Throwing this up here so we don’t have to thread jack posts about Rick Perry or Tim Pawlenty in order to discuss this incredibly important issue…
As Jim Geraghty notes in his excellent daily Morning Jolt (if you aren’t signed up to receive it, go do it now) today, the debt ceiling debate is causing a remarkable Republican Civil War — even a Conservative Civil War. He likens it, amusingly and appropriately, to a comic book civil war:
No, this is messy, with lots of longtime allies and friends surprised to find themselves in opposition. This is the conservative version of the Marvel Civil War, a comic-book storyline in which all of the publisher’s most prominent heroes took sides on the institution of a “Super Hero Registration Act,” in which any person in the United States with superhuman abilities had to register with the federal government as a “human weapon of mass destruction,” reveal his true identity to the authorities, and undergo proper training. Those who signed also had the option of working for a government agency, earning a salary and benefits such as those earned by other American civil servants.
Iron Man and Mr. Fantastic of the Fantastic Four supported the act. Captain America and Daredevil opposed it. And the storyline tossed away the familiar story of heroes’ fighting villains to the surprising, unpredictable, and incongruous sight of popular, noble heroes’ fighting other popular, noble heroes — each convinced that his view is the right one and the best way to protect his values.
Geraghty points out that this issue has pitted Rush Limbaugh vs. Thomas Sowell; Sean Hannity vs. Ann Coulter; and Pat Caddell vs. Hugh Hewitt. Count this blogger as surprised that I would ever see the day that Ann Coulter is trying to talk sense into Sean Hannity. I would also add to the list of brothers against brothers the Grover Norquist vs. Club For Growth showdown. This issue is dividing us like nothing I’ve seen in my lifetime, especially not in my 13 years of following politics.
My general thoughts (and they are mine – in no way representative of this site or any other front page posters, who are welcome to post their own thoughts) are this: the Tea Party – and candidates like Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann – are on the verge of costing us every opportunity to win in 2012. After already defeating our chances at taking over the Senate in 2010 with self-inflicted wounds like Angle, O’Donnell, Miller, and Buck, the Tea Partiers seem hellbent on relegating our chances to retake the White House next year to the trash heap as well.
If these negotiations (whatever level they still exist) in the House and Senate fall apart, Obama will point to the Republican Party and say, “They did nothing. All I wanted was a balanced approach. A compromise. And all they wanted was to lift up their unrealistic extremist principles. And the horrible economy that resulted is their fault.”
The American people will buy it hook, line, and sinker, and Obama will be re-elected overwhelmingly in 2012. We will squander the number one line of attack we have against Obama going into 2012: the economy.
All because of… what, exactly? What is so horrid about the Boehner plan, which was crafted in the face of intense Democratic opposition in the Senate and the White House? It gives conservatives $1.2 trillion in spending cuts. That is huge. It also gives conservatives a vote on a balances budget amendment. Also huge. In return, it raises the debt ceiling by $1 trillion. Of particular note is what is not included in the bill: tax increases. Gone. Something that was unthinkable a few weeks ago.
And so this plan appears to me to be a fantastic compromise. But there are those, sadly, for whom “compromise” is a dirty word.
Refusing to back the Boehner plan because it doesn’t include a balanced budget amendment in the actual bill (like Tim Pawlenty) – is a ridiculous reason to hold the process hostage. You’ll get your BBA vote; the legislation requires it. Personally, I think holding a vote at a later date would be more beneficial anyhow, because it gives the American people time to work their Congressmen and women and express our desire for a BBA.
On the other hand, refusing to back the Boehner plan because it raises the debt ceiling at all (like Michele Bachmann) is pure, childish foolishness. The debt ceiling is going to be raised because the debt ceiling has to be raised. The adults in the room entered this debate understanding that, and determined to get what we could in return for raising the ceiling. The Boehner plan would most likely pass and be signed by Obama — yes, I realize that Obama said he would veto it, but let’s be honest: it’s the only serious plan being considered that could pass before August 2. Obama will be pressured into signing it, all the while declaring that he didn’t really like it but it was all Congress could give him. And when America hears about the Boehner plan being passed by Reid and signed by Obama, guess what they will hear? A Republican came up with a plan to end the stalemate. The Republicans saved the day with their plan, when the President never had one.
The fact that non-candidates like Sarah Palin threaten the new members of Congress over this, and that candidates such as Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann give them cover to oppose the Boehner plan, is simply despicable to me.
Reports are that many Republican Congressmen weren’t actually opposed to the bill last night, but that they simply requested a night to sleep on it and mull it over. I’m hoping against hope that they wake up this morning and realize there are two paths before them now: one, pass the Boehner plan and become the saviors of the debt talks; two, defeat the Boehner plan and essentially give Obama the White House for four more years. If the Boehner bill goes down in defeat, this Civil War may be one that the GOP does not recover from for a very long time.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:01 am
The Senate Dems rejected CCB. The ball should be in their court now.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:05 am
Jennifer Rubin offers this warning to candidates like Pawlenty, Bachmann, and Ron Paul who oppose the Boehner bill:
“they should consider whether the bulk of Republican primary voters really want their president to sound like a second-rate blogger.”
Amen to that.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:08 am
If Boehner can’t pass his plan in the House this morning, sources say Mitch McConnell will approach Harry Reid about quickly coming up with a compromise plan in the Senate.
I can almost guarantee you that whatever McConnell and Reid come up with is going to be a lot worse than the Boehner plan……
July 29th, 2011 at 9:11 am
There IS a Tea Party/Palin plan: Raise Debt Ceiling with Cut, Cap and Balance.
Case closed.
Thank God for Sarah Palin!
July 29th, 2011 at 9:12 am
I agree with Peggy Noonen. The conservative thing to do now- in the Burkean sense- is to pass Boehner’s bill. It’s progress. Those who insist on “100% my way or we all go to hell” are going to be punished severely by voters.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:12 am
Matt C,
“I can almost guarantee you that whatever McConnell and Reid come up with is going to be a lot worse than the Boehner plan……”
Absolutely. The first McConnell plan sucked.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:14 am
moreover, Matt C., you’ve got it backwards. If Boehner prevails over Hannity/Levin/Limbaugh & Palin, you’re likely to see a 3rd party movement.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:17 am
I also agree the BBA should be a separate vote. If it’s included as part of the package, Democrats can say they voted against it because the cuts themselves weren’t “balanced.”
But the part I don’t get….. I watched a lot of the debate in the House last night, and lots and lots and lots of Democrats accused Republicans of “brinkmanship”. Yet these are the same people who are also voting down the only viable plan in the House. Pelosi and Hoyer could end this standoff if they were truly SOOOOOOO concerned about averting the crisis. But they are playing the game of brinkmanship too.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:23 am
Jack,
“moreover, Matt C., you’ve got it backwards. If Boehner prevails over Hannity/Levin/Limbaugh & Palin, you’re likely to see a 3rd party movement.”
No, you’re not. Those guys have railed against the Bushes, Doles, and McCains of the world ad nauseum for about 429 years. We still don’t have a third party. These guys don’t actually build anything. They are entertainers. They flap they’re jowels and maintain they’re “purity” in their little cacoons that protect them from taking any real responsibility.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:24 am
As for the candidates, I think TPaw is pushing too hard on this thing. I’d take the Boehner plan, and side with Huntsman on that. I don’t think TPaw is being reckless, but he’s holding out for too much.
Bachmann, on the other hand- by refusing to raise the ceiling no matter what happens- is a nihilist.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:27 am
The GOP controls 1 out of three critical players in this drama—the House. The Dems own the WH and the Senate. Thus, there is only so much that we can hope to get out of this showdown. Push it to far and we could lose everything, including 2012. One entity (The House) is not going to prevail ultimately over the combination of the president and the Senate. We need to use what leverage we have to get the best we can get without going over the cliff.
Matt Coulter states:
My general thoughts (and they are mine – in no way representative of this site or any other front page posters, who are welcome to post their own thoughts) are this: the Tea Party – and candidates like Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann – are on the verge of costing us every opportunity to win in 2012. After already defeating our chances at taking over the Senate in 2010 with self-inflicted wounds like Angle, O’Donnell, Miller, and Buck, the Tea Partiers seem hellbent on relegating our chances to retake the White House next year to the trash heap as well.
