1 The Obama administration says  failing to hike the debt ceiling could put the U.S. government in default and "throw the global economy into chaos."


...

DeMint: If vote to raise debt ceiling is GOP's Waterloo, 'let it be'

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said on the conservative Laura Ingraham Show he is considering filibustering an upcoming vote to raise the nation's $14.3 trillion debt limit, if it doesn't contain other fiscal reforms.

Asked if that would serve as the GOP's "Waterloo" in the 2012 elections, the senator replied, "If it is, then let it be."

...

Obama: Parties must 'come together' to solve debt problem

"At some point, we're going to have to come together as Americans," Obama said before meeting with the co-chairmen of the fiscal commission he appointed last year, Democrat Erskine Bowles and Republican Alan Simpson.

"As they pointed out in their bipartisan effort, it is important to put everything on the table," Obama said.

Obama did not adopt the fiscal commission's recommendations, but said its work "helped shape my thinking on these issues."

At the White House today, Obama echoed some of the themes of his speech. He said debt reduction should not sacrifice essential programs like education and energy, and that wealthier Americans should bear a higher percentage of the tax burden.

"We've got to look at everything, including our security spending, in order to achieve the goals that we need," Obama said.

2 Boehner said it cuts $315 Billion over a decade.

That's $31.5 Trillion in a millennium.

Or $7.8 Quintillion in a galactic year.

That's some serious cuts, wingnuts.

3 What CBO is saying is that the reduction in the deficit for this fiscal year is $352M.

"The study does confirm that the bill would cut spending authority by $38 billion, but it will take longer for those cuts to show up on the bottom line."

4 don't be too hard on yourself Ace after all we have Dr. Jugears "what defense of the defense of marriage act" T. Ogabe in charge....

NOBODY knows what any of this really means because at the end of the day there is the fear bambi will 'unprecedentadly" do whatever he feels like at any given time.....

I am waiting for the GOP to force him to agree to a budget law he doesn't like and then try to executive order his way around it illegally.....

if we had the Senate it'd have already happened I think.

5 We were sold on a $100 billion spending cut the first year, not $38 billion whenever it makes its way through the machinations of government.

6 The deficit is $1,600,000,000,000

Whether we are discussing cutting $352M, $8B, or even $38.5B doesn't matter - it is all peanuts.

7 3 Miss '80s baby,

yeah that's it....I think maybe we need to generate samizdat media cartoons of the Federal government as a bookie.....

the economics are similar and so is the Vig they charge......

essentially the feds took 352 mill or so out of their pocket but they lost mob backing on 38 billion in future funds to draw on if the bets go wrong.

8
I'm not an expert on Congressional procedure, either, but I do know when I'm getting stroked.

9

Look, AP are desperate for Obama to be the New Amazing, and Hot Air has pretty much the worst political acumen of all Conservative sites on the internet. They're the most puppy eyes "But... that's not what they said!" of us all.  

I mean, sure, maybe this truly is just AMAZING, but we can't find one tangible cut in the deal?

Even if all you need to do to save your company is rearrange the departments and put better policy in place, you still usually fire SOMEONE. Just to show you're serious.

10 You did JUMP THE GUN, ace.   You and many others............

It wasn't a bad deal; it was a decent stare -- the first step of many

You and many others need to step back from the edge.........

11 decent starT

too early to type good

12 Obama: Parties must 'come together' to solve debt problem

So he's going to discuss the budget at his weekly White House parties?

13 5 Steven,

we hold one branch of the three involved and barry was going to starve our military for good theatrics....

take what we can get and safeguard the troops' pay next year.

14 Similarly , the "spending" that took place over the last two years also has not hit the deficit yet.   Some monies were spent, but far more are already in the pipeline for future spending. 

Basically, we are talking about momentum...  Government spending is like a speeding locomotive and slowing it down takes time.  An average freight train  traveling at 55 miles an hour may take one mile to come to a stop.


Unfortunately, the U.S. Federal Government is like an overloaded freight train traveling at 180 mph toward a washed out bridge a quarter-mil ahead.

We're screwed.

15 The Weeping Boner said this morning on Laura Ingraham that the $352mill was "not accurate."  Although, he didn't go on to explain how it wasn't.  He reiterated the $315billion savings overall over ten years...and how this was but a first step.  Bigger step comes next with "trillions." 

Although, for the life of me, if this recent deal is the "best deal we could get"....how do they expect to squeeze trillions out of the budget?  What variables will be in play to give them that upper hand that they didn't have a week ago?

16 Who the hell can figure it all out? The numbers only change every 15 minutes.

A majority of Americans (if you believe the polling - and I do) think that Ryan's plan goes too far and others in a super-majority think 'the rich' should be taxed more.

Maybe it's the pessimism of tax-time calling, but seriously, who cares. Let the country burn. Those of us strong enough will survive. Let everyone else too dumb to function fail and fall. I'm not caring right now.

17
So cuts were indeed made?

Yet the debt limit needs to be raised significantly.

???

18 We must "come together" , says the most partisan , marxist ,fuckin' tool we've ever had in the white house .
Ummmm, no .
  Hell no.

19 Hey ace, you're starting to sound like a don't-really-know-it-all.

20

But what could be wrong with letting the govt shutdown occur?

Does it even matter?

Like I said over at Hotair... "Don't just do something, sit there!"

21 Here's my problem. In 2009 we added about $800B to the budget for ARRA, TARP and so on(The Stimulus Package) which were supposed to be one time things.  So how come the 2010 budget wasn't $800B less?

22 .....and no 'cut' is "tangible".  All 'cuts' are reductions in spending

If you want Actual Reductions in current spending, we need to wade through rivers of 'cuts' / reductions in spending increases

isn't economics fun?

23 Count me as still angry.  Not because the cuts aren't real, but because Speaker Boehner claimed he wasn't going to use obfuscation tactics.

If there's this much controversy over what a "cut" is, then obfuscation came in somewhere.  The Speaker should have been much more clear when he explained the deal- and claimed "352 Million" (or whatever it was) "in immediate spending cuts, with a further 38 Billion cut from planned future spending" or whatever.

Also- 38 billion is pathetically pathetic, and they should have gone for the shut down.

24
Okay, fine.

But ask Allah and A.J. to explain to me why we're still funding a $100M museum for Dead Kennedy?

This does not jive with the facts on the ground.

25 So cuts were indeed made?

Yet the debt limit needs to be raised significantly.

???

Posted by: Soothsayer, Republican Whip at April 14, 2011 12:24 PM (uFokq)

Not raising the debt limit is the easiest way to enforce a balanced budget.

Something the Republicans say they support but don't have the numbers for. But they will balk at doing it in a way that is perfectly attainable.

26
The roof the roof the roof is on fire

The roof the roof the roof is on fire

The roof the roof the roof is on fire

We don't need no water let the motherf****r burn

Burn motherf****R burn

27 22,

the "miracle" of "baseline budgeting"....

the economy would fix itself if we even had a real freeze but despite the fact Grammy didn't get a COLA on her social security I assure you the federal scavenger class got a raise to combat the inflation they swear isn't there.

28 Can't we just write off our debt? I don't really understand what writing of is...but they do, and they're the ones writing it off.

29 >>>We were sold on a $100 billion spending cut the first year, not $38 billion whenever it makes its way through the machinations of government. Miss80sBaby was also right about that -- technically they were promising $61 billion in new cuts over the $40 billion already assumed by NOT passing Obama's 2011 budget request. So, honestly, I think, they did promise $61 billion on top of the $40 billion. (and technically from that standpoint we got 78.5 billion.) My problem though is that whatever was "technically" promised it STILL makes sense to make $100 billion your opening bid. You know you won't get that but whatever your bid is that is the highest possible figure you could plausibly get. What the dipshits in Congress did -- Hal Rogers, Appropriator -- was open the bidding at like $31 billion. HE OPENED THE BIDDING AT A LOW COMPROMISE FIGURE. Because he doesn't want to cut. Now, after that, the Tea Party revolted and demanded we chase the $61 billion BUT OUR HAND WAS ALREADY TIPPED: I think it was pretty obvious at that point that tired old useless time-servers like Rogers only wanted the $31 billion, and the $61 billion was a purely a sop to the Tea Party. And this was emphasized when the Tea Party/Repubclian Study Group attempted to go back to $100 billion, and you had people like Rogers and Cantor arguing with the Democrats claiming that would take a "meat-axe" to spending. Rogers has to go. I think Cantor does too. I will give Boehner a pass IF he gives me Rogers. But we need Rogers off that goddamned Appropriations Committee.

30 13:  Then let Obambi deal with the media backlash of withholding military pay. At some point, having a fight involves actually having the fight and not always making excuses about why it's not wise to have this particular fight right now.

31 Maybe it's the pessimism of tax-time calling, but seriously, who cares. Let the country burn. Those of us strong enough will survive. Let everyone else too dumb to function fail and fall. I'm not caring right now.

I'm beginning to agree with you.

32 What needs to be done is that Congress enacts the budgetary process reform inside the 2012 budget bill, as well as shorten budget windows. Force appropriators to make those tough choices now. It was a bit more difficult here because FY '11 ends on September 30th, but they should have insisted on cuts that affected the deficit this year. Regardless, government accounting needs a complete overhaul.

33 This does not jive with the facts on the ground.

Posted by: Soothsayer, Republican Whip at April 14, 2011 12:27 PM (uFokq)

And planned parenthood. and Joe Biden's train set, etc....

34
Not raising the debt limit is the easiest way to enforce a balanced budget.

Yeah, I mean this is not rocket science -- any asshole can balance a checkbook, right?

The plot thickens...

35
Headline of editorial on today's National Review Online:

Strike One:
BoehnerÂ’s budget deal is a fake.


So, the NRO editors think it's bullshit too.

36 If this recent deal is the "best deal we could get"....how do they expect to squeeze trillions out of the budget?

2012

37 ""Maybe it's the pessimism of tax-time calling, but seriously, who cares. Let the country burn. Those of us strong enough will survive. Let everyone else too dumb to function fail and fall. I'm not caring right now.""

yeah thats where I'm at. Its to the point where its better to watch it all burn. It will never correct as long as marxist cock holsters like obama infest the country.

38 I can swear on the soul of my mother that you can stake your children's lives on AP reporting.

39 O/t:  I'm not sure how I feel about this but fox news apparently picked up on the story.  That may be a good thing as the university might have been tempted to sweep in into the back pages.  Makes you wonder who the student is what their background is and why they did this.

40 So, the NRO editors think it's bullshit too.

Posted by: A Rogue Wave Named Bruce at April 14, 2011 12:31 PM (OAgCy)

When even the pundits of the Republican establishment are calling it BS, what should anyone else think?

41 Can't we just write off our debt?

Well, yes...in a sense, we can.  Our debt, unlike that of many other countries, is in our own currency.  We can just print the money to pay it off (and ultimately, that IS what will happen because there  D.C. is on a cash bender and ain't going to stop until they hit the wall.)

The result will be Weimar-republic-style inflation (Gas at $1,000 a gallon), complete economic ruin, social chaos and the collapse of the American Republic.

We can do that.  Hell, we ARE doing that.

42 29 Cantor seems more conservative than Boehner, but he, Boehner, and McCarthy are all career politicians. They have their uses and Cantor has made fewer mistakes than those two; however, they're not the best we can do.

43 Rodgers is Old School / 1970s Republican, spending OPM at essentially the same rate as Democrats.

You won't get him off the Committee chair until you pry his cold dead hands, etc.

44
What the dipshits in Congress did -- Hal Rogers, Appropriator -- was open the bidding at like $31 billion. HE OPENED THE BIDDING AT A LOW COMPROMISE FIGURE.

Yes, that was Mistake #1.

You never go into negotiations and start at what you *think* the other side will agree to. Stupid³.

45 At some point, having a fight involves actually having the fight and not always making excuses about why it's not wise to have this particular fight right now.

But we've been taught (indoctrinated, really) for years that "a fight avoided is better than a fight won."  Which is only true when the fight isn't important.  When the fight is important, a truer statement is, "I fight sincerely fought and lost is far superior to a fight avoided."

Unfortunately, most people don't understand that- including our elected representatives- and so they choose to avoid fights of principle, on the principle that avoiding a fight is, in itself, a virtue.

46 Here's the nut of it: many of these items are "authorizations" to spend cash, but not obligations to spend cash. They can spend the money, but they don't have to -- and if they don't get to it for whatever reason, the "authorization" may or may not expire. (Often, it's written in such a way that it doesn't.) It's a twee argument because you can't really call it a "cut" if you never intended to spend the money anyhow, or if the spending is so far off in the future that it doesn't impact the current budgeting cycle.

47 OT: Why does Sen. Grassley keep getting re-elected?
and why does he hate whitey?

http://tinyurl.com/3j9auwb

48 Ace @29 - this isn't about opening bids, though.  This is about firm, written "Pledge To America" promises that weren't fulfilled. If you don't have a strategy to fulfill the promise, then don't make the promise.  You don't make the promise and then blame your own lack of strategy for why you can't fulfill it.

49 As I have been saying since the beginning, the actual number cut in the 2011 budget, the one that the Dems refused to produce last year, is of much less importance than setting the stage for the 2 battles where real change can be made, the debt limit and the 2012 budget. Given that Congress and the dipshit in chief are now arguing about how much to cut not whether or not cuts are required I'd say the ground has been laid for a discussion on our terms. If the Republicans screw the pooch on these two issues, that's the time to lose ones shit.

50 I don't know. I feel like I'm being spun but I'm not sure who's doing the spinning or in which direction.

Government has developed its bullshit so that no one really can see what they're doing.  It's the plan, Ace.

51 What I have objected to is they kept saying they were going to cut spending. They have not cut spending at all. At least two House members and one Senator have said in the end, spending this year will be higher than last year.

