AM (Cm66w)
The end game is going to be when we raise taxes and make massive cuts. There is no other way out and these plans are just whistling past the grave yard.
I am talking massive cuts too, about 400 billion a year for the next 3 years and raise taxes on everyone, including the 50% that don't pay taxes 1% which would bring in about $100 billion.
That would eliminate the deficit in 3 years after that they could start whittling down the debt.
It won't happen though, no one wants to pay for what we have already borrowed and no one wants to cut what we already gave away.
Posted by: robtr
This also presumes that the additional taxes won't be spent. based upon all evidence to date, this is what will happen.
Posted by: Blue Hen at July 27, 2011 10:16 AM (326rv)
The only reason I'd love to do nothing by Aug 2 is to see Obama either hold granny's check or look like a bluffing boob.
Either way he's fudged.
Posted by: Soothsayer at July 27, 2011 10:16 AM (sqkOB)
Posted by: 80sBaby at July 27, 2011 10:17 AM (o2lIv)
Can you imagine on Aug 3rd Obama coming out vilifying the Republicans for him choosing to deprive Granny of her check and then going to a big b-day party for himself?
Posted by: Soothsayer at July 27, 2011 10:18 AM (sqkOB)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST at July 27, 2011 10:18 AM (lbo6/)
Posted by: joncelli at July 27, 2011 02:14 PM (RD7QR)
Just like Boehner and Reid -- who says it's "either-or"?
Posted by: cthulhu at July 27, 2011 10:18 AM (kaalw)
Posted by: Sub-Tard at July 27, 2011 10:19 AM (0M3AQ)
As the great Sean Connery said in The Rock: "Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen."
Mr. Boehner you should strive to go home and fuck the prom queen. That is all.
Posted by: mpfs at July 27, 2011 10:19 AM (iYbLN)
And then a week later, while Obama is starving poor Granny, he leaves for Martha's Vineyard for two weeks.
From Martha's Vineyard Obama will "feel Granny's pain" and continue to blame Republicans.
This won't happen, of course. But I wish it would because Obama would be toast.
Posted by: Soothsayer at July 27, 2011 10:19 AM (sqkOB)
No signed paper can hold the iron. it must come from men.
Juicyfruit.
Posted by: sifty at July 27, 2011 10:20 AM (ECjvn)
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 27, 2011 10:21 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: Red Shirt at July 27, 2011 02:15 PM (FIDMq)
Also that barely ambulatory dowager's hump was working with Boehner on a bill when el JEFe gave him different marching orders and all of a sudden he's acting like Boehner's plan is the biggest pile of shit he's ever seen. Of course it helps him that the salad tossing media will never question him on that.
Posted by: Captain Hate at July 27, 2011 10:21 AM (zsvKP)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at July 27, 2011 10:22 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: Truman North at July 27, 2011 10:22 AM (K2wpv)
The 2011 Quadriplegic Kickboxing Championships of Yuma, AZ.
Posted by: sifty at July 27, 2011 10:22 AM (ECjvn)
Remember WWII and how it pulled us out of the great depression? Ok same war only the nukes are there at the start of it and it is the muzzies vs the rest of the world. The muzzies are nuked out of existence early on - we lose N.Y. city, Washington D.C. and California drops into the ocean during the nuclear exchange. So basically it is a win - win - win for the US.
So what happens to the Chinese during WWIII?
Posted by: Sub-Tard at July 27, 2011 10:22 AM (0M3AQ)
Posted by: t-bird at July 27, 2011 10:22 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Jean at July 27, 2011 10:23 AM (hpnF1)
So whats the end game? I mean a year or two from now, when it finally sinks in that we'll never pay our debt, and intrest on it continues to grow?
I mean its got to be some kind of global war, maybe some kind of mass die off, zombies etc. Can anyone give some historical context?
Think Russia post-Soviet Union with a dash of modern day Mexico. High prices, lots of poverty, a probably very socialist central government messing with knobs and levers, rampant crime, massive corruption, etc.
