I think those websites were shut down on purpose. Even if they weren’t, what the chance those Congressmen will even listen? A lot of American citizens are not lobbyists, Corporate execs, or Wall Street contibutors.
You’re right of course. Those *bennies *as you call them, funded by the entire country and flowed down to the citizens of those states, were never intended to help their re-election chances among the electorate and thereby buy their votes.
How silly of me :rolleyes:
Yeah, kind of like passing another stimulus plan.
I see you’ve gotten your answer. Sometimes, as one of the few voices of reason on this site, I’m forced to type faster than I should.
And really - KS? Nebraska? There’s a difference? I notice that nobody can really justify it, or directly address those points. All they do is cry about ‘teabaggers’ (make a 12 yr old proud), say that they wish Obama would stop caving, etc.
In the speech last night, Obama went to the left of Reid. Some think that Reid and Boehner were about to get a deal done, so he tried to cut to the front of the line and insert himself. All his yammering about corporate jets, paying your fair share, and other class warfare… that was the kickoff to his 2012 election, nothing more.
In my opinion this was always a matter of time before barack was put in a situation he was never going to win, this is the situation the republicans have wanted. If barack sticks to his guns and makes corporate America pay more tax he losses his backing for the next election, if he sticks to his guns and they default on their payment obivously an economic crisis will occur again Obama gets the blame. If he goes for the Republican way then he loses the working person and probably labelled a “sell out”. For me alot of emphesis is being placed on why is barack not doing this? or why is he not doing that?..etc, If he is really commander and chief let him lead he’s an intellgent guy. As a usual without a doubt the only winner will be white coporate america and now the president will finally realise what he’s up against. (just in case any over opinionated and under educated morons say anything i am white). As i am english i can only give an outsiders opinion but whatever happens in the future the uk and usa have alot to answer for in general.
Perhaps it is time to reconsider just raising the debt ceiling without any strings and deal with this later as in during the budget cycle. I know that is seen as just “kicking the can down the road” but at least when you kick the can down the road you keep it out of the ditch.
Time for the Republicans or the Democrats to reconsider it?
Time for the government as a whole - the house, the senate, the president, republicans and democrats.
It is becoming more and more likely that there will be no agreement on a long term solution so lets put out a short term solution and avoid default.
The question of how long is the tricky one. I’d say that based on prior track records, enough to cover the rest of this fiscal year and all of next year assuming continuing resolutions instead of a new budget.
Any new budget should address the debt ceiling. Yes, I know that’s a different part of the constitution but the net effect of the budget is what creates the debt ceiling issue.
So let’s say the Democrats realize that and hasten to cut a deal. And let’s say the Republicans realize that, and so can haggle effectively once the other guy blinks first. How do you convince 'em to do otherwise?
@Congress: Get your collective paws off our economy, you damned, dirty apes!
There is no haggling at this point. Either the limit gets raised, and soon, or the government shuts down. Then Obama either invokes the 14th or starts deciding who gets paid. Any guesses on how long that situation will remain before the limit gets raised again?
As I said at the very beginning of this - Boehner showed his cards when he said the limit would get raised. There is no reason to compromise. The fact that he can’t deliver his caucus on a compromise makes it even stupider to negotiate with him.
I’m just guessing, here, but – the last time you bought a car, did you and the salesman go back and forth and back and forth until a compromise had been reached, at which point he said he just had to talk to his manager, and then suddenly you wound up with a worse deal after the apologetic guy led you into a good-cop-bad-cop rigmarole? Because I hear that happens to some people.
I’ve actually never had that happen to me (the deal get worse after it’s been agreed), but I’m sure it does happen. I generally do car-shopping via e-mail these days - it’s harder to get pressured and you have plenty of time to do comparisons.
What doesn’t happen is the buyer (let’s say that’s Boehner) coming in to the dealership saying “No matter what, I will buy a car today” and then getting a better deal than sticker.