In any event, I also said that this CR wasn't the big deal on the amount but it was a big deal on the strategy for 2012. By knuckling under on the threat of another phony shutdown Boner showed the commies that they could bend him on any budget deal.

That does not bode well for either the debt limit or 2012. What we may be seeing here is the death of the Republican party, because there are a LOT of people who are pissed.

52 Yes, Rogers must go.  Isn't it at least possible that Boehner is giving him rope?

53
I know the other shoe is about to drop, any time now.

The stories about these MC's dipping their hands in the pork barrel. I can feel it in my bones; it's coming.

54

Never, ever trust a politician in regards to finances.  I was at a town hall meeting for my state representative and he stated they had spent less of the taxpayers money last year than the year before.  Now I just happened to have looked at the budget numbers that morning and knew it was bullshit.  So afterwards I asked him to clarify and he insisted they had spent less state TAXPAYER money since they got 4 billion in stimulus money.

So I asked, well where do you think that stimulus money came from?  And he explained to me that it came from the fed and our state is only 1 / 50th of the fed so 49/50ths of the money came from non state taxpayers.

I think my reply was something along the lines of.... are you really this fucking stupid?

55

Ace, the whole problem with the Republicans now is that everything is fifteen year time horizons.

Paul Ryan's plan is the best example of this. No intense deficit reduction for the next decade because his Medicare plan will pass AND all governments from now until half a century from now will follow his recommendation.

Republicans are using this to not make large cuts along with this problem and then shrug and say 'What can we do? We had a long-term plan?"

56
MC = members of Congress

57

look, the right and the left are screwing us "inside, outside, upside down" unless they ELIMINATE ALL OF THE SOCIAL PROGRAMS AND CUT SPENDING IN ALL THE PROGRAMS LEFT WE ARE DOOMED...and all this namby pamby what about grandma crap ain't gonna matter anyway.....btw, if you have a grandma toss her some cash and stop EXPECTING EVERYONE ELSE TO HELP HER OUT......

 

btw...before "james and the giant peach" became my favorite book..."inside, outside, upside down" was.

58 And yes, I do agree that it's still worth passing the CR, even as weak-tea as it is. The main value of this effort, as with Ryan's budget, is not that it solves any of the larger problems -- it's that it advances the battle-lines inch by painful inch. We run the risk of losing the war while we grind out these tiny painful victories, though. At some point you have to commit your forces and take the goddamned hill.

59 This is true; but cutting 100B now wasn't for the already appropriated dollars - it was for the future.

If you want to get the appropriated dollars, then the debt ceiling is the place to get them.  Do not raise the debt ceiling without having already passed and signed reprogramming bills for those appropriated funds.

The process should have been:

1. No initial debt ceiling without a deal on troop pay
2. 100B in real cuts to unappropriated funds
3.  No second debt ceiling without reprogramming of appropriated, but unobligated funds.
4.  2012 budget with structural cuts in the T's, not the B's

60 Posted by: JackStraw at April 14, 2011 12:34 PM (TMB3S)

The problem with that argument is that the Republicans have not shown any indication that they'll actually put up a fight over the debt limit or the '12 Budget.

So this was a big bell-weather issue to me: did they have the gumption to stand up for their principles?  And, not surprisingly, the answer appears to be "no."

61 Boehner is Grant in the Wilderness

by the left flank, march; by the left flank, march.  Lee out-marched him for months

but eventually, who surrendered to whom??????

This is going to be a long ugly messy sloppy process.  The 'deal' this week was Malvern Hill; you take and keep moving.  Petersburg and Richmond are close...

62

Ace,

You seriously think the twats at  Hot Air aren't really concerned about the approbation of the leftards?

Poppin' Fresh is squishy in many different ways.

63 the ground has been laid for a discussion on our terms

This.  From now on, I think BO will be treated like a kid at a cocktail party.  How cute you are, young man, now go watch TV while the adults talk.  His fiasco of a speech has permanently damaged him, probably fatally.

64 2012

Posted by: pep at April 14, 2011 12:31 PM (GMG6W)

So there are two possibilities with this current deal.

1) The Republicans establishment screwed conservatives over again intentionally.

2) This really was the best the Republicans could manage.

In either case the best thing we can do is push them on it hard. We *must* make them feel that they will pay a personal price if they do not implement *much* more. 

If we sit back and say, "oh, ok" it gives them the greenlight to either continue screwing us, or wallowing in their own incompetence.

Announce that the tea party will primary every Republican that votes for this. We can always change our minds if they do produce the serious fight you and some others think they will in 2012...

65

Do you think that there will be an intense movement of Tea Party activists in ten years as strong as today?

Republicans know exactly what they are doing. They are pushing the hardest decisions about the debt and deficit to a time when they know they will have to make different choices because they are electorally viable.

66 Oh please. I haven't seen this much "accounting is hard" rhetoric since the Enron trial.

Is the common man in this nation that much of a mathematical moron that he can't understand this basic accounting and spending? I would think now that all the "free-credit" has dried up people are starting to get a much better grasp on earn vs. spend budgeting.

And who the hell ever said you get a "rebate"? That is the stupidest thing I have heard since Obama said we have "57 states". Maybe even more stupid.

67 Isn't it at least possible that Boehner is giving him rope?

Certainly it's possible.  I believe it's just as possible that the Earth's magnetic poles will reverse tomorrow.

68

I don't know. I feel like I'm being spun but I'm not sure who's doing the spinning or in which direction. -Ace

Go with instinct, sir.  You know it feels wrong.  We all know that much more is being spent behind the scenes that hasn't actually been told to us.

The Bernanke's trillions overseas, the true extent of the '08 bailout and the '09 bailout, and now the smoke-and-mirrors of the budget deal last week.

None of it is real, and even on the (foolish) assumption that the deal wasn't as bad as it seems (and is), it still shows that the Republicans lack the will to fight for what is needed, and that most of the populace still doesn't give a damn.

You know it's all screwed up to hell.  Don't let yourself be deceived into believing the hype that it's bad, but it isn't that bad.  It's frakking bad.

69 His fiasco of a speech has permanently damaged him, probably fatally.

Posted by: pep at April 14, 2011 12:37 PM (GMG6W)

Never ever underestimate the ignorance of the Independent voter.

70 Ace, I've worked in the defense Industry for most of the last 40 years. Government budgeting is arcane beyond comparison. Spend vs. Commit, multi-year vs. fiscal year, fenced vs. unfenced, and blah, blah, blah. What should be the take away is that, whatever the type or color of the money, thay've got less of it to spend.

71
We are Abraham Lincoln and John Boehner is Ambrose Burnside.

(Am I doing this right?)

72 >>>Ace @29 - this isn't about opening bids, though. This is about firm, written "Pledge To America" promises that weren't fulfilled. but people like Rogers didn't take that pledge and are determined to spend like Democrats. I sort of agree but you know, if someone promises to cut $100 billion but only has half the Congress, what do you do? You can only try. You can't and don't control the senate. I am angry about the low opening bid because that is clearly some people not even trying.

73 Rogers has to go. I think Cantor does too. I will give Boehner a pass IF he gives me Rogers.

But we need Rogers off that goddamned Appropriations Committee.




Agreed!

74 So. Does this mean we can give Ace his razor blades back?

75 "Although, for the life of me, if this recent deal is the "best deal we could get"....how do they expect to squeeze trillions out of the budget? What variables will be in play to give them that upper hand that they didn't have a week ago?" Control of the senate Control of the executive branch

76 And on the other hand, we have the AP, which... well, let's say I trust them about as far as I can spit a minivan. Gold right there.

77 >>>Go with instinct, sir. You know it feels wrong. Not necessarily. If money was due to be spent in 2012 or 2013 and we cut it in 2011, then we have made cuts -- real cuts. Just cuts that don't occur right now. Now, you can say "they can always vote to spend that later" but you can also say that about any cuts. Cuts we made this year could be undone *in this session,* too.

78 Never ever underestimate the ignorance of the Independent voter.

Exactly.

We don't survive as a Nation with the current crop of uneducated rejects heading to the voting booths. We have to start getting serious about voting requirements - we need civics tests as a precursor to someone exercising their privilege to vote.

We get serious about that or we can forget about all this talky-talk we do here on the blogs. None of it will matter because we'll be stuck with the same crop of weaksauce political sunts in office just because the wind shifted in a different direction in a particular year's election cycle and the fence-sitting, uneducated asshole independents wanted to 'try something new'.

79 You need to write more posts like this in which you admit you are a fucking tool.

80 I wondered about this after reading your posts yesterday. This so called secret meeting where Boehner and Obama agreed to the non-cuts with the agreement that neither would rat each other out. How likely was that? If anything it seems to me that the Dems are simply using the CBO to split the TP and the GOP.

81 ""Maybe it's the pessimism of tax-time calling, but seriously, who cares. Let the country burn. Those of us strong enough will survive. Let everyone else too dumb to function fail and fall. I'm not caring right now.""

I'm there, too. Focusing on me and mine and reasonable preparedness with like-minded folk. We're beyond political fixes, I am afraid. Not that the political theatre isn't interesting. Bread and circuses!

82

I'm sure AJ Strata is correct in his explanation of how standard budgeting procedures work. But so what? The impossibly ambiguious, opaque, and byzantine nature of the federal budget process is not some technical issue ancillary distracting us from the problem -- it is the problem.

Ultimately the House of Representatives determines how these budgets work and where and when money is spent. There's nobody else with that power. Their job right now is to design a solution that either achieves the desired result within the process they've made for themselves, or else change the process. The process is complicated, inefficient, and extremely slow? Well, golly, I guess you'd better go and fix it, then.

83
No, because I'm pretty sure we were promised that spending levels would be returned to 2008.

So all the ridiculous spending outlayed by the Democrats for 2009, 2010, 2011,..., should be disregarded.

84

Paul Ryan's plan has now set the right edge of the debate. Obama has set up shop four miles left of what should have been reasonably expected to be the left edge of the debate.

The right edge of the debate relies on consistent, responsible Republican leadership to get the debt and deficit problem anywhere close to under control along with Medicare reforms that alone are really difficult to imagine as electorally possible.

No plan defunding Obamacare is going to pass the Senate right now, period. So, what exactly is the midpoint? If we aren't going to get the Ryan plan, will the Republicans demand more immediate cuts to payment rates, programs, spending or find another way to cut 'trillions' decades from now?

85

Has anyone over at Kos or DummiesUnderground ever admitted that he didn't totally understand the issue he was railing about?  Kudos to Ace for struggling with competing sets of principles, publically and for conceding that his first take might have been off.  That shows seriousness of purpose.

Frankly, I'm in the same boat trying to figure out whether we're being played by the GOP establishment (again).  We all need to understand what's going on here because the stakes are huge.

86 Government budgeting is arcane beyond comparison.

Which is stupid.  I've worked with budgets for large organizations (no, nothing as mammoth as government, but still), and it's not that hard to have a paradigm of: "This is how much money you have this year.  Spend it wisely."  There is no reason to "authorize" spending 5, 10, or 15 years out.  The only exception I can see to that is long-term contracts (which, I know, the Government has in spades), but even those can be handled on a per year basis.

Even for Military procurement: have they never heard of ESCROW?

87 "if it doesn't contain other fiscal reforms" BULLSHIT. DeMint should be filibustering raising the debt ceiling period. Now you know how this faux-con can even hint at endorsing Mitt Romney.

88 (Am I doing this right?)

Posted by: Soothsayer, Republican Whip at April 14, 2011 12:40 PM (uFokq)

are you just putting the tip in?

89
See? Eggmcmuffin is happy that you're coming around to the bogus 'cuts.' That should tell you it is a sham.

90 hahaha This lovely explanation we are being treated to is the direct result of how strong Ace was yesterday in all his posts.  We all knew about how this stuff works, and, if we didn't, Miss 80's Baby has been hanging from the chandeliers shouting at us all for over a week, giving us one hell of an education in how the government works.  No, Ace and company saw it clear as the light of day and I'm thinking that some people are afraid of the absolute truth out there shining back at them. 

If you listened to beck this morning he took it one step further by tieing it all in to a difference in philosophy, political philosophy.  Saying that if you are under 40 you can't recognize it cause you haven't looked it straight in the eye, thanks to those over 40 people who have and have made it so you don't have to.  He quoted Lincoln on education and he conjured up Reagan just by everything he said.

91

Ace, we all are being spun- from both ends.

Truth is the cuts are better than the AP reported and less than Boehner reported.
So what. Even 100 billion in cuts today would be symbolic. What is needed is structural change to the system.

In the big picture, this compromise 1) gives the Rebublicans a W; 2) Continues the momentum; 3) Shows they aren't the red-eyed idealogues the left portrays them as; 4) sets the stage for next time; 5) and moves the ever important Overton Window.

Yeah, Obama's speech yesterday is proof that it has moved thanks to conservative effort. The Dems are on refense now, acting reactionary.

Was it an awesome deal? No. Do I love it? No.

My advice, take the win. Use the dissatisfaction to spur the GOP leadership forward. Since they saw the near revolt here, this has to enter thier calculus of how to play the debt ceiling battle. My guess is they know they have to play that (the important battle) harder.

92 You did JUMP THE GUN, ace. He should have read Jennifer Rubin's WaPo column.

93 $38 billion in cuts..."I'm pissed off, throw the bums out, we're screwed, fuck them"

It's really only $352 million...."kill em all, anarchy, we are all going to die"

actually it really IS $38 billion...."hooray"

94 I liked bananas ace. His posts were shorter and angrier. I'm sure he'll be back when the pubs fold like a cheap suit on the debt ceiling and 2012 budget. There is no escape ace come back to the dark side.

95 You guys fail to realize the implications of neglecting to raise the debt ceiling.  And it is, indeed neglect.  Neglect to not only our economy, but zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

96 Government spending is arcane and confusing on purpose. I will be the first to admit I have not idea what they are talking about. The only thing I am sure of is that the cuts were not large enough for my tastes. Now what I do know is that I hope I have a good meal tonight and my flights are on time tomorrow. How's that for being self centered?

