PDA

View Full Version : General Politics Another View on this mess


HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 11:03 AM
As the democrats continue to demonize anyone they can (look at McCaskill, Reid, Obama comments) it would be very appropriate to remind the Missouri Senator and the Senate leader that the house has passed a budget and they have done jack shit. As well, it would be worthwhile to point tout that working to find a solution is not advanced by throwing wordbombs at the people involved when you have not done one thing in 2 freaking years to even address the budget issue other than to vote down the only two proposals Obama has made by a unanimous vote.

If anyone needs to man up and do the right thing it would be the democrats who have through their lack of any interest in a budget and their lack of balls to address the reckless spending they have allowed have come to the end of that road.






Leadership by Default

On election night last year, when it had become clear that Republicans would take over the House of Representatives, John Boehner noted that in contemporary American politics the president takes the lead. Republicans, he would say on other occasions, control only one-half of one-third of the government.

It is the only part of the government, however, that has shown any leadership in this year’s budget debates. House Republicans passed a budget that cuts spending, including entitlement spending, even though many Republican voters objected. President Obama, meanwhile, first proposed a budget that even Senate Democrats rejected as unserious, and then gave a speech outlining a second budget but failed to follow up by submitting an actual proposal. Only Senate Democrats performed worse; they have not enacted a budget in more than two years.


Obama is at it again, saying fine things about cutting trillions of spending without making any public disclosure of what specifically he would cut. At the same time he is portraying the Republicans as obstructionists who are threatening Grandma’s Social Security checks. In light of all this, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell is preparing for the worst with a “contingency plan” if the situation remains deadlocked.
The Kentucky Republican has proposed a convoluted scheme whereby the debt ceiling would increase and the president would have to submit specific spending cuts. Congress would have the power to keep the debt ceiling from rising if it amassed a two-thirds majority that found those cuts inadequate. The goal is to keep the government from hitting the debt ceiling, defaulting on its bonds, or interrupting popular programs on which millions of people rely, while also holding the president accountable for his fiscal choices.

That’s a highly optimistic gloss on it, anyway. In reality, everyone would consider the Republicans partly responsible for an increase in the debt ceiling if they adopt this course; everyone would consider them to have lost their nerve for a fight; everyone would expect the spending cuts not to happen; and everyone would be right. Which is why it does not appear that House Republicans, or even all Senate Republicans, are going to follow this course.

The alternative is for Republicans to take the initiative. They should continue trying to reach a deal with the president. But they should also pass legislation through the House that raises the debt ceiling, cuts spending, and implements reforms. For good measure, they should clarify that if the government ever does run up against the debt limit, bondholders and Social Security recipients will be the first to be paid off.

That move would clarify that House Republicans are not threatening a default and not standing in the way of anyone’s Social Security check, and serve the ball back to the Democrats. Legislation wholly crafted by Republicans is unlikely to be enacted. But its existence should give the Republicans more leverage in any talks — and a defense against Democratic attempts to blame them should the talks fail.

Our view throughout this debate has been that the debt ceiling ought to rise, because there is no economically responsible way to move all the way to a zero deficit this summer. But the excessive spending that brought us to this point must also be addressed. If President Obama and the Democrats are unwilling to act, Republicans may have to take the first steps on their own.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/271755/leadership-default-editors

BucEyedPea
07-14-2011, 11:33 AM
The US credit rating is not even relevant to the real issues. The US govt credit rating should have been reduced earlier—and by the market not those agencies that do the govt's bidding.

Amnorix
07-14-2011, 11:36 AM
Another right wing view, you mean. Because that's, you know, very different from the 14 threads showing the other right wing views on why this is all Obama's fault and how the Democrats suck this time, just like last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, and the....

HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 11:40 AM
Another right wing view, you mean. Because that's, you know, very different from the 14 threads showing the other right wing views on why this is all Obama's fault and how the Democrats suck this time, just like last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, and the....


I was looking high and low for the democratic senates version of the budget and darn it all to hell, I cant locate one. When you find one that gives credit to Harry Reid, Obama, McCaskill, or anyone from the Senate on the budget effort they have made, can you post it please?

Out of a desire for fairness and even handed analysis we need to get that information. Either the vote they took on the budget recently passed by the house or the budget they proposed originating in the senate will be great. Last year or this year.

