US POLITICS SPRING 2011: Let's just call off this country.

like 1995 all over agin

Sully's last response:

2 pm. Back to the bipartisan 1990s!

we could reduce military spending a lot if we stopped having wars, Mr. President...

wrt Lincoln & the Republican party, my understanding was that Republican was the liberal party and the party of choice for African-Americans until about the 1960s, when JFK started supporting civil rights and MLK...when that happened, not only did many African Americans start voting Democrat, but white conservative Southerners, who were for the most part Democrats, suddenly jumped ship.

so was Jacob Javits, a liberal senator from NY, 1957-81.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Republican

― your generation appalls me (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, April 13, 2011 1:41 PM (39 minutes ago)

^^i'd like to thank him for everything

Even if Obama makes the case for raising taxes on the rich now, Republicans know he folded on getting rid of the Bush cuts last December. How are we going to get any follow-through on this.

Meanwhile former Bush administration official Marc Thiessen (best known for supporting torture) is moaning in the Post that the budget deal involved too much trick cuts and cuts of one-off programs and he proposes the following in the Washington Post:

It turns out the actual cuts to discretionary spending may only amount to $14.7 billion.

Bottom line: Conservatives feel swindled, and some House Republicans are even saying they will not support the deal when it comes to a vote tomorrow.

Their anger is understandable. But rather than tank this deal, they should pocket the smaller-than-expected savings and move on to the next fight — the battle over raising the debt limit — where the grounds for victory are more hospitable. They should do so chastened by this experience, and determined to exact even larger concessions.

As I pointed out my column Monday, unlike the fight over the government shutdown, the GOP holds all the cards in the debt limit fight. Obama’s weapon in last week’s standoff was his veto — his willingness to kill the temporary spending bill House Republicans passed and allow the government to close. In the debt-limit fight, this weapon is not available to him. Using the veto would cause the government to default, something the president cannot — and will not — allow. All House Republicans have to do, if negotiations bog down, is start passing a series of small debt-limit increases to keep the government solvent — and attach large spending cuts to each one. Obama will have no choice but to sign them.

every sentence of that last paragraph is wrong

yeah that wasn't my understanding of the situation at all

It seems backwards. But that's the upside-down world Thiessen and others live in.

According to the Washington Post Obama's gonna punt again and have a 16 member panel of congressmen working with Biden on finalizing a plan. I wonder what the odds of Bernie Sanders or others to the left of getting on that are.

As great as Shakey becoming my secretary of defense.

we could reduce military spending a lot if we stopped having wars, Mr. President...

We could, but Jimmy Carter massively increased DOD spending with no wars going on.

“We cannot afford $1 trillion worth of tax cuts for every millionaire and billionaire in our society. And I refuse to renew them again.”
— President Obama NY Times

However if the 16 member panel I am calling for proposes slightly less than $1 trillion worth, I will sign that

yup, let's see how big Barry talks when his campaign people start noticing a dropoff in campaign funds from his core constituency of "liberal" hedge funders and BigLaw partners.

They know they'll be ok. He's offering his usual 'bipartisan' approach that calls for more spending cuts than tax increases

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/obama-deficit-plan-a-mixed-bag-for-democrats-and-a-sharp-contrast-with-gop.php?ref=fpa

And Republicans will fight to make the Bush tax cuts permanent

the GOP holds all the cards in the debt limit fight

Letting the US gov't go into effect, ending your US political career and causing your fortune to be worthless. Sure they are going to do that. Riiiiiight.

Letting the US gov't go into effect default

how 'permanent' is permanent in this case? I mean, you can always raise taxes later when you're no longer surrounding by crazy ppl

(making the gigantic leap that 'no longer surrounding by crazy ppl' is any kind of accurate predicition of the immediate, or distant, future of the U.S. political sphere)

we've been waiting for the crazy people to leave since 1980, morbz.

name's not morbz

also Adam it sounds like the way Bush-advisor-guy puts it, it will be Obama's veto that causes the debt ceiling, not the House's bill...dude proposes doing it in a way that could shift the blame onto Obama's shoulders

anyway, i've said it before i'm saying it now and i will say it again ... i worry more about the Blue Dogs, the gabbnebs and the apparatchiks w/n the party and the Beltway insiders/media outside always urging "moderation" than i worry about the crazy people/mad dogs (who don't know any better).

(sorry Drugs)

no prob, apologize to Dr. Morbius :D

Here's another meme that never seems to be challenged by anyone, ever:

"If we're going to resolve our differences and do something meaningful, raising taxes will not be part of that," House Speaker John Boehner declared shortly after his White House meeting.

The Bush tax cuts had sunset provisions that made them expire at the end of 2010. They were not, are not, fucking permanent until the end of time. I don't expect the profit sharing and bonuses my company handed out ten years ago to still be coming to me when the company's doing poorly. Billionaires somehow expect Christmas every day.