97

Posted by: Joe Sandman Biden at April 14, 2011 12:48 PM (/Mla1)

Too frakkin' funny

98 Posted by: Lemmiwinks at April 14, 2011 12:47 PM (pdRb1)

I'd like to cut your jib.

Wait, no, that's not right...

99 There will eventually be a breaking point. Eventually America will figure out that 500 and some odd assholes have destroyed a country of 300,000,000. Way too lopsided, and eventually shit is going to hit the fan. The song jawbreaker from Judas Priest sums it up-

Deadly as the viper peering from its coil
The poison there is coming to the boil
Ticking like to time bomb
The fuse is running short
On the verge of snapping if it's caught

And all the pressure that's been building up
For all the years it bore the load
The cracks appear, the frame starts to distort
Ready to explode,  Jawbreaker

Crouching in the corner
Wound up as a spring
Piercing eyes that flash are shimmering
Muscles all contorted
Claws dug in the dirt
Every ounce of fibre on alert

100 Hey.  I just got banned at Hot Air.

That means you guys get me now 24/7!

101 Here's how fracked we are as a Nation.

Top trending topics on Yahoo --

Not the budget or the debt ceiling.

It's the Taco Bells Dorito taco shell and Catherine Zita-Jones trip to rehab.

102

Why are we supposed to be happy that Boehner cuts so many trillions from the potential 2021 budget? Are we supposed to forget that spending increases happen?

If we had a transparent and intelligible budget process, perhaps this would make sense, but what is going to happen in the 2013 budget when the same process that happened here happened in reverse?

Good luck getting people to get excited about the accounting going in the opposite direction. No one will care, and so few people will follow. As long as politicians are able to defer and conceal, they will use the budget process to their advantage.

Exactly how hard is it to change anything the Republicans have done or will do? It only takes one fucking budget from the Democrats. None of this is real.

 

103

If we have learned something about the CBO, its garbage in, garbage out.

I don't think its impossible at all to diminish the cuts numbers for political purposes.

104 Whether we are discussing cutting $352M, $8B, or even $38.5B doesn't matter - it is all peanuts.

I thought this way at first, however, from an engineering standpoint 30 something billion is about 20 dB less than what is needed and 300 something million is 20 dB less than that.  So the question of whether it is 20 dB or 40 dB inadequate is not entirely academic from an exponential perspective. 

IMHO the CBO has more credibility here than Boehner.

105 100 Hey.  I just got banned at Hot Air.

That means you guys get me now 24/7!

Wear that badge with pride! 

106 any Wise Pol can make numbers dance like ballerinas on meth

the Greater Point is to change the landscape of battle, so that the Great Debate is over how much to NOT spend rather than how much to spend.

I think that's starting to actually happen--and that is very very good

baby steps.........

107 Posted by: 18-1 at April 14, 2011 12:23 PM (7BU4a)

This, and nothing but this.

108 Hey.  I just got banned at Hot Air.

No "revolution" for you!!!

109

Posted by: laceyunderalls at April 14, 2011 12:49 PM (pLTLS)

Rehab stories taking priority is just sad.

But Dorito taco shells???  That's epic.

110 "if it doesn't contain other fiscal reforms" We heard this BULLSHIT from Mike Pence, too, and it's just passed off as a given that the debt ceiling will be raised, but it will be "Armageddon." About as much as a Saturday night cat fight in a Denny's sounds like it.

111 Hey. I just got banned at Hot Air. That means you guys get me now 24/7! Posted by: Kasper Hauser at April 14, 2011 12:49 PM (HqpV0) OK then, large Coffee, no sugar and regular milk

112 Ace,
Like you I am feeling very 'spun' with this budget stuff. A couple of things. . .
The AP, Reuters, NY & LA Times are proven deceivers and they absolutely can not be a source for what is going on. Trust but Verify as someone once said.

This cluster fuck goes to show how gigantic and dysfunctional our government is. Less is more and limited government is the only solution to this in the future.

Our budget problems are not going to be solved in this CR. This is strictly a skirmish and the real battle is the next budget. Getting our panties all tied up in a knot ala Hugh Hewitt does nothing and I think plays into the libs hands. That does not mean that we do not hold the GOP's feet to the fire, call 'em, write 'em and make sure they understand that IF there is not significant reduction of this next budget they will get primaried. Period. My congress critter is Issa and he is solid, but I have let him know that if the GOP does not make meaningful long term reductions I will go against him in the primary and maybe even the general election if he survives that.

Remain calm but steadfast in the fight. We need more limited government types elected to to do some real good. The last election was good, however tighten your chin straps more battles are ahead.

113 40 When even the pundits of the Republican establishment are calling it BS, what should anyone else think?

Some of them started changing their minds this morning after they saw the full CBO report.

114 Who cares what AJ Strata says, he's an illegal-alien loving RINO pussy.  Fact of the matter is Boehner and Co. promised $100 billion in cuts, then it got cut down to $61 billion, and then to $38 billion, and nobody can tell if the cuts are even real.  Is that what we were after?

115

Ed Morrissey (at Hot Air) wrote:

"Also, the CBO appears to have assumed that some of these cuts from spending would never have been spent even without the rescissions, a possibility but not a certainty without the rescissions in place."

He makes a good point here.  I remember working for the county highway department when I was in college an hearing that, towards the end of the fiscal year, they spend a bunch of money they were authorized to spend on things they did not need in order to make sure that they would not get their authorization reduced the next year.   This is how government workers think.  If it's there they spend it - there is no benefit to underspending. 

 

 

 

116 Posted by: Cicero at April 14, 2011 12:45 PM (QKKT0)

Pretty much this about this place. The mere fact that the head Ewok says, "someone put me some fucking knowledge" strengthens my gooey man love for him, not lessens it.

117 "becasue we remained strong, the soviets came back to the table"

take a little break, watch a little you tube, you may not have liked what happened during his administration, I know I got pretty annoyed most times, but hey, he led us.....

118 Rehab stories taking priority is just sad. "Detox? There's a bargain. $13,000 for a 3 and a half week treatment. And, folks, I don't want to sound like a casual user or anything, but if you can come up with $13,000 you don't have a problem yet!" - Sam Kinison

119 OT, but the IL House has voted to ban trans-fat  statewide(restaurants, movies, schools, bakeries, etc) AND voted to make ya register before buying Draino and similar household chemicals. The Draino bill passed unanimously. That'll surely de-bone us, right?

120

Posted by: Cicero at April 14, 2011 12:45 PM (QKKT0)

Ditto. I am no expert on the economy, and generally restrict any comments to snark.  But being suspicious of the GOP comes from long experience. I think it was rather natural for Ace to assume the worst. The percentages and history are with him on that.

121

This is political speak that revolves around the baseline budgeting concept. They're claiming that they've made cuts, but these are only cuts to the baseline and not the actual budget. It's the same kind of cut that Washington always talks about: this year they're spending x, next year they had planned to spend x + y, but now they'll spend x + (y-z), where z<y. At the end of the day they'll still be spending more next year than they spent this year, which is an increase, not a cut.

What they should have done is taken the 2008 budget, divided by 12 months, and allocated the pro-rated amount for the remainder of the current fiscal year. That would have been real cuts.

122 That means you guys get me now 24/7!

Posted by: Kasper Hauser at April 14, 2011 12:49 PM (HqpV0)

Good, now, bacon just this side of crispy. And keep it comin.

123
Memo to: the Republicans

To show you how reasonable I am, I will make this modest proposal.
All I want in terms of spending cuts is an amount that exceeds the compounding  debt on the interest.

Is that too much to ask? Can we at least do that, now?

124

I can just about guarantee the debt ceiling won't be a fight. Republicans are getting an earful from banks and Wall Street, who finally decided that politicians at least ostensibly concerned about free markets might be good for them.

Republicans need that election money from finance in 2012, and they aren't going to put banks or the lending of the federal government at risk. They are putting in all on the 2012 budget.

125 <<<<Joe's Husband Erg>>>>> Which one of you revolutionary budgetthumpers is going to be the first to present a workable cut?  Which ones of you will be the first to convince the Democrats?  Which ones of you will be the first to be laughed at and excoriated by the media?  My "educated" guess is that none of you will, especially the ones who speak of sustainable budgets and reasonable debt rates.  My "experience" is that those who speak tough of budget cuts and the CBO are the ones that piss their pants and run after the first RINO is fired.

126 I dunno either.  According to the GOP's explanation, a budget for '11 is cuts for '12, provided that they feel like doing it in '12.  Very different than the note that Boehner was sounding during the campaign, and I have a hard time believing Congress can't order the Federal Government to stop spending if it really wanted to.

127

We didn't take baby steps getting here.  Evel Knievel never jumped as fast or as far.  On his fastest day, Richard Petty never got this far so quickly.

So to take baby steps backwards is a bit hard to swallow. 

Boehner played us for a fool.

What other "savings" are waiting out there?  Did he see some funding left over from the Apollo program that he can cut?  Maybe a few dollars that we didn't spend on the Korean War?

They're either making real cuts or we're being lied to.

Let's see an agency get cut.  Let's see PBS funding zeroed.

Then, and only then, will I believe that Boehner is something other than a RINO

128

But Dorito taco shells???  That's epic.

Too bad we're soon going to be so broke that we won't be able to afford them anyway... (this presupposes we still have enough corn not going into biofuels to be able to make the blasted things). 

/People's priorities are so messed up. 

129 First, let me say thanks Ace for acknowledging the comment I left about not rushing to buy into the AP spin.

You (generally, not specifically) have to remember that the AP *IS* liberally biased and Obama-worshipping. And what was the first impression that came out of the deal? Boehner won. Obama and the Democrats got rolled by having to agree to a number that was even higher than Boehner initially asked for.

So to placate Obama's liberal base and (this is VERY important) to attempt to split the Republican party from their "Tea Party base," they are spinning that it was, in fact, the REPUBLICANS who got rolled by that oh so very clever fella, Obama.

The easiest way to understand this is: although the CBO may CLAIM that the funds were "unlikely" to be spent, that's like claiming that the ValuRite vodka is "unlikely" to be drunk by one of the resident morons. If a federal agency has authority to spend a dollar, it will spend that dollar and they don't even care on what - a 20 year supply of Post-it notes if that's what it takes. That's the DEFINITION of baseline budgeting. If you don't spend the money, your baseline goes down and the amount of money you get NEXT year goes down too. How many bureaucrats do YOU know that would leave even a penny on the table given that reality?

CBO works only with the unreality with which it presented as too many people learned during the ObamaCare debate. That CBO claimed the budget would only be decreased by $352 million only means that the CBO is working with the faulty assumption that bureaucrats AREN'T bureaucrats and won't act as bureaucrats have acted since the beginning of bureaucracy.

130

Shorter AJ:  smart guys know that $38.5b in budget speak really means $352m in the language of the cretins. Don't be a cretin, Ace.

Hey Ace, just because the smart guys knew this was smoke and mirrors and now are splainin what they really meant by $38.5 billion doesn't make it less a fraud. Fuck these liars, sideways.

131 Oh! Never Mind

132 >>The problem with that argument is that the Republicans have not shown any indication that they'll actually put up a fight over the debt limit or the '12 Budget. The problem with your argument is they haven't even started those negotiations yet. They took the '11 negotiation down to the last hour so yea, I'd say just short of a shutdown which would have weakened, not strengthened their future negotiating position, I think they have signaled that they are willing to fight hard. As I said, if they don't thats the time to freak out. Not before the battle even starts.

133 On our hike yesterday some of the birds were carrying suitcases.

134 Hey.  I just got banned at Hot Air.

It took you this long to get banned?  and I assume you have only been banned once?  I think I smell the taint of RINOism on this one.  You must cleanse yourself by getting banned a second time.

135

The easiest way to understand this is: although the CBO may CLAIM that the funds were "unlikely" to be spent, that's like claiming that the ValuRite vodka is "unlikely" to be drunk by one of the resident morons. If a federal agency has authority to spend a dollar, it will spend that dollar and they don't even care on what - a 20 year supply of Post-it notes if that's what it takes. That's the DEFINITION of baseline budgeting. If you don't spend the money, your baseline goes down and the amount of money you get NEXT year goes down too. How many bureaucrats do YOU know that would leave even a penny on the table given that reality?

This is true. We just had outrage stories a week or so ago about congressional staffers getting big bonuses because the money was left in the accounts. Who here thinks that money would be returned to the treasury?

The CBO is worthless. Its way to easy to game it.

136

Just a recap:

(1) We are angry because the cuts clearly aren't $100 billion

(2) We are more angry because the cuts aren't even $61 billion (pro-rated for the amounr of time left in the year)

(3) We are furious to find the number is around $38.5 billion

(4) We lose our fucking minds to discover the number is around $400 million

(5) We realize that it probably was around $10 billion for this year with so much more coming the future cause this is how the government works.

(6) We are happy?

137 They are putting in all on the 2012 budget.

HAHAHAHAHA!

Wait.  You weren't joking?

Here's the thing- there will always be some constituent group they "need" for the next election.  So if "need support of group X" is always a criteria for what they do, they're just as bad as the Democrats.

Standing up on principle is the only thing we should accept from our politicians.

138

>> Even for Military procurement: have they never heard of ESCROW?

Kinda, yeah.  They're called "option years" and they go in the budget.

Consider a contract I might know about, I ain't sayin.  It's awarded in Sep 2010, it has one base year and 3 option years.  The total budgeted allocation is $100MM, $25MM a year.  There's $25MM in each of the 4 year budgets, but only the first year is allocated and funded.  The others are not funded, and may or may not be spent, government's option.

So they're in the next 3 FY budgets.  They are not committed.

