House GOP still hellbent on debt-ceiling showdown
The juxtaposition here is telling.
First, from Politico, an explanation of how House Republicans and their leaders are approaching the issue of a looming showdown over the debt ceiling:
“I think it is possible that we would shut down the government to make sure President Obama understands that we’re serious,” House Republican Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state told us. “We always talk about whether or not we’re going to kick the can down the road. I think the mood is that we’ve come to the end of the road.”
Republican leadership officials, in a series of private meetings and conversations this past week, warned that the White House, much less the broader public, doesn’t understand how hard it will be to talk restive conservatives off the fiscal ledge. To the vast majority of House Republicans, it is far riskier long term to pile up new debt than it is to test the market and economic reaction of default or closing down the government.
GOP officials said more than half of their members are prepared to allow default unless Obama agrees to dramatic cuts he has repeatedly said he opposes. Many more members, including some party leaders, are prepared to shut down the government to make their point. House Speaker John Boehner “may need a shutdown just to get it out of their system,” said a top GOP leadership adviser. “We might need to do that for member-management purposes — so they have an endgame and can show their constituents they’re fighting.”
That’s right: By the admission of top GOP officials, internal party “member-management purposes” may require them to force a shutdown of the U.S. government. Furthermore, House Republicans are out of the speaker’s control and even more intransigent than understood by the White House and the general public, which already believes them to be extremist.
Now contrast that with President Obama’s statements today at a White House press conference to close his first four-year term:
“America cannot afford another debate with this Congress about whether or not they should pay the bills they’ve already racked up. If congressional Republicans refuse to pay America’s bills on time, Social Security checks, and veterans benefits will be delayed.
We might not be able to pay our troops, or honor our contracts with small business owners. Food inspectors, air traffic controllers, specialists who track down loose nuclear materials wouldn’t get their paychecks. Investors around the world will ask if the United States of America is in fact a safe bet. Markets could go haywire, interest rates would spike for anybody who borrows money. Every homeowner with a mortgage, every student with a college loan, every small business owner who wants to grow and hire.
It would be a self-inflicted wound on the economy. It would slow down our growth, might tip us into recession. And ironically it would probably increase our deficit. So to even entertain the idea of this happening, of the United States of America not paying its bills, is irresponsible. It’s absurd….
Republicans in Congress have two choices here. They can act responsibly, and pay America’s bills, or they can act irresponsibly and put America through another economic crisis. But they will not collect a ransom in exchange for not crashing the American economy. The financial well-being of the American people is not leverage to be used. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip.”
In the weeks ahead, the American people will have to decide which of those two narratives they find more appealing, patriotic and rational. But the GOP has already made its choice. They continue to insist, publicly and apparently in private conversations among themselves, that it’s “damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead” toward a government shutdown. Having whipped themselves into a fervor, convinced of the holiness of their mission, they will not be dissuaded from carrying it out.
The rest of us are just along for the ride.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
1,012 comments Add your comment
Peadawg
January 15th, 2013
10:27 am
TaxPayer
January 15th, 2013
10:24 am
If we do somehow default, I’ll blame Congress and the President. D or R doesn’t matter to me.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:27 am
Peadawg: everybody/everything paying their fair share
Causing people unneeded pain is not a “fair” share at all.
Clearly you think poor people should have to experience some “pain” over this, while not applying an equal amount of pain to the upper classes. That would be the antithesis of “fair share.”
So you’re right, I disagree strongly with that.
Granny Godzilla
January 15th, 2013
10:29 am
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
10:24 am
Obama ain’t like you. He’’s got four mansions in four different states staffed with servants (gardeners, housekeepers, etc.) He’s part of the EVIL rich that you SO despise. NO “plan” is going to work – to late. Go over the FISCAL CLIFF now – three months – it’s going to happen THIS YEAR.
.
.
.
.
Who’s got the screen cleaner?
That one provokes a huge guffaw.
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
10:30 am
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:22 am
I’m suggesting that if growth estimates used to base revenues and spending in the future prove to be ridiculously overstated as in the past, the ability to realize cuts diminishes.
These guys are much more intersted in political optics which I see we agree on…however, actually taking the bull by the horns without concern for party or re-election is impossible as things stand. Heck, given all the focus on the obligatory hypocrisy for all involved, I could see the GOP at some point putting up ads suggesting DEMs want to push granny off some cliff…more bizarre things have happened..
Peadawg
January 15th, 2013
10:32 am
“Clearly you think poor people should have to experience some “pain” over this, while not applying an equal amount of pain to the upper classes.”
Where did I EVER say that? You must not know what “everybody” means.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:33 am
Stevie Ray: I could see the GOP at some point putting up ads suggesting DEMs want to push granny off some cliff…
Probably.
Frankly Democrats frustrate me because they are whiny little crybabies over not getting more during the fiscal cliff deal, and whiny little crybabies over the trillion dollar coin idea being thrown out.