Once Boehner said “No matter what, the debt ceiling will be raised” then why negotiate with him, other than as political theater? Especially once you do the math and realize he can’t pass any sort of limit increase compromise without huge numbers of Democrats in the House.
No, see, that’s my point: let’s not say that Boehner is the buyer. As with the salesman who needs his manager to sign off on the bargain, he’s not actually the guy with authority to make a deal. He’s there to get some compromises out of you and then reveal that someone else needs to commit.
So, to reverse the analogy: think of it as someone who sure looks like a car buyer and haggles amateurishly before extracting a concession while seemingly committing to an okay deal – before explaining that he of course needs to consult his wife first.
Who said anything about negotiating with Boehner?
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/07/25/278811/lee-admits-he-is-an-extortionist/
A moment of sympathy of John of Orange. Here’s the kind of guys he has to deal with, from your good friends at ThinkProgress, which is a somewhat lefty site, so appropriate contamination protocols are recommended…
From an interview with Chris “Giant Tweety-Bird” Matthews:
What these people are up to is an effort to take a one-off election victory, and use it to permanently alter the government of the USA, and alter it in such a way as to make it effectively impossible to turn back. They are trying to destroy the “majority rules” premise of our government, much like they did when they make 60 votes in the Senate the effective limit by screaming “filibuster!” every ten minutes.
Its no longer about persuading a majority of the people to agree with you, its about denying and destroying the capacity of a majority to govern. They see themselves as losing the game, and so they want to change the rules. And they are desperate enough to take any chance, risk any disaster, to have their way.
Barry Goldwater would puke his guts out.
Ah… so you’re saying that Boehner is superfluous to the whole thing? This may be true. In which case a shutdown is may be because the Tea Party wing of the House (sounds like they have between 80-100 votes) won’t vote for any increase that is in any way a compromise (see the ridiculousness of the BBA requirement in the post above).
I guess I see the final situation being Boehner putting something up for vote that passes the House with mainly Democrat and non-TP Republicans. Either right at the deadline or even a bit after it (once the fallout from a shutdown starts). Possibly only getting us into next year, and containing roughly the cuts that Obama and Biden already wanted.
I’m honestly not sure. It’s often hard to tell whether someone is playing dumb or truly being dumb, or whether a threat is just a bluff, or whether a guy who sets himself up to look like a superfluous figurehead really is; the whole reason any such tactic sometimes works is that sometimes it’s not a tactic; it looks the same either way. Likewise,
They certainly want the other side to believe they’re strongly against such a vote – either because it is true, or because having the other side believe it could be a tactical advantage. I don’t know and they’re not telling.
Its the essence of bluffing, disinformation. You don’t want the other guy to know when you are bluffing, but you by God better know yourself if you are!
Notice how often the Pubbies swear up and down that the American people are on their side in this issue, even as every poll out there shows a solid majority favoring some sort of revenue enhancement. OK, taxes! There, I said it, right out loud, TAXES!
Look at this poll from WaPo, and tell me that the Pubbies have even the slightest substance to their claims of support from the people.
December 2010: Boehner calls the upcoming vote on the debt ceiling “an adult moment” that needs to be done in order to avoid “the serious problem that would exist if we didn’t do it.” The Treasury Department estimates it needs at least $2 trillion to cover borrowing through the November 2012 elections.
May 2011: Republicans moves the goalposts, stating that any increase in the debt ceiling must be matched by an equal amount of spending cuts.
June 2011: Republicans move the goalposts, walk out of Biden comission, state that no tax increases would be acceptable.
July 2011: Republicans move the goalposts, demanding a Balanced Budget Amendment to be part of the deal to raise the debt ceiling.
Late July 2011: Republicans move the goalposts, rejecting a democratic plan with no new taxes because they want a two-stage process, forcing another debt-ceiling vote in 2012.
So we went from the Republican leadership proposing an “adult moment” (read: a clean debt-cveiling increase) to a demand for draconian cuts, a balanced-budget amendment, no new taxes, and a chance to repeat all this fun during the 2012 primary season. So tell me again, who’s been unwilling to compromise here?