139 You must cleanse yourself by getting banned a second time.

Posted by: Snorting the NPR butt hash so you won't have to at April 14, 2011 12:58 PM (F/4zf)

lake minnetonka?

140 Kabuki. It's Ryan v Obama.

141 IMHO the CBO has more credibility here than Boehner. Even some FOX News dipshit made Boehner squirm over some dumb joke about Biden. You could hear his balls shriveling during the clip.

142 this morning I heard something I thought was wholly bizarre and I can't remember what cable outlet has the person who said it.  But they said that if the congress appropriates money for the president to spend, he has to spend that money.  I thought that was bizarre, as a shopper I thought "but what if he gets the $400. designer dress on sale with double coupons that stack and free shipping for $30 bucks and no tax, does he have to buy it someplace else for $400 bucks"...and then the person said that the congress threatened to sue one of the presidents if he didn't spend the money.  Come to think of it, the person might have been Mike Reagan, talking about his new book about his dad.

Don't you find this totally bizarre but it sure explains a lot of the BS doesn't it.  And I also heard this morning that the president would be the CEO of America and no CEO would be allowed to behave like this (that one was said before coffee on CNBC)

143 Ace, It goes beyond the pledge too, because Boehner said multiple times the same thing as the pledge in January and February. Also Hal Rogers is in his position due to Boehner. Why the hell pick someone whose goal is to undermine your program. Recinding spending authority two years from now is not a cut in this years spending.

144 Work until April to pay the taxes. Work until August to pay the Humungus. Work until December to buy toy trains.

This is getting old.

145

Re: jumping the gun.  It is not the customers' job to be satisfied - it is our representatives' job to satisfy us, their customers and bosses!

Screw moderation and fuck patience to death - I want the Dems to be afraid of us, and the RINOs terrified of us.  Next time they'll all know we will ask tougher questions, and the time after that, tougher still.  Any of our SOBs that can't keep up the pace we primary their asses into retirement, and we defeat their SOBs on principle because they deserve it.

Stay the course, and keep the end goal in mind: to take the country back from the socialist corruptocrats.  We can't do it all at once, but niether should we be content with the pace set by those who haven't lifted a finger to do it so far.

146 But the fact that it's easy doesn't mean it's not real.

Yeah, but the fact that spending fucking goes up under the deal does mean that the fucking "cuts" aren't real.

1.37 is more than 1.35. That's 2011's and 2010's "discretionary" spending, in trillions, says CBO. That's increased spending.

It's so much more spending, no calculator I own can handle enough digits so I can figure out how many citizens' lifetime earnings it represents. Eyeballin' it, I'm getting about 25k—whole working lives taken. Twenty-five thousand extra. This year.

Out here in the fields where money gets harvested, these numbers are real. They're time spent. And we can't bullshit-accounting any of it back.

There is no "baby step." There is no "start." There is no "cut." There is only The Boning.

147 Even for Military procurement: have they never heard of ESCROW?

The Constitution does not allow long term Defense appropriations.  Congress gets a short leash.

148 hotair never even let me join

149 no, the US govt didn't take baby steps getting all of us into his Giant Clusterfuck

so what?  I was talking about the process of solution--not how we got here

just because we got screwed in Huge Doses does not mean we get Unscrewed quickly or cleanly

This is going to be a Roto-Rooter job ( although their policy is "if you can see the shit, tell them to call a plumber" ) .  We can see The Shit everywhere and there's no one we can call in

150 86 ...There is no reason to "authorize" spending 5, 10, or 15 years out.  The only exception I can see to that is long-term contracts (which, I know, the Government has in spades), but even those can be handled on a per year basis.

Longer budget windows and lack of meaningful budgetary process reform gives them a greater chance of spending like drunken sailors. That's one of the reasons why implementing some of the budgetary process reforms in the 2012 budget should be a high priority, because they would allow for less cheating.

151 I heard the same thing about what real savings vs planned expenditures vs the bottom line. It was from my wife. She was discussing buying shoes. I didn't get a blow job from agreeing to those spending plans, either.

152 Well, at least we've got a couple of weeks to review the final package and do a complete evaluation before spending another trillion dollars.

Oh wait, the bill was typed up on Tuesday and is being rushed through for a vote today before anyone can run more than a cursory crunch of the numbers.

Sort of tells you all you need to know about what a great deal this must be....

153 Between these short bus politicians in DC and Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown as my governor it's no wonder I need medication and booze.

154

This was bound to pick up steam and will not be good for this country, imo.  It might also be prevented, but with things starting out the way they are, it doesnÂ’t seem likely.

Read about what happened in England when the Sterling ceased to be the worldÂ’s reserve currency.

155 hotair never even let me join

Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 14, 2011 01:01 PM (Cm66w)

We have standards.

156 105 100 Hey.  I just got banned at Hot Air.

That means you guys get me now 24/7!

Wear that badge with pride! 

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at April 14, 2011 12:50 PM (9hSKh)

..............

it is kinda cool when people get banned at hotair the first place they come to is here..........

157 I find this very confusing.  Why can we not just unappropriate the Porkulus money that hasn't be contracted yet.  That's got to be hundreds of billions that no one is getting now, so no one will feel the loss.

158 Rogers has to go. I think Cantor does too. I will give Boehner a pass IF he gives me Rogers.

But we need Rogers off that goddamned Appropriations Committee.

Posted by: ace at April 14, 2011 12:28 PM (nj1bB)

Ah, but Ace, now you see precisely why Boner resisted pressure not to even put Rodgers in Appropriations this session. He needs Rodgers in that spot. And the current deal shows why. If boner wasn't fully on board with the scam, then he is too dumb to be Speaker and should resign.

159 hotair never even let me join

Consider it a badge of honor.

160

This is also not talked about a lot, but a huge portion of deficit reduction in the next couple of years will have nothing to do with Ryan, Obama, Republicans, or Democrats.

The payroll tax holiday will expire, unemployment benefits will come to relatively normal levels, funding given to the Commerce and Treasury departments will drop dramatically, etc.

This is at least 75% of the drop in the yearly deficit from Obama's budget to Ryan's. I imagine it could be as high as 90%.

161 Hey. I just got banned at Hot Air.

Welcome to the after party.

162 Longer budget windows and lack of meaningful budgetary process reform gives them a greater chance of spending like drunken sailors. That's one of the reasons why implementing some of the budgetary process reforms in the 2012 budget should be a high priority, because they would allow for less cheating.

Every Congress is sovereign.  Going for budgetary rules never works because they can be overridden at will, and as we learned with things like the Dems not even passing a budget, no force holds Congress to its own rules.

163 They took the '11 negotiation down to the last hour so yea, I'd say just short of a shutdown which would have weakened, not strengthened their future negotiating position, I think they have signaled that they are willing to fight hard.

1) I reject the notion that a non-shutdown "Government Shut Down" would have hurt the Republicans.  I saw far too much caterwauling from the media in the days just before the shut down trying to convince people that it would be terrible.  If they'd been at all sure that any negatives would have stuck to the Republicans, and not the Democrats, they would have at least soft-sold the horror stories: instead they went full blown "People are gonna DIE!!!!"

2) What gives you the idea they'll fight hard for the '12 budget?  How hard they fought on... oh... anything else?  Them sticking to their guns and cutting obviously unnecessary expenditures like funding for CPB and Planned Parenthood?

When someone is a new candidate, I have to take them at their word- more or less.  That's why we like credentialed candidates who we can vet.  Once someone has an actual national-level record, I don't have to guess what they'll do- I can look at their actions in the past and fairly safely presume they'll stick to those modes of behavior.

164 15 - "What variables will be in play to give them that upper hand that they didn't have a week ago?"

A week ago the only items that could be worked with are 6 months of discretionary spending authority. We we are learning, that means that programs are funded (or not) and whether or not the money is spent is up to the people executing those programs.  Let me give an example:

I work on Defense programs, and each program must be "funded" before it can be executed. There is a set amount that is deposited (or will be, at some point during the year) in a federal account.  The funding is now "allocated" but it isn't spent until we perform work and bill the Government.  It is quite common for us to bill for less (or more) than the amount that has been allocated.  Sometimes those funds are swept up, but usually unspent but allocated funds are used for other items, like extra bells and whistles for things the military wanted but didn't think they could afford.

What this process is doing is going into all of those accounts of unspent money and pulling it back.  That is actually unusual, I can't recall seeing it happen.  But there is no guarantee the money would have been spent at all, and it is common for it not to be spent during this fiscal year, since most federal programs work on a 5 year budget window.

In any case, this round of discussion could only work with about $450 billion in discretionary funding, that which has not already been allocated to fund activities that have already occurred during the first half of the year (even though they may not have been billed for it yet).  Such as my paycheck, which I have already received, though my time on some programs may not have been billed yet.

The CRs are unable to address any mandatory spending that are defined by statute.  Those programs, like Medicare, are on auto-pilot. That is why they said we are going to shut down the Government, but Medicare and Social Security checks would still go out.  Those expenditures are enacted in law, not in budgetary appropriations. They just keep on chugging along year in and year out according to the law that established them.

The 2012 budget fight (and the debt ceiling too, if the GOP had the balls to fight over it) can address statutory changes.  The House can pass legislation that changes the fundamental structure of an entitlement.  Medicaid is a perfect example here, change it from a guaranteed level of service program administered by the federal government, to a block grant given to the states to enact as they will, within a set of service goals.  This is how welfare was reformed in the mid 90s (with a great deal of success).  Once those statutory reforms have passed the House, then the budget is passed that provides the operational funds to administer the new program.  You can sit there with the 2012 budget and a new law at the same time and say "pass them both, or we shut down the government".  Clearly, Obama's intent will be to veto any structural changes to the statutes.  If he is unserious about our problems (and yesterday's speech certainly indicates that), then that refusal to sign reforms becomes a major campaign issue as our candidate will then promise to sign the law when elected. Then the voters get to choose whether they want to be adults or wishcasters.

165 Cognitive dissonance as provoked by typical news reporting:

Report on something you have intimate knowledge of: "What bullshit, how could a reporter this fucking stupid even operate a keyboard."

Report on something unfamiliar: "This is a goddamn outrage! Once again, Boehner assrapes America - burn this fucker down!!!"

166 Hey. I just got banned at Hot Air.

Welcome to the after party.


We welcome you to AOSHQ with open, weeping syphilitic sores and lots of val-u-rite.

167 Is FY 2011 spending < 2010 spending?
[ ] Yes
[X] No

Doesn't sound like a cut to me.

168
I'm so distraught and beaten down to a nub that at this point I'd be happy if we just defunded the Dead Kennedy museum.

That's all. Please.

169 It is a brand new world....

170

it is kinda cool when people get banned at hotair the first place they come to is here..........

Posted by: Racefan at April 14, 2011 01:04 PM (2gCJN)

Because I've got nowhere else to go!

171

it is kinda cool when people get banned at hotair the first place they come to is here..........

Posted by: Racefan at April 14, 2011 01:04 PM (2gCJN)

I feel really out of the loop.  I rarely go there unless someone links there and I am in a position to click and then I kept wondering where all these people were talking.  Finally someone gave me a clue with talking about some "green room" and I took a peak.  It's ok, overhyped, still can't figure out why people think it is a top conservative blog cause really, if you are honest, Ace's place has it all over them.

172 Which one of you revolutionary budgetthumpers is going to be the first to present a workable cut? Where is Issa on fraud and abuse? How about we start cutting the programs Bush added while growing the size of our government. As for RINO's, let Scott Brown and the Main sisters heads roll.

173 Just saw a breif clip of Boehner; he made the point that if an agency has approval to spend X dollars, chances are that they will. He has a point. If the Department of Underwater Basket Weaving has spending approval for $10 billion but has only spent $4 billion so far, what are the odds that they won't find a reason to spend the remaining $6 billion?

174 So if the money being spent by the government now was appropriated long ago, why would we have a shut down if the CR isn't passed?

I'm really confused.

175

154--The Weeping Boner must step down from the House Weepership.  End of story.  Otherwise, you are looking at, at best, a replay of the destruction of the GOP as we saw from the Shamnesty debacle.  This is what is now at risk.

Worse things could happen, by my estimation, than another complete meltdown by the GOP. Its effectively dead as a political party anyway. The Tea Party people need to get as far away as possible from Speaker Cryin John and the coming collapse. The Tea P it seems to me now has one choice--step forward and beat and replace the GOP fraudsters, or complete the process of assimilation and face the same fate as the GOP.

176 I have already sent letters to the commie moonbats and RINOS who "represent me" in California over this bullshit deal.

I'm sure I'll get a form-letter response in a month or so that lists their resume and how concerned they are with my opinion.

We have to replace Boehner. Word has to be given:

Make a bad deal, lose your job.

177 Posted by: Paper at April 14, 2011 12:59 PM (VoSja)

This clearly characterizes the bipolar mind. Rinse, repeat.

178

Ace: Don't let this move your personal Overton Window.

Even if the almost-$40B number is correct, that's still about thre orders of magnitude too puny to make a difference.  Kind of like trying to destroy a tank with a wooden baseball bat.  Sure, they dented the paint, but the tank is still going to run over your children and demolish your town.

179 toby - Why can we not just unappropriate the Porkulus money that hasn't be contracted yet.  That's got to be hundreds of billions that no one is getting now, so no one will feel the loss.

That "unappropriation" - a reprogramming or recission, of the unspent porkulus (last I heard it was $700B), would have to be a new bill - passed by the Senate and signed by the One. 

The only leverage to do it is with the debt ceiling.  The Pub's can say - no raise in the debt ceiling until those unspent (obligated, is the correct term) dollars are reprogrammed -- that can be understood by the public.