Obama frustrates me because he seems hell bent on caving for the sake of what he perceives to be his own “optics.” Won’t hold the line on anything. If he hadn’t gone up against Mitt Romney, he could easily be painted as having no core himself.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:34 am
Hey Fred and That Black Guy, that last one was for you
Keep pretending I’m a liar dudes!
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
10:34 am
Occupation – you are the rube. DENY DENY DENY…….. it depends on what the definition if “is” is. Quit lying to yourself and take responsibility. YOU voted for these unfunded or under funded big gub’ment SOCIALIST Fed Spending Prrograms….. yes you did! And YOU and voters like you are the reason we have this hawg at the trough spending FED DEBT disaster.
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
10:35 am
Peadawg
January 15th, 2013
10:25 am
Is there really any merit to the phrase “agree to disagree”?
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:35 am
Peadawg: Where did I EVER say that? You must not know what “everybody” means.
What possible extra pain on the rich are you planning on introducing that would be equivalent with reducing the very low amount of health care and food money poor people currently receive? What would be equivalent pain to that?
Answer: NOTHING. Not even a 100% tax on money over $250k would do that.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:36 am
Peadawg: Is there really any merit to the phrase “agree to disagree”?
It’s purpose is “I’m right and you’re wrong but I’m not willing to continue talking about it”
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:36 am
Stevie Ray: Meant to send that to you:
Is there really any merit to the phrase “agree to disagree”?
It’s purpose is “I’m right and you’re wrong but I’m not willing to continue talking about it”
Peadawg
January 15th, 2013
10:37 am
“Is there really any merit to the phrase “agree to disagree”?”
Peadawg
January 15th, 2013
10:39 am
“It’s purpose is “I’m right and you’re wrong but I’m not willing to continue talking about it””
No it’s purpose is “I’m not changing your mind and you’re not changing mine and I’m tired of going in circles”
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
10:40 am
I don’t know of any other country who got out of such a pickle that did not increase revenues on all tax paying classes. I think what is referred to as the middle class should pay a “fair share” even if it is $250 bucks a year. As long as the pressure is exclusively on the “rich” via increased rates and elimination of deductions…all told could increase total taxes on these folks by a material multiple..at some point, the exodus commences.
bucket
January 15th, 2013
10:40 am
@ DannyX – how can an intellectually honest person continue to ridicule Republican ideas and not call out the leadership of the Democrat party that has the majority in the US Senate (yet hasn’t passed a budget in how many years?) and also holds the White House with a President who submits a budget to the Senate that was voted down 100-0? The Republicans were swept out of power in 2008 in large part because they had been spending like drunken sailors during Bush’s term as POTUS. I can admit the failures of the Republican party. Why can’t Democrats admit the faults of their own leaders without trying to paint every crisis as the sole responsibility of the Republicans?
Welcome to the Occupation
January 15th, 2013
10:40 am
Morality? ” Quit lying to yourself and take responsibility. YOU voted for these unfunded or under funded big gub’ment SOCIALIST Fed Spending Prrograms….. yes you did!”
I don’t support Obama at all. Obama is a president of austerity, just like his Republican counterparts.
“YOU and voters like you are the reason we have this hawg at the trough spending FED DEBT disaster.”
Wrong.
As everyone knows — except a few people on this blog apparently — it was the financial crisis, brought on by bankers and their cohorts in government, and the subsequent looting of our public coffers to try to stop the unraveling of the entire financial system in the aftermath, that has made our fiscal problems more acute.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:40 am
No it’s purpose is “I’m not changing your mind and you’re not changing mine and I’m tired of going in circles”
Semantics. Same thing.
Brosephus™
January 15th, 2013
10:41 am
Stevie Ray
Regardless to the amount, the GOP House has already gone on record on more than one occasion to the necessity of debt limit increases for the next 10 years. If you’re upset because the numbers are skyrocketing, then you should be demanding more revenues as that would cut down on the deficit. If you want to cut government spending, then increase private sector spending. The spending of the last 4 years came because somebody had to fuel enough consumption to keep us going.
I have to recuse myself. Still fighting the flu.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
10:42 am
Jay’s blog is part of the FED Gub’ment SOCIALIST broadcasting system and this is a test……. blah, blah, blah. blah…… this has been a test. In case you really do (and will) go over the FISCAL CLIFF go to any OPEN public relief shelter for our FREE stuff. GOOD LUCK FINDING AN OPEN SIGN!
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:43 am
Morality is becoming unhinged.
