As far as I know, Governor Huntsman has the first statement out on deal reached between the White House and Congress. Here’s his statement from his website:
“While this framework is not my preferred outcome, it is a positive step toward cutting our nation’s crippling debt.
“Because the legislation promises cuts commensurate with the debt ceiling increase, forces a vote on a much-needed federal balanced budget amendment and provides the only avenue to avoid default, I encourage members of Congress to vote for this legislation.
“While some of my opponents ducked the debate entirely, others would have allowed the nation to slide into default and President Obama refused to offer any plan, I have been proud to stand with congressional Republicans working for these needed and historic cuts. A debt crisis like this is a time for leadership, not a time for waiting to see which way the political winds blow.
“Going forward, I will aggressively advocate for a plan from the congressional committee that includes real cuts, entitlement reform, and revenue-neutral tax reforms — without any tax hikes.
“The Republican members of Congress deserve tremendous credit for moving this debate to the forefront and at long last beginning to get Washington in line.”
July 31st, 2011 at 10:28 pm
This will help Huntsman. This is the moment where he can create room between himself and the others.
Everybody else will be against this deal…I think. If Hunstman does end up being the only voice for it……..it helps him, greatly.
July 31st, 2011 at 10:30 pm
Jon, who?
July 31st, 2011 at 10:45 pm
Jon,
Bachmann’s statement is out at the same time.
Michele will take the lead on this while the other candidates follow except for Huntsman.
I notice Junior (my personal #5) took another shot at my #4, Mitt.
July 31st, 2011 at 10:50 pm
#3:
Sounds like Bachmann might be marching in the “no” parade by herself if the initial reaction from House Republicans is any indication:
http://www.rollcall.com/news/house_gop_hails_boehner_as_man_of_the_hour-207895-1.html?pos=hln
July 31st, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Ron Paul?
July 31st, 2011 at 11:05 pm
Is that how you “civilly” attack someone? Where are your balls Huntsman? Start naming names!
July 31st, 2011 at 11:06 pm
Bachmann: “Mr. President, I’m not sure what voice you’re listening to, but I can assure you that the voice of the American people wasn’t the ‘voice that compelled Washington to act.’ It was you that got us into this mess, and it was you who wanted a $2.4 trillion dollar blank check to get you through the election. Everywhere I travel across the country, Americans want less spending, lower taxes to create jobs, and they don’t want us to raise the debt ceiling.
“The President continues to press for a ‘balanced approach,’ which everyone knows is code for increased spending and taxes. Throughout this process the President has failed to lead and failed to provide a plan.
The ‘deal’ he announced spends too much and doesn’t cut enough. This isn’t the deal the American people ‘preferred’ either, Mr. President. Someone has to say no. I will.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/60349.html#ixzz1TkLu3PLi
July 31st, 2011 at 11:16 pm
Good statement from Jon. I’ve liked what I’ve seen of him the past couple weeks.
July 31st, 2011 at 11:18 pm
I agree with Smack & MWS. This was a good move by Huntsman, and it’s the right side to be on. I’m also encouraged by Jonathan’s link in #4. One of these days, Bachmann will have to learn that simply saying “no” to everything is not a strategy, nor it is an accomplishment.
July 31st, 2011 at 11:42 pm
Seems like a good statement and he’s taking a sensible position.
Bachmann’s making a fool of herself. Again.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:13 am
The reaction of millions of Americans
via Twitter:
trscoop Brian – Right Scoop
Watching this debt ceiling debate go down has moved me a little more in the direction of Palin if she runs. #establishment
August 1st, 2011 at 12:40 am
Bachmann’s Childish Critics Reveal a Serious Candidate
>>>08/01/2011 Michele Bachmann? is far from certain to win the Republican Party nomination for President in 2012. But one thing is looking more and more certain: She will attract more scrutiny from the media than all the other GOP candidates combined. But, judging by the childishness of the attacks Bachmann is drawing from the liberal press, it will be the media, not the candidate, that will be end up diminished.
(…)
>>>the media loath Bachmann’s unapologetic conservatism, her evangelical Christianity, her folksy manner and, perhaps most of all, her “new feminism.”
But, when added to her strong debating skills, command of the issues, ability to connect with voters and fund-raising prowess, these qualities make Bachmann a formidable presidential candidate.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45238
August 1st, 2011 at 1:39 am
Huntsman (and Romney and the rest) did squat to help. IT WAS PALIN via facebook who entered the poker game at the right moment leading the Tea Party to force Boehner to delay the vote and go back the next day with a sweetened deal for Conservatives.
Just remember THAT folks. Palin DID something here, instded of the silent Mitt et al.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:43 am
August 1st, 2011 at 1:50 am
Jack,
So Palin is 100% for this Obama/Reid/Boehner deal now.