180 Posted by: Dave in Texas at April 14, 2011 12:59 PM (Wh0W+)

Well, I'm more talking about things like purchasing new jets from Boeing or Lockheed or whatever: where you have to "appropriate" the funds today that won't be spent for 5 years or whatever.  Take that out of this year's spending (or follow the plan that most business do where you divide final cost by X where X is the number of years from now until you actually make the purchase, and then take that much out of each of those years' budgets).

181 someone got banned by Poppin'Fresh and AP....

welcome comrade, welcome.....

Ed just admitted he knows we're screwed then.....

he had eased off the banhammer for the non-gospel non-RiNo choir for a bit.....

guess he figures it is okay since the next election or is that erection is two years off....

182 Otherwise, you are looking at, at best, a replay of the destruction of the GOP as we saw from the Shamnesty debacle. This is what is now at risk. Posted by: iknowtheleft at April 14, 2011 01:03 PM (G/MYk) BINGO.

183
fuckit

The first thing we need to do is change the name to the Inappropriations Committee.

184

Adamantly refusing to go off topic...

By giving the speech that he did yesterday, Obama definitively proved that he is really not that smart - neither he nor his advisors.  Even the left should have picked up on this.  All of the talk about the 'professorial president' is just empty pap that is even less believable today than it was two days ago.

People who say it going forward don't risk being called idiots, they are idiots and they will have no credibility in trying to refute that simple fact.

185 It is possible to make cuts and make them quickly.  When Clinton was elected the funding for parts of the missile defense program was cut before he was even inaugurated.

186 i tried to join hotair a few years ago and they wouldnt let me for some reson, never tried again........... fuckem.........

187 toby - So if the money being spent by the government now was appropriated long ago, why would we have a shut down if the CR isn't passed?

Very good question, because the funds to do important things - like pay the troops - aren't laying around unspent.  It's the useless, porkulus stuff laying about.  Moving it - reprogramming - requires an agency get approval from the appropriators.

188

You can only cut money that has been appropriated and not yet spent.  There is no other way to do it. Once spent, the money is gone, whether salaries, asphalt, bullets or Planned Parenthood. 

That is why this whole exercise has been a little bit of Kabuki theater.  The real cuts come next year, both in terms of lowering dollars appropriated and in, hopefully, changing the base case.  Cuts should mean cuts, not slow down in the rate of growth.

It would be good to see every agency have to go to zero based budgeting every third year or so (every year is probably impractical). 

189 177 So if the money being spent by the government now was appropriated long ago, why would we have a shut down if the CR isn't passed?

I'm really confused.

Posted by: toby928™ at April 14, 2011 01:09 PM (GTbGH)

Ever since miss 80's baby was skitish I've been trying to find the answer to that question cause it is a wholly bizarre system.  I find it so funny that they criticized wall street when wall street has so many restrictions they could never think of being this deceitful.   I mean this is the evil genius of budget processes and we have to think if we did this in our personal finances what would happen?

190 Puhleeeeze ... N P friggin' R got $445 million and you believe there were cuts?!

191 you know.....i said it yesterday.....and i say it again today....I OPT OUT!  sorry, i'm not in a "sharing mood"

192 Hey, whatever happened, it's no reason not to panic!

193 186 fuckit

The first thing we need to do is change the name to the Inappropriations Committee.

They never should have been made their own entity, especially when it appears they were just let loose.

BTW- That slime-ball Hal Rogers is now introducing his bill. Vote expected in an hr.

194 That is why this whole exercise has been a little bit of Kabuki theater.

If it's theater, we were promised seeing a boner cut 100 billion dollars.

I want my fucking ticket refunded.

195

112The AP, Reuters, NY & LA Times are proven deceivers and they absolutely can not be a source for what is going on

Wait a minute; 72 hours ago the press was uniformly declaring Speaker Cryin John the Big Winnertm. If there object is to make boner look bad, why did they start building monuments to the guy last week and through the weekend. Were they deceiving you then, or are they deceiving you now?

196 AllenG - Well, I'm more talking about things like purchasing new jets from Boeing or Lockheed or whatever: where you have to "appropriate" the funds today that won't be spent for 5 years or whatever.

A civilian agency could do that, DoD cannot.  Thats one of the reasons DoD ends up with arcane contracts and insane audit and controls.

197 Obama's speech was about what we should expect from the little prom queen.


If they wanted to cut, they could cut.

If there are plans in place to deal with thermonuclear war with China.

Pretty sure there are ways to cut some money from NPR and Mosquito Vector Control in Guam.

198 If you owe taxes, good article in Marketwatch
http://tinyurl.com/4327ugk

199

Just saw a breif clip of Boehner; he made the point that if an agency has approval to spend X dollars, chances are that they will.

He's exactly right.  Lemme tell ya what happens here in DC every September.  Every agency and sub-office looks at their bottom line and finds all the money they had authoirty to spend still that, somehow, didn't get spent during the year.  Do they turn that money back in to the Treasury?  Hell no.  They - and I am not effin' kiddin' kiddies - rush out to spend it all in the remaining 2 weeks of the fiscal year.

Why?  Because if they don't Congress or their agency comptroller will cut their budget by the amount of the unspent money in the next fiscal year.

That's the tragedy (miracle?) of baseline budgeting.

Boehner did cut actual spending, and more importantly he cut the baseline budget in a lot of places so we won't get boned in that quick-spend-all-the-money! drill next year, and the year after that, and the year after that.

200 Unreported Soros Event Aims to Remake Entire Global Economy

201 Every Congress is sovereign.  Going for budgetary rules never works because they can be overridden at will, and as we learned with things like the Dems not even passing a budget, no force holds Congress to its own rules.

Ah, but if you set the rules -and then follow them- so that they eliminate base-line budgeting, multi-year "appropriations," and all those other things Congress uses to obfuscate what we actually spend, then when the Democrats get back in power, it is harder for them to go back to that- people will really be able to sit up and say, "Wait, when the Republicans were in office, they said 'Here's what we're spending this year,' why is it that you don't know until the CBO has analyzed your document?"

202
ah, I see.

Appropriated funds are written in stone.

But for Lindsey Graham, for example, our 1st Amendment right is malleable and revokable.

Is this how Congress works? If so, it sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks.

203 ""it is kinda cool when people get banned at hotair the first place they come to is here..........""


I got banned at free republic for either saying the word "shit", or it was making a reference to the fact that if the muslims ever started blowing up schools, then we would play cowboys and muslims and would be done by noon the following day. Both "infractions" probably appeared in my same post, so I don't know what caused it. Fuck them too, I'm not a country club republican who drinks with his pinky extended.

I did find this place rather fast after that, and saw that welcoming bit about spitting on hands, and hoisting flags. lol

204 The Repubs should save this speech and this date and give it a name, who knows 'the watershed speech of 4/13/11', something.  But make it famous as the speech where Barry outted himself as an idiot.

205

So if the money being spent by the government now was appropriated long ago, why would we have a shut down if the CR isn't passed?

Short answer: it was authorized, not appropriated.  What was appropriated (actual authority to spend money) was the short term budgets.

There's a difference between the two.

And that fact annoys the living shit out of "authorizers," because everyone in DC knows the only thing that counts is the actual appropriation.

206
That slime-ball Hal Rogers is now introducing his bill.

Can't wait to hear what's in it. A lotta cuts for 2013 and beyond, I suspect.

207

Eh...its amazing what a well timed AP article can do. Don't ya think! 

208 Wasn't there a story mentioned here a few weeks ago that at least 200 billion in duplicate spending has been identified in the budget?  Why can't we cut that - seems to me that if this is "duplicate" spending, shouldn't it be the easiest to excise?

209
So if I have this right, as soon as your elected to Congress, you have a license to raid the U.S. Treasury?

210 When when the Democrats get back in power, it is harder for them to go back to that

Maybe if the GOP held them to it, but they don't.  Comity uber alles.

As for people...people don't pay attention to that stuff.  Most people can't even name the Speaker of the House.  Are they going to care that a procedural rule was ignored, especially if it was ignored to give free goodies to a voting block?

Do you expect the MFM to go after Dems on it, or tout the 'goodies' aspect of the law?

Procedural rules are ineffective.  Real cuts are what matters.

211 Were they deceiving you then, or are they deceiving you now?

Yes.

Or, more appropriately- they were deceiving Boehner and his acolytes then, and they're attempting to deceive the rest of us now.

A civilian agency could do that, DoD cannot.

Presuming that's true (I certainly don't know one way or the other, so I'll take your word for it), why can't they?  If it's "because Congress passed a law..." then Congress can (and should) pass a different law.

212

""it is kinda cool when people get banned at hotair the first place they come to is here..........""

I would try posting on there occasionally if it wasn't for the fact they haven't had an open registration period in over a year as far as I know. I find that really annoying considering they are listed as one of the most visited conservative blogs on the internet right now, so why be so stingy with letting people register and comment?

213 A civilian agency could do that, DoD cannot.

Presuming that's true (I certainly don't know one way or the other, so I'll take your word for it), why can't they?  If it's "because Congress passed a law..." then Congress can (and should) pass a different law.

The Constitution.

214 192 177 Ever since miss 80's baby was skitish I've been trying to find the answer to that question cause it is a wholly bizarre system.  I find it so funny that they criticized wall street when wall street has so many restrictions they could never think of being this deceitful.   I mean this is the evil genius of budget processes and we have to think if we did this in our personal finances what would happen?

Well I still shouldn't have been shouting, I still hate Hal Rogers, and I also hold that Boehner is a weak leader. But budgetary process is what it is and it's apparently been that way for decades now. Some lone lawmakers have tried to change it but it's hard to get those rules to stick.

215 When I first started to read Captain Ed's post, I have to admit I thought "Oh gee, the establishment got its talking points to him."

OK, now I feel stupid.  Is this some kind of reverse-reverse subtle ninja sarcasm?  Come on man, just hit me with a sledgehammer; you don't have to kiss me first.

216 Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at April 14, 2011 01:22 PM (TpXEI)

Okay, I've got to admit.  You got me with that one.  I wish I disagreed with you.

Posted by: Jean at April 14, 2011 01:23 PM (WkuV6)

I was unaware the Constitution discussed the specifics of DoD appropriation.  Article and Section?

217 AllenG

Art 1, Section 8

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

218
It's a swell process.

Spending/appropriating [raiding] funds can be done immediately.

Cutting funds takes years.

219

Anyone have numbers for how much less is appropriated in the FY2012 budget than the FY2011 budget?

I tried to figure this out, and I honestly don't see much difference. I see a lower deficit due to lower unemployment payments, payments to Treasury/Commerce, and the payroll holiday expiring, but I can't see a large change in the baseline budgeting.

220 You're welcome.

221 I have no option now but to embrace a hefty tax increase.

222 ""it is kinda cool when people get banned at hotair the first place they come to is here..........""

I sometimes invite Hot Aryans over here when I see them using poor etiquette over there.

223 We're dead, Jim. Dead.

224 209 Can't wait to hear what's in it. A lotta cuts for 2013 and beyond, I suspect.

H.R. 1473- Making Appropriations for the Department of Defense and the Other Departments and Agencies of the Government for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2011, and for Other Purposes (Closed Rule, One Hour of Debate) (Sponsored by Rep. Hal Rogers / Appropriations Committee)

225 >>>I got banned at free republic for either saying the word "shit", or it was making a reference to the fact that if the muslims ever started blowing up schools, then we would play cowboys and muslims and would be done by noon the following day. Both "infractions" probably appeared in my same post, so I don't know what caused it. Fuck them too, I'm not a country club republican who drinks with his pinky extended. Ahem. Bear in mind that YOUR excited utterance is MY permanent record. Same at Free Republic. Don't pat yourself too hard on the back for making other people's lives more difficult.

226 Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at April 14, 2011 01:21 PM (9hSKh)

there were a couple of stories mentioned.  People who get paid by corporations to find redundancies gave their work free to the government cause they love America and, like the budget commission, it seems like they were ignored, first by the administration and then by the fourth estate, as my dad loves to call them.  I've seen at least 4 different reports mentioned on here and elsewhere.

But hey, if it is in the vested interest of the republicans to shroud "the process" in mystery too, then who would want this stuff to come out but, the American people, so fat chance anyone discusses any of this.

227 Can anyone provide a link that will explain this arcane system?  I'm not sure I read every comment so maybe its above and I missed it.

228 I find that really annoying considering they are listed as one of the most visited conservative blogs on the internet right now, so why be so stingy with letting people register and comment?

Posted by: Nate at April 14, 2011 01:22 PM (BBlzg)

Have you tried emailing Mr. Ed?

229 Hot air lauged laughed at my IP address and called me Sally. Its ok though, I found a home here and ya'll love me for my insightful analysis and stinging commentary. 

230

Okay, so we have a budget.  Some people say it spends too much.  They negotiate a compromise to cut 1% of it.  Then there is a disagreement about what was really cut - maybe it's only 0.1%.  People get angry.  Then we find out that maybe it's really 0.6% that got cut, so people stop being angry because the 0.1% charge is false.  Yes, we are being spun. 

They still only cut 1% or less.  The deficit is about 45% of the budget.  Whether we cut 1% or 0.6% or 0.1% is trivial - we need to cut 45%. 

We need to be angry about this.  We need Buford Pusser Goes To Washington kind of anger.  Do not calm down.  Stay angry. 

231 Posted by: Jean at April 14, 2011 01:25 PM (WkuV6)

Ah.  Okay.  I'd forgotten that last clause. 

Though that makes me wonder about the current appropriations process.  Or, I guess, it makes me wonder if we're doing it wrong as regards Boeing and Lockheed making new jets.  I'm wondering if we should go to a model more like the public has with car manufacturers- Let Boeing and Lockheed design what they want, and the US can purchase the ones they like (and authorize sales of any to our allies- but only to our allies).

232 211 Wasn't there a story mentioned here a few weeks ago that at least 200 billion in duplicate spending has been identified in the budget?  Why can't we cut that - seems to me that if this is "duplicate" spending, shouldn't it be the easiest to excise?