Hey, it takes one to know one
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
10:44 am
ADAM
I think that the OWS movement which is clearly left wing, made an entire protest on the wings of wall street and the wealthy are evil. I think the focus and platform to tax the rich more became a mantra so we now have all these educated and uneducated folks using some undefined term (fair share)thinking we can address any more that 6-8% of our problems in this fashion…
rightwingextreme
January 15th, 2013
10:45 am
what….nothing from the wapo for jay to cut and paste today?
killerj
January 15th, 2013
10:45 am
LOVE IT!,MORE POPCORN & PEANUTS TO WATCH THE MONKEYS PLAY!,what do you expect Jay when half the country does not want this man in office,more of the same for the next 4 years my friend.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:46 am
and the wealthy are evil.
I don’t recall this being part of it. I recall instead that the bankers and wall street caused serious issues, and specifically recall OWS movement leaders indicating they were fine with capitalism that was regulated and responsible, and that some people being wealthy is fine as long as they don’t tie that to control of the government and/or control of people’s lives.
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
10:46 am
Brosephus™
January 15th, 2013
10:41 am
Feel better..I had the flu about 10 years ago and thought I was gonna die…
indigo
January 15th, 2013
10:46 am
Morality – 10:34
I missed the speech where Obama announced he was implementing Socialist Federal spending programs.
Link please.
indigo
January 15th, 2013
10:47 am
Brosephus
Did you get a flu shot?
Christian Conservative
January 15th, 2013
10:47 am
Paul
Just, what, exactly, is this ‘budget’ you keep going on about?
Here it is… All for you Paul in PDF format. Make sure you read it word for word now so it may sink in to that lib brain of yours… It easily passed the house but with dems willing to spend us into bankruptcy it didn’t pass the dem controlled senate. It is sad that Oblama and the dems want to spend our children and grandchildren’s money……
http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf
http://budget.house.gov/fy2013prosperity/
td
January 15th, 2013
10:49 am
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
9:53 am
td — “Oh now Jay. You progressives can not argue in one breath that the number of Federal employees have decreased and in the next breath say the creation of a Department is “massive expansion of government bureaucracy”.
Someone’s been doing the Rip Van Winkle sleep and got their Administrations mixed up.
DHS was a *Bush* creation. You know how you have to stand in security lines now at the airport and get your bags x-rayed and swabbed for explosives? That’s all Bush.
Cutting government headcount — that’s Obama.
Clearly, you’ve become confuzzled and lost.
You may want to look at the below link and revise you talking points accordingly. My whole point to Jay is that the formation of DHS did not increase the size of the bureaucracy as he claimed it did.
http://www.opm.gov/feddata/historicaltables/totalgovernmentsince1962.asp
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
10:49 am
Brosephus™
January 15th, 2013
10:41 am
BTW, since the debt will continue to outpace (materially) any individual taxing, more drastic action needs be taken. We all know no real spending cuts, even those involving reduction in future spending are BS.
I say we put a debt/annual interest expense atmosphere about the ceiling. Give BO 25 trillion of additional debt and see what he does with it….now thats a metric worth implementing..
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
10:51 am
Since the “evil rich” and “makers” are getting brought up more and more this morning, I think it’s high time to remind everyone of something.
Tax cuts don’t create jobs. At least, not tax cuts on the accumulation of personal wealth, which is what we’ve been dealing with for the last 10 years.
We don’t need tax cuts to incentivize the accumulation of personal wealth, because the accumulation of personal wealth is its own reward. What we need to incentivize is direct investment in job creation for American workers, and the creation of jobs for American workers by American businesses (as well as foreign businesses). To that end, I have no problem with the following sorts of tax cuts.
If Aloysius Fatwallet III opens up his checkbook and directly creates a small business (landscaping crew, caterers, storefront florist, whatever), I have no problem incentivizing Mr. Fatwallet’s actions by granting him generous tax cuts and tax relief for setting up and starting his business. I also have no problem with keeping some of those taxes low on an ongoing basis, so long as he hires American employees and verifies their status properly. If he puts Americans to work, then IMO he deserves a tax cut.
If Joe Bob the Roofer manages to find enough work to hire two more guys for his small business, I have no problem extending Joe Bob Roofing, Inc. a generous tax incentive so long as he hires American workers and verifies their status properly.
If Bigtime Computing Components, Inc. — a manufacturing concern out in Silicon Valley — hires more Americans to assemble their products, I’ve got no problem giving Bigtime a nice tax break for doing so, especially if they verify that they’re hiring Americans.
I even don’t have a problem with giving tax breaks to companies like Kia if they increase their American headcount. If you’re helping the American economy by putting Americans to work, then IMO you deserve a tax break.
OTOH, if you’re going to sit on your fat tuchus, clipping stock redemption coupons and spending your days searching for tax avoidance schemes, I have no problem raising your income taxes to obscene levels. If you’ve got wealth to spare, then I can definitely see the American society helping YOU if YOU act in pro-social ways — such as putting Americans to work.
OTOH, if you’re going to play Little Jack Horner and sit in the corner, hogging all the pie, then IMO you *deserve* to carry more of the tax burden.