Very interesting. So it’s only her and Huntsman.
Take a look at the photos on the top of this site. Any others there backing THIS deal? I’ll check back tomorrow.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:50 am
#13 – Yes, and Palin has yet to take a stand on the ACTUAL deal on the table. Radio silence for two days. What a profile in courage….
BTW, if Palin opens an umbrella, is that what causes it to rain? Gimme a break.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:23 am
Palin IMPROVED what would have been a far crappier deal. (no one’s talking about 100% for…)
at least Palin accomplished something when it counted, instead of posturing for or against some deal with meaningless pronouncements
August 1st, 2011 at 2:30 am
and let me elaborate, quoting from Commenter “John” Smith:
Say what you will about Harry Reid, but the fact is that the man is an excellent political negotiator.
He plays every political hand that he’s dealt as if he’s holding four aces, whether he actually has four aces or not. He may be a curmudgeon. He may be goofy. But, never forget that he made his political bones in Nevada cowboy politics and making political deals with the mob.
As good a natural political poker player as Reid is, his skills are accentuated when he sits at a table with John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. Boehner, bless his heart, is an honest man. Every hand, he’s dealt three tens. And, every hand, just to be fair, he shows his cards before the betting begins.
McConnell, by contrast, doesn’t flip his cards in advance, but he also is risk averse. He’s so risk averse that he plays every hand like he’s holding a pair of jacks, even if he’s holding better cards.
Six days ago, these three gentlemen sat down to play their latest hand of political poker over the debt ceiling. Boehner flipper his cards, thought “I’ve got a pretty good hand”, and came out with a big bet (cap, cut, and balance). McConnell, ever the gentleman, decided to call to help his friend John Boehner build the pot. Reid called too and then said “you’re betting too big to win this hand”.
The way their poker games usually play out from there is this. In the next round of betting, Boehner bets small, McConnell calls, and Reid then steals the pot with a big bet. Boehner and McConnell then claim “victory” because they didn’t lose as much money as they could have.
So it was that Boehner had a second deal all set to pass the House that Reid could then take, ignore (amend), and send back his deal, a deal for a 2.7 trillion dollar debt limit hike coupled with 2.7 trillion in spending cuts, of which 30 billion were verifiable and the balance came in the form of nebulous “promises” not to hike spending over the next ten years as much as previously planned.
Boehner would twist enough arms to get it passed, and all of the experts would talk about his victory because taxes were taken off the table and because there were spending cuts, albeit only 30 billion of which were quantifiable.
Yes, some people would be a little pissed about how this process played out and what the deal looked like, but they’d get over it. Twas always thus, and always thus would be.
But, as the saying goes, “a funny thing happened on the way to the forum”. Right before the second round of betting, right before Boehner sent his watered down deal to the Senate, this stupid, know-nothing, meddlesome housewife from Wasilla, Alaska phoned into the table last Thursday and said “I’m all in”.
Everyone went nuts. Poker expert Charles Krauthammer advised the House to ignore that housewife, fold, and declare victory. Poker expert Laura Ingraham decried the audacity of this housewife sitting at the table with the grown-ups and advised her and the rest of the little people to defer to the experts. Political blood flowed. Recriminations and threats flew everywhere.
Today is Sunday. No deal has been finalized. But, the deal that will be finalized supposedly will look like this: 2.4 trillion dollar debt ceiling hike, 1 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years (only 30 billion verifiable), and 1.4 trillion in triggered, across the board, mandatory cuts if a to-be-named debt advisory panel can’t make and get passed a comparable deal.
Is it a perfect deal? No, it still sucks. But, it’s still a hell of a lot better than what it would have been if that stupid housewife from Wasilla hadn’t chimed in on Facebook on Thursday and encouraged freshmen Republicans to hold the line.
And, herein lies the magic of Palin. What I suspect is that she knows perfectly well, in this political environment, that cap, cut, and balance wasn’t going to pass. But, unlike Boehner and McConnell, she sees no reason to capitulate in advance.
No, odd as it may sound, she’s a lot like Harry Reid when it comes to political negotiations. Palin made her bones going toe to toe with the Frank Murkowski’s and Big Oil executives of this world. When she sits down at the poker table, she plays every hand like she’s holding a royal flush.
Frankly, that’s why she accomplished more in two years as Governor of Alaska than all of the Republicans running for President have in their combined political careers. She understands how the game is played. She never got exactly the deal she wanted. In politics, you never do.
But, unlike the geniuses of the GOP establishment and unlike the so-called experts who opine from afar about “the little people,” when it comes to policy debates, she knows when to hold them, when to fold them, when to walk away, and when to run.
