How long will republicans play chicken with the economy?

[Fear_Itself]

@flickster

Was there not a time during the 2009-2010 span that the Dems did indeed have 60 votes, if you include the independents that caucus with them?

I don’t count Lieberman, who is unreliable. He supported McCain/Palin in 2008, forchrisakes!

[Lamar_Mundane]

@Omg_a_Black_Conservative

(S)he speaks the truth. Republicans are actually more unified than are Democrats.

Cap and trade is a scam.

Cap and trade was originally a Republican idea, and just a few years ago, almost all of the front runners for the Republican nomination supported it. What happened?

[foolsguinea]

Apparently cap & trade was a scam. Which fits with it having GOP support.

@Omg_a_Black_Conservative

… and it actually taxes you (oh, wait. it’s a ‘fine’, not a ‘tax’) simply because you exist.

This clause is where we actually differ. You are not taxed for existing, you are taxed for being a citizen. If you want to only collect money from ‘evildoers’ that’s a fine. If you want to only collect money from users of government services, that’s a fee.

You are a partner in a democratic system of government. You can choose to participate responsibly or to run it into the ground.

[Bloodless_Turnip]

@Lobohan

The Tea Party is opposed to everything Obama is doing, right? Look up the congressional voting records since Obama took office.

Let’s see, Republican base hate’s Obama, so:

Republicans vote against the Start Treaty.
Republicans vote against Cap and Trade.
Republicans vote against Immigration.
Republicans refuse to seat Obama appointees.
Republicans nearly shut down the government.
Republicans nearly (so far) wreck the global economy by holding the debt ceiling hostage.
Republicans fight health care reform.

These are things that were either Republican ideas or were routine during Republican presidencies. And that’s off the top of my head.

Actual cites please. Thanks.

[Lobohan]

@Bloodless_Turnip

Actual cites please. Thanks.

Do you want actual cites for the things I listed? If I provide them and you find that the list is factual, will you admit you are wrong?

[septimus]

It seems Mitch McConnell has found a solution to this Seldon Crisis.
(see e.g. latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-mcconnell-debt-plan-20110712,0,892271.story )

Since it would be unthinkable for Republicans to vote to raise the debt ceiling and avert bankruptcy, the plan is for Republicans to vote not to raise the debt ceiling and let Obama veto that. This way bankruptcy is averted, but Obama takes the blame for it.

(I’m trying to think of a clever synopsis for this, but the whole story seems like a self-parody needing no help for hilarity.)

[Robot_Arm]

@septimus

It seems Mitch McConnell has found a solution to this Seldon Crisis.
(see e.g. McConnell unveils complex plan to avoid default on debt )

Since it would be unthinkable for Republicans to vote to raise the debt ceiling and avert bankruptcy, the plan is for Republicans to vote not to raise the debt ceiling and let Obama veto that. This way bankruptcy is averted, but Obama takes the blame for it.

So the Republicans want a constitutional amendment to require the U.S. to always have a balanced budget. As an alternative, they’re willing to allow the debt ceiling to rise automatically unless action is taken to prevent it.

What a bunch of gutless weasels. Getting our deficits under control will require tough decisions, and they will turn themselves inside out to not be the ones to make them.

[Gangster_Octopus]

McConnell is clearly motivated by whats best for the country.

[flickster]

@Omg_a_Black_Conservative

(S)he speaks the truth. Republicans are actually more unified than are Democrats.

Cap and trade is a scam.

Immigration? No. Illegal immigration? Yes.

And Democrats don’t refuse to seat Republican appointees? Would you care to take off the rose colored glasses?

This isn’t true at all. Earlier this year, it was the Democrats willing to shut down the government. I definitely remember a few Democrats flatly stating after the fact that they’d rather have the government shut down than to make any concessions regarding abortion, whereas their Republican counterparts said they’d not have shut down the government over abortion (which was evidenced by Republicans budging and Democrats not budging).

I said this elsewhere, and I’ll say it again. The debt ceiling is not infinite, though some people seem to believe it is. For shits and giggles, let’s say we raise the debt ceiling. Then what? We’ll be right back at this point in another year, at which time the Democrats will do what they’re doing now-- conceding those things which which will do little to address the U.S.’ skyrocketing debt and kick the can of insolvency down the line for future generations to solve.

Because it’s ill-conceived, there’s no reason to believe it will lower the U.S.’ debt (even the CBO states that it will cost more than originally stated) and it actually taxes you (oh, wait. it’s a ‘fine’, not a ‘tax’) simply because you exist.