Bushco kinda deliberately booby-trapped the tax code 10 years ago, though. so even though they aren't technically permanent (no tax cut/hike really is since Congress can always raise/cut taxes as it sees fit), it's still gonna be a bitch to let the Bushco tax cuts expire (esp. during an election year).

x-post I was just joking about Lincoln. Yeah, a Republican, but totally different time. He's the rare example of a president that both Democrats and Republicans praise, Democrats (for what he did) and Republicans (for, um, because he was a Republican, and because they're too chickenshit to say anything bad about one of the few presidents most Americans can probably name). Did everyone else know that Lincoln is our only president who was also a patent holder?

I love that Obama said this in his speech today (but...)

The fact is, their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America. As Ronald Reagan’s own budget director said, there’s nothing “serious” or “courageous” about this plan. There’s nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. There’s nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don’t have any clout on Capitol Hill. And this is not a vision of the America I know.

When it comes time for Congress to negotiate the details, and Obama is calling for a May meeting of 16 congresspeople, this well-said statement will be weakened or destroyed.

Just catching up here:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/13/obama.deficits/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1

here's one for the "unusual details" file:

Under the terms of the deal, roughly $20 billion would be taken from discretionary programs while nearly $18 billion would come from what are known as "changes in mandatory programs," or CHIMPS, which involve programs funded for multiyear blocks that don't require annual spending approval by Congress.

gotta love those government acronyms

Please read David Leonhardt's column today in the NYT regarding the considerable income the federal government would make when those Bush tax cuts expire in 2012.

Frum:

ut we must never deceive ourselves: We are arguing for policies with a lot of political negatives attached to them. Which means we have to take some basic political precautions.

In the current Republican mood, however, precautions are for girlie-men. Republicans have succumbed to a strange mood of simultaneous euphoria and paranoia. Republicans have convinced themselves both that: (1) American freedom stands in imminent danger of disappearing into totalitarian night; and (2) that the vast majority of the great and good American people are yearning for a mighty rollback of big government, even at considerable personal sacrifice.

And so Republicans have united around Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) proposal that for the first time in modern conservative history explicitly joins a big tax cut for the rich to big cuts in health care spending for virtually everybody else. If this were a tennis game, the Republicans would be placing the ball in exactly the spot on the court where it must never, ever go.

yup read that this morning

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/13/business/economy/13leonhardt.html?_r=1&ref=davidleonhardt

xp

We believe that low rates for high earners accelerate economic growth.

stopped reading

like you might as well tell me you believe the sun revolves around the earth

"Frum" is Greek for "trickle down"

i know a lot about tennis and i'm having trouble getting that reference xxp

he's saying that rallying behind Ryan's budget is the equivalent of lobbing directly to Nadal's backhand on clay

yeah that still makes no sense, needlessly vague lol

why not just say you're throwing pujols a fastball over the plate on a 3-1 count i guess

apparently the political commentariat can only express itself in arcane or worn sports metaphors.

maybe he was so disdainful of having to lower himself to a sports metaphor that he intentionally picked one that most ppl wouldn't care about?

xp lol

Here's a stat I don't think gets enough attention, from the comments in the Times article:

In our supposedly progressive tax system, the highest bracket is set at $370,000 taxable income. The ultra-rich have incomes as high as 2000 times this figure, but they are still at this same bracket.

re: gumming up the works, here's how you do it old school:

http://www.paywithpennies.com/

Greetings. This site is about my culture jamming involving large payments in pennies to organizations that are difficult to deal with. Banks, government agencies, and the occasional retailer have all fallen prey to "penny payments." In today's society, it is all too common to hassle the consumer or the taxpayer. More and more we are asked to "hold," "wait in line," "fill out complex or time consuming forms," or give up confidential information.

"the occasional retailer"

haha

are you joking?

wrng thread. twice! ignore.

watched Obama's deficit bit. pretty dece, if light on specifics. favorite part was when he basically pointed out that he would be one of the elite millionaires who will be getting tax cuts at the expense of meemaw's low medicare premiums. did lol.

wow this guy is fucking awesome: http://www.tbd.com/articles/2011/04/mayor-vincent-gray-protest-budget--58362.html

A day after D.C. mayor Vincent Gray, several councilmembers and several dozen protesters were arrested for staging a protest in front of the Senate, Gray said the arrest was just the beginning of a budget battle between federal lawmakers and the city.

During an appearance on CNN Tuesday, Gray said the city became a "political pawn" between Republicans, Democrats and the White House as they negotiated to avoid a federal government shutdown, the AP reports. He also said that "there's no other jurisdiction in America that would be told they cannot spend their own local tax dollars."

When asked if he would protest again, Gray said, "we will do whatever it takes to get issue in front of people."

Gray also said he was proud that he was arrested along with the other councilmembers.

"I was proud to stand up for my city,” he said. “I was proud to be there with council members, with 41 (protesters) who were detained during the protest.”

good editorial from the NYT this morning too - http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/13/opinion/13wed1.html?ref=global

re: budget

anyway, i've said it before i'm saying it now and i will say it again ... i worry more about the Blue Dogs, the gabbnebs and the apparatchiks w/n the party and the Beltway insiders/media outside always urging "moderation" than i worry about the crazy people/mad dogs (who don't know any better).
― It's Britney, bitch! (Eisbaer), Wednesday, 13 April 2011

funny to see gabbneb become a name for this!