The way I see it, if you’re wealthy, then you can either put your excess resources to work by employing Americans (and thereby receive a well-deservedreward for your actions) or they can be put to work FOR you by means of you paying higher taxes.
td
January 15th, 2013
10:53 am
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:35 am
What possible extra pain on the rich are you planning on introducing that would be equivalent with reducing the very low amount of health care and food money poor people currently receive? What would be equivalent pain to that?
This begs the question why are the poor, poor? One can not expect a person to change their behavior when you (government) continues to enable the behavior.
F. Sinkwich
January 15th, 2013
10:53 am
“I missed the speech where Obama announced he was implementing Socialist Federal spending programs.”
Indigo forgot about Obamacare.
Indigo has memory problems.
Poor Indigo.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
10:53 am
Adam and Occupy just won’t admit they voted OBAMA….. maybe Obama isn’t far enough to the SOCIALIST left to suit you. That I understand. But you voted for Obama. Yes recent events (banking crisis ripoff – voted by Dems and Repubs including Obama) greatly increased the Fed Debt but the fact is the Fed Debt was already huge and was built up over decades of unfunded and under funded spending on big gub’ment SOCIALIST social programs, wars and other such trivial things. Dot.com bubble – real estate bubble – healthcare bubble (happening now) and the final mother of all bubbles the gub’ment treasury bond bubble resulting in the big “D”. Obama will go down in history as the Calvin Coolidge of 2013.
SkyHawk
January 15th, 2013
10:54 am
By not raising the debt ceiling DOES NOT mean we won’t pay our bills as the president suggest. There is more than enough money to cover our debts as long as the Democrats would be willing to FINALLY come up with some meaningful spending cuts to balance the budget. What a concept that is just completely ignored by Reid, Pelosi and Obama.
Nothing more than scare tactics by Obama that he is apparently accusing the GOP of doing. Hypocrisy at it’s best
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
10:54 am
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:46 am
Of course OWS (bad misguided effort) wanted to close down exchange. Also all the cries by many about the government passing laws to get nose in corporate compensation..I think that is a bad idea as while a small percentage make obscene amouts, the precedent would open pandora’s box.
Ii noticed that Lew got a 3 million dollar bonus at Citi courtesy of us taxpayers…I would think there would be some pressure toward that end..
Welcome to the Occupation
January 15th, 2013
10:57 am
Morailty? ” In case you really do (and will) go over the FISCAL CLIFF go to any OPEN public relief shelter for our FREE stuff. GOOD LUCK FINDING AN OPEN SIGN”
The most traumatic point for common people of a certain stripe, especially those with authoritarian leanings, is this idea of “free stuff”, which is just the grasping of desperation in the face of a social order that is declining, where elites have carried out a coup and rendered such common-man’s virtues quaint and irrelevant. That’s the really tough part for people who think a certain way.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
10:59 am
td — “You may want to look at the below link and revise you talking points accordingly.”
Why? I’m not the one wrongly claiming that government employment’s gone *up* unver Obama.
“My whole point to Jay is that the formation of DHS did not increase the size of the bureaucracy as he claimed it did.”
That might have been your point, but that’s not what you said. You presented two completely dissimilar things — one of which didn’t even HAPPEN under Obama’s watch — as some sort of self-refuting evidence that Obama really *has* increased government headcount. Total fail on your part.
Quite frankly, the Wall Street Journal and Forbes have BOTH grudgingly conceded that Obama’s cut a significant amount of government jobs.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
10:59 am
td: This begs the question why are the poor, poor? One can not expect a person to change their behavior when you (government) continues to enable the behavior.
Begging the question. You ASSUME the poor are poor by choice when you ask that question. They are not.
How do I know? TRY IT
Jhunt163
January 15th, 2013
10:59 am
Adam, Thanks for your response. I am traveling from the west coast today and will be out of touch. The only reason I brought up the cuts is that I first heard about the $1.2 trillion and then that figure rose to over $2 trillion. However, when I search the web for spending cuts, the only thing I can find is Sen. Corker asking where the cuts are and absolutely zero outline of any cuts at all except those included in the sequester, which hasn’t happened. I think there are many on this blog that possess a great deal of knowledge and was hoping to pin it down. I know DDR posted a report from the Commerce committee that showed a cut of about $1.3 billion, but that was it.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
11:00 am
Morality?: maybe Obama isn’t far enough to the SOCIALIST left to suit you. That I understand.
Oh FFS.
If he was really far left socialist I would have sat out the election.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:00 am
“If you are wealthy then you can either put your resources to work hiring or it can be done FOR YOU through taxation”. Ahhhhhhhhh…….. redistribution of the wealth – Obama’s platform – and the basic philosophy of S O C I A L I S M! Who would have guessed?
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:00 am
F. Sinkiewicz — “Indigo forgot about Obamacare.”
Fishy forgot about Bushalist Medicare Part D.
Bush = Obama.
Fishy voted SOSHULIST twice.