It's eliminated in the 2012 budget (H.Con.Res.34).

233

it is kinda cool when people get banned at hotair the first place they come to is here..........

*hangs head in shame*

Guilty as charged. ._.

234 I am ignorant on this, alas.

Ace...you ignorant slut...

235 Listening to Rush... I've lost count of people trashing Boehner, who can't name anything else about him other than this budget bill, and that he cried. It would be nice if we knew more about our political leader's politics and positions on issues, but this is further proof that image is everything in politics. When image triumphs functionality or structure of policy, in the end there will be...

236
ahhh, sounds like a bill that rewards Rogers' lobbyists friends

I'll try to glance at it, later.

237

Anyone have numbers for how much less is appropriated in the FY2012 budget than the FY2011 budget?

Not a direct comparison, but check this out.

238 Boehner is on C-Span now.

239 Wooo HOOOOO Dunkin donuts is IPOing....wooo hoooo

240

Canada says, “Hey, all of the Canadian lefties knew he was an idiot.  Why could YOU see it?”

Good question.  Dems?  I think that question was directed at you.

241

budgetary process is what it is and it's apparently been that way for decades now. Some lone lawmakers have tried to change it but it's hard to get those rules to stick. Posted by: Miss'80sBaby

Time to nuke it from orbit, just to be sure.  I'm at work.  How did "our" side do on the mfm this morning?

242

Sorry, link posted above is subscription only.  Short version:

 

The Fact Sheet deals with H Con Res 34, Budget Resolution for FY 2012, which the House is scheduled to consider on Thursday and Friday, April 14 and 15. The measure calls for total spending of $3.53 trillion in FY 2012, $179 million less than the president's request. The measure projects spending and revenue levels that would produce a deficit of $995 billion in FY 2012, which is $169 billion less than the deficit under the administration's request. The measure projects spending and revenue levels for FY 2013 through FY 2021, and calls for keeping overall revenue as a share of the economy at averages between 18% and 19%. The measure exempts certain tax-cutting measures from budget enforcement rules, including extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, adjusting the alternative minimum tax (AMT), and extending the current estate tax rates. The measure also includes a policy proposal that would alter the funding structure of Medicare from the current "fee-for-service" model to a "premium support" model under which future beneficiaries would receive a subsidy to purchase a qualified private health insurance plan rather than being directly covered by a government-sponsored plan.

 

The Rules committee has recommended a restricted rule making in order five substitute amendments.

243 I picked a bad week to stop snorting Comet®

244 222 Anyone have numbers for how much less is appropriated in the FY2012 budget than the FY2011 budget?

It's supposed to be less since the bill goes back to '08 levels, then below that. The appropriations for discretionary are in the hundreds of billions less but Ryan focused more on cutting mandatory.

245 Never got on the Hot Air train. Seemed more like a public shuffle-board game for retired shoe salesmen than a site interested in actually changing anything.

Not a bad thing I guess. But I want more than play-by-play commentary on how the boat is sinking when I'm on the boat. Maybe a brief discussion of how to plug the hole or something crazy like that.

I get to see 75% of everything they do over there here anyway. Which is nice.

246 ""Ahem. Bear in mind that YOUR excited utterance is MY permanent record. Same at Free Republic.

Don't pat yourself too hard on the back for making other people's lives more difficult.""

Yeah , but what I said was far more tame than what I have seen over there, and miles tamer than what I see here.


I never even heard the word cock holster until I came here. lol

247

@232 FUBAR

Not yet, because their terms of use makes it really clear that they only have open registration periods, so I figured I'd just have to wait until they open up again.

I don't find their content annoying. It is just the fact that I'm not sure why they would need to be so careful with the amount of people they let register.

I do like it here at Ace of Spades as well though.

 

248 171 It is a brand new world....

Posted by: Kasper "Banned-at-Hot_Air" Hauser at April 14, 2011 01:08 PM (HqpV0)

but now i  have a few questions...........

1- do you like bacon?

2- do you drink?

3- if it was between spending the day with a lib or getting kicked in the head by a Ette with Stompy Boots on what would it be?

249 In any event, the Republicans look the fool for promising $100B in cuts, this year, and not delivering.  I don't see how one gets around that.

250 I'll be your huckleberry ...

251
OT: just for a little break

Did you hear the Left's (new?) spin on the Death Panels? It goes like this:
1. Death Panels do not exist in Obamacare.
2. But if they do, it's because a Republican from Georgia put it in there.
3. But Death Panels don't exist.

252 247 Sounds like a good start, though it could have been more.

253 I'm not cutting Boehner or any of the rest of the GOP leadership any slack until someone can explain this to me.

Meanwhile, more than $700 billion gathers dust in accounts all around Washington.

That’s right. An arcane budgetary category called “unobligated funds" ncludes money that Congress has appropriated for agencies and programs in every corner of the federal government. When that money goes unspent, it just sits there — like an ancient wooden chest on a Caribbean island, just waiting to be pried open.

fiscal year’s federal budget contains $703,128,000,000 in “unobligated balances.” Thus, more than $703 billion languishes on department, agency, and program ledgersm

While unspent obligated money must be stewarded for specific purposes for up to five years, these unobligated funds “have not yet been committed by contract or other legally binding action by the government,” OMB explains.

In fact, Senator CoburnÂ’s office estimates that $82.4 billion of these funds are between six and 20 years old! You read correctly: At this very second, the federal budget contains $82.4 billion that has hibernated in numerous accounts between FY 1991 and FY 2005

The money is just sitting there, uncommitted to anything in particular, and 2.5 times the amount they "cut" has been sitting around from between 6 and 20 years.

And they can't go after it, why?

Seems like it would be an easy sell to the voters.

254 There is little worse, or more dangerous, frankly, than someone who loves to make idle threats.

True.  Anyone with children should know this.  Heck, anyone who has ever been a child should know this.

255 245 Time to nuke it from orbit, just to be sure.  I'm at work.  How did "our" side do on the mfm this morning?

I don't know, other than that e21 speech by Rep. Ryan and Rep. Scott's defense of the 2012 budget on the floor. Otherwise, I can't check until later. 

256

#247 and #250

Thank you both. It is hard to look at a proposal for a $995 billion dollar deficit with any optimism, but that piece of it is a little better than I expected actually.

 

257
And they can't go after it, why?

Because it's probably not really there. I dunno, maybe it was siphoned off like a slush fund for the last decade.

258 Put me some knowledge, O Morons:

How, in real life, do we replace Boner I, the Hapless, with a suitable spined-American?

No confidence vote? Petitions? Cookie sales?

259 This whole episode validates my initial criticism of the unforced error known as the Pledge to America.

There was no reason to lay a $100 billion cut bogey out there in the first place. $100 billion was always peanuts compared to the trillion-plus dollar problem we have, but for some reason they felt the need to put up the target.

And they did it after we were so deep into the election cycle it was already apparent we would make huge gains and retake the House. I don't know if there's any polling on it or not, but I'd be shocked if the Pledge made a bit of difference in even the closest of races.

So now the House leadership is left trying to reconcile how $100 billion really equals $38 billion which also equals $352 million if you hold it up to the light at the right angle.

Calling it a lie or a trick goes a bit far. But it's a good reminder that the GOP is still The Stupid Party™.

260 I never even heard the word cock holster until I came here. lol

Posted by: Berserker at April 14, 2011 01:34 PM (gWHrG)

or dickmitten.

261 The money is just sitting there, uncommitted to anything in particular, and 2.5 times the amount they "cut" has been sitting around from between 6 and 20 years.

The mystery of Obama's stash is solved.

262 Where's my fuel excise tax rebate?  What's that you say, gasoline is up?

*grumble* - good for nothing, jugeared, Marxist.

263

Remember Enron?

If you can't explain how the system works on a single page, it is probably just a pile of bullshit hiding fraud.

264 #263 you must, however, be able to spell "huckleberry" ...

265
Just like in that episode of Justified when the records showed that the bank robbery money was supposed to be in evidence vault but they lost track of it.

266 237

it is kinda cool when people get banned at hotair the first place they come to is here..........

*hangs head in shame*

Guilty as charged. ._.

Posted by: KinleyArdal at April 14, 2011 01:29 PM (i4EAV)

Meh... don't feel bad, I actually poked around LGF and couldn't get aboard so I eventually found my way here and haven't left. Its been 3yrs now and I still don't understand most of Ace's musings but I hang around for the booby jokes and libtard bashing.

 

267

Not yet, because their terms of use makes it really clear that they only have open registration periods, so I figured I'd just have to wait until they open up again.

Posted by: Nate at April 14, 2011 01:34 PM (BBlzg)

Email him.  He occasionally posts about how he'll let you in if you email him.  The open registration period isn't very long.  I waited a few months before I caught one.

The only content that bothers me is the smugness Ed exhibits when he disagrees with his readers on an issue.  "In the future, people will look back and wonder why we denied gays the basic human right to marry for so long." 

268 McCarthy's count is solid.

OT: Mika: At least Obama had the guts to attack Paul Ryan to his face

269 The originally-promised $100 billion cut would have been something of a joke even if it had gone through unscathed. Too small by an order of magnitude. 

270 Posted by: dananjcon at April 14, 2011 01:40 PM (pr+up)

don't feel bad, I think there are days when Ace doesn't understand his own musings.

271

I was told there would be no etiquette requirement here.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 14, 2011 01:39 PM (OWjjx)

And no math=high traffic.

272 I'll gladly make spending cuts someday if you'll let me raise spending today.

273 277:

But he always apologizes for that.

274 ""but I hang around for the booby jokes and libtard bashing.""



Yeah that's my excuse too.

275 275 McCarthy's count is solid.

OT: Mika: At least Obama had the guts to attack Paul Ryan to his face

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at April 14, 2011 01:41 PM (uVLrI)

I don't think that's guts.  You invite someone to your home to hear you speak and then you decimate them in front of all the guests.  Yeah you didn't mention their name, they were the guy with the republican joke of a budget proposal but still that takes a different kind of viciousness.

276

Thank you both. It is hard to look at a proposal for a $995 billion dollar deficit with any optimism, but that piece of it is a little better than I expected actually.

Well, don't forget all these CBO scores are based on the current shitty economy we have now.  If we could get the economy working again, tax receipts would rise.

Oh, we'd still be very, very boned.  But we'd be boned for fewer years into the future, and deficits would be likely to decline more quickly than currently projected.

That's why the economy is Job #1.

Which is why Barky opted not to focus on it since inauguration.  His Job #1 is the destruciton of the American way of life.

Seriously, after looking at his record on the eocnomy since January 20, 2009, I don't know how else anyone could see it.

277
I'm gonna take over and ruin the No Labels party just like how Jesse Ventura ruined the Reform Party.

278 The measure calls for total spending of $3.53 trillion in FY 2012, $179 million less than the president's request.

So we are back to measuring the cut from what Obama requested. if I am not mistaken, 3.53T is more than the total budget we wound up with for 2011.

So right off the bat they are once again starting the bargain at a position that is not really acceptable for the end point.

They are either liars, stupid, or just worthless.

279 If the federal government has money just sitting around why haven't they started a hedge fund and why isn't that money making money to get us out of this mess?

280 Oh by the way.  I like how Obama's spending cuts are really raising taxes.  Because the government is spending money on you when you get a tax cut.  Maybe I'm being alarmist, but that sounds vaguely...dangerous to liberty...to me.

281 Maobama did the same thing to Ryan as he did to the SCOTUS. That's what little men do.

282 Rush: "This [Obama's speech] was a personal bitch slap."

283 275McCarthy's count is solid.

OT: Mika: At least Obama had the guts to attack Paul Ryan to his face

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at April 14, 2011 01:41 PM (uVLrI)

There were no blond jokes before she was on TV.

284 I was told there would be no etiquette requirement here.

Forget etiquette. You can't even get people to put their damn pants around here.

285 We have been trying to figure this out for a week.  Imagine what it's like if you are a congressman who went ot law school to avoid any math.  And your staff were liberal arts, save the world types and your star struck intern is a poly sci major.  So really who is on staff to figure this out.  Even the business majors would have trouble with this, you'd need engineers, heck you'd need retired wall street guys.

The budget meanderings of the US should not be a four dimensional maze, it should be easily understood by your average American. 

286

This is the problem with the new egalitarian internet activism. Too often people conflate principle and policy. And too often we let demagogues like Michele Bachmann shoot down Republicans doing the heavy lifting in the arena of policy.

I agree with much of this post which is why I have left Boehner alone. People have no clue, bouncing all over the place, trying to disect the nunances of this budget, and often making fools of themselves.

Its too easy and cheap just to shout platitudes at our leaders and constantly beat them up because they suck. In reality, people like Ryan and Boehner are pretty good leaders with difficult problems wot solve with little leverage and a lot of cats to herd.

287

Forget etiquette. You can't even get people to put their damn pants around here.

And this from laceyunderalls.  I love the juxtaposition.  ;-)

288 The budget meanderings of the US should not be a four dimensional maze, it should be easily understood by your average American. 

+100

289

As per Vic: "That does not bode well for either the debt limit or 2012. What we may be seeing here is the death of the Republican party, because there are a LOT of people who are pissed."

I don't like to say it, but Vic just could be right. There are a lot of people pissed, AND there are a lot of people who are pissed but starting to get in the mode of throwing up their hands and saying, "To hell with it. It's broke and will never be fixed. I'm going to spend my time worrying about taking care of my family instead of this crap, because you can't trust or depend on a one of these pols, regardless of party. And BTW, don't even DREAM of asking me for my hard earned money to support the R party, or dare to lecture me about not voting and not supporting these soft boiled eggs." 

290 If the federal government has money just sitting around why haven't they started a hedge fund and why isn't that money making money to get us out of this mess?

All Obama's leveraged "investment" in stupid shit like high-speed rail is, essentially, the government acting like a hedge fund.