Nothing as drastic as Dawn of the Dead, just decades of misery and the end of the US as the dominant power of the world.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at July 27, 2011 10:23 AM (FkKjr)
"President Obuttfuck had massive majorities in both houses of Congress for two years, and he failed to get a budget passed. He had the opportunity to lead from the front, but instead of tackling the massive fiscal challenges this nation faced, he chose to kick the can down the road while he rammed through a failed stimulus package, failed bailouts for the automakers, and a monstrous 2500-page abomination of a health care bill that robbed a half-trillion dollars from Medicare, all of which exacerbated this fiscal crisis. Our national debt will surpass the GDP within months, and he has no plan to deal with it. He would rather saddle our children and grandchildren with a crushing fiscal burden they will never escape from than make the tough choices required to get us out of this mess".
This is the message they should be pounding over and over and over until they're blue in the face.
Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at July 27, 2011 10:23 AM (IoUF1)
To put it into a little perspective for myself... Let's go with the analogy of the family - If the federal government "went bancrupt", but chose to honor it's full and current debt like it's the house payment. Since most bancruptcies call for a 7 year plan, that would mean we would need to not only cut the spending to be no more than projected revenues, but would need to include slightly over $2 trillion in expense at 0% interest to pay off the debt in that time frame.
Since current revenues are only anticipated at about $2.2 trillion this year, that would only leave $200 billion to run the federal government over the next year. Then it would only increase by the rate of revenue growth over the next 6-7 years.
The short: Until DEBT reduction (not deficit) is seriously considered, it's hard to take any of them seriously.
Posted by: Dilligas at July 27, 2011 10:24 AM (HhjUQ)
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 27, 2011 02:21 PM (9hSKh)
Well, that too I guess. But they actually had/have a website for black people called "365 Black" (I think). I think it's 365black.com
Posted by: yinzer at July 27, 2011 10:24 AM (/Mla1)
We get the reins again and don't do shit, we deserve to Balkanize.
Posted by: sifty at July 27, 2011 10:26 AM (ECjvn)
So -- did Boehner ever get around to releasing his revised plan today?
When buying a house you take a 30 day escrow, but I guess trillion dollar government borrowing only takes a bit less than 24 hours to peruse...
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at July 27, 2011 10:26 AM (EeYDk)
The CBO report was a mixed bag for Reid; while it found his cuts wanting, the CBO said his plan would cut the deficit deeper and faster than BoehnerÂ’s bill. The Speaker is also rewriting his measure after getting a CBO score that found him falling short of his deficit reduction goals.
Several things.
First, which baseline (or baselines) is the CBO using to score Reid's bill?
Second, where's the text for Reid's bill? Who has seen it other than Reid and the CBO?
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 27, 2011 10:26 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at July 27, 2011 10:27 AM (cbyrC)
Obfuscation: It's not just a river in Egypt.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at July 27, 2011 10:27 AM (LH6ir)
Hell, my dream budget is to freeze spending at pre-tarp levels. I can't figure out how one time economy savers like tarp, stimulus, QExx even get counted as baseline, anyway.
The House ought to pass a Ryan plan, or something with actual cuts, every day for however long it takes the senate to pass out of their asses. They could do cat crap and ball ants on Tuesdays just to give the senate an out.
Posted by: kurtilator at July 27, 2011 10:27 AM (juh4Z)
Posted by: Bambi! at July 27, 2011 10:27 AM (RD7QR)
you are right; we need to pick a year (200
Posted by: matt foley at July 27, 2011 10:27 AM (2WDMC)
Posted by: Bambi! at July 27, 2011 10:28 AM (RD7QR)
the big spending is not a Democrat strategy, it is the strategy of the real majority Party - the progressive Ruling Class.
we aren't getting anywhere on spending cuts because the leadership of BOTH political parties is fighting us tooth and nail with every weapon they have.
crikey, why can't everyone see that yet?
Posted by: Shoey at July 27, 2011 10:28 AM (jdOk/)
Posted by: BlackOrchid at July 27, 2011 10:29 AM (SB0V2)
They and the Russians nuke each other out of suspicion about what the other is going to do about the rich Persian oil fields.