Poor Fishy.
lovelyliz
January 15th, 2013
11:01 am
The Republicans don’t mind spending our tax $$$$$$$$$$$$$. Sure, they’re all about cutting Medicare and Social Security which are self-funded and don’t contribute to the deficit, but they’re all about increasing defense spending. Got an abstinenance only program that’s an abject, proven failure? The GOP will throw more tax $$$$ at you than you know what to do with.
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
11:01 am
td
January 15th, 2013
10:53 am
I totally agree on the thought that entitlements, in more instances than we want to admit, are actually enablers and have a negative impact on many. There is much more harm in suppressing the dreams of some than simply throwing money at them..
Welcome to the Occupation
January 15th, 2013
11:01 am
td: “This begs the question why are the poor, poor? One can not expect a person to change their behavior ”
Has very little to do with their “behavior”. And everything to do with the conditions in which they find themselves and in which they start out.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:02 am
Morality — “Ahhhhhhhhh…….. redistribution of the wealth – Obama’s platform – and the basic philosophy of S O C I A L I S M! Who would have guessed?”
And wouldn’t you know, it’s already been part of our tax policy dating back to the Eisenhower Administration.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
11:02 am
JHunt163: Part of the problem is they have the sequester cuts scheduled to happen, but keep moving the start date. Both sides of the aisle don’t want the cuts to happen, but they won’t admit it after whipping up hysteria over spending cuts.
The House GOP can’t simultaneously make the case that we need cuts while continuing to delay the cuts. The Democrats are then left open to say cuts have already been made to the high amount mentioned (some actually HAVE been made but they are smaller) because the House GOP won’t drop the “we have a spending problem” meme long enough to admit they oppose large spending cuts.
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
11:05 am
What is the coJoe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
10:59 am
Agreed but what is the latest on the employment numbers to govern healthcare? Probably nobody knows but it’s clearly on the horizon..
What is the concensus on transaction tax?
Welcome to the Occupation
January 15th, 2013
11:06 am
Morality?, Adam: “This begs the question why are the poor, poor? One can not expect a person to change their behavior ”
If Obama really were “far left socialist” then, well, he would have dropped off the radar of mainstream American politics as he would have not been represented by either of the two right-wing parties, the Democrats and Republicans who together exercise a monopoly on the political system.
lovelyliz
January 15th, 2013
11:07 am
Since when have the Republicans ever met a defense program outside of one that helped wounded veterans or a failure of an abstinance only progam that they ever wanted to cut?
Dirty Dawg
January 15th, 2013
11:08 am
Seems to me that our Repug friends have convinced themselves that they are in a ‘win-win-you lose’ position. They fail to raise the debt limit and Obama ignores it and continues to pay our bills and protect the ‘full faith and credit’ of the US – and they Impeach him…he doesn’t pay the bills and our, along with the rest of the world’s, economy goes into a tail-spin – and they Impeach him for that…or, he caves and gives em a bunch of cuts to the budget and they (The Boner-guy) gets to strut around and claim that ‘this time I got 100% of what I wanted’ and Obama goes down as a failure even before his second term begins. Point is, bad guys win sometimes too, but only if you let em.
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
11:10 am
An anyone tell me why the French want to draw us into another war to protect it’s imperial interests? Last time that happened we lost 55,000 kids….So what if they actually are radical? Does that mean France and other allies need to throw money and lives at this at this time. I think the big risk is in France domestically with a huge population of muslims…even if only a miniscule % of those are
a threat…still this pacifist thinks this will be another ridiculous loss of life and we should have no role whatsoever. Of course the DoD will be itching to put our overpriced resources to use….perhaps we drone more innocent victims…
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:11 am
“I would have sat out the election”…… so his amount of SOCIALISM was just fine with you so you voted OBAMA – which is your right. Now we are half way there. NEXT realizing and admitting you are not part of the solution to the Fed Debt problem? Stop the denial.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:16 am
If you believe that Obama and the Dems are a “right wing” party then you are some where LEFT of SOCIALIST. Just thought you should know.
TaxPayer
January 15th, 2013
11:19 am
I’d love to see the typical Republican on the phone to one of their many debt collectors (from all the charges they ran up on their credit cards, no doubt) trying to explain how they plan to pay off their balance due (plus interest and late fees) by cutting their payment.
Republicans don’t do math. Or science.
Williebkind
January 15th, 2013
11:20 am
How many years will it take Obama to get the economy going–12 years mabe? We need to change the terms a president can run. I know Obama can do it because he said he could. He just needs another term after this one.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
11:20 am
Morality?: so his amount of SOCIALISM was just fine with you so you voted OBAMA – which is your right. Now we are half way there.
It’s all in your head, man.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:22 am
Eisenhower? Maybe you missed my point – maybe you ignored it. I was not talking about the system of taxation . I was talking about your THREAT to help the rich decide HOW they should spend the money they or their family EARNED. That is definitely a SOCIALIST, redistribution of the wealth, philosophy. So now you are advocating that the gub’ment tell us HOW we are to spend our money under threat confiscation?
