But I’m not talking about fault. I’m merely saying that, if one side plays that card, and the other swerves, the one who played that card can get the win. If that’s how things play out, then the approach can (and did) work.
Sure, if things play out differently – and the brinkmanship continues, and they both go over the cliff – then we can at that point have an entirely separate conversation about which of 'em was at fault. But I haven’t yet said a word about fault, and have no idea why you’re trying to summarize my viewpoint in such terms.
OK, take those “war wind-downs” out of Reid’s, and his still cuts more than Boehner’s ($927 billion in spending cuts vs. $917 billion in spending cuts).
Repubs want cuts? We give you cuts. More than the Repubs could pass. Compromise: this plan isn’t really what Democrats want, but they offered it up. Cutting spending in an economic downturn isn’t something they typically believe in, but they’re doing it anyway because they want to compromise and actually pass something and save this country from economic ruin.
The Democrat’s current plan has no tax increases or even simple tax reform. So, again, to quote Fear Itself, you got nothin’.
And no one has the real balls to touch the Big Three. Not even the Repubs in their bill.
Here’s a bloombergstory highlighting that House member Tea Partiers are fine with big fat government spending as long as it is pork coming their way:
[Bloomberg quote]Sixty House members backed by the Tea Party, whose opposition to federal spending helped bring on an impasse over raising the U.S. debt ceiling, represent districts that last year received $43 billion in government contracts.
In 16 of those constituencies, spending exceeded $1 billion each – more than twice the median amount for all House districts, Bloomberg Government reported today.
“People don’t like federal spending in the aggregate, but when it’s back home where you’re spending the money, that’s a different story,” said Charles J. Finocchiaro, a political scientist at the University of South Carolina, in Columbia, in an interview [/Bloomberg quote]
I see. My summary was correct after all. One faction is playing 8-year old kid pretending to be a lunatic so it can get more cotton candy or money for drugs or something. The other faction has the part of concerned adult, wondering what kind of parental or psychiatric intervention is required.
You’re doing a remarkably poor job of reading what I’ve written; try re-reading it without any preconceptions – or figuring that I’m 100% sure that the GOP will be 100% at fault if the other side doesn’t blink – and see if you can then characterize my position accurately.
I’m saying that, if the Republicans refuse to budge, and the Democrats budge, the Republican “refuse to budge” strategy will have worked. And that’s all I’m saying.
I’m not saying I won’t know who’s at fault if neither side budges in time. I’m not, in fact, saying anything about fault. There aren’t really any lines to read between.
You beat me to this. I was just reading my copy while on the throne (to be delicate) and was thinking it should be posted here.
While The Economist is a bit conservative for my tastes I have been a subscriber for 15+ years. Great magazine. Dare I say the best in the world for its niche.
Believe me, I have checked the entrails, I have looked into smoke, and I have even consulted with the Council of Elders, and they, too, have foreseen doom. You have been forewarned. Midnight will mark the Dawn of the First Day. 72 Hours Remain.
It appears that a deal is in the works. And the peasants rejoice…
At last, the Republicans can focus their laser-like attention on their number one priority, which is jobs, jobs, jobs! The job-creators are safe now, if you drive past one of their gated communities, be sure to give them a thumbs up in passing, or whichever digit seems most appropriate.
The exitement is palpable, especially amongst the student community, now that there is a good chance they will be freed from the burdens of academic life. With Pell Grants cut, they can fling themselves headlong into the exciting world their parents hoped to keep them from. Your more or less artistic types, you English majors and the like, will probably opt to be barristas, with its trendy, hipster atmosphere. The more adventurous may well go for the exciting, fast-paced world of the bicycle messenger.
America in decline? Nonsense, America in recline, as our job creators settle into the comfortable cushioned world of free choice, unhindered by cigar-chomping labor bosses and so-called “rights”. And the worker is secure in the knowledge that his job is there for him so long as he is irreplacable, so long as he appropriately servile and grateful.
The flood gates of employment are open, and here they come. Yessiree, jobs, jobs, jobs.*
*Not available in all locations. Yours, mostly.
Well, heck yeah, with all the jobs that are going to be created, we’ve got to find the workers somehow! Why have these slackers sitting around in class learning useless information from socialist professors when they can actually be out there building wealth for the upper class, don’t ya know?
The deal looks like something most Congressman and Senators can hold their noses and vote for. But why the exemption of Social Security, Medicaid, and food stamps from any cuts?
I’m not saying take health care away from sick kids, but at least make the programs accountable so that some fat can be cut there. Surely there are a few middle managers making salaries that can be gotten rid of. Why do we hold certain programs sacred? Just because we like the idea of a Social Security program means that nothing within that program can be questioned?