Posted by: An Observation at July 27, 2011 10:29 AM (ylhEn)
Well, that too I guess. But they actually had/have a website for black people called "365 Black" (I think). I think it's 365black.com
So when is Mickey D's going to have 365yellow or 365red or 365brown...so on and so forth to "celebrate" i.e. pander to every group under the sun?
Idiots. That's even more shameless than the "I'm lovin' it" garbage slogan.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 27, 2011 10:29 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at July 27, 2011 02:22 PM (PLvLS)
Just make sure that it's put in as a "promise" to raise taxes, like all those cuts that have been "promised" in every budget for the last 30+ years.
Posted by: Dilligas at July 27, 2011 10:29 AM (HhjUQ)
Seriously, I'm done even trying to follow this shit. It's so fucking pointless.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at July 27, 2011 10:29 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: George Orwell at July 27, 2011 10:30 AM (AZGON)
So basically the opening of Atlas Shrugs then?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Recording with his cell. at July 27, 2011 10:31 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: sifty at July 27, 2011 10:31 AM (ECjvn)
Posted by: zombie howard cosell at July 27, 2011 10:31 AM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Jean at July 27, 2011 10:32 AM (hpnF1)
Posted by: Jay Carney at July 27, 2011 10:32 AM (/Mla1)
Harry Reid's plan is not written down on paper.
Boehner's plan cuts $1B from what we borrow this year.
Sell your gold, buy ammunition.
Posted by: Truman North at July 27, 2011 10:32 AM (K2wpv)
The number one reason to be against the Reid plan for now--no one has actually seen it:
Go to The Hill's Briefing Room blog and find Dem lawmaker: "Nobody I know" has seen Reid plan
I keep trying to post a tiny url link but it won't let me...
Someone needs to highlight loudly and often that Congress keeps passing shit it hasn't read and doesn't understand, only to find out the damange they've done much later.
Posted by: keninnorcal at July 27, 2011 10:33 AM (DnNn/)
Posted by: joncelli at July 27, 2011 10:34 AM (RD7QR)
129 So what happens to the Chinese during WWIII?
They and the Russians nuke each other out of suspicion about what the other is going to do about the rich Persian oil fields.
Okay. Cool. What happens to Africa? This story is getting good.
Posted by: Sub-Tard at July 27, 2011 10:35 AM (0M3AQ)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST at July 27, 2011 10:36 AM (lbo6/)
Posted by: Serious Cat at July 27, 2011 10:36 AM (jlHTi)
Posted by: sifty at July 27, 2011 10:36 AM (ECjvn)
Our rulers will be safe in walled compounds, while we serfs fight for scraps using wheelbarrows full of credit cards.
Posted by: Hrothgar at July 27, 2011 10:38 AM (Qp5Ml)
Posted by: Fritz at July 27, 2011 10:39 AM (p2IBw)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST
Don't discount us. Our amps are perfectly suited for this level of spending.
Posted by: Spinal Tap at July 27, 2011 10:39 AM (326rv)
Africa? Total chaos, the end days, a total breakdown of any civil authority, slaughter as gangs and warlords run amok, war, exploitation, violence and suffering beyond measure...
In other words Tuesday.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Recording with his cell. at July 27, 2011 10:40 AM (0q2P7)
I'm using my credit cards to buy ladders and ammo.
Posted by: sifty at July 27, 2011 10:40 AM (ECjvn)
Posted by: Rich
And this scares the hell out of the donks. Let their worthless base see that they can get along fine when the giant teat "shuts down", and they "may" lose a few of them. (Maybe. They're not that smart to begin with...)
Posted by: Hobbitopoly at July 27, 2011 10:41 AM (h1p5V)
Again? Didn't the EPA already fuck around with those last year?
Posted by: Waterhouse at July 27, 2011 10:41 AM (zC6YH)
Posted by: dfbaskwill at July 27, 2011 02:00 PM (71LDo)
--------
dfbaskwill has it exactly right. Let's please stop the charade that either plan will substantively address the debt level. Boehners pathetic limp dick spending "cut" proposal is exhibit A to that point
Posted by: Mook at July 27, 2011 10:41 AM (eP5IM)
Posted by: HondaV65 at July 27, 2011 10:41 AM (8X9tr)
@102: "So what happens to the Chinese during WWIII?"