Amnorix
07-14-2011, 11:54 AM
I was looking high and low for the democratic senates version of the budget and darn it all to hell, I cant locate one. When you find one that gives credit to Harry Reid, Obama, McCaskill, or anyone from the Senate on the budget effort they have made, can you post it please?

Out of a desire for fairness and even handed analysis we need to get that information. Either the vote they took on the budget recently passed by the house or the budget they proposed originating in the senate will be great. Last year or this year.



Point is there's nothing new in this OP, or different. And the issue of whether a budget, as such, is adopted, isn't one that is going to influence enough voters to win an office for sheriff anywhere, much less Congress or POTUS. The issue is the debt ceiling and the deficit/debt, not whether continuing resolutions are adopted or whatever.

Quickie
07-14-2011, 11:56 AM
I was looking high and low for the democratic senates version of the budget and darn it all to hell, I cant locate one. When you find one that gives credit to Harry Reid, Obama, McCaskill, or anyone from the Senate on the budget effort they have made, can you post it please?

:popcorn:

HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 12:08 PM
Point is there's nothing new in this OP, or different. And the issue of whether a budget, as such, is adopted, isn't one that is going to influence enough voters to win an office for sheriff anywhere, much less Congress or POTUS. The issue is the debt ceiling and the deficit/debt, not whether continuing resolutions are adopted or whatever.

Well No. That really is not the point at all. You would like that to be the point however things is what things is. The debt ceiling issue has been known and ignored by your party, added to, and made worse and now they are having to deal with a fix that they simply won't accept on any condition and with no regard for the impact on the country and the economy.

To say we will cut the deficit over 10 years to X is all bullshit, smoke, mirrors and a game. The measure of the impact of a reduction is how much will we spend in the next fiscal year vs the current fiscal year and if the difference is not a negative number.....we loose. Spending less is calculable. The debt ceiling will be fixed we all know that all the republicans are asking for is that we have a firm grasp on cutting federal spending that is not a wish and a prayer and a promise that we all know is not real and not enforceable.

If Harry or the rest of the senate dems or even Obama for that matter expect any credibility on this, they should be showing how well they have done and use their experience on budgeting and fiscal matters as a tool to help. But then, they can't. They dont have any such experience. Tsk Tsk. Aint that the shits.

Amnorix
07-14-2011, 01:14 PM
Well No. That really is not the point at all. You would like that to be the point however things is what things is. The debt ceiling issue has been known and ignored by your party, added to, and made worse and now they are having to deal with a fix that they simply won't accept on any condition and with no regard for the impact on the country and the economy.


Thank you for pointing out these eternal truths for me to dwell upon. It's true. It's all true. It's totally the Democrats fault. The Republicans did not cut taxes costing hundreds of billions in lost revenue. They did not launch multiple wars, some completely unnecessary, costing hundreds of billions of dollars in additional expenses. The Republicans did not control both houses of Congress and the White House for six years in the very recent past. I accept the blame on behalf of all Democrats everywhere.

To say we will cut the deficit over 10 years to X is all bullshit, smoke, mirrors and a game. The measure of the impact of a reduction is how much will we spend in the next fiscal year vs the current fiscal year and if the difference is not a negative number.....we loose. Spending less is calculable. The debt ceiling will be fixed we all know that all the republicans are asking for is that we have a firm grasp on cutting federal spending that is not a wish and a prayer and a promise that we all know is not real and not enforceable.

If Harry or the rest of the senate dems or even Obama for that matter expect any credibility on this, they should be showing how well they have done and use their experience on budgeting and fiscal matters as a tool to help. But then, they can't. They dont have any such experience. Tsk Tsk. Aint that the shits.


Yeah, well, the Economist doesn't think so. Neither do the majority of American voters who, in poll after poll, agree that higher taxes are needed to help close the deficit. Neither, seemingly, does HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER BOEHNER, who seems to have been willing to agree to a massive spending cut tied to limited tax increases only to have his own party, clinging to DYSFUNCTIONAL AND COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE lines in the sand and "my way or the highway" thinking, cut off his balls and wreck what would have been a very good plan for helping to solve the deficit problem going forward.

Instead, based entirely on the mantra of no new taxes, the Republicans, controlling only one-half of one branch of Congress, is trying to hold the rest of Congress, the WH and the nation hostage, holding sovereign default as a gun to the country's head to dictate policy. In so doing, they are fundamentally rejecting the results of the 2008 election that put Obama into the WH by an overwhelming majority DUE TO THE REPUBLICANS OWN BRUTAL LEGACY OF FAILURE.

