My understanding is that the TP love BBA, but hate the idea of a “Super Congress”.
Maybe nitpicking batshit isn’t a good idea. Mental hygiene, and all…
I guess… Republicans are willing to avert a crisis, but they are deferring to the Republicans who are very much looking forward to the forthcoming crisis. It’s like how Republicans want to reduce the deficit, but Republicans don’t want to reduce the deficit. Or how Republicans understand that defense spending ought to be cut, and Republicans want to increase defense spending. And how Republicans voted to end Medicare, but Republicans want to save Medicare.
Who needs an opposition party to the Republicans at this point?
The Republicans are the ones who have set conditions on raising the debt ceiling, not the Democrats. The crisis is a completely Republican created crisis.
You paying attention? On the one side, you got the Dems, grumbling but mostly in line. On the other side, you got John of Orange, supposedly the leader of the Republican House. He opens his mouth, and about half his own party shuts him down in like two fucking hours! Who the hell is Reid supposed to compromise with?
Has either side really offered a true compromise?
That is, has anyone representing committed supporting votes put anything on the table that they didn’t like but represented a middle position? Obama offered to cut Medicare in exchange for some tax increases but it isn’t clear that he had the votes plus the spending cuts were deferred. No one on the Republican side can offer anything with a tax increase unless they can assemble support from Tea Party immune members.
I have little tolerance for either side trying to blame the other side. The situation is the combined effect of the actions of members of both parties.
What you should have little tolerance for is the Republicans holding the specter of default over the heads of America to get budget concessions.
Only if by “the situation” you refer to our large national debt. Because if by “the situation” you mean the default crisis, then you are just incorrect. One side, the Democrats, want to raise the debt ceiling. The other side, the Republicans, won’t raise it unless they get what they want. So, the situation is entirely of Republican creation.
The whole Gang of Six package of spending cuts and tax increases has bipartisan support in the Senate… and is DOA in the House, it appears.
If the Tea Party wants to reject something that has the support of fiscal liberals like Senator Durbin and the spending hawks like Senator Coburn, then what, pray tell, can true compromise really be?
Yup. To me that’s the closest we came to compromise (it actually got me optimistic for one bright, sunny afternoon).
And of course it was DOA for plenty of reasons (DailyKos hated it almost as much as the Tea Party).
In the end a clean bill (maybe with ~$1 trillion in real cuts) to get us through the election is what we need right now. Have the elections, have a debate on what really needs to happen (tax reform, entitlement structure, everything) and then go into it with either a firm Tea Party mandate (both houses and President) or something more like the status quo but with a President that doesn’t need to get re-elected, and perhaps a chastened Tea Party (or, at the very least, a Speaker that actually speaks for his party).
Sorry, I don’t buy that. If the objective is to avert disaster in the financial markets, Boehner has put forward a plan that he can get through his party. If you’ve read it (and I have), it’s not all that unreasonable; buy time now, and figure it out later with a bipartisan commission that is immune to amendments and such. Frankly, it reminds me of BRAC (a subject near and dear to a defense contractor exec’s heart).
How is the speaker’s deal any different than Reid’s, wrt setting conditions? Seems to me they are both unwilling to compromise so far, and to blame one side just displays partisanship and an unability to think critically.
Sorry, until you apologize for your earlier ham handed attempt at an insult, you don’t get replied to.
Because reducing the deficit is not necessary to raise the debt limit.
Indeed, Mr Smashy. Upon further reflection, I have failed to take into account the cable news cycle.
ETA: What do you think the length is now?
agreed, unless you are part of the landslide GOP majority in the house who feels they have a mandate to do something about runaway spending. Didn’t W get it raised something like 7 times? (with Obama voting against?)
Honestly? 1-2 months, unless it’s something very longstanding (ie, ridiculously high unemployment, high mortgage rates or energy prices, etc… something that people are reminded of every time they wake up).
Why is that linked to raising the debt limit, other than political extortion? If we submit to this terrorism, would they not be encouraged to link an anti-abortion amendment next time, or Defense of Marriage amendment after that? If they want to debate spending cuts, or a balanced budget amendment, let them do it like adults without holding the country at gunpoint.
First of all, I’d object to calling it terrorism, especially in light of what just happened in Norway. Please.
Since most of the posters on this board are reasonably intelligent, I trust I don’t need to point out the differences of linking long term deficit reduction and the debt limit, vs social policy stuff. They are very related, as I’m sure you see.
As for extortion - that happens all the time in Congress, although they’d call it negotiation. Were you equally against Obamacare because they got their 59th and 60th votes in the Senate by trying to buy off the (Dem) Senators from KS and LA? If not, why not, other than your politics may have been in favor of more Government footprint in the private healthcare space?
More thoughts from Slate on the meltdown that didn’t happen today, regarding the debt ceiling.
And this is why they are playing the game this way
Fair point. It’s actually more hostage-taking, anyway.
Were you even aware that the extra bennies were not, as you imply, for those Senators but for theirstates? :dubious: You are indulging the righty smear tradition of insinuating corruption where there’s only representation going on.
Raising the debt ceiling has never been refused . Sometimes politicians will play political games to gain points with their constituents, but nobody ever said no. The debt ceiling allows us to pay for commitments already made. It does not give the president a blank check.
Moodys say they will kick our credit rating down at least to B if we do not pass the ceiling. The markets around the world are waiting to see if the Repubs can act like adults. There will be serious consequences if they can not. Interest rates will jump. Financial activity will be slashed. All for some stupid tea bagger show off idea. They should be recalled for stupidity.