I concur with you Matt. I would also point the finger at the talk show trio to which you refer (H-L-L). They are using their soap box for their own egomaniac agendas, not for the purpose of advancing any kind of constructive policy reforms.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:27 am
A republican party without the Tea wackos (including Sarah Quitter) would be a better party.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:34 am
Be careful MattC, Romney may read what you wrote and post it on his website. Afterall, people are looking to see and hear what he has to say on this all important national issue.
I agree with what you wrote. It’s can’t be all or nothing. Republicans have to take as much as they can get. And the debt ceiling has to be lifted.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:36 am
Oh, and one other thing: Speaking of Hannity, Levin, and Limbaugh, et.al., I once again ask—where were they when their heros George W. Bush, Tom DeLay, and other cohorts were spending like crazy, expanding government big time, and running up more debt? Seems like we have a serious credibility problem here. They all participated in the Rove directed efforts to suppress any conservative critique of Bush policies. Those guys have no credibility in my book.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:39 am
The Republicans have proposed now 3 plans on how to handle this issue. The first two were squashed by the Democrats in the Senate without debate or discussion, no attempt at compromise. Even tho the second plan, Cut Cap Balance, actually got Democratic votes in the House. So who really is the “party of no compromise” on this issue?
If the GOP was smart, that’s how they’d be actively trying to frame this debate. Sadly, they’re not doing as good a job on that front.
On the actual bill, the Boehner bill isn’t that great, but again it’s better than what we’ll get from the Dems in the Senate or McConnell, who’s worthless in this fight. If I were in the House, not sure how I’d vote on the matter…
July 29th, 2011 at 9:39 am
There is no way Reid and Obama will allow the Republicans to come away from all of tbis looking like saviours. No way. Even if this bill leaps all of the hurdles in front of it and is signed into law, at that point the Democrats will just start blaming the continuing bad economy on the fact they couldn’t get a better compromise out of the obstructionist Republicans — in particular, the Tea Party “extremists.”
If the Boehner plan were a game changer that would lead to a revived economy, the Democrats would have a hard time continuing to demonize the GOP. But it’s not. It’s as unserious as any of the solutions currently being proffered and will do very little to change the direction we’re headed in.
Look, the Republicans are in a tough spot here. I don’t know what the solution is exactly, and I’m even open to the idea that the Boehner plan is their best bet. I just don’t buy that it will prove to be any sort of political winner for the party.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:45 am
Also, for the record – I blame Ken Buck’s loss in CO far more on the GOP’s ineptitude in the Gubernatorial race than on him. Without the ability to campaign together in that state & the support of the RGA backing up the state party, it crippled Buck’s campaign. With a reasonable GOP candidate…even if that was Tom Tancredo instead, Buck probably would have won as the party was united in both races & more cohesive in CO. That’s my 2 cents.
Also, RE: Miller – the GOP retained the seat anyway, so his victory in the primary really doesn’t mean much at this point. You can keep complaining about O’Donnell & Angle all you like…
July 29th, 2011 at 9:46 am
Let’s Recap (Correct me if I’m wrong, folks)
The Boehner Plan
For
Romney
Bolton
Against
Bachmann
Pawlenty
Paul
Others?
July 29th, 2011 at 9:48 am
12 And a smarter party!
July 29th, 2011 at 9:49 am
O’Donnell and Angle = Scapegoats for posters who can’t stand the Tea Party
July 29th, 2011 at 9:52 am
#18 – Huntsman is for. Santorum is against. Romney “applauds” Boehner, but would not specifically endorse the plan.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:53 am
18
Romney has not said he supports the Boehner Bill. Huntsman said he has.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:54 am
A much as I have become incredibly tired and frustrated with EVERYONE in the process, INCLUDING the GOP….I’m not sure I can honestly blame or criticize the Tea Party when their main plan – to lower spending – is the one thing that has been completely neglected by Washington, and it certainly isn’t in the current administration’s instinct (as it might actually have been with the previous admiinistration) to cut spending, absent other circumstances.
Obama has given two demands throughout this entire process – the first was that we impose $1T in new taxes on people who already pay 40% of the tax burden, despite having only 20% of the wealth (to say nothing that the liberals first instinct when the time comes to start paying off the debt will be to raise taxes AGAIN on the same people). But the second demand is even more disturbing: kick the can far enough down the road to the point that it won’t have an adverse impact on President Obama’s chances to win re-election.
The main tenant of the Reid plan…in fact, the main difference between that and the Speaker’s plan, is that we push forward any future opportunity to have a serious debate on spending, any future debate on reducing the debt, until after we have no real way to hold Obama accountable for what he says or does, or until Republicans are the ones holding the bag by sitting in the White House.
I don’t necessairily think Republicans have gone about this the best way – but I’m also not sure they’ve had many other options
July 29th, 2011 at 9:54 am
I don’t normally agree with Chris L. but his #14 was brilliant. And true. When will we get consistent and stop playing radio talk show politics?
Rove isn’t helping matters at all either.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:54 am
Boehner’s plan will add $7 trillion in debt in 10 years and increase spending every single year. How is that even a plan the Republicans are considering? There is no way our economy will survive with over $20 trillion in debt 10 years from now.
If spending is frozen at this year’s level for the next 10 years, Washington considers that a $9 trillion “cut”. Don’t be fooled by Washington terminology. There will be no cut in spending for the next 10 years.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:55 am
Why do we have elections if we are going to buckle under.
I disagree completely with this blog.
They passed CCB. They should stop, and say, we passed our bill, that’s it. Take it or leave it.
Default (which is actually not Default) is better than blindly raising the debt ceiling. Did the Dems think about this when they passed Obama Care. No. Voting Yes on the current plan is a vote to fund ObamaCare.
People are saying, well, we will hurt 2012. Sorry, its time to make a stand for this nation. What would happen if our founding fathers put of the American revolution.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:55 am
I keep hearing the hardcore right say that the Boehner plan won’t fix the crisis we have and so we should reject it for even more cuts. The problem is, this is all we can get the Democrats to compromise on.
The dirty little secret here is this – The United States of America is headed for a catastrophe of Biblical proportions no matter what we do at this point. The damage has already been done during the last 70 years – the only way we get out of it is to hit bottom (which we are not even close to yet), declare bankruptcy on our debt, and start over.
So we quibble and argue over peanuts for nothing. I say, let’s accept the Boehner plan, get Obama out of the White House and pray for a miracle that we can get the Senate in 2012 and pass some serious legislation.
Now is not the time to go full bore on these cuts – the Cancer in Washington needs to be rooted out first before we can begin fixing the real problem…if there’s any way to fix it at all.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:56 am
You guys, we’re toast.
If the economy dives because of default or cuts to the FBI, CIA, Border Patrol, food inspectors, and other vital functions, Obama WILL NOT OWN THE ECONOMY any longer.
Then, we can kiss the 2012 election goodbye.
We need to pass SOMETHING. Plain and simple.
Otherwise, the Tea Party is dead. Gone the way of the Whigs.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:56 am
MC,
Thanks, I’ll change it.
Should I put Mitt down as an “On The Fence” or a “No” then?
July 29th, 2011 at 9:57 am
#17 — Jane Norton would have been our next Senator from CO had she won the GOP primary. The Tea Party activists defeated her just like Mike Castle, and chose purity over electability. Just like O’Donnell, along with purity we got a gawd-awful candidate as part of the deal.
I live in WY, and my brother and his wife live in CO. I got to watch all the ads. They got to experience the race firsthand. It was not a pretty sight.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:57 am
“The dirty little secret here is this – The United States of America is headed for a catastrophe of Biblical proportions no matter what we do at this point. The damage has already been done during the last 70 years – the only way we get out of it is to hit bottom (which we are not even close to yet), declare bankruptcy on our debt, and start over.”
Debt interest consumes a grand total of 9% of the budget.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:59 am
#29 – Mitt lives on the fence. In a moment that calls out for someone with business and financial acumen, the self-professed expert is MIA.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:00 am
One thing nobody seems to be talking about:
Did you know that the Boehner plan, if passed is NOT the end-all-be-all?
The Boehner plan cuts spending.
No one is saying we cannot pass tons more cuts the next time we have to raise the debt ceiling.
Why don’t we pass the equivalent of 5 Boehner Bills in the next couple of years?
July 29th, 2011 at 10:00 am
12:
A Republican party without the Tea Party wackos would have folded weeks ago and given us tax increases (with everyone calling it “revenues” to cover themselves) and a worthless promise to lower spending.