Williebkind
January 15th, 2013
11:23 am
TaxPayer
January 15th, 2013
You premise is what makes your statement entirely wrong. Conservatives tend not to spend more than they have–that is a liberal habit.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:25 am
S. Ray — “Agreed but what is the latest on the employment numbers to govern healthcare? Probably nobody knows but it’s clearly on the horizon.”
I don’t know, but I’d say look at Hawaii. For over 25 years, they’ve had mandated health coverage for anyone who has a job, and it’s working okay for them.
“What is the concensus on transaction tax?”
IMO, too difficult to enforce and police. Simpler to just raise rates if you’re after tax revenue from financial transactions.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:25 am
One more day without going over the FISCAL CLIFF….. be thankful for small things.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
11:26 am
Morality?: HOW they should spend the money they or their family EARNED.
Guess what? Money is fake. U.S. Currency is nothing more than a societal illusion.
The only reason it even exists is because the U.S. government also exists.
So keep going on about how you “earned” all that thin air.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 15th, 2013
11:27 am
Morality? “If you believe that Obama and the Dems are a “right wing” party then you are some where LEFT of SOCIALIST”
The Democrats are a right-wing party. They are pro-finance, pro-capitalist, militarist (no party that used to be known as the party of war could really be anything else), and pro-austerity (just with some minor strategic differences with their Republican counterparts.
The fact that that claim baffles you says nothing about the truth of the claim – which is indisputable – and much more about the wild swing to the right of our ENTIRE political discourse in the past 30 yrs, but particularly since the end of the Cold War, fall of communism, etc.
Dharma Bum
January 15th, 2013
11:29 am
America is paralyzed politically because both sides now reduce people to lowest common denominators: wealth, race, “-isms,” etc. If people would quiet down and grow up a little, they might be surprised at how much they may agree with someone “from the other side.”
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:29 am
“Morality” — “Eisenhower? Maybe you missed my point – maybe you ignored it.”
The only point you’ve got is the one atop your head.
“I was not talking about the system of taxation . I was talking about your THREAT to help the rich decide HOW they should spend the money they or their family EARNED.”
Better to look at it as an OPPORTUNITY to put Americans back to work and to be REWARDED for doing so. Only America-hating goons like yourself would see it as a threat.
“That is definitely a SOCIALIST, redistribution of the wealth, philosophy.”
That is goon thinking, and it doesn’t surprise me, coming from you.
“So now you are advocating that the gub’ment tell us HOW we are to spend our money under threat confiscation?”
No. You have a choice. It’s really quite simple.
Most adults know how to make choices and to accept the consequences arising therefrom. Perhaps you missed that day in kindergarten.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:30 am
So it has come to this point. The Fed gub’ment will TELL you HOW to spend your money (if you have any) and if you don’t spend it THEIR way they will just STEAL it from you through taxation. SOCIALISM traced with, dare I say it, COMMUNISM?
Welcome to the Occupation
January 15th, 2013
11:31 am
Or, put differently, the structural role of the Democrats in today’s politics is virtually identical to that of the so-called “moderate” or Rockefeller wing of the Republican party a few decades ago. That’s just another way of saying that the Democratic party is essentially, when all is said and done, a party of the RIGHT.
Adam
January 15th, 2013
11:31 am
Taxation is NOT theft. That is a libertarian illusion and is full of sh*t.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:34 am
This just in — Senator Schumer will now support the nomination of Chuck Hagel for SecDef.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:36 am
“Morality” — “So it has come to this point. The Fed gub’ment will TELL you HOW to spend your money (if you have any) and if you don’t spend it THEIR way they will just STEAL it from you through taxation. SOCIALISM traced with, dare I say it, COMMUNISM?”
See, it’s ignorant crap like this that makes people not want to talk to you.
St Simons - aboriginal Bootakook 2014
January 15th, 2013
11:39 am
our debt problem started with Ronald Reagan & trickle-on economics
and will not end until we ditch this horrendously failed ideology.
Dharma Bum
January 15th, 2013
11:41 am
Morality, isn’t that a little hyperbolic? What hard evidence do you have that the government is going to tell me how to spend my money? I just went and bought sushi for lunch… no helicopters flying overhead observing me, black SUVs tailing my every move, or government agents telling me whether I could or could not buy that delicious roll.
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
11:43 am
Williebkind
January 15th, 2013
11:20 am
That’s funny. I guess he will be more effective with $20 trillion total debt, limited, if any net pick up from current tax plan which is alledgedly going to more than offset with cuts (mostly not cuts but promises to limit increased spending)….the spending will increase per current pace…total spending, net of new tax revenue will continue to grow in ugly fashion..
He can’t deal with the hand he has been dealt except to increase spending just like those before him.