What amuses me is that I actually support BOEHNER'S efforts here. A broad, ambitious plan to attack the deficit is exactly what I, and I suggest a large number of economists and Americans in general, would LOVE to see. But the far right extremists are refusing to let their own elected Speaker of the House do their job.

Thanks for the dysfunctional government. The Republicans' can't even decide who Obama should be negotiating with -- Boehner or Cantor, while the Senate Minority Leader throws out an absurd plan to let the President do whatever he wants, and is instantly shot down by everyone. And you say Democrats are dysfunctional and can't govern.

You guys can't even figure out which guy should be leading the negotiations.

HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 01:38 PM
Alas, Ill wait for the information on your parties efforts to date that would bring light to the dark on their special economic prowess and budgeting skills.

Then if you can lets hear more about the vast majority of the american people, some more about the extremists that all seem to dwell in the right side of the political spectrum and how they control the country. Dysfunctional government is special as well. That is clearly the fault of one part of the mix. While again, you can give us some in-depth analysis and insight in to how perfectly functional the Senate has been on the budget efforts. You will wont you?

How long has it been since the Senate produced a budget? Two years I think? And the House under Ms Pelosi. Can we see theirs?.....this dysfunctional government the republicans have created should have a very functional example from the two or even 4 years prior to last November if I follow your logic.

Two houses and the White House for two years.....and you call today dysfunctional and blame who?

Shame on you. You are better than that.

HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 01:52 PM
I do hate polls. For one that says X there is one that says Y. But just to add balance to your claim of "Neither do the majority of American voters who, in poll after poll, agree that higher taxes are needed to help close the deficit", here is a recent, like today, poll that says quite the opposite

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/july_2011/55_oppose_tax_hike_in_debt_ceiling_deal

(Rasmussen) — As the Beltway politicians try to figure out how they will raise the debt ceiling and for how long, most voters oppose including tax hikes in the deal.

Just 34% think a tax hike should be included in any legislation to raise the debt ceiling. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% disagree and say it should not.

There is a huge partisan divide on the question. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Democrats want a tax hike in the deal while 82% of Republicans do not. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 35% favor a tax hike and 51% are opposed.

patteeu
07-14-2011, 02:32 PM
Another right wing view, you mean. Because that's, you know, very different from the 14 threads showing the other right wing views on why this is all Obama's fault and how the Democrats suck this time, just like last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, and the....

I'm confident that you'll find a reason to vote for Obama in 2012 no matter how irresponsible and unserious he and his fellow democrats continue to be about fiscal matters.

patteeu
07-14-2011, 02:41 PM
Thank you for pointing out these eternal truths for me to dwell upon. It's true. It's all true. It's totally the Democrats fault. The Republicans did not cut taxes costing hundreds of billions in lost revenue. They did not launch multiple wars, some completely unnecessary, costing hundreds of billions of dollars in additional expenses. The Republicans did not control both houses of Congress and the White House for six years in the very recent past. I accept the blame on behalf of all Democrats everywhere.




Yeah, well, the Economist doesn't think so. Neither do the majority of American voters who, in poll after poll, agree that higher taxes are needed to help close the deficit. Neither, seemingly, does HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER BOEHNER, who seems to have been willing to agree to a massive spending cut tied to limited tax increases only to have his own party, clinging to DYSFUNCTIONAL AND COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE lines in the sand and "my way or the highway" thinking, cut off his balls and wreck what would have been a very good plan for helping to solve the deficit problem going forward.

Instead, based entirely on the mantra of no new taxes, the Republicans, controlling only one-half of one branch of Congress, is trying to hold the rest of Congress, the WH and the nation hostage, holding sovereign default as a gun to the country's head to dictate policy. In so doing, they are fundamentally rejecting the results of the 2008 election that put Obama into the WH by an overwhelming majority DUE TO THE REPUBLICANS OWN BRUTAL LEGACY OF FAILURE.

What amuses me is that I actually support BOEHNER'S efforts here. A broad, ambitious plan to attack the deficit is exactly what I, and I suggest a large number of economists and Americans in general, would LOVE to see. But the far right extremists are refusing to let their own elected Speaker of the House do their job.