Right now, we’re at least looking at decent progress.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:00 am
I’m a fiscal conservative and support the TP principles, but we are going to maybe win the battle here and lose the war (2012 Presidential election).
July 29th, 2011 at 10:01 am
This debate is revealing the character of the two factions of the republican party.
You have the squishy, spineless RINO’s who’s only concern is making some type of compromise with the democrats.
and
You have the constitutionally conservative Tea Party who’s only concern is the future of this country.
We are done with the go-along-to-get-along weepy wimps in the GOP. Call us names, denigrate us in any fashion you want.
It’s your funeral in the end.
You elitist brainiacs have helped put us in this economic catastrophe.
Cut, Cap and Balance was a great ‘compromise.’ There is another plan, called the ‘Penny Plan’ that has a lot of merit. Boehners ‘plan’ actually cuts nothing. It’s all smoke and mirrors, as usual, just like the alleged 30 Billion in budget cuts that turned out to be about $300 million.
The Republicans should have walked away after the Dems rejected Cut, Cap and Balance.
We are cursed with pathetically weak leadership in the GOP.
Palin will change that.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:05 am
Tele
You are so stupid.
“You have the squishy, spineless RINO’s who’s only concern is making some type of compromise with the democrats. and You have the constitutionally conservative Tea Party who’s only concern is the future of this country.”
— If you are truly concerned about the future of the country, you GET OBAMA OUT OF OFFICE and THEN, get EVERYTHING you want.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:06 am
Actually, the debt deal will eventually get worked out, probably without revenues, and probably in a manner that doesn’t let Obama off the hook.
An equally big problem for us should be the manner in which the ratings agencies are holding a gun to the head of our country, essentially moving the goalposts and telling us that, even if we DO sort through the current mess, they could issue a ruling that would serious damage our country.
Its time we started looking at a way to decertify these agencies.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:06 am
Thankc Matt C and Massachusetts C,
The Boehner Plan
For
Bolton
Huntsman
Against
Bachmann
Pawlenty
Paul
Santorum
Palin
On The Fence But “Applauds” It
Romney
July 29th, 2011 at 10:07 am
while i agree with most tea party positions, them not approving a compromise is only strengthening the democrats hands because the senate will put something together that can actually pass and the president would actually approve and the one tea party block in the house is going to stop it only because it is not enough of what they want. republicans will take the blame and nothing will happen.
Bad move politically in the short run certainly and probably in the long run as well. I tend to agree with ma conservative here.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:09 am
Massachusetts Conservative Says:
July 29th, 2011 at 9:56 am
You guys, we’re toast.
If the economy dives because of default or cuts to the FBI, CIA, Border Patrol, food inspectors, and other vital functions, Obama WILL NOT OWN THE ECONOMY any longer.
Then, we can kiss the 2012 election goodbye.
=========================================================================
Complete and utter nonsense.
First, the economy is going to be bad no matter what we do and the Democrats will try to blame Republicans regardless. Heck, they are still blaming Bush.
Second, we do stand up and do what is right. Why try to elected conservatives if they are going to act like liberals.
Third. The only hope this economy has is getting spending in control. Kicking the can down the road will not help.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:09 am
Craig
He doesn’t applaud the plan, he applauds Boehner’s steadfast opposition to tax increases.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:10 am
#35 – Looks like a correct assessment, which I predicted about a week ago. But even I could not foresee the latest debacle. I watch CNBC a lot and rarely have I seen some of their hosts and guests so animated and willing to basically call some members of congress crazy. Business people, most of whom are conservative, can’t believe what they are witnessing.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:10 am
37
Exactly. These dopes attacking Boehner’s plan need to understand that WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET EVERYTHING WE WANT WITH THE DEMOCRATS STILL HOLDING THE SENATE AND WHITE HOUSE!!! On the one hand they act like staunch Constitutionalists, but on the other hand they don’t like the part in the Constitution that says we have three branches of Government and that legislation must be voted and passed through all three.
The time for real change will come in the spring of 2013 when we control everything. We must have patience. If we jump the gun too early, we destroy our chance to get real change.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:10 am
36:
Eh, if we held all the power I might agree with you (I’d caution that arrogant abuse of power is what caused Obama to fall from lofty heights in 2010). But the fact his the Dems do control the veto pen and the Senate.
You don’t have to be a soft-kneed elitist to realize you can’t get everything you want from our government’s current make-up. It’s okay to take half a loaf, or even less if you’re making progress and plan to come back to the table and demand more again later.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:11 am
Thunder,
“Why do we have elections if we are going to buckle under.”
Obama and all those Senator were elected too.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:11 am
“Bad move politically in the short run certainly and probably in the long run as well. I tend to agree with ma conservative here.”
Until the last couple of weeks, the President was holding ANY deal hostage to imposing a trillion in new taxes on the population…in particular, on those who already pay twice their fair share of the tax burden while receiving virtually no benefit from most government programs.
From the very start of this debate, if you ask me, Republicans have sucked at getting their message out.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:12 am
Craig (29) sometimes the silence speak louder than words.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:13 am
37. That’s it. Principles mean nothing , you’re only concern is the next election.
Well, if we get more of the same only slower with squishy RINO’s what’s the point?
We need radical reform. Only one person in the race has shown the ability to bring that. Only one has had the courage to step up.
She is needed now more than ever.
If the pathetically weak GOP leadership cannot frame this issue to show the American people the truth about Obama and what the dems are doing, they deserve to lose. Caving to the democrats is not going to help their election prospects.
The GOP is close to going the way of the Whigs, and if not for the Tea Party it may have in the last election.
Right now the Tea Party is the only reason Boehner is in power.
So keep pissing on us. That’s a great strategy.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:15 am
Matt “MWS” Says:
July 29th, 2011 at 10:11 am
Thunder,
“Why do we have elections if we are going to buckle under.”
Obama and all those Senator were elected too.
========================================================
True, but I didn’t vote for them, I voted for the Republican’s and I expect my congressmen to do what is right and stop spending money like a million drunken sailors.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:16 am
Just in — this is BIGGGGGG – Cong. Pence on Laura Ingraham just said Boehner plan NOW TO INCLUDE BALANACE BUDGET AMENDMENT CONNECT!!!
Congrats to Palin & Co.!!!
This is BIG!
July 29th, 2011 at 10:16 am
Should we be taking bets on when and what Romney will say after the debt crisis debate is over with?
When will he speak?
What will he say?
July 29th, 2011 at 10:18 am
The Boehner Plan
For
Bolton
Huntsman
Against
Bachmann
Pawlenty
Paul
Santorum
Palin
“Does Not Endorse It” Because “Silence Speaks Louder Than Words”
Romney
July 29th, 2011 at 10:18 am
“INCLUDE BALANACE BUDGET AMENDMENT CONNECT!!!”
While I have previously been a big proponent of this, the shape that it took a couple of weeks ago suggested to me – strongly – that our military and foreign policy spending would take the brunt of the impact from a BBA.
Thats left me a lot more skeptical of it than I would have been previously.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:21 am
Jack,
Why are you such a homer? That’s the problem with you who worship politicians. I see a lot more names other than Palin against it.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:21 am
Tele
You don’t seem to get it.
Principles MATTER TO ME… a LOT.
But when we have Obama in office from 2012-2016… what happens?
(1) Obamacare never gets repealed, we will then have another new entitlement program, and ultimately government-run health care
(2) The Bush Tax Cuts expire, causing economic problems.
(3) The Supreme Court goes liberal for the first time in decades.
(4) Spending is never seriously addressed whatsoever
(5) 4 more wasted years as we head toward insolvency
July 29th, 2011 at 10:24 am
I’m cautiously optimistic of Boehner Plan 2.0, but am skeptical of an attempt to throw together a BBA in such a short period of time.
There are literally dozens of varieties of BBA’s out there… which specific one gets the nod for inclusion in this bill? Can the lawyers draft it in time for a vote today? Will that avoid the loopholes that plague some varieties of BBA?
But most of all — will this version pass the Senate? Especially now that Reid has stepped forward with another Reid plan that Obama will be sure to support and give the Democrats the victory here?
I fear the House GOP has overplayed their hand and is about to lose this chess game…
July 29th, 2011 at 10:24 am
I understand the politics of adding a BBA (to get the bill votes to pass), but it paints a picture of a leader and party with tin ears. The American people are tuned into this debate and know what is going on and what is at stake. Last night they heard that Boehner’s bill didn’t have the votes to pass and tonight they will hear that it passed because a BBA was added. The commentator will note that a BBA has no chance of passing and that even John McCain called it “deceiving.”