I say give him 25 trillion total debt atmosphere…see how that works out for us..
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:45 am
D. Bum — ” I just went and bought sushi for lunch… no helicopters flying overhead observing me, black SUVs tailing my every move, or government agents telling me whether I could or could not buy that delicious roll.”
What kind of roll was it?
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:47 am
WOW….. and all along I thought you were an ordinary, run of the mill socialist – but you are far beyond that. JAY when someone tells me I hate America and I am a goon then I have the right to reply in kind. I LOVE the USA…. I am LOYAL to the FISCAL welfare and future of the USA. I am not LOYAL to OBAMA or ANY PARTY over my LOYALTY to the USA. .. as you appear to be. Voting for Obama or anyone that continues to promote the demise of our fiscal future is the definition of a PARTY LOYALIST. I do not hate America – I strongly dislike the politicians in the Fed Gub’ment that continue to be PARTY LOYALISTS over being USA LOYALISTS – both Dems and Repubs. I am for the FISCAL survival and welfare of the USA. You sir are a SOCIALIST or worse.
Dharma Bum
January 15th, 2013
11:48 am
Rainbow roll… I like having the fish variety!
St Simons - aboriginal Bootakook 2014
January 15th, 2013
11:50 am
Social Securiteh does not increase our debt or deficit.
Any con who insists on cutting SS because of debt is lying to you.
Stevie Ray
January 15th, 2013
11:51 am
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:25 am
I thought that about the transaction tax but upon further research, the tax will actually be easy to collect and the impact will affect the high risk deals…given all the tax havens et al that will remain in code ad infinitum and the pure incentives that that are reversed by raising cap gains and dividend taxes, a fraction of a percent of transaction tax creates favorable incentives…just my opinion…I could be wrong..
Could raise hundreds of billions per year..too bad no true pros and cons debate will take place since WH and those in Congress in bed with Goldman, Citi (see Lew) and the like…be nice if our interests were no subordinated to such a low level.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:53 am
Bum – you missed our earlier conversation. Someone on here came right out and said that either the “rich” should spend THEIR money where the gub’ment wants it spent or the gub’ment can punish them through taxation and confiscate their families hard earned money from them and “redistribute’ it to WHO the gub’ment wants it to go to. I was merely pointing out that this from of “redistribution” is a basic philosophy of Obama’s and a basic philosophy of Socialism.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
11:57 am
“Morality” — “WOW….. and all along I thought you were an ordinary, run of the mill socialist – but you are far beyond that. JAY when someone tells me I hate America and I am a goon then I have the right to reply in kind.”
Wrong. YOU started the name-calling. Just like you always do.
When YOU call ME names, I have the right to reply to YOU in kind. That’s why you got called a “goon.”
“I LOVE the USA…. I am LOYAL to the FISCAL welfare and future of the USA. I am not LOYAL to OBAMA or ANY PARTY over my LOYALTY to the USA. .. as you appear to be.”
Given your past history here, your perceptions are clearly not to be trusted, goon.
“Voting for Obama or anyone that continues to promote the demise of our fiscal future is the definition of a PARTY LOYALIST.”
You’re not in a position to make such pronouncements and have them taken seriously.
“I do not hate America”
If it takes the threat of higher taxes to get you to act in a pro-American manner — and if you STILL complain — then you most certainly do hate America, your protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
“I strongly dislike the politicians in the Fed Gub’ment that continue to be PARTY LOYALISTS over being USA LOYALISTS – both Dems and Repubs. I am for the FISCAL survival and welfare of the USA.”
You’re for selfishly refusing to act in America’s best interest in her hour of need. You’ve already demonstrated and admitted to that right here on this thread.
“You sir are a SOCIALIST or worse.”
Better than being an America-hating goon like yourself.
Dharma Bum
January 15th, 2013
11:57 am
Gives me a little hope:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/us/politics/no-labels-sponsors-meeting-aimed-at-fixing-congress.html?ref=us&_r=0
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
11:59 am
Not all “rich” people stole money from “victims to get “rich”. Some actually worked hard for it. That is the ” American Dream” – you know – the dream you want to destroy.
Dharma Bum
January 15th, 2013
12:00 pm
Morality, a random poster spouting off nonsense on a blog shouldn’t be a cause for concern and is not indicative of an imminent communist takeover.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
12:00 pm
“Morality — “Bum – you missed our earlier conversation. Someone on here came right out and said that either the “rich” should spend THEIR money where the gub’ment wants it spent or the gub’ment can punish them through taxation and confiscate their families hard earned money from them and “redistribute’ it to WHO the gub’ment wants it to go to.”
Lies make baby jebus cry.
I also hate it when you lie.
“I was merely pointing out that this from of “redistribution” is a basic philosophy of Obama’s and a basic philosophy of Socialism.”
But you’re an America-hating goon, so nothing you say can be trusted. After all, you lied about what was said here earlier. Who knows what other lies and untruths you’re likely to spread?