It'll be a cold day in hell before it makes a dime.

291 The "budget deal" was to give a final discretionary spending of 1.055T. Mandatory spending was 2.44T. That gives a total of 3.49T for 2011.

So 3.53T is not any kind of a cut. Where is the promised 6T cut? Oh that is ten years down the road.

292 Americans for Tax Reform is defending the deal.  They're a bunch of fire-breathers.

293 One thing for sure, knowledge is power. The problem is that most of those wanting to cut spending are ignorant of the process (me included). You can bet that those who wish to suck at the government teat know exactly how the process works. Personally I think the federal government ought to be shut down permanently because its pretty much filled with thieving bastards. But if that can't happeen then an organized group of fully knowledgable people ought to set their sights on one part of the government (like dept. Of labor) and use every trick in the book to shut that mfer down. A concentration of firepower if you will.

294 Man ‘Engulfed In Flames’ At San Francisco Porn Shop

Arson investigators said it was not exactly clear how the man caught fire. Police indicated he had apparently been watching videos in a private booth when the fire ignited.

They have discovered the porn equivalent of Monty Python's Killer Joke!

Oh and....  EN FUEGO!!!

295 299 As per Vic: "That does not bode well for either the debt limit or 2012. What we may be seeing here is the death of the Republican party, because there are a LOT of people who are pissed."


Word.

296

Ace,

That explanation is b.s.  Sure, the money trickles out - but it trickles out in the year congress pledge's it.  Either they cut $$ that had already been alocated, or cut the amount of money spent for "X" from a previous budget to "1/2 X" meaning that some federal agency or program gets less money.

Congress is not this year budgeting money for 10 years from now.  That is a lie.  A budget is how much congress is apprpriating and spending this year.  Whether or not the agency spends that money this year is not relevant (but, for the record, do you really believe that any agency does not spend $$ it is given in a fiscal year - that almost never happens).

If it is money appropriated as a grant for a non-gov't agency like Planned Parenthood, it is $$ that is given to Planned Parenthood this year.  Not 5 years from now.  Planned Parenthood is not receiving money from the 2004 budget this year.  They received and spent that money already.

So, this idea that these nebulous cuts are somehow real and not smoke and mirrors is hogwash. 

Yes, it is true that for a capital project, money may be allocated this year but not actually spent for a few years - b/c you need to do design, site-work, etc. and then build.  But, a) that is not teh vast majority of where these cuts are coming from and b) even in those cases the money is allocated and provided to the agency in question.  The agency has to have the money before it can bid out the jobs and enter into contracts.

so, the explanation is hogwash.  it's the same as claiming that a cut in the growth of teh budget from 6% to 5% is a spending cut.  It is not a spending cut, it is simply increasing spending less than you wanted to.

Each year, each program and agency get a budget.  that budget is not based on 2004's budget, it is based on this year's budget.  This idea that we have to look out to the future to see these cuts is farcical.

297 Oh so that explains hot air, Rush is saying he played golf with boner and he's a nice guy.

Even Rush is not free of being influenced.

298 Budget Process Stages

Excerpt:

Adoption of the Budget Resolution. House and Senate Committees hold hearings on the PresidentÂ’s budget and the Budget Committees report a concurrent resolution on the budget that sets each committeeÂ’s allocation of spending authority for the next fiscal year and aggregate spending and revenue levels for 5 years. The budget resolution also establishes aggregate totals with respect to revenues and spending for the entire federal budget. This resolution, once adopted, is not law, as it is not signed by the President. The allocations, enforceable through points of order, establish the framework to consider spending and revenue bills on the House and Senate floor.

299 Let Boeing and Lockheed design what they want, and the US can purchase the ones they like (and authorize sales of any to our allies- but only to our allies).
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther)

Tried that, see F-20 Tigershark

300 The budget meanderings of the US should not be a four dimensional maze, it should be easily understood by your average American. 

+100

Posted by: toby928™ at April 14, 2011 01:49 PM (GTbGH)

Kinda like the laws we're responsible for knowing.   Some guy much smarter than me said that was part of the way the Ruling Class kept the rest of us in our places.

Isn't it convenient for them that it's a by-product of Leviathan?

301

There are a lot of people pissed, AND there are a lot of people who are pissed but starting to get in the mode of throwing up their hands and saying, "To hell with it. It's broke and will never be fixed...

I submit to you that the people saying that are the very people swamp_yankee is talking about.  They are the ones who don't understand how the business runs and because they don't they do the whole "pox on both their houses" schtick.

I agree, the budget process should be simple and simply explained.  And it actually is - at the 70,000 foot level.  But we've having discussions at the 100 foot level and then throwing up our hands because we don't understand the nuances. 

I think Boehner is doing a pretty good job.  You want to see him go to town on the budget?  Then strengthen his hand and elect a Republican House, Senate and White House in 2012.  Anything less than that, we're not going to get everything done that needs to be done.

All of it is harder than it looks from the outside.

302 287 If the federal government has money just sitting around why haven't they started a hedge fund and why isn't that money making money to get us out of this mess?

Posted by: curious at April 14, 2011 01:44 PM (k1rwm)

Because 3rd world potentates need walking around money thats why! And who the hell are you to question us??

303 Forget etiquette. You can't even get people to put their damn pants around here.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at April 14, 2011 01:47 PM (pLTLS)

i intend to put some pants on today............. gotta make a beer run, and hit a few balls around the backyard.........  cant do that without pants.............

304 >>>Its too easy and cheap just to shout platitudes at our leaders and constantly beat them up because they suck. I agree generally with your general point but I do think it is useful to have the base angry and always pushing on these people. The easiest thing for them to do is compromise generously and get the handshake photo-op and love from the MSM; we need to fight that natural path of least resistance.

305

The measure calls for total spending of $3.53 trillion in FY 2012, $179 million less than the president's request

So the hill that we we're supposed to hold out for is only $179 million less than what Obama wanted? I was going to question the million/billions part, but this is STILL only slowing the growth, not true cutting. Forget right or wrong at this point. How in Hell can anyone talk about this starting point seriouly from now until next November!?!

306 Fargin' meaningless, all of it. America can't even service the interest on the debt, let alone the debt iteself. We needed bold, we got blah! I'm not ready to give up, but we're totally unserious, and it will be our downfall.

307 In reality, people like Ryan and Boehner are pretty good leaders with difficult problems wot solve with little leverage and a lot of cats to herd.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the proof of leadership is in the achievements. 

If the problems are intractable, then we are boned anyway.  The Speaker of the House has great power over his caucus.  They need to draw the line and put all the enemies of fiscal sanity on the other side, even those in our own party.  If you are going to lose, at least lose to the titular opposition party, not your own.

308 Federal Budget Process:

1. President requests budget proposals from agencies- How much do you need for the coming year?

2. President directs OMB to sort everything out and White House works with OMB to create a final budget proposal, based on budget requests and President's priorities.

So, let's say that Obama wants to by and Presidential Ferrari next year. He'd work this priority in to the budget for whatever agency is responsible for the Presidential ride. He can simply add the money on top, cut money from other areas of their budget so it's "neutral", or cut a little from several other agencies and call it "neutral" in respect to the overall budget. Or he could fund it by using funds set to expire in the coming year and call it "neutral" or even claim to have cut the overall budget if the Ferrari turns out to add less to the total than the total of expiring funds.

3. In February, the President is traditionally due to present his final proposal to Congress

4. Congress looks it over and decides whether or not to give him any money at all and what money to authorize for specific areas.

For example, Congress can decide "Hey, he doesn't need a Presidential Ferrari!" and not authorize the Dept. of Presidential Pimpmobiles to spend the $250K. Congress can then claim to have cut the President's budget by $250K. Note that, at this point, no money was spent by anyone for the Ferrari. If Congress wants to be thorough, they can add language to their budget bill that says "all agencies are prevented from spending any money on a Ferrari" which would prevent the President from skipping oil changes and tire rotations on the limo in order to "save up" for a Ferrari.

5. Congress, after much bickering about the patriotism of cowboy poetry and other weighty matters, is supposed to pass a budget resolution that says how much money all agencies are allowed to spend for the next year. Some of it is money that they must spend, some is allocated to a "stash" that they can spend. (such as, when a Prominent Grand Klegal and Senator dies, they can direct that $168,000 be given to his kids and grand kids out of the "stash" money- without increasing the budget or causing additional spending). This is supposed to happen before Oct. 1 of the current calendar year, otherwise they must pass a CR, which basically says keep spending money and we'll figure out how much later.

6. The President should sign the final budget bill into law before Oct. 1 for the same reason.

Or he can go back and threaten Congress to remove the specific language which forbids him to use discretionary funds (such as the Sen. Byrd Legacy fund or anything else in the stash) to keep him from buying the Ferrari. If he is successful, both parties claim to have cut the budget. If the Ferrari leaked to the press, they can both be really clever and change the language to read "No money for Ferrari's in 2012" or even more clever "No Presidential Pimpmobile Money for a Ferrari" which leaves the President free to fund the Ferrari through the Vice Presidential Hooptie Fund, then just not let Biden drive it.

Again, by this point, no money has been spent. Let's say that M'chelle, after the Bill is law, tells Barack that, if he buy's a Ferrari, she'll make him shave her back, so he decides to forego buying it. This leaves "extra" cash, which is in the budget, so next year he can claim to have "cut" 250K from the budget by not spending money that was already not spent.

309 Then strengthen his hand and elect a Republican House, Senate and White House in 2012.  Anything less than that, we're not going to get everything done that needs to be done.

All of it is harder than it looks from the outside.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 14, 2011 01:54 PM (sbV1u)

I have been hearing that same song and dance for 50 years. We gave him what he needs in 2010. he just has to have the balls to use it.

310

"I find that really annoying considering they are listed as one of the most visited conservative blogs on the internet right now, so why be so stingy with letting people register and comment?"

I've lost interest in them, I've cast my lot here. But I never did figure that whole registration exclusivity thing out. Same thing at MM's site.

Anyone know what that's about or what the logic is? If you don't want mavericks, toss them out when they misbehave. But I think they miss some really good comments.

311

So the hill that we we're supposed to hold out for is only $179 million less than what Obama wanted?

Did you also note how much it reduced the deficit compared to what Obama wanted?  That's the real news in that piece.

312 I expected that anything less than a government shutdown was going to have many here to call for the head of any Republican that agreed to the compromise no matter what. It's what they do. They are Terminator conservatives.

313

I have been hearing that same song and dance for 50 years. We gave him what he needs in 2010. he just has to have the balls to use it.

You (we) didn't give him the Senate.

314

In other words, to follow up on my previous comment, the "spending cuts" in this deal are nothing but smoke and mirror gimmicks.  And the explanation provided by Strata proves this.  If all the deal does is "commit" to cut spending in the future, it does not do anything.  The "commitment" can be overturned in the actual budget.  Anyone who argues that this is too complex for us idiots to understand has been in washington or in party politics too long.

You either spend "X" dollars or your spend less than "X" dollars.  Anybody arguing there is some other answer that is more complex is idiotic.

"the ship of state is so big and slow you could never understand it, so just believe us when we tell you we've "cut" $38 billion in spending.  Sure, it does not show up anywhere as a spending cut, but believe us, it's there.  It's just too complicated for you peons to understand.  You see, in 4 years, project X will have $20 less b/c of today's courageous cuts.  these cuts will wind there way through the beuaracracy in such a way that you can't understand it, but it will happen.  Vote for me again and I'll cut even more spending."

315

So the hill that we we're supposed to hold out for is only $179 million less than what Obama wanted?

Did you also note how much it reduced the deficit compared to what Obama wanted?  That's the real news in that piece.

Posted by: Sean Bannion

 

I did not. My perusing is limited during daylight. Please tell me that it's an improvement. Lie if necessary.

316

I did not. My perusing is limited during daylight. Please tell me that it's an improvement. Lie if necessary.

It's an improvement.  No lie.

Nowhere near what it needs to be - but still better than what Barky would have done - which is move the needle in the complete opposite direction.

317 315 So the hill that we we're supposed to hold out for is only $179 million less than what Obama wanted? I was going to question the million/billions part, but this is STILL only slowing the growth, not true cutting. Forget right or wrong at this point. How in Hell can anyone talk about this starting point seriouly from now until next November!?!

That's not counting any mandatory cuts, repeals, or other policies as enacted by the budget.

318

You (we) didn't give him the Senate.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 14, 2011 02:00 PM (sbV1u)

How many times do we have to say that the House has the power to control the budget process? Boner promised small part budgets on a take it or leave it basis.

Yes, that means shutdowns. If he backs off of that then he is not willing to fight.

Why can you guys who want to play along to get along not realize that we are at the point of no return now?

we had all all three; House, Senate, And Prez a few short years ago but because we had to have RINOs to get the majority we still got nothing.

At some GD point we have to have a frakin' HILL TO DIE ON.

We are at the point of eating dog. Wake the fk up.

319

I don't know how or why you are trying to defend what is, clearly, incompetence and/or stupidity.  And we have a history, here.  The GOP is rerunning the Shmanesty tactics.  This is not new.  They also told us how difficult it was, on the inside, for that.  Bullshit.  As this is.

I'm not defending anything.  Just trying to explain how it works in practice.

The only other solution is to let the Dems run the country alllllll the way into the shitter, and then we can sit there are say, "Told ya so!"

That's an option.

But it sure as shit isn't leadership.

320

Posted by: monkeytoe at April 14, 2011 02:01 PM (sOx93)

 

Well hello there, my leetle friend...

321

@320

The only thing I can figure is that the more commentors make it harder for them to moderate the comments and prevent spam. But in the end they basically close themselves off from a lot of people who want to contribute to the discussion, while benefiting from their clicks and web searches.

I really appreciate the fact that Ace is so open with letting people jump in here, even if some of the commenters can be a little "PG-13" at times for my virgin ears.