It boggles my mind that amending the Constitution on the eve of default is even a topic much less an actual proposal.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:24 am
Telly,
I think this comment from some random dude on another site sums things up pretty nicely:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/174303-house-gop-leader-mum-on-friday-vote
July 29th, 2011 at 10:25 am
Palin supporters (and supporters of Bachmann, Pawlenty, et al) — there is a difference between standing on principle in pure ideological terms and living in reality. That’s what you seem to be missing here.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:25 am
“But when we have Obama in office from 2012-2016… what happens?”
You honestly believe Obama gets reelected for holding a deal hostage to 1) huge tax increases and 2) kicking the can down the road.
The only thing Obama has shown himself open to cutting are tax incentives, and our military.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:26 am
The Boehner Plan (Update: With BBA)
For
Bolton
Huntsman
Pawlenty
Palin
Against
Bachmann
Paul
Santorum
Still Thinkin’
Romney
July 29th, 2011 at 10:26 am
In other words, a BBA should be something that we take the time to do correctly, not rush through at the eleventh hour out of desparation….
July 29th, 2011 at 10:27 am
You people really don’t seem to get it.
(1) The debt ceiling does not prevent spending. It prevents borrowing. The spending will continue, regardless of whether the debt ceiling is raised. The two are NOT connected. The debt ceiling prevents us from borrowing to pay our bills. The spending will still happen, it just won’t be payed for.
(2) If the debt ceiling is not raised, there will be severe damage to the economy, and Republicans will be blamed. Obama will escape the 2012 elections, able to blame the economy on Republicans.
(3) If we cut spending now, and raise the debt ceiling, we can still beat Obama in 2012. Once we have a GOP president, we can reform entitlements, cut spending, pass a Balanced Budget Amendment, and repeal Obamacare.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:27 am
Jack Says:
July 29th, 2011 at 10:16 am
Just in — this is BIGGGGGG – Cong. Pence on Laura Ingraham just said Boehner plan NOW TO INCLUDE BALANACE BUDGET AMENDMENT CONNECT!!!
==============================================================
Carefull……………… Its only a promise to have a vote in the future. They can pass the plan and reject the Balance Budget Amendment.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:30 am
Thunder:–
Yes, PROMISE TO HAVE A VOTE. Thus far, Reed tabled the vote.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:30 am
61
You really underestimate the power of the media.
Did you see what happened in 1995?
July 29th, 2011 at 10:31 am
65:
The Balanced Budget Amendment stuff is pretty worthless if you ask me. Basically, all you’re getting for your troubles is a vote on it that still needs 2/3 in both houses. It’s the most worthless chit we’ve got.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:32 am
Oh, and one other thing: Speaking of Hannity, Levin, and Limbaugh, et.al., I once again ask—where were they when their heros George W. Bush, Tom DeLay, and other cohorts were spending like crazy, expanding government big time, and running up more debt? Seems like we have a serious credibility problem here. They all participated in the Rove directed efforts to suppress any conservative critique of Bush policies. Those guys have no credibility in my book.
=======================================
They were criticizing George Bush for his big spending. Limbaugh correctly pointed out that Bush was conservative on some issues but was not a conservative like Reagan. He also criticized the compassionate conservative mantra that Bush was putting out.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:32 am
The BBA is posturing, because it won’t pass, but at least it puts everyone on the record.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:33 am
The Promise to Have Balance Budget Amendment Vote in Senate IS NOW PART OF THE NEW BOEHNER BILL GOING TO THE SENATE!
THAT’s the issue!
July 29th, 2011 at 10:34 am
Matt C,
“In other words, a BBA should be something that we take the time to do correctly, not rush through at the eleventh hour out of desparation….”
Exactly, you don’t want to write a Constitutional Amendment with the same haste that you do an essay when there is 5 minutes to go in the exam.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:34 am
Thus far, Reed tabled any Balance Budget Amendment vote in Senate.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:35 am
I wonder if Nero had the senate vote on fiddling while Rome burned.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:37 am
I think Keith Hennessey got the political analysis right:
http://keithhennessey.com/2011/07/27/why-i-support-the-boehner-bill/
If we go into default, this will be disaster for Republicans. There are clearly a major schism in the party. There have always been divisions, but this one really concerns me.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:39 am
74.
LOL!
July 29th, 2011 at 10:40 am
53
Actually Allen West and Laura Ingraham said yesterday that they support Boehner’s plan. So it’s not all hardcore moderates.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:50 am
Hardcore Moderate = Bill Clinton
July 29th, 2011 at 10:51 am
Hardcore Moderate = Bob Dole, John McCain, Sarah Palin
July 29th, 2011 at 10:53 am
@fearandvoting
Fear and Voting REPORT: Boehner Gives Up, Adds Balanced Budget Amendment To Plan http://bit.ly/pTb2op [ThinkProgress]
July 29th, 2011 at 10:53 am
And of course, Mitt Romney
July 29th, 2011 at 10:53 am
I am firmly living in reality.
Reid has said Boehner’s plan is DOA on arrival.
They want this brinkmanship because they know that no matter what, they can spin it to their benefit due to a complicit media and the relative low I.Q. of the voting public.
The dems have offered NO plan. Boehner is trying to compromise with a puff of smoke…it is ridiculous.
If the House passes the Boehner plan it will still be shot down in the Senate. If you think continually caving and caving will somehow redound positively for us politically I think you are the ones not living in reality.
We passed a great compromise in Cut, Cap and Balance that even had some democrat votes.
Boehner should just walk away and let the dems own this.
If your concern is all political, you guys really suck at the politics of this.
So we are faced with losing the political battle either way, we may as well stick to our principles …maybe someone can show the American people the truth eventually.
We are currently approaching 15 TRILLION in our National Debt. To get an idea of $1 trillion, if our congress saved $1 million a day, it would take 2,740 years to pay off $1 trillion and 41,100 years to pay off $15 trillion ~ and this does not include interest or future debt. Our civilization is only 2000 years old. They are spending us into oblivion that will destroy our country. It has to STOP.
This is not a losing political argument, given someone with a modicum of political acuity. The current weepy wimps in Washington… not so much.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:54 am
The worst part of this is that we are arguing over what amounts to a bunch of non-binding resolutions that will be ignored as soon as the next Congress comes along. None of this stuff is anything more than rhetoric. The only thing that matters right now are the amount of the debt ceiling increase and the amount we are going to cut from the next budget. Everything else is just a bunch of hollow promises that don’t mean anything. That includes Cut, cap and balance.
Congress cannot force future Congresses to cap spending without a constitutional amendment. Any attempt to do so would be unconstitutional. So when the next budget comes along, they will read the Cut, Cap and Balance pan, pretend like it is a nice idea, and then set it aside and do their normal business. This whole debate is a fraud, and unfortunately there are a lot of people that have been sucked in by it.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:55 am
If the Democrats had passed a bill they knew would never get passed by the House, we wouldn’t call it dealing in good faith either. The idea that we can just pin the blame on Democrats because we passed Cut, Cap, and Balance is ludicrous and extremely naive.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:55 am
Criteria for making a “moderate” Republican:
(1) Supporting amnesty
(2) Policing the world
(3) Supporting tax increases as part of a “balanced approach”
(4) Supporting nanny-state laws
Well, doesn’t describe Mitt. So there’s that.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:57 am
Adding the BBA kills the Boehner bill. Let’s not pretend like this is a great success. There is no way the Senate approves the BBA to get the debt ceiling increased.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:59 am
If it is only a promise to vote on the BBA, why would we want that? Why would we want it voted down? That basically kills the issue going forward.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:03 am
87:
Basically to get everyone on record. It means nothing, so if it gets a few extra votes, I suppose the leadership will be willing to throw them a bone. It doesn’t kill the issue though. A balanced budget Amendment has been floating around for decades.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:09 am
“(2) Policing the world”
Maybe a generation ago, but not anymore. Current, temporary, knee-jerk isolationism aside, the idea that America must have an active role in global affairs is a Conservative idea, embraced by most conservatives.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:09 am
Wait, isn’t RomneyCare a “nanny..”?
Isn’t hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of millions in tax fees and increasing “net” taxes on all businesses in your state a “balanced approach”?