Thanks for the dysfunctional government. The Republicans' can't even decide who Obama should be negotiating with -- Boehner or Cantor, while the Senate Minority Leader throws out an absurd plan to let the President do whatever he wants, and is instantly shot down by everyone. And you say Democrats are dysfunctional and can't govern.

You guys can't even figure out which guy should be leading the negotiations.

This negotiation isn't about how to close the deficit. It's about taking the first small step in that direction. We just had a giant leap in the opposite direction, not in the form of tax cuts but in the form of astronomical, unprecedented, mostly-unnecessary, democrat-directed spending so it shouldn't be a big surprise that the party elected to counter that profligate irresponsibility wants to begin by addressing spending first. They're not even considering serious entitlement reform right now, which will be unarguably essential to any real deficit fix. There will be plenty of opportunities for both revenue enhancement (hopefully as a part of real tax reform) and entitlement reform in the future if anyone in Washington DC is serious about addressing the deficit.

I urge you to urge your democrats to do the right thing by giving up these business-as-usual games where they pretend to offer unspecified spending and entitlement cuts in the out years in return for solid tax increases now.

Amnorix
07-14-2011, 02:43 PM
I'm confident that you'll find a reason to vote for Obama in 2012 no matter how irresponsible and unserious he and his fellow democrats continue to be about fiscal matters.

I could definitely go with Romney. My suspicion, however, is that the Republicans will nominate someone that I really don't care for.

I could definitely vote for Brown again.

If I had to bet, I'd bet I'll vote for Obama but Republican for House/Senate. But my stance towards Democrats has greatly soured since, for example, I joined this board. The issue here is that those favoring Republicans wear blinders, rarely seeing that Republicans do any wrong at all, which drives me bananas.

The absolute positions both sides stake out (in Washington and on this board) drives me bananas...

Amnorix
07-14-2011, 04:39 PM
Alas, Ill wait for the information on your parties efforts to date that would bring light to the dark on their special economic prowess and budgeting skills.

The Republicans have shown no better, unfortunately. Both have had their opportunities, and both have sucked. Take off your partisan blinders and you'll see it pretty clearly.


How long has it been since the Senate produced a budget? Two years I think? And the House under Ms Pelosi. Can we see theirs?.....this dysfunctional government the republicans have created should have a very functional example from the two or even 4 years prior to last November if I follow your logic.

Well, they learned from the best -- the Republicans, who apparently couldn't reach budget resolution several times themselves. But did you bitch and moan about dysfunctionality and irresponsibility then? Of course not. Stop being such a complete partisan hack and wake up.

For instance, under Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., the upper chamber hasn't passed a budget in more than two years.

Because Congress always works on the budget resolution for the coming fiscal year, Hoyer is right that a unified Republican Congressional majority failed to pass a finished budget in 2004 and 2006.

Nor was it much better when Republicans ran the Senate. No budget resolution emerged in 1998, 2004 or 2006.

Two houses and the White House for two years.....and you call today dysfunctional and blame who?

Shame on you. You are better than that.

Spare me the lecture, it's a joke. The budget doesn't even have the effect of law, and isn't signed by the President. The Republicans also need to look in the mirror on this very issue. You have vision troubles.

http://www.dancanit.com/jthorse/images/Blinders_1.jpg

HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 04:51 PM
Are you unwilling to recognize the house has passed a budget bill, sent it to the Senate who refuses to bring it to the floor?

I wont deny the problems are with both parties but I do believe that by passing a budget, the Republican house has done their job in this instance. Blinders are off. Why are you so incapable of giving credit where credit is due?

Amnorix
07-14-2011, 05:02 PM
Are you unwilling to recognize the house has passed a budget bill, sent it to the Senate who refuses to bring it to the floor?

errr...that's a simple fact. I tend to recognize simple facts.

I wont deny the problems are with both parties but I do believe that by passing a budget, the Republican house has done their job in this instance. Blinders are off. Why are you so incapable of giving credit where credit is due?


So if the Democrats spent alot of useless energy trying to pass some budget that the Republicans filibuster, so it doesn't get passed, that results in...what? How does that benefit anyone? What good does that do? And if they somehow got some liberal Republicans members to vote in favor and pass something wildly at variance with the House budget, knowing they can't resolve the two, then what? Both houses "win" in your view. They get credit for trying?

I don't give credit for political games. And that's all this is.

go bowe
07-14-2011, 05:04 PM
I could definitely go with Romney. My suspicion, however, is that the Republicans will nominate someone that I really don't care for.