 

322 Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 14, 2011 02:06 PM (sbV1u)

I think you have seriously lost your audience.  People are tired of inaction and more tired of empty promises. 

Yeah, I remember clearly during the last election how calm BO was.  Now I realize he was calm cause he knew he could keep the republicans running in circles if he still controlled the senate.  It's sad how the ball was dropped as regards the senate.

Rush is reporting that boner is "shrugging off" any criticism from you conservatives about the number.

Well, that's nice, as directed by BO, boner is putting you conservatives in your place, the tea party folks in their place and the budgeteers in another room with duct tape on their mouths.

323 So you got a time machine that tells you what was spent two years from now.

324 I am going to enact my own spending cut.  I'm not donating a dime of money to any republican in the next election cycle.  It's not a huge loss to them, probably an aggregate of about $1,000 I would have donated to various campaigns.  Screw them.  I'm done.  They're worthless.

325

ya'll love me for my insightful analysis and stinging commentary.

Many here already suffer from stinging.

326 Talking about chuck u shoo mer figuring that the republicans will punt and he just set the debate on the debt ceiling as the most important thing we do in the next 25 years.

So he is essentially saying, if the debt ceiling goes up a dime, he will say they won the debate. 

per Rush

327

All of it is harder than it looks from the outside.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 14, 2011 01:54 PM (sbV1u)

Yes. It is. If you have never planned or managed a multi-year budget. Unfortunately this leave the majority of Americans feeling like they must trust Congresspeople... the overwhelming majority of whom have never balanced a checkbook, much less managed a budget.

So they, in turn, look to the leadership who have been in Washington for decades and voted on budgets all the time. Except that none of them have ever actually managed a budget either. They depend on whatever the lobbyist in their office tells them or whatever the "think tank" that they subscribe to sends over. This occasionally (such as in election years) will be modified according to the latest polls that have surveyed people who have never managed a budget. 

In short- by the end of it all, not a damn person has a fucking clue what they are doing and everyone who understands the processes works in a private enterprise, which pays 10% of their budget to lobbyists or just prays that the imbeciles in DC won't fuck things up worse than they already have each year.

328 Curious, have you formulated your battle plan for how you will make it to one of the bridges or tunnels when the collapse hits The City?

329

OT: Over at the National Review. Allen West is opposing the House Budget deal...

And judging by his comments he is TICKED at Republican House Leadership right now.

 

330 Look if 2/3 of the budget is entitlements, we can't cut everyone's check and pay off the chinese if push comes to shove, so we won't really have to default, it will just be a tough month where you might have to feed anyone who comes to the door.

331

But the GOP holds the power of the purse

That's where you're wrong.  They need Senate buy-in for any bill generated in the House.  No buy-in, then that bill will be butchered in Joint Committee.

I'm not arguing about the bait-and-switch.  I am as frustrated as you all are with the lack of progress on massive cuts.  I "get it."

But it should not mean we take our ball and go home.  By that I mean staying out of the voting booth.  I agree with Ace, it's useful to have the base riled up.

This reminds me of one of Murphy's Laws of Combat:  "The enemy gets a vote."

That's what's going on here, and I don't think anyone is giving that any consideration.  The Mormon Moron from Searchlight will keep tying things up in knots.  That's reality.

332 Gotta go for a while, back later

333 Look if 2/3 of the budget is entitlements, we can't cut everyone's check and pay off the chinese if push comes to shove, so we won't really have to default, it will just be a tough month where you might have to feed anyone who comes to the door.

Posted by: curious at April 14, 2011 02:15 PM (k1rwm)

Good idea, but unfortunately no.

We've been borrowing 40% of every dollar that we spend- including entitlement dollars.

We'd have to stop entitlements for years in order to pay off the debt. 

I personally think that this is the way to go, but I am a heartless cretin who would simply feed my own grandmother out of my own money, if the government let me keep any of it, instead of stealing it and using it to make sure Aunt Zenuti keeps her house. 

334

Posted by: monkeytoe at April 14, 2011 02:12 PM (sOx93)

And we thank you for your support.

Posted by: The DNC at April 14, 2011 02:13 PM (OWjjx)

 

No problem.  that always persuades me - telling me I have to pick the lesser of 2 evils.  That is wrong.  If teh country is going to be destroyed by crushing debt, I would rather the Dems own it entirely than have the GOP give it bi-partisan flavor.  then maybe someday in the distant future my grandkids will have a chance when all the idiot liberals and independents wake up to reality.

I'm under no obligation to support the republican party.  If they don't show me results, then screw them.  I've given them chance after chance after chance.  they have spit on me again and again. 

This idea of "you don't understand this complex budget process" is silly.  The gov't either spends 100 dollars, or it spends $75 dollars.  there is no mystery that I am too dim to comprehend.

335

Damiano, agree with one change:

In short- by the end of it all, not a damn person has very few have a fucking clue what they are doing and everyone who understands the processes works in a private enterprise, which pays 10% of their budget to lobbyists or just prays that the imbeciles in DC won't fuck things up worse than they already have each year.

Welcome to Washington, DC.

Now you see why I scrub the want-ads everyday.  I can't wait to get the fuck out of here.

336 And we thank you for your support.

Posted by: The DNC at April 14, 2011 02:13 PM (OWjjx)

I hope everyone learns the lesson here: if you don't vote for us, the budget will be $315 million dollars higher.

So man the phones and send in those checks.

337 HereÂ’s the thing. Yes, itÂ’s right that this is the way budgets have always worked. The problem is that just because this is the way itÂ’s always been done doesnÂ’t make it right. The way itÂ’s always been done: spend now, cut next year. Next year never comes. This is the Boz Scaggs budget process.

338 oh wow, my friend said that they could take 100% of your earnings, for three consecutive years, before we would be out of debt.

Now that is just plain frightening.

339

Well, short of ensuring that a large chunk of Moron Nation are members of Congress in 2012, we're stuck.

So what's your Plan B?

340 You desperately need to calm down, Ace. You've kind of been embarrassing yourself the last few days. Some of us need you. You've been one of the few conservative bloggers who can step back and recognize when the Tea Party / true con wing is engaging in histrionics. I don't want YOU diving in head-first with them.

341 the only way to get out of this is to spend less money and grow the economy.  And make sure we make things here, and people who live here buy the things we are making here.  We can start by opening a new incandescent light bulb factory and repealing the law that the lobbyists told those uninformed in congress to outlaw them in favor of truly dangerous, seal off your room if you break one, replacements.

342

The Constitutional Union of American States.

Well, the Civil War did start 150 years ago this month...

343 Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 14, 2011 02:18 PM (sbV1u)

You're correct, Sean, with your analysis, however your conclusion assumes that "the enemy's vote" counts for more than one. It does not.

If the House said, "We vote that the government can spend $1" and the Senate voted "Cowboy poetry and Genital Washing for everyone!", we'd have an impasse.

From there, either side can choose to stand it's ground or negotiate. If they either stand their ground or negotiations fail, you get a shut down... which is almost meaningless since there is plenty of crap of the books that would keep "essential" crap running, that is paid for by taxes that keep coming in.

The problem we have is that Republicans said "$100 billion of real cuts!" and the Democrats/ Obama said "You can have this $33 billion of money that we have in this desk drawer from last year". Boehner then bit from the poised apple and claimed it as historic... and accomplish none of what he was mandated by voters to do.

344 Some of us need you. You've been one of the few conservative bloggers who can step back and recognize when the Tea Party / true con wing is engaging in histrionics. I don't want YOU diving in head-first with them.

Posted by: Vyceroy at April 14, 2011 02:28 PM (TA6XQ)

what?  Ace has bravely gone where no one else was willing to go and you call that "embarrassing himself"?

The paragraph I isolated above is a fine example of what a RINO looks and sounds like, thanks for the clear representation.

Sheesh I'm an independent and I can see this.

345

Boehner then bit from the poised apple and claimed it as historic... and accomplish none of what he was mandated by voters to do.

Let's you and I declare agreement (because we do) and move on.  I'm not here to sell anything.  I was just trying to explain my view from the "inside"  Bwahahaha.

346

 If he backs off of that then he is not willing to fight.

Exactly.  If we're going to die anyway, lets die fighting.  We need leaders with balls, not guys that whip out their kneepads when democrats tell them to suck their cocks. 

347 what?  Ace has bravely gone where no one else was willing to go and you call that "embarrassing himself"? By engaging in complete histrionics over a budget deal which he now admits he didn't / doesn't understand? Letting himself be controlled by emotion, rather than logic, like what passes for the intelligencia of the left is apt to do? Yes, I call that embarrassing. This budget deal sucks. It's not worth Ace rending his clothes, sitting in ashes and wailing "burn it! Burn the government down!" over. There are far more important battles ahead. B-T-Dubs, Kasparov got banned at HA? Too bad, there's are far more deserving of that.

348 the subtle messages of politics.  The irony wasn't lost on Forbes

349 354 oh wow, my friend said that they could take 100% of your earnings, for three consecutive years, before we would be out of debt.

Now that is just plain frightening.

Posted by: curious at April 14, 2011 02:25 PM (k1rwm)

Heh... that's the good news.

Here's the bad news: if they took 100% of your earnings in year 1, there would be no year 2 or year 3 earnings to take, since no one would have anything left to keep anything open past year 1. 

This is why calling people who earn over $250K/ yr. "rich" infuriates me. The vast majority who fall into this category are small business owners who pay themselves $50K or so per year, then use the rest to hire new employees, buy new merchandise to sell, pay off loans for machinery, or make payroll for existing employees when clients are past due on invoices.

Or, an example more close to home for many people: let's say that you're married. You and your spouse make $125K each. If you file as "married", you get a tax hike.

Now combine the two and assume that each spouse has their own small business and pay's themselves $30K.

350 Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 14, 2011 02:34 PM (sbV1u)

Ha! I feel for you!

You're welcome in TX anytime. It ain't perfect, since everyone from CA and the other crashing states is fleeing here, but it's at least still resembles reality.

351 I think Mark Steyn has it right - if you are really serious about cutting down the size of government, you start eliminating entire departments.

That won't be possible until 2013.

352

"The only thing I can figure is that the more commentors make it harder for them to moderate the comments and prevent spam. But in the end they basically close themselves off from a lot of people who want to contribute to the discussion, while benefiting from their clicks and web searches."

Thanks, Nate. Don't know what else it could be.

353 But for Lindsey Graham, for example, our 1st Amendment right is malleable and revokable. I would send Ann Barnhardt to the Senate, if it meant her filibusters on CSPAN were like her ripping Lindsay Graham a new asshole. She could tell off both houses. Fuck the imbeciles who thought Christine O'Donnell was speaking truth to power going on Bill Maher and talking about mouse-human hybrid brains.

354 I still object to you saying that Ace "embarrassed himself" in any way.  If he did, he seems to be in pretty good company then.  LINK

355 Before you remind me how bad Mike Castle sucked, you wouldn't have Boehner complaining the GOP only has the House. Buck wouldn't have looked so scary if you didn't have wall-to-wall coverage of that dingbat witch. Angle might even have looked normal. But the Dems and the media used O'Donnell's broom to paint the whole Tea Party movement. The only reason Scott Brown was elected and Republicans took the House was that Obamacare sucked so bad. The progressives hated it, too, and they were sitting out the midterms until Christine O'Donnell got their asses off the couch.

356 So would one be correct in assuming that since it takes months, nay, years for government to "turn the ship" and for money to roll through all of the hurdles on the spending side of things that the expansion of the debt ceiling should also work in this fashion? If this is the case I guess Turbo Tim can just knock of the "we're all going to burn if we don't give him more cash like RIGHT NOW" business, right? Considering Timmy's past examples of his mathematical prowess I'd also like to see where he got the May 16th OMG date from exactly (my guess is that they used a standard dart board for this complicated task).

357 And usually when someone says his sexuality is "complicated," I just clear matters up and say "No, it's not really very complicated at all, you're just gay."

20 years later, this shit does come up...

I don't know why we didn't stay together, back  in the good old days...

Uhm, because you kicked me out of your house because you said you wanted to get your "ghey" on?

;"> ;">But, I am totally straight!  ;"> Look ;"> at me!  I have ;">children ;">and I am ;">divorcing ;">my wife!  I think you are so ;">hawt ;">!

Yeah, that's fucking fantastic1 Thanks for calling me. 10 years too late.

;"> ;">I ;">still ;">think you are hawt!

Thank you, I guess. How do you know I don't weigh 350lbs?  I could, you know...

358 Ace, the permanent record comprised of your own posts--excluding posts by anyone else--is probably enough to give righteous people the vapors. And I mean that as a COMPLIMENT!

359 toby928@231 To get an idea of just how arcane the budget process is, you can start at Defense Acquisition University, dau.mil, which has all sorts of information on just defense budgting. My advice is to take a 'lude before you start; Valium won't be strong enough.

360 AllenG@86 It's well beyond stupid. You have to try getting work done while dealing with it to appreciate just how well and truly fucked it is. And needless to say, if you tried using the same rules as the government at your company, you'd go to jail.

361 For a guy who admits he doesn't understand it, you have shown no dearth of opinions on the subject.

Perhaps if you studied BEFORE posting, you wouldn't come off as a complete flake, blowing with the latest wind like a flag fluttering around in turbulent air.

~~~~~~

I'm all for civics tests for voting privileges, as lacy suggested above.  Not gonna happen, it would spell the end of the Democratic Party.

362

The government just slashed it's 'petty cash fund'.  Doesn't everyone have a $50 billion petty cash fund?

I think both sides are right.  These cuts were largely cuts of money in limbo - not cuts of spending in the pipeline.  However, if not cut a President one year away from an election will surely try to re-deploy the money.  So we saved something in the range of what both sides claim, and there's no way of knowing what was actually saved because there's no way of knowing what Obama could re-deploy with a Republican House.