I know working hand in hand side by side with Ted Kernnedy is something else. Call it what you want
July 29th, 2011 at 11:14 am
*Ted Kennedy
July 29th, 2011 at 11:16 am
I could see a plan that required $250b in spending cuts in exchange for, say, a $500b increase in the debt limit, a point where we could balance the budget within four years.
…then followed by a complete repeal of the debt ceiling and repalcement with a cap on spending as a % of the GDP, for example, a balance between the peak GDP of the last five years, and the projected GDP of the next year.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:31 am
Let’s being honest here… this bill saves us only 22 billions for next year. Forget 1.2 trillions over 10 years nonsense; Afterall, we cannot bind the future Congress. They will ignore everything they have said at this point next year. And second, we are forgetting how Boehner treated his fellow Representatives with the “compromised” 2011 budget. For all purposes, there was no more a billion of cuts, when Boehner claimed otherwise. yes, there is a trust issue with him among the freshman Republicans. Having said this, I agree that the Boehner is the best we could get presently, and we should pass it to score a political point with Americans. These are the only reasons we should pass it.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:35 am
Hooray!!! At least Boehner 2.0 is dead!!!
July 29th, 2011 at 11:36 am
Craig
No, Romneycare is not a “nanny.”
In fact, Arkansas health care and Texas health care are “nannies.”
Because in Massachusetts, you have to be responsible for your own health care.
In Arkansas and Texas, if you get sick or injured, the nanny state gives you free health care at the emergency room, and the taxpayers have to pay for it.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:39 am
We have to raise the debt ceiling very quickly. Congress, incuding Republicand and Democrats, voted for budget where expenditures outpaced revenue, so we knew the debt level would be rising. We need to pay our bills first, and then we need to figure out our spending problem. We can’t tell our creditors that we can’t pay them while we posture. You pay your debts and then figure out how to reduce them going forward.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Inclusion of the BBA might actually be the thing that we need to get a deal…
Because when it comes time for reconciliation, the House can drop the BBA, in exchange for Reid dropping his absurd plan to push off any future debate until after the elections.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:53 am
#5 Matt – Super huge amen to that.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:57 am
MC,
Is ObamneyCare (to quote my favorite debater of all time, T-Paw) a “nanny state solution”?
July 29th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
99
The word “Obamneycare” is a farce to begin with, so I cannot agree with the premise of your question.
Obamacare is not so much a “nanny-state” solution as it is a big-spending, tax-raising, Medicare-bankrupting monstrosity which is hurting the economy.
Romneycare, is not.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
93 – This bill saves us nothing. It is merely a promise to cut deficits in the future. It is not binding in any way. Let’s be clear about that.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:09 pm
@93 – I should have read the rest of your post before I responded. I think you are exactly right.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:16 pm
Matt K: I think you’re comment in 97 is the most likely outcome. Reid can “force” Boehner to cut the BBA, then the original Boehner plan can go back and pass the house.
The entire “we can’t bind future congresses” thing is a lod of horse crap. The binding of future congresses with past debts is what got us here in the first place. Changing the rules of the game such that you have to cut spending to raise the debt ceiling will become binding, if we can make it into a new norm. But even a spending cap would only work in so far as it’s normative.
Look, you can’t solve the debt problem so long as the Democratic party is rigidly and inflexibly dedicated to defending entitlements without any change whatsoever, with the complicity of the mainstream media and young hipster idiots. If millennials actually grew a set of brains and basically said “Excuse us, boomers, but we’re not paying for your crap, so smarten up, and we’re voting enne mass for candidates who support entitlement reform, get over it,” we might actually solve the problem. But the likelihood of this happening is next to nill. Particularly since Democrats now know they can literally scuttle any Republican proposal just by letting some dea partiers decide to torpedo it because it’s imperfect (and what the heck is “conservative” about that, I ask you)?
July 29th, 2011 at 12:18 pm
I think the way Pawlnnty has handled this might just be the factor that moves him out of first in my personal rankings. Romney is MIA, Huntsman is solid on fiscal stuff but stupid for wanting to pull out of Afghanistan, Perry… if he avoids getting pulled to the right on immigration, I might give him a look. He makes me nervous in a general election though. If Romney had come out in support of the Boehner plan, he’d be a solid number 1 choice for me right now.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:23 pm
103 – It is not a load of horse crap. It is the constitution. You cannot pass a law requiring a future Congress to do something. The only way to cap spending or require a balanced budget is through a constitutional amendment.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
103 – Another misconception. “Millenials” are running away from Obama:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/07/28/under_obama_millennials_move_into_the_gop_column_110740.html
July 29th, 2011 at 12:26 pm
Jazemer11
The version of the BBA being considered includes the spending caps in the language of the Amendment.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:28 pm
107 – Where is the version of the BBA? I have heard of so many versions, but have never seen any actual language.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
108
Here’s the text of the Balanced Budget Amendment
http://www.scribd.com/doc/52020805/GOP-Balanced-Budget-Amendment-Text
July 29th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
While I applaud Mitt’s stand in favor of Cut, Cap, and Balance as soon as we can get it, I would prefer that he make a forthright tactical endorsement of the Boehner plan, even if it costs him a lot of support from those on the other side of the Conservative divide.
Hate to say this, but Huntsman is looking good by comparison in this debate.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:40 pm
110 – This debate will be an afterthought in a few weeks. Romney doesn’t get any significant benefit from taking sides in this debate, especially with the amount of passion there is on the other side.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:52 pm
Bottom line, compare and contrast the courageous leadership of Palin vis a vis BBA and Boehner VS. the “out of sight” Mitt!
Nothing more need be said.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
110:
Romney has nothing to gain by wading into the sausage factory of Congress, and he’s not in any position to make a difference in the outcome.
Basically, people are just making a quick dig at Romney for not doing something stupid and pointless on a piece of legislation that will continue to morph up until it’s finally passed.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
109 – I like that. There are a few things I would change. I think it is too inflexible with the ability to raise taxes. I think the debt ceiling is a gimmick and should just be repealed. It shouldn’t be necessary if there is a cap on spending. In general it is very attractive.
There is no way that version would ever get validly proposed or ratified though. I am in favor of something similar to this, but only if it is a serious debate and not a gimmick like this seems to be. If it isn’t a serious proposal that has the potential of actually getting enacted, I am not going to waste my time with it.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
113 – Exactly right, and they are smart to make their dig. It won’t mean anything in the long run though (unless we actually get to the point where actual default is threatened … at that point he needs to step in and suggest a solution).
July 29th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
” I think the debt ceiling is a gimmick and should just be repealed. ”
Less gimmick, more out of date. IT once had a purpose, today it acts as more of an inhibitor to paying our bills than to swiping the credit card.
But it has a substantial flaw in that 1) it obviously is not working now, and 2) the inflationary nature of even the best economy ensures that, at somepoint, you have to increase the cap.
I’m open to, as part of a problem-resolving deal, a small increase in taxes on the highest incomes (even though I would probably still describe their tax rates as horribly unjust)…but to impose one trillion in taxes to do nothing more than keep the debt where it is, is unacceptable.
The price of raising taxes should be a concrete plan to eliminate the deficit, develop a plan to pay down the debt within 30 years, all without gutting the military or our foreign policy.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
115:
Step in and suggest a solution? As Mitt pointed out a month ago, he’s currently unemployed. If he stepped in and gave a plan of his own, he’d look downright foolish as everyone would look up from what they’re doing, laugh, and go right back to it.
He’s not in Congress and he wouldn’t be the leader of the party until he won the nomination.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:26 pm
Agree completely Thomas. These people egging Romney on to come out and take a side are using it as a trap. No matter which side he takes, he’ll take MUCH more heat than if he just stayed out completely.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:44 pm
It’s becoming more clear today listening to Rush that it’s all about Tea Party ideology . Whatever Boehner proposed would have been defeated…if it called for raising the debt limit……
July 29th, 2011 at 1:45 pm
Isn’t leadership taking a side? Or at the very very least offering up your own well thought out compromise? Talkin’ to you, Obama.
Here’s our candidates chance to show if THEY are capable of that, too. Kinda like a trial run. And America is watching.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
CF. I know it’s hard for some to understand this, but Romney is not an ELECTED MEMBER OF CONGRESS.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
And this “My name is Willard Mitt Romney and I’m a unemployed just like you” is both ridiculous and arrogant. Dems are going to jump all over that.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:49 pm
Default is the best policy going forward and will force the gov’t. to live within its limits. We should be embracing a default in that it will force the gov’t. to reform Medicare and Social Security as private plans freeing up money to enact significant tax cuts.