Once again, she played The Political Gambler, and the deal the American people are going to get as a result is far better (or, perhaps more precisely, appreciably less awful) than it otherwise would have been.
P.S.: Unlike all of the Republican presidential candidates who said “oh, make the original deal” or “no deals”, that stupid housewife from Wasilla actually can claim when all is said and done “I don’t like the deal, but it’s better than it would have been if we hobbits hadn’t spoken up”.
P.S.S. I do not know what the exact nature of the debt committee is, as details have not been confirmed. I would assume that whatever they approve must have majority consent and then the consent of both houses of Congress. If that is the case, then one would assume that we’re going to get the across the board triggered cuts. If that is not the case and the committee somehow automatically can do its own tax hikes and/or spending cuts without further consent, then I suspect the stupid housewife from Wasilla might offer a future facebook post about that being another example of all that is wrong with politics in Washington.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:39 am
Will Never Vote For Jon Huntsman For Anything. Never! That is all.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:51 am
Jack,
So would Palin if she were in congress TODAY vote for it or against it? Or is she just blabbering away on social media playing all sides?
Yea or Nay. Put down your phone, Sarah. They’re voting now.
Which is it?
August 1st, 2011 at 3:08 am
craig for abp:
Palin didn’t merely blabber, she effectively led/moved the tea party legislators to demand/hold out for a better deal
August 1st, 2011 at 3:11 am
(craig for abp = craig for anybody but palin)
August 1st, 2011 at 3:27 am
One of the subtexts of this deal that could have implications for 2012 is that republican congressional leaders showed they could work with Obama/Biden. I thought that the intent of walking away from WH negotiations was to show they couldn’t work with Obama, but now it looks like he stepped in the make the deal. Its confusing at best, but the headlines will be Obama and GOP strike deal that angers liberals. That is the kind of headline Obama’s campaign wants.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:35 am
Palin did nothing except embarrased herself even further.
August 1st, 2011 at 6:49 am
Yes, Jack, Palin is pulling all the strings. When she says “jump,” all the Republicans in Congress say, “how high”?
So is she going to direct her automatons to vote yes or no on the final deal?
How she revealed this yet to mortals?
August 1st, 2011 at 6:59 am
Overall, the deal seems fair – a $1T debt limit increase in exchange for an equal number of cuts, and automatic spending cuts even if the proposal by the newly-established debt comission is rejected.
As I said last night, my main objection is that this could still be viewed as a major political victory for Obama, because it allows him to kick the can of any further real debate on the issue down the road until after he has either won re-election, or left office.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:00 am
Is there any evidence that Palin actually meets with any of these Congressmen she controls, or do they- like Jack- simply have to keep refreshing her Facebook page, like modern day petitioners at Delphi, waiting for the Oracle?
August 1st, 2011 at 7:07 am
Actaully, add one concern to what I said…doing the morning reading, it appears that the automatic spending cuts which could occur if Congress does not accept the debt comish’s reccomendations are divided equally between defense and non-defense.
The military only takes up 20% of the budget, if we’re expecting the Pentagon to absorb half the cuts…well, this deal might not be nearly as good.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:13 am
Many liberals think Obama sold them out of this debt deal. It appears both sides will have to deal with their crybabies, but the fact is the Democratic left has more to complain about. There isn’t a dime of tax increases, and there is going to be a vote on a BBA.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/60343.html
August 1st, 2011 at 7:14 am
Matthew,
But Defense is (and I’m ballparking here) probably more like 40-50% of spending when you don’t count things that can’t/won’t be cut, like interest payments and Social Security.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:17 am
“and there is going to be a vote on a BBA.”
…that has absolutely no chance of passing. Big Whoop.
Yes, the Democrats have a lot to complain about…in the actual substance of the deal, Republicans probably have more to be happy about. But when it comes down to the politics of it – who is hurt or helped more – the Democrats dodged a major bullet by having a deal that spares the Executive Branch from getting caught up in any further debate on this issue until after the 2012 elections.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:21 am
“But Defense is (and I’m ballparking here) probably more like 40-50% of spending when you don’t count things that can’t/won’t be cut, like interest payments and Social Security.”
The problem is that you’re talking about cuts that go far beyond streamlining and improvements to the point that we’ll have to lay up ships, close recruiting offices, delay new weapons systems, and in other ways do all the things which make our military less able to fight and win a major conflict…even as we seem unlikely to make make other policy changes (such as reducing how much money we send to China every year) that might actually justify a smaller military.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:32 am
Matthew,
Obama is going to have plenty of problems to explain in 2012, don’t you worry.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:32 am
………..Winner and Loser talk has already started. I’ll give my take:
Winners:
1] The ratings agencies – they held a gun to our head and got our wallet. They also avoid the potentially fatal event of downgrading the US, only to see traders shrug it off.