Per John Milius, 600 million of them survive, and will be screaming.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 27, 2011 10:41 AM (xy9wk)
Posted by: Jean at July 27, 2011 10:42 AM (VWdoE)
We will pass some POS and raise the debt ceiling. There will still be no T-Bill takers at zero percent. Taxcheat Timmy will do QE-III (or call it something else but does the same thing).
They will blame the Republican's "political posturing" for causing the need. The press will tout exactly what they say word for word straight from the talking point papers.
Republicans lose, the country loses, and when the collapse come even the 53% lose.
Posted by: Vic at July 27, 2011 10:43 AM (M9Ie6)
When the Democrats win, the Democrats get everything they want.
When the Republicans win, the Democrats get everything they want.
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at July 27, 2011 10:44 AM (/zYUh)
Posted by: Spinal Tap at July 27, 2011 10:45 AM (326rv)
Again? Didn't the EPA already fuck around with those last year?
Posted by: Waterhouse at July 27, 2011 02:41 PM (zC6YH)
I posted a link on that the other day in one of the head line threads. In 2007 the Democrat Congress increased the CAFE standards. Now Obama wants to increase them again to an insane amount that is basically impossible to meet w/o going to those stupid POS "smart cars".
He plans to do it by executive fiat.
Congress will do nothing and let him get away with it, depending on one of the automakers to sue.
Yeah, forget that.
Posted by: Vic at July 27, 2011 10:46 AM (M9Ie6)
@152: "This is like watching the finals of Battle of The Bands and it's between Grim Reaper and Krokus."
Will Krokus be playing Midnight Maniac?
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 27, 2011 10:46 AM (xy9wk)
Posted by: Rammstein at July 27, 2011 10:47 AM (AZGON)
The Debt Ceiling is the only leverage we have that is strong enough to trade for repeal.
Posted by: toby928™ at July 27, 2011 10:47 AM (GTbGH)
For God's sake if our own guys can't even speak plainly without swallowing all of the wrong and boneheaded assumptions the press bandies about then we are doomed. The people who want to raise the limit are the ones who have to make a case that we will be better off if they get their way. It isn't the other way around. Yeah, to a junkie the thought of not putting a needle in their arm may seem like a crisis but really the opposite is true. Their body is traumatized every time they do it and they had damn well better stop if they want to continue drawing breath.
We can't argue starting with the other side's assumptions. That is how we got in this mess.
Posted by: Voluble at July 27, 2011 10:48 AM (JKX4x)
Anyway, then boehner can say that the nation has decided to retire it's debt and engage the nation in doing that. Have bake sales, are washes, free concerts, raffles, penny auctions, luncheons, anything to generate money to go into that account and 'pay down the debt".
go ahead. laugh, but heck nothing else has worked. They are at each other's throats, the American people by poll think they are all crooks, why not think out of the box and try to get the spirit of this country going again. Heck you could shame big corporations into giving to raffles. Who wouldn't buy a chance to win a 60 inch big screen tv or heck, a house from one of the home builders. Point is, when nothing is working, change the damn conversation, change the direction, don't keep driving toward the damn cliff.
Posted by: curious at July 27, 2011 10:49 AM (k1rwm)
@152: "This is like watching the finals of Battle of The Bands and it's between Grim Reaper and Krokus."
I'm assuming the judges would be drawn from Y&T and Dokken?
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 27, 2011 10:50 AM (xy9wk)
@178: "We can't argue starting with the other side's assumptions."
That's all we ever do. Other than outright surrender, it is our only tactic. Seems to work well enough....
Posted by: Your GOP elites at July 27, 2011 10:52 AM (xy9wk)
I actually didn't know Bolton closely followed such disputes, so that's why I posted it. As for Reid, some in the chattering class thought he might change his tune on Boehner's plan but he unsurprisingly hasn't. Neither has the Admin.