July 29th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
I can’t believe this entire thread. The democrats are using this “crisis” to divide republicans… apparently with great success. This isn’t, or shouldn’t, be about TP, E-con, So-cons, NeoCons, or anything else.
This should be about the left-wing statists, led by Obama, versus all the rest of us.
As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, this controversy is largely phony because there is no 2012 federal budget.
Don’t fall into the leftist trap.
July 29th, 2011 at 2:11 pm
Re #123: the only way to “force the gov’t. to live within its limits.” is for the voters to do it.
July 29th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
It is. However, at the moment Romney is NOT in a leadership position. If this were July 2012 and he was the presumptive nominee, yeah he’d need to have an opinion on the subject. He’d also be able to call the Boehner and the Congress Critters to him and have some pull into formulating a strategy.
At the moment, Romney’s opinion doesn’t mean much more than mine does. So, does would it help the country if Romney got into the weeds of the legislative process? No. Would it help candidate Romney in the primaries? No. Would it help nominee Romney in the general? No. Is there an actual call for Romney to set out a position of the Boehner bill in it’s ever changing form? No.
Could it all backfire on him if Boehner’s plan falls apart? Yes. Is part the advantage of NOT being in Washington that you can take a pass at specifics? Yes (hence why people are rarely elected president out of Congress).
Smart thing to do. Let Congress do what Congress does. There’s going to be mud on both sides when all this is over, and it’s best to keep our candidate out of it and fresh for the general election.
Oh please. It was just a joke. Democrats can try jumping on that if they feel like looking foolish.
July 29th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
Considering all the umemployed suffering out there without a billion dolars in their bank accounts, was it proper?
Or was it just a good joke by Sir Mittster?
July 29th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
Let’s get this straight.
Romney unlike the other candidates refuses to take a courageous stand one way or the other, and you find that somewhat admirable and cunning for a politician.
And even though Romney has great ideas in this area, he’s NOT going to tell us until the economy ALMOST goes down the tubes next year.
Ok, I gotcha.
July 29th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
*dollars
July 29th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
127:
A joke is a joke. Obviously he wasn’t looking for sympathy. No one cares except the people who want to be offended.
128:
I don’t find stupidity to be particularly courageous. Romney doesn’t have to have an opinion on the exact plan, which again is ever changing, so he gives broad support to Boehner. That’s fine. It’s what’s best for him as a candidate.
Whether Romney has any brilliant ideas, I don’t know. I doubt he’s taken much time to formulate them as, once again, he’s not in a position for it to matter and the situation will be long resolved in one way or another long before he has any say in the matter.
July 29th, 2011 at 2:43 pm
Craig, Romney has repeatedly said he favors Cut, Cap & Balance. I do not believe that he is privy to all of the details of the negotiations in congress. Yes, Romney can be cautious when he doesn’t know all of the details. He is a guy that takes a strong position when the requisite information is available. There are candidates that feel like they have to publicly opine one way or the other to stay relevant, but Mitt isn’t in such a position. I know you are searching for a way to attack Mitt, but he stated that his strategy was to lay low until September in order not to over-expose himself too early. His opinion or position on this is not going to make one bit of difference, so it’s not like he is abandoning his country. To make it out as such would be quite dramatic. He has said as much as he needs to say about it.
Do you think Palin’s comments are helping the cause?
July 29th, 2011 at 2:43 pm
Thomas Alan,
To suggest Mitt’s stand on this issue doesn’t mean much more than yours is fallacious. The split in the House on the issue was close enough for Mitt to conceivable have made a difference. The Boehner plan, while admittedly leaving much to be desired, sets us on the right track toward where we want to go, and there are NO viable options.
Mitt should weigh in on this very critical debate….and I say that as a strong supporter of him.
July 29th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
Dave, do you think Congress is looking to Mitt to weigh in on this?
July 29th, 2011 at 3:31 pm
This debt ceiling thing will not solve the economy. It is idiocy to make such a big deal out of a small thing. Luckily for the far far right, they are not in total power so they can be stopped from destroying Conservatism forever.
This is one small legislative battle, no matter what legislation is passed, this has much more potential to damage the winner than make any real improvement in the economy!
By putting all the eggs in this faulty basket, every down turn, every dollar slide, every thing becomes the fault of the “Tea Party”. Just as every premimum rise is Nancy, Harry and Obama’s fault after Healthcare. You broke it, you pay for it.
This is a small battle in a long war to fix our government and economy, yet the best voices have diminished their power by putting too much into this little tiny fight that will do little good and possibly allow blame for everything to come at their feet.
Also, by acting so unreasonably they have tarnished the image of the Tea Party. And that is a shame. A dirty rotten shame! They have lost so much more than could possibly be gained.
And honestly Dave, this is such a small hill for anyone to die on. Why in the world would Mitt want to start a pissing fight with anyone over this? Because in 6 months to a year, it will start all over again… This is routine legislation that will not matter a year from now, except it has cost many politicians their reputations.
Mitt is the only sane one left.
July 29th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
“attack Mitt, but he stated that his strategy was to lay low until September”
I’m not sure that type of behavior is what America is looking for in a future leader. But who knows, Obama layed low for two years in the Senate and he got in.
Look, I’ll keep Mitt as my #4 but that courageous Huntsman son is nipping at his heals at #5.
July 29th, 2011 at 3:49 pm
*LAID LOW
July 29th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
135. Well, with Huck and Perry not in the race, at least not yet, I’ll think of Romney as your #2 guy.
July 29th, 2011 at 3:54 pm
This thread seems to be dead. Maybe we can have a front page article posted about Palin looking over the shoulders of freshmen congressmen in an attempt to exert influence over something she doesn;t even really understand.
July 29th, 2011 at 3:58 pm
Greg,
Fair enough.
July 29th, 2011 at 4:02 pm
Matt,
When does the debt ceiling reach it’s absolute top? Michele Bachmann would like to know your adult answer.
July 29th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
131.Greg Says:
July 29th, 2011 at 2:43 pm
“Craig, Do you think Palin’s comments are helping the cause?”
No, Palin’s an undisciplined rogue bully but her threats run hollow. She has no power. Here’s what America thinks about her TODAY:
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/us-favorability-palin
July 29th, 2011 at 4:10 pm
Craig,
How do you realistically cut government spending 40% overnight without destroying the American economy?
July 29th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
OUR CANDIDATES, Bachmann and T-Paw are leading the fight on the right side of this, imo.
(Although T-Paw may be wavering and flipping over to Boehner’s bill now that the BBA has been worded in somewhat. Stay tuned.)
July 29th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
Matt,
Is that what the Balanced Budget Ammendment or raising the debt ceiling actually do?
Or are you talking about something else all together?
July 29th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
Craig,
Even if you cut Social Security benefits by 40% overnight…..
Even if you shafted health care providers by only paying 60% of what Medicare and Medicaid is supposed to reimburse them…..
Even if you laid off 40% of the federal workforce tomorrow and only paid 60% of the pensions owed…..
Even if you cut education spending 40%…
Even if you sank 40% of our naval fleet, sent 40% of our soldiers home without pay, and scrapped 40% of our airforce….
Even if you stopped paying benefits to 40% of veterans……
You still wouldn’t have cut overall spending 40% because the government can’t unilaterally cut its interest rate by 40%.
This crisis has solidified in my mind that Bachmann is an incredulous hack who is either a complete charlatan, or completely stupid.
July 29th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Craig,
Raising the debt ceiling enables the government to borrow the money to pay its bills.
July 29th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
*Amendment ..I blow that word a lot.
July 29th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
Matt,
Is there EVER a limit on the debt ceiling in our children’s future. Let’s say $20 TRILLION!
July 29th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
Matt,
I think you morphed into TEX with that last sentence in #145.
Hyperbole much?
And when did Bachmann call for an overnight 40% cut?
Link? Or is that also hyperbole.
Look, I know you’ve invested a lot of effort over the years pushing T-Paw.. but tearing down (actually slandering) Michele, a candidate who also strongly opposes the Boehner bill with T-Paw unless he’s flipped is TEX like, very unlike you, and just plain hyperbole.