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
12:01 pm
“Dishonesty” — “Not all “rich” people stole money from “victims to get “rich”. Some actually worked hard for it.”
Nobody here said otherwise.
“That is the ” American Dream” – you know – the dream you want to destroy.”
Baby jebus is bawling his little eyes right now over your lies.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
12:02 pm
D. Bum — “Morality, a random poster spouting off nonsense on a blog”
Frankly, I think you could stand to read what I *actually* wrote. You know, instead of taking “Dishonesty’s” word for it.
Mr Right
January 15th, 2013
12:03 pm
Four years into his presidency, the problem is not of his making; Obama spoke about “spending that Congress has already committed to” and “debate with this Congress about whether or not they should pay the bills they’ve already racked up” as if he had nothing to do with the rate of federal spending since January 20, 2009.
The name calling above never does anyone any good!
Adam
January 15th, 2013
12:07 pm
Capitalizing SOCIALIST is SCARY.
Oooooooooooooooo
Dharma Bum
January 15th, 2013
12:08 pm
Joe Hussein, no offense was meant to you, and I did read what you wrote… I’m just not quite sure how he extrapolated what amounted to complete nonsense from your post that didn’t really say any of those things… perhaps he has a gold medal in mental gymnastics?
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
12:08 pm
WRONG – I never stooped to your level of name calling. Heh – IF you are a Socialist how is that name calling? I may HATE (I prefer strongly dislike) the philosophy of the current occupants of the White House and their Party – and I am talking about philosophy here – you know the “redistribute the wealth “SOCIALIST philosophy you advocate? I say you hate this country because this philosophy that you voted for is destroying the FISCAL future of the USA.
Edward
January 15th, 2013
12:10 pm
The GOP wants the government to fail, they want a coup so that finally and for all time their masters, the Koch’s and such, will have total and complete control. We will descend into a third-world status with only the very rich being served by the very poor. Goodbye Middle Class, you don’t do the rich any good, you must die.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
12:11 pm
The left has redefined the word “HATE” to mean that if you don’t AGREE with them then you hate. I don’t hate you – I just disagree with you. You are WRONG!
Adam
January 15th, 2013
12:18 pm
Again, Morality, it’s all in your head.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
12:18 pm
Bum- maybe he didn’t really mean to say it – though that is the way he thinks – but the fact is that IS what he said. YES – that is what you said and it is here in writing. You said it – you believe it – so be honest and don’t deny your beliefs. Are you now denying that you do not believe the gub’ment should force people to spend their own money on what the gub’ment wants them to spend it on? Deny it – I dare you.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
12:18 pm
D. Bum — “… perhaps he has a gold medal in mental gymnastics?”
His grasp on reality is tenuous as best, don’t you think?
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
12:22 pm
Dishonesty — “WRONG – I never stooped to your level of name calling.”
WRONG. You do it almost daily.
“Heh – IF you are a Socialist how is that name calling?”
You repeatedly assert that I think, believe and want things that I do not. You are dishonest and a goon. You are not to be trusted.
“I may HATE (I prefer strongly dislike) the philosophy of the current occupants of the White House and their Party – and I am talking about philosophy here – you know the “redistribute the wealth “SOCIALIST philosophy you advocate?”
Fail. Once again you are mistaken, yet assert your beliefs are if they are truthful. You are dishonest and are not to be trusted.
“I say you hate this country because this philosophy that you voted for is destroying the FISCAL future of the USA.”
I love this country because I enlisted in the military to protect it, and because I will devote my assets to help her recover.
You hate this country because you are a selfish ***hole and have admitted as much.
If the socialists will freely give of themselves and their wealth to help this country, then sign me up as a socialist. In such a case, I’d much rather join ther socialists than be stuck with a bunch of selfish ***holes like you who don’t want to help this country back on her feet.
You should be ashamed of yourself, goon.
Morality?
January 15th, 2013
12:22 pm
You have a right to disagree – no matter how wrong you are and I won’t call you a hater for it. I expect the same courtesy. So you misplaying the HATE card won’t work on me.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 15th, 2013
12:25 pm
Dishonesty — “Bum- maybe he didn’t really mean to say it – though that is the way he thinks”
Lie.
” – but the fact is that IS what he said.”
Lie.
“YES – that is what you said and it is here in writing.”
Lie.
“You said it – you believe it – so be honest and don’t deny your beliefs.”
Lie.
You are dishonestly misrepresenting what I said and what I believe. I’m being honest. You are not.
“Are you now denying that you do not believe the gub’ment should force people to spend their own money on what the gub’ment wants them to spend it on? Deny it – I dare you.”
I deny that what you claimed I said is in any way representative of what I actually said or believe.
I deny that you have any understanding whatsoever of what I actually said or believe.
I deny that you are in any way trustworthy or that you have any affection whatsoever for this country.