I could definitely vote for Brown again.

If I had to bet, I'd bet I'll vote for Obama but Republican for House/Senate. But my stance towards Democrats has greatly soured since, for example, I joined this board. The issue here is that those favoring Republicans wear blinders, rarely seeing that Republicans do any wrong at all, which drives me bananas.

The absolute positions both sides stake out (in Washington and on this board) drives me bananas...

bananas, huh?

it drives me nuts...

almonds, to be specific...

HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 05:06 PM
Then you either refuse to recognize when people do their job or you do not understand the process. Or you just don't like the process.

go bowe
07-14-2011, 05:20 PM
Then you either refuse to recognize when people do their job or you do not understand the process. Or you just don't like the process.

i don't like the process, fwiw...

amno described it to a t...

modern politics is so partisan that we can't get anything done...

i miss the days when jerry ford was speaker of the house, both parties worked together to reach compromises that benefited both sides and which benefited the country...

HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 05:24 PM
i don't like the process, fwiw...

amno described it to a t...

modern politics is so partisan that we can't get anything done...

i miss the days when jerry ford was speaker of the house, both parties worked together to reach compromises that benefited both sides and which benefited the country...

I agree. The days of leaders who saw the job as getting to agreement and seeing opportunity in compromise is a memory. But, it will move back to there. It will take time. There were a lot of bridges burned to a crisp.

go bowe
07-14-2011, 05:28 PM
I agree. The days of leaders who saw the job as getting to agreement and seeing opportunity in compromise is a memory. But, it will move back to there. It will take time. There were a lot of bridges burned to a crisp.

wow, i'm kinda surprised that you are so optimistic about it...

i have to admit that i'm pretty pessimistic on this issue...

HonestChieffan
07-14-2011, 05:35 PM
wow, i'm kinda surprised that you are so optimistic about it...

i have to admit that i'm pretty pessimistic on this issue...


This too shall pass. The system works. It bends. It bends back. You mentioned Ford, Johnson, Dirksen...they were professionals who treated the role with respect. Contrast that with Nancy Pelosi and her tenure and how she remade the rules of the house and performed like no other speaker ever has. I dont see Boehner as able to fix it overnight but he has brought back rules that allow for debate and room for amendments. It will take more. But I see Reid as just as entrenched in his battle ready approach that until he is gone and a new leader moves in, its a mess.

The impact of that is lasting but by no means permeant.

Obama had his opportunity but I see no hope he can be the catalyst to bring normalcy to the process. Its not his style and he has not shown any ability to be the problem solver we need. He is just as entrenched as Reid is. He blew it on that issue.

Stinger
07-14-2011, 11:53 PM
modern politics is so partisan that we can't get anything done...



This is actually a good thing IMO less things for them to mess with or up. (Both Parties)

patteeu
07-15-2011, 09:09 AM
i don't like the process, fwiw...

amno described it to a t...

modern politics is so partisan that we can't get anything done...

i miss the days when jerry ford was speaker of the house, both parties worked together to reach compromises that benefited both sides and which benefited the country...

I don't. Those were the days when democrats led the march toward "progress" and Republicans went along for the ride. Meanwhile, what may have seemed like a benefit to the country was really the groundwork for the debt crisis (not to mention the culture of dependence on government) that's coming home to roost today.

ROYC75
07-15-2011, 10:43 AM
The government is funded until Sept 30th.... why the Aug 2nd date, I dunno.

go bowe
07-15-2011, 01:43 PM
I don't. Those were the days when democrats led the march toward "progress" and Republicans went along for the ride. Meanwhile, what may have seemed like a benefit to the country was really the groundwork for the debt crisis (not to mention the culture of dependence on government) that's coming home to roost today.

groundwork for the debt crisis?

in what way?

go bowe
07-15-2011, 01:44 PM
The government is funded until Sept 30th.... why the Aug 2nd date, I dunno.

funded or funds appropriated?

we run out of actual money around aug 2d, even though it's been appropriated...

patteeu
07-15-2011, 02:33 PM
groundwork for the debt crisis?

in what way?

Business as usual in Washington DC for decades was built around the ever-increasing size and scope of government and the expansion of entitlements while concerns about future financial viability were almost always kicked down the road for future legislatures to deal with. Even the so-called Social Security fix of the Reagan era was just a case of delaying the insolvency issue until a day when the participants would no longer be around to have to deal with it.