July 29th, 2011 at 4:33 pm
144 should have said.. NOT raising the debt ceiling would do
July 29th, 2011 at 4:35 pm
Craig,
I completely share your frustration with government spending and borrowing. I’ve written several FPPs about it over the years. I consider myself one of the hawkiest budget hawks on this site (for instance, I would accept…….. gasp…….. tax increases in exchange for massive spending cuts to balance the budget). I completely agree that what this country has done is completely immoral and irresponsible, and I say to both parties, “a plague on BOTH your houses”. But making all the cuts at once would have such a devastating impact on our economy that it would make the situation for our children WORSE than if we raised the ceiling while we cut spending and reform entitlements.
But Bachmann either doesn’t understand that, or she’s just grandstanding for the little niche she’s carved out. Either way, she’s once again proven why she’s a backbencher who has never accomplished anything in Congress. Her “solution” isn’t conservative at all, but a radical shock to the economy and American society. It’s ironic that some of these Fire-eaters who are supposedly SOOOOOOO conservative are more or less proposing the same thing that Lenin and Mao did- shed all the old obligations of the ancién regime, and let it all burn to hell, so as to create a New Order.
July 29th, 2011 at 4:37 pm
“We are all Sarah Palin…………..
They are scared to death of Sarah Palin!” – Rush Limbaugh
July 29th, 2011 at 4:38 pm
Craig,
“And when did Bachmann call for an overnight 40% cut?”
So how does government pay for $1 of spending with 60 cents of revenue, without borrowing the difference?
Are you telling me Bachmann hasn’t told you what her (lack of) plan would entail? There’s a shock…….
July 29th, 2011 at 4:52 pm
Bachmann’s behavior also helps explain her dismal electoral record, and why she routinely underperforms up-ticket Republicans in her district by wide margins. She holds the most Republican district of any of the 4 Minnesota Republicans by the skin of her teeth.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
The House is voting on the Boehner bill now. It will pass.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:15 pm
So, T-Paw (the “election over-performer”) comes out opposing raising the debt ceiling the day after Michele’s does at her local press conference on her bus tour.
Matt,
Has T-Paw told you his plan?
I’m all ears.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:17 pm
I keep waiting for a presidential candidate to offer a framework of how he would do it, but it hasn’t happened. How about some guts, guys?
Dick Morris and his wife put a pretty good framework for balancing the budget in their book “Revolt!”: control Medicaid spending and reduce domestic discretionary spending to 2008 levels to get the deficit down to a “safe” level, tweak Social Security and let growth do the rest. Once the budget is balanced, pay down debt and reform Medicare for the long term. It’s not that hard.
And yes, when people find the interest on their credit cards, and other loans going up because of a default, it won’t be Obama who takes the blame, just Clinton didn’t take the blame for the ’95 shutdown: the White House always wins these things because of the bully pulpit until there’s an opponent – and by that time the damage will be done and it’ll be a generation before the Democrats lose again. Our country can’t afford more Democratic misrule because certain people are like the child sho takes his toys and goes home because he doesn’t get everything he wants – that’s the real problem here – to the public, the Tea Party (which I love) looks frightfully immature. You can’t get everything you want at once, so take what you can get and come back for more next year.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:18 pm
Question:
Who is the first Republican woman in the state of Minnesota’s history to be elected to congress?
Hint: 1st name is Michele
July 29th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
Craig,
TPaw supports the Boehner Bill now that it has a BBA tethered.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Craig,
Who was the first left handed Minnesotan elected to Congress?
I’d make that guy President!
July 29th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Boehner Bill Passes!!!!
July 29th, 2011 at 5:25 pm
Michele joins 19 other Republicans and 188 Democrats in voting against spending cuts and for default.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
So it goes to the senate and dies.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
Correction, Michele joined forces with 21 other Republicans all all 188 Democrats who voted…….
I would think someone with all her legislative accomplishments and prestige in the House could lead more Republicans than that!
July 29th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
I’m looking for a left handed/right brain dominated Republican president.
Why are so many presidents left-handed?
July 29th, 2011 at 5:30 pm
Craig,
A final bill will emerge that cuts spending and doesn’t raise taxes, no thanks to Michele and her 188 Democrat buddies.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:33 pm
She’s not in leadership. Hey, maybe Boehner or Cantor could get 3% in Iowa.
Congessional members zillions of votes make it difficult for one of them to be elected president. We’ve had what, one elected in our history?
Why? Because they have to take a stand. Popular or not.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
No Democrat voted for it. Obama just said it was a “fruitless exercise”.
This will get ugly now.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:38 pm
Fox News says only Huntsman spoke for it today BEFORE the vote. Bunch of cowards.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:38 pm
I think cutting the deficit is more than cutting programs. We need to start looking at the number of agencies and boards that exist. For example, the health care bill created hundreds of agencies and boards. That costs money in terms of space, salaries, etc. The financial meltdown happened because the SEC and a number of regulatory agencies were asleep at the switch or watching porn. In the real world, there would have been a lot of firings. In Washington DC, we get over 100 new agencies and a army of bureaucrats. We could cut the physical size of government by 1/3 at least by getting rid of the redundancy.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:42 pm
Craig,
“She’s not in leadership.”
Exactly. She tried, but guys like Mike Pence supported the other guy. Wonder why?
Speaking of wonder why…. why do you suppose Michele has so much turnover among her Congressional staff?
July 29th, 2011 at 5:43 pm
Huntsman’s stock has risen with me.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:43 pm
Craig,
“We’ve had what, one elected in our history?”
So why do you expect Michele- who doesn’t even have the support of her colleagues- to be the 2nd?
July 29th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
So when do we get the BBA now? Oh, please.
What childish games the congress plays!
Raise the limit on the credit cards with Obama and a Democrart-controlled Senate in charge.
That should help. Sure it will.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
mac,
Me too.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Her “solution” isn’t conservative at all, but a radical shock to the economy and American society.
=====================================
The trouble is that Bachmann’s votes are more political than about legislating. A president has to be more about legislating than being political. Even getting a bill passed with all Republicans means having to deal with tea party Republicans, more traditional conservative Republicans, and moderate Republicans. Ever since this budget debate has Bachmann voted yea on anything? That is not leadership.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:48 pm
She’s not in leadership.
=======================
She tried to get into the leadership and she didn’t even get much support from tea party freshmen. That tells you something.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:48 pm
Matt,
Because we need a change.
This country has got to try something different and bold.
That’s Michele Bachmann. Other’s think that’s Sarah Palin. Many think Romney or Perry look the part.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:51 pm
Craig,
I’d be change. Why not vote for me?
I’ve also passed as many bills as Michele…..
July 29th, 2011 at 5:52 pm
Coming off the fence:
Now that SC Republicans have voted No on the Boehner bill, Romney will come out against it so he can win their 2012 endorsement.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:53 pm
Huntsman’s statement is out, who will be next?
July 29th, 2011 at 5:54 pm
This should liven up the Ames debate stage for the candidates.
At least the ones with the guts to show up and engage.
That’s likely will total three candidates that night. The others will deflect like only politicians can do.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:55 pm
Why change, Matt. The course is clear.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:55 pm
The no votes: 22 GOPers who balked Boehner
Speaker John Boehner pushed his debt-ceiling bill through the House Friday night with the support of 218 Republicans. Here are the 22 no votes:
Justin Amash (Mich.)
Michele Bachmann (Minn.)
Chip Cravaack (Minn.)
Scott Desjarlais (Tenn.)
Tom Graves (Ga.)
Tim Huelskamp (Kans.)
Steve King (Iowa)
Tim Johnson (Ill.)
Tom McClintock (Calif.)
Mick Mulvaney (S.C.)
Ron Paul (Texas)
Tom Price (Ga.)
Connie Mack (Fla.)
Jim Jordan (Ohio)
Tim Scott (S.C.)
Paul Broun (Ga.)
Tom Latham (Iowa)
Jeff Duncan (S.C.)
Trey Gowdy (S.C.)
Steve Southerland (Fla.)
Joe Walsh (Ill.)
Joe Wilson (S.C.)
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0711/The_no_votes_22_GOPers_who_balked_Boehner_.html?showall
July 29th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
You got your bill. Won’t pass the senate. Won’t be signed.
But you made your point.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
184.
THANKS, those are all my favorites!
July 29th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
Looks like Romney has spoken, well sorta:
Mitt Romney
Despite President Obama’s failure of leadership, House GOP took a strong stance to hold the line on spending & reject Obama’s tax hikes
http://www.facebook.com/mittromney/posts/10150259559851121
July 29th, 2011 at 6:01 pm
Michele Bachmann (Minn.)