All of This x 2

[ElvisL1ves]

@flickster

Was there not a time during the 2009-2010 span that the Dems did indeed have 60 votes, if you include the independents that caucus with them?

No, there was not. The MN GOP stalled Franken’s victory until June. Kennedy was in the hospital the entire time and and could not vote. Lieberman sided with the Republicans on every significant vote, all while sucking up Fox’s adulation as “the responsible Democrat” (he is neither). Even adding them into your total, there was only about a 2 month window when the Dem caucus could in any way be considered to add up to 60. Basic facts, friend.

Now, please tell us, when did the Constitution get changed to require 60 votes on every Senate vote? That’s been the regime we’ve been stuck with for years.

[flickster]

@ElvisL1ves

No, there was not. The MN GOP stalled Franken’s victory until June. Kennedy was in the hospital the entire time and and could not vote. Lieberman sided with the Republicans on every significant vote, all while sucking up Fox’s adulation as “the responsible Democrat” (he is neither). Even adding them into your total, there was only about a 2 month window when the Dem caucus could in any way be considered to add up to 60. Basic facts, friend.

Now, please tell us, when did the Constitution get changed to require 60 votes on every Senate vote? That’s been the regime we’ve been stuck with for years.

So, I was correct. Technically there was a window where the dems had 60 votes. The fact they were unable to get them to all ride the same bus is a whole other issue

[ElvisL1ves]

No, you were not. Go back and reread the parts about Kennedy and Lieberman a little more closely. :rolleyes: And I didn’t even mention Nelson.

[Bloodless_Turnip]

Amusing how Obama voted against raising the debt limit while a Senator. I guess maybe he wasn’t as “knowledgeable” about these things back then.

[gonzomax]

@flickster

Life must be good in Fantasy Land…

Let’s just look back at a little timeline…

Democrats controlled congress and the checkbook from 2007 to Jan 2011. Obama take office in 2008 and you not only have complete control of Congress, but the Senate & the White House as well. Pray tell, what happened to the deficit during this period?

According to the GAO

According to their simple chart

2007: -$275.5 B
2008: -$1,009.1 TRILLION
2009: -$1,253.7 TRILLION
Probably a good thing 2010 wasn’t included

Instead of paying for those programs, looks to me like the controlling Democrats walked the check and left the US taxpayers holding the tab.

CHART: When Will Tax Cuts Become The Public Debt's Biggest Problem?

This is a simple chart that even a tea bagger could understand. The Bush policies are responsible.

[flickster]

@gonzomax

Bush-Era Tax Cuts Projected As Largest Contributor To Public Debt [CHART] | HuffPost Impact

This is a simple chart that even a tea bagger could understand. The Bush policies are responsible.

“Here’s what it would be if…”
And if a frog had wings, he wouldn’t bump his ass…
Bottom line - don’t spend more than you bring in

It’s really that simple

[Fear_Itself]

@flickster

Bottom line - don’t spend more than you bring in

It’s really that simple

Which is what Democrats have been saying for years; we just bring in more, and the problem is solved.

[Bone]

So when the right refuses to increase the debt ceiling to extract concessions and threatens catastrophic consequences they are considered to be sinister and likened to terrorists and hostage takers. How is that different from when a union goes on strike and threatens to bring down a business in order to extract their concessions? Other than the obvious scale.

[Omg_a_Black_Conservative]

@Fear_Itself

Which is what Democrats have been saying for years; we just bring in more, and the problem is solved.

It’s too bad the Democrat plan also includes taxing the rich to bring in more than we spend. Which is impossible, mind you, on account of there not being nearly enough of them in them in the U.S. to sustain such a tax increase.

[Fear_Itself]

@Omg_a_Black_Conservative

It’s too bad the Democrat plan also includes taxing the rich to bring in more than we spend. Which is impossible, mind you, on account of there not being nearly enough of them in them in the U.S. to sustain such a tax increase.

So, because taxing the rich won’t wipe away the entire deficit, we should not raise their taxes at all? Is that what you are saying?

[Robot_Arm]

@Bone

So when the right refuses to increase the debt ceiling to extract concessions and threatens catastrophic consequences they are considered to be sinister and likened to terrorists and hostage takers. How is that different from when a union goes on strike and threatens to bring down a business in order to extract their concessions? Other than the obvious scale.

Well, when union members go on strike they are risking their own livelyhood along with the company’s. I suspect most Republican members of congress could survive a default with little change to their lifestyles; and I’ve read that one member of their leadership has money invested in a fund that would thrive under such a scenario.