Posted by: 80sBaby at July 27, 2011 10:53 AM (o2lIv)
So maybe the republicans ought to introduce a bill that says that they are opening a legitimate, only to pay down the debt account, for the American people that no one can touch except the person in charge of literally taking the money and paying down the debt.
Posted by: curious at July 27, 2011 02:49 PM (k1rwm)
--
That idea worked so well with the "Social Security Lockbox", didn't it?
Posted by: Mook at July 27, 2011 10:58 AM (eP5IM)
Clyburn and a group of House Democrats are urging President Barack Obama to invoke the 14th Amendment to raise the debt ceiling if Congress canÂ’t come up with a satisfactory plan before the Tuesday deadline.
Clyburn, the third-ranking House Democrat, said Wednesday that if the president is delivered a bill to raise the debt ceiling for only a short period of time, he should instead veto it and turn to the phrase in the Constitution that says the validity of the U.S. government’s debt “shall not be questioned.”
Posted by: willow at July 27, 2011 10:59 AM (h+qn8)
I understand with just a couple of months left in the FY, we aren't getting much cut in it. I further understand that the big savings in baseline budgeting always come in the out years, because effects are multiplied.
BUT $1 billion doesn't make it. Obama is spending that much every six hours. Even at this late time, we can do $10 billion this year and $50-100 bil next, and this will help with the total.
AND we MUST have some sort of cap to enforce the spending levels.
FINALLY, I will NEVER support any commission or committee or other DC creation after all the previous incarnations failed to cut a damned penny. There is only one scenario this approach would work, and I doubt it would pass the Senate:
1. Allow Boehner, Pelosi, Reid, and McConnell to name three members each.
2. Build an 8-wide gallows.
3. Hang Pelosi, Reid, and all of their appointees.
4. Allow the remaining members to make the cuts.
Posted by: Adjoran at July 27, 2011 11:00 AM (VfmLu)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST
We will not be ignored.
Posted by: Rammstein
Our legacy wil not be denied.
Posted by: Love Handel at July 27, 2011 11:00 AM (6rX0K)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 27, 2011 11:04 AM (Cm66w)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, EXXXTREMIST at July 27, 2011 02:36 PM (lbo6/)
FIFY
Posted by: Closet Krokus Fan at July 27, 2011 11:05 AM (4136b)
So maybe the republicans ought to introduce a bill that says that they are opening a legitimate, only to pay down the debt account, for the American people that no one can touch except the person in charge of literally taking the money and paying down the debt.
Posted by: curious at July 27, 2011 02:49 PM (k1rwm)
--
That idea worked so well with the "Social Security Lockbox", didn't it?
Posted by: Mook at July 27, 2011 02:58 PM (eP5IM)
I don't know, I keep hearing that the dems are able to fund stuff like obamacare and it's a lock and no one, not even future congresses can change it. So, if they can do it for obamacare and other dem pet projects, why couldn't they do it with this.
Heck they can have Sarah Palin and donald Trump come out and announce they are doing it....
But, this isn't working, the tea party electees are being slaughtered by the dems and by their own republicans, which isn't fair, so maybe change the damn tone and think of something else.
Posted by: curious at July 27, 2011 11:06 AM (k1rwm)
Posted by: Tesla at July 27, 2011 11:07 AM (/ZZCn)
and chuckie mad nasty comments about the tea party freshman.
Guess the tea party has them just a slight bit upset maybe?
btw, I don't think they vote yes on either plan.
Go back to the drawing board and come up with another plan...period.
Posted by: curious at July 27, 2011 11:14 AM (k1rwm)
One: It assumes that we can kick this can one more time and get away with it. I doubt that will work. Meaning we act now or not at all. Yes the odds are against us. But this is the cards we have been dealt.
Two: It assumes things will be a lot better in 2013. I don't think so. Too many states have open primaries and Obama isn't likely to have a serious primary challenge. That means the Dems will pick us a RINO; so heads they win and tails they mostly win. And it is a sure bet that the same people saying wait will still say that because we won't have the sixty senators needed to get past a filibuster.