Chip Cravaack (Minn)
Steve King (Iowa)
Mick Mulvaney (S.C.)
Tim Scott (S.C.)
Tom Latham (Iowa)
Jeff Duncan (S.C.)
Trey Gowdy (S.C.)
Joe Wilson (S.C.)
TC,
You’re right
July 29th, 2011 at 6:06 pm
Prediction:
DOA in Senate
Reid bill will not carry BBA
T-Paw’s head spins
July 29th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
Governor Jon Huntsman Statement on Passage of Boehner Debt Limit Plan
July 29, 2011
“This evening we saw actual leadership in our nation’s capital – something the American people have not seen from President Obama or my opponents.
“It’s easy to talk about hope, bang podiums, and point fingers. It’s another thing to stand up and offer a serious solution like Speaker Boehner’s proposal.
“The debt ceiling circus is just the latest example of Washington’s failure to rise to the occasion. We have a generational opportunity to get our books in order and stop spending money we don’t have.
“Speaker Boehner’s proposal is a step in that direction. But we have a long way to go and this President has proven he’s unwilling to lead us there.
“This country needs an experienced leader with serious solutions. A proven leader with more than rhetoric – a leader with a record.
“I refuse to pass down a country to the next generation less good than the one I inherited. At this late hour, it’s time for President Obama to demonstrate some leadership by working to pass the Boehner plan in the Senate and signing it into law.”
http://jon2012.com/campaign/Jul-29-2011/Governor-Jon-Huntsman-Statement-Passage-Boehner-Debt-Limit-Plan
July 29th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
..which should surge T-Paw in Iowa before Ames.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
At least Huntsman showed some courage on the pro-side where he must of felt pretty lonely.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:13 pm
Craig,
Lonely?
218 Republicans sided with Boehner and Huntsman. 21 sided with Bachmann and her 188 Democrat allies.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:13 pm
190. Nice statement from Huntsman. With Obama and the Democratic Senate, Boehner’s plan was as good as we could get. To stand up like that against the talk radio clowns shows some real guts by Huntsman.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:21 pm
Matt,
Among Republican candidates with for our nomination.
On another note, I’ve just dropped T-Paw below Huntsman, Cain, and my mailman.
Se ya in Iowa!
July 29th, 2011 at 6:23 pm
Realistically, if you want to pare down the deficit, you can start by putting a tariff on our trade with poorer nations than ourselves – in particular, China.
We send tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars to China through our trade deficit that only help China to rapidly expand both the size and hostility of its military. This, in turn, provides the main reason to have a dozen aircraft carriers and bases in Japan and Australia and others.
Forcing American workers to compete with nations like China and Mexico also eliminates jobs here (how many cars are made in Mexico to be sent to the United States?), to say nothing of driving down wage and benefit levels (which increases dependence of Medicare, Social Security, etc.)…AND it deprives millions of Americans who didn’t go to, or dropped out of, college of the opportunity to land a good paying job…this only increases dependence on Medicaid, and other asistance programs.
Sure, trade has benefits, but it hasn’t been nearly the cure-all that its proponents claimed (expected?). Start making more stuff here, and stop sending so much money to China, and we could kill two birds with one stone by boosting income tax revenue, AND allowing ourselves to cut spending.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:35 pm
@BarackObama you’re wrong, threatening to throw seniors under the bus because you refuse to prioritize govt spending.Time to womanup & lead-
Sarah Palin tweet
“Time to womanup”.
Barracuda Gladriatix going right for the jugular!
July 29th, 2011 at 6:44 pm
TexCon,
I just see where MY Republican congressman voted “no.” I’m going to have to look into that…….
July 29th, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Craig,
“On another note, I’ve just dropped T-Paw below Huntsman, Cain, and my mailman.”
LOL! Why? ‘Cause I said mean things about Michele?
July 29th, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Romney throws support behind Boehner bill…..after it passes.
You guys are so right about him!
LOL
July 29th, 2011 at 7:05 pm
Uh…Telly…..Maybe that’s because the Boehner Bill just recently reached its final version with changes Gov. Romney could support better.
Or maybe Romney is just and evil alien shape-shifter like you have been saying…
July 29th, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Or Jerald
Romney lacks a spine.
No political courage!
July 29th, 2011 at 7:09 pm
Remember Telly, the bill hasn’t passed the senate yet or been signed by Big O.
The game’s not over yet.
But I’m sure Sarah Palin will decend from Heaven at any moment and tweet out a commandmant to her fanboys that will save the country and the world.
By the way, I hear they are looking for someone to play the new Wonder Woman. I can’t think of anyone that would be better than Sarah. I mean, she is a living, breathing super hero…
July 29th, 2011 at 7:11 pm
202…TexCon
Or maybe Romney understands the only real way to fix the Big O mess is for him to get in the WH and the GOP to take over in 2012
July 29th, 2011 at 7:16 pm
By the way, TexCon, I realize it is lost on you, but this is not about Romney, it’s about fixing the mess the country is in.
If winning personal points will keep him out of the WH, Romney will take the heat and play his cards carefully.
You RomNots, of course, hope Romney disappears tomorrow, but the rest of us want him fixing this mess.
If we have to put up with childish rants from you and the other RomNots to do it, so be it…
July 29th, 2011 at 7:21 pm
I think the Rombots miss the point of the Romnots, during the two biggest events in the Obama presidency, healthcare reform and the debt ceiling crisis, Romney has been MIA.
His lack of courage to speak about those key events, shows us what kind of president he would be. One who likes pale pastels.
July 29th, 2011 at 8:02 pm
Romney is a spineless,finger in the wind,flip flopping political opportunist.At 64 years of age he still doesn’t know who he is,what to think,what to say without paid hacks,flacks and lap dogs telling him
where the wind blows.
Just look at this monumental debt ceiling battle,he’s hiding like a wimp,
the coward he is.
He opens his trap only after the vote.
Exuse me,I have to take a puke!
July 29th, 2011 at 8:40 pm
Here ya go TEX:
:barf
July 29th, 2011 at 8:41 pm
:barf:
July 29th, 2011 at 8:41 pm
Nevermind, the little barf smilie did not work.
Sorry about that.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:32 pm
#206….TexCon
Romney was “MIA” on fighting Obamacare?
Your credibility just sank off the bottom of the chart…
July 29th, 2011 at 9:40 pm
Face it TexCon, you prefer a firebrand. Whether or not that firebrand can actually get anything done is beside the point.
How old are you anyway?
Just to refresh your memory, Reagan didn’t get in the WH by riding into town guns a blazing, he made a great deal of effort to make his tent of support as wide as possible and then used his election mandate wisely to turn things around.
Sure, he took a hard stand when it would get the needed results, but he certainly wasn’t my way or the highway on everything…
(PS. Even is Romney had been tweeting his heart out about every little minutia regarding the debt debate, you would be taking pot shots at him the whole way any how.)
July 29th, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Looks like Romney may have lost Allahpundit:
allahpundit Allah Pundit
Romney finally weighs in on Boehner’s bill. Kind of. A little. http://is.gd/A1plE5
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/29/huntsman-to-romney-no-leadership-on-the-debt-ceiling-negotiations-huh/
July 29th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
Willard Rockefeller Romney is such a wimpy,no testosterone coward,
he’s done nothing in his life but leach on other people’s ideas and
creations.
He couldn’t come up with an original idea to save his corny,boring life.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:31 pm
Maybe we shouldn’t be too hard on Willard…remember…
- it takes a team of special effects artists and animatronic engineers to make Romney respond!
That takes time!
July 30th, 2011 at 10:03 pm
ABC News’ Jonathan Karl reports:
ABC News has learned that Republicans and the White House have struck a tenative deal to raise the debt ceiling before the Aug. 2 deadline. It’s not done yet, but here is the framework of the tentative deal they have worked out, according to a source familiar with the negotiations:
•Debt ceiling increase of up to $2.8 trillion
•Spending cuts of roughly $1 trillion
•Special committee to recommend cuts of $1.8 trillion (or whatever it takes to add up to the total of the debt ceiling increase)
•Committee must make recommendations before Thanksgiving recess
•If Congress does not approve those cuts by late December, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare.
April 5th, 2012 at 11:23 am
It is his donation to BoA that made me start disliking Warren Buffet. BoA is crap in many respects. Let them fend for themselves.