2] McConnell – He looks like the go-to guy for the deal, to say nothing of the fact he was the opposition leader when the Senate voted down Reid’s debt plan.
3] Wall Street – see the number at 9:30 for all the explanation you need.
Draw / Push:
1] Tea Party – people probably aren’t going to think much different of them than they did two motnhs ago. The liberals will thing they are extremists, the Conservatives will love them, and lots of independents will have sympathy for them, but think they are a little too nutty to associate too closely with. They scored a victory, but there are also going to be deep divisions and potential primary challenges now.
2] Obama – He looked weak, for sure…and he has been damaged by it. But by pushing any further talk of the issue until after the 2012 election, Obama can still look at this bill and think he got some personal victory from it.
Losers:
1] The debt ceiling – many people are now calling for it to be scrapped altogether
2] Liberals – They got virtually nothing of substance that they asked for, and are now somewhat disillusioned with their leader
3] Harry Reid – Republicans and Democrats alike went over, under, and around him to get a deal done, while he complained on the Senate floor…and then had his own debt proposal rejected by the chamber he controls.
4] Mr. Speaker – When Bhoenor has such a hard time whipping his own membership into line, and has to push back votes again and again until the newest members of the party declare themselves satisfied, he may not be the effective person we need there.
August 1st, 2011 at 8:27 am
Matthew,
I pretty much agree with your rundown of winners/losers. But I think this was a victory for Boehner. He pretty well kept the caucus together, helped get us a pretty good deal considering we only have one of the 3 deciding players in this, and he showed Indies that Republicans can govern.
Liberals have to be pretty upset that Obama’s line in the sand was getting the extension through 2012, instead of getting more taxes. He just showed them that his reelection is more important than their principles.
August 1st, 2011 at 8:47 am
The Tea Party with its leader, Sarah Palin, was a big winner — and now the major new force in America re-defining the Dem – GOP split to the Elite/Establishment (both traditional parties)- Little People/Fly Over America split.
August 1st, 2011 at 8:49 am
Obama/Elite political & spending excesses have spawned the Anti-Obama/Anti-Elite (Palin) and Tea Party (Anti-Obama/Anti-Elite Party)
August 1st, 2011 at 8:52 am
My point is — as evidenced right here on Race42012 — the battle going on is WITHIN the GOP, that is will the Tea Party prevail and take over.
Generally speaking, most commentators here are FOR the establishment-GOP, while those of us like Teledude and myself, are FOR the Tea Party.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:01 am
I keep a ten foot pole between myself and ANY movement which places un-qualified, un-professional Sarah Palin at its head.
The debate did nothing to change anyone’s perceptions about the Tea Party, and it may now even be driven to primary out some of its own representatives for doing what they should be expected to do.
You hold out until you have to do something else. If we had failed to get a deal over the weekend, the Dow would already be down 300 pts. As it is, Wall Street is having a good day and it seems very clear that the credit rating is secure for a while. Keeping AAA was priority #1.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:03 am
Jack. Sure. Whateveaaa. Sorry to disappoint, but when the only thing you know how to do in Washington is to obstruct all, then the only thing Palin said right is contested primary – but not who you nor the goddess thought would be primaried. I say, if you can’t come to a compromise for the good of the country, you need to go home.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:05 am
Who is Huntsman?
August 1st, 2011 at 9:11 am
I can’t be dragged into the media’s desire to count winners and losers in this debacle (plus, its way to early). America’s prestige has been damaged, perhaps irreparably.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:15 am
Rightgal, a COMPROMISE WAS REACHED via Palin.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:16 am
Rightgal, the deal was sweetened just enough via Palin pulling back Boehner last week, to get the Tea Party congressmen on board.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:25 am
A compromise was not reached via Palin or any other Tea Party nuthead.
I agree with many – if not most – of the things the Tea Party stands for.
But if they weren’t there, we would have had a deal weeks ago.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:30 am
Jack,
Whatever.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:54 am
Matthew, yah, but not as good a deal (not as crappy as it would have been).
August 1st, 2011 at 10:12 am
454. Yeah…a much worse ‘deal’ for the country.
The weeping wimps in Washington are not giving us the leadership we deserve.
But a real leader is on the way.
heh heh
August 1st, 2011 at 10:21 am
Throughout, Huntsman has been pitch-perfect in this ordeal. Personaly, I don’t LIKE the deal, but it has to be passed. It’s too late to get anything better, and it’s better than it might have been.
Kudos to the Republicans in Congress….Boehner did his job well under trying circumstances.