All tax and spending must originate in the House so even though it is the only part of the government we control it is the only one that matters. Besides, if the House passes a bill mandating interest, military salaries and social security gets paid first, along with an OK to issue new bonds as part of rolling over expiring notes the government will only shut down and not default. The Senate would be hard pressed to refuse and the Kenyan Idiot wouldn't dare veto. At that point it is almost entirely people who wouldn't vote Republican in a million years who get hurt in a shutdown so time would be on our side.
Obama and Reid know this.
Then there is the Final Option. Go all in on Cut Cap and Balance. The bill has only been tabled in the Senate, meaning a simple majority vote can bring it back up for debate. So find four D Senators who are up for reelection and aren't retiring and do whatever it takes. Promise that they won't be able to buy TV time because our forces are going to prebuy every frickin minute for sale right now if they don't play ball. I'm talking local car dealers will be squealing like pigs because there won't be one single spot available. That leaves the filibuster and that isn't a problem either if you have balls. Let them, only make them do the real thing. How long can they last with the spectacle of an impending (or actual) shutdown and every night the news opens with some D with a piss bottle strapped to his leg reading the phone directory? And again, if you ram it through with 'bipartisan' support Obama won't have the stones to veto it.
And forget the ratings agencies, if we actually win this thing any downgrade will be temporary and long forgotten come election day. Lose and we are going to get downgraded regardless of how we end up selling out.
The only compromise is that we would probably have to send a modified CCB bill that only required a roll call vote on the BBA because we probably can't muster the 2/3 needed to pass it, especially during the sort of scorched earth campaign I'm proposing. But that would be a good bargain because we could slaughter every NO vote come election day and try again in '13.
Posted by: John Morris at July 27, 2011 11:36 AM (sCRhB)
If they can change the language (revenue = tax) maybe we need to use FREEZE. When the dems scream it cuts 9 trillion just tell them, thats impossible, it is a freeze, its not going up or down. Its the ultimate in fairness and coooompromise that Obama wants.
Posted by: The Schwalbe : © at July 27, 2011 11:47 AM (UU0OF)
Posted by: Molon Labe at July 27, 2011 02:35 PM (g5MrG)
Nothing in these conversations reflect any reality. what's the point? There is no budget. Government spending is based upon fantasy projections in accordance with laws written by previous democrat/rhino congresses with language that means the opposite of what it means to decent, honest people.
Screw it. Just raise the Debt Ceiling eighty two quadrillion, nine hundred elevety hundred trillion dollars. That will get things past the 2012 elections and have room to continue borrowing when hyperinflation kicks in and the 500 Million dollar bill buys a slushee with a half off coupon.
Posted by: Minuteman at July 27, 2011 02:49 PM (hbAPu)
If the d's still had the house - we'd be looking at economic rape."
Reality reality: Not that long ago, the Rs had the White House, Senate, and House. They cut nothing and grew the gummint. Who controls what is effectively irrelevant. Cuts - massive ones - are coming whether the political will for them exists or not. The *only* question is whether the cuts will be made voluntarily (and thus with limited pain), or forced by outside factor (and thus with bonus pain).
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 27, 2011 02:08 PM (xy9wk)
Political reality: Don't raise the debt ceiling and something will be cut. The House has the upper hand. Take away the credit card unless there are some changing of ways..
Posted by: Minuteman at July 27, 2011 02:54 PM (hbAPu)
Both "plans" suck. 2.0 versions of both will suck.
Even if we had a brillant plan . . .that EVERYONE agreed on . . .
we don't have the ability to follow even a brillant plan.
Buy food, arable land, guns & ammo, hand tools, dig a well etc.
Posted by: simplemind at July 27, 2011 03:11 PM (za3QZ)
If they're just going to compromise in conference, I'd rather they start from the CCB (since the House has already passed it and all) position than from Boehner's.
Posted by: JohnJ at July 27, 2011 04:30 PM (JVjmU)
Posted by: Midnight Clad at July 27, 2011 04:44 PM (Qbs3S)
Posted by: The Snowman Audio Book at July 28, 2011 04:59 AM (3OGep)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2774 seconds, 317 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Blog President Ace O'Spada at July 27, 2011 09:49 AM (nj1bB)