I see. So, when confronted by a raving maniac, who’s brains are boiled in batshit, and who is threatening to destroy our economy and pretty much everybody else’s…the correct procedure is to be ballsy, to spit in their eye and say “Go ahead, you haven’t got the guts to pull the trigger!”
I find that proposition dubious.
The poor work much harder for their money.
What’s the odds that the raving maniac is bluffing? 5 to 1? Place your bets here!My money’s on Obama to be bluffing, while the GOP actually goes through with their plans.
Boehner withdrew because he did not have the votes. He does not control the party . The tea baggers will not suddenly become reasonable. Any compromise will meet huge internal Republican resistance. The baggers may be forcing Boehner into rejecting any deal.
Republicans have much more to lose. Their constituents have a lot more in the stock market, and their donors are more likely to be large corporate donors, whereas Obama has far more small individual donors. If Obama was going to fold, he would have done it by now. He knows the Republicans are holding a weak hand, and the Republicans know he knows it. Their corporate handlers will jerk the chain hard if the markets start to tank this week.
I predict a full retreat by the GOP leadership, resulting in a clean, long term debt ceiling bill with no spending cuts. Pubs will roll over and pee like scared puppies when their trust accounts start to evaporate. Of course, the Tea Party will go apeshit and bolt the party, nominating their own candidates in 2012. We will see the beginning of the end of the Republican Party in the first weeks of August, 2011.
Good riddance.
The “small individual donors” have just as much to lose. They can’t afford to have their retirement savings plummet in value yet again.
So I think it boils down to which side gets blamed by the public if we default.
Which raving maniac was that? From your POV, of course.
Perhaps if there were more negative consequences for having kids one can’t afford, she’d be less inclined to have them?
An extreme statement to demonstrate a point: the more you ameliorate the consequences of bad decisions, the more of that behavior you’re going to get. Which is unhealthy for the country’s finances, for society, for strong families, etc.
And we have a cite for this? No? Just asking.
You are working off of the old liberal paradigm. In the old days, you’d be right.
Last time around, presidentially speaking of course, 50-50, it appears.
And of course, Dems outspend the GOP the last time around.
For the record, I actually don’t have much of an issue with any one side raising more than the other - it’s free speech, and Americans should be able to give to who they want to give. And despite 2010-cycle’s huge Dem money advantage, they got their asses kicked, which shows that it’s not all about the money.
But next time, please check your facts before you spout off bad ones, thanks.
Please - the proper term for the poorest of the working poor is “Lucky Duckies”.
No, they don’t have as much to lose, because they control much less of the equity market. Simply put, the very wealthy (the top 20%) own nearly 90% of the equities in the US. They are the ones with the most to lose, and they will be the ones bring the most pressure to bear on who they perceive to be the roadblock in negotiations. Who do you think most of the top 20% support, the Democrats, or the Republicans? Who will suffer the most if that support is withdrawn?
Heh. No, I agree that we need a different term for the working poor – to set them apart from those who aren’t, y’know, “working”. So how about “the working poor”, for a start?
Oh, dear, my analogy was too obscure? Have you any potted plants about, you could put one in front of the screen, perhaps a philodendron could break it down into terms you could grasp.
Your value-added reply is all that I’ve come to expect from the American left.
Thanks.
PS Bush lied, people died, no blood for oil, etc.
Tax cuts, job creators, skin in the game, etc.
Whose horse should I bet on in this race, though? Boehner’s horse looks pretty good, but I think they beefed it up with too much talk and Tea Party money. Obama’s horse looks like it’s about to collapse under the weight of its rider, and it seems rather sickly, probably because the owner can’t afford it decent healthcare. To hell with it, I’ll shoot 'em both and turn them into glue.
Ha ha. Okay, there IS going to be a deal, right? The GOP isn’t really going to start a worldwide depression just to try to hurt Barack Obama. Fun’s over, guys!
Boehners horse is a pinto. The front part is different from the back part that pushes the animal forward. All the brown skin is way in the back where the horses head can not see it… The horse’s rear is crapping out tea bags. In its oat bag are communion wafers taken from pat Robertson’s church. The Koch brothers are paying the horse’s entry fees and collecting all the winnings.
Think of them as Sheriff Bart holding a gun to his own head.
Nobody move or I’ll blow this [REDACTED]'s head clean off!