Party of No: In debt fight, Dems reject Republican compromise

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 3:14 PM GMT
    I think that will be the narrative people will read into when judging Obama's presidency. His unwillingness to take the lead. In healthcare he let Congress draft a bill whose merits are as yet to be determined, there hasn't been a plan for Libya or Syria, and the latest being the budget debacle that he deliberately left to the last moment in an attempt to force Republicans to take his position. If the US defaults on its debt, it will be a direct result of Obama's unwillingness to compromise and the ideologues in the Senate.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/07/debt-fight-dems-reject-republican-compromise

    House Speaker John Boehner has introduced two bills that would raise the nation's debt ceiling and end the current default crisis. The first, known as "Cut, Cap and Balance," was tabled by Senate Democrats without an up-or-down vote. The second, Boehner's plan to cut more than $900 billion in federal spending and raise the debt ceiling by a slightly smaller amount, could face a similar fate if it first passes the House.

    For the Tea Party Republicans who make up a significant part of the House GOP caucus, Boehner's proposal is a significant retreat from "Cut, Cap and Balance." Those who support the Boehner proposal, which is formally known as the Budget Control Act, consider it a major compromise -- something they are backing only after being convinced that their first choice could never pass the Senate.

    Throughout the debt dispute, President Obama has talked a lot about compromise. In his speech to the nation Monday, he used the word six times, saying America "has always been a grand experiment in compromise" but that in Washington lately, "compromise has become a dirty word." Obama's appearance at a University of Maryland town hall a few days before was a virtual seminar on compromise.

    While Obama preaches the virtues of compromise, his Democratic allies and surrogates are bashing Republicans for rejecting what the White House characterizes as earnest, good-faith efforts to find common ground. "I hope that Speaker Boehner and [Minority] Leader McConnell will reconsider their intransigence," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said a few days ago. "Their unwillingness to compromise is pushing us to the brink of a default." (At the same time, Reid has been issuing absolute, inflexible statements like, "I will not support any short-term agreement.")

    But the fact is, the Republicans who admitted defeat on "Cut, Cap and Balance" showed a unmistakable willingness to compromise. "The president has asked us to compromise," House Minority Leader Eric Cantor said Thursday afternoon. "We have compromised."

    What about Obama? His compromises, if any, are more difficult to discern because the White House has been militantly secretive about its position. In the past few days, in fact, White House spokesman Jay Carney has gotten downright testy whenever reporters point out that Obama has never released a debt-ceiling plan, making it impossible to know exactly where he stands, and therefore whether he has compromised on any of his original positions.

    "The idea that there is not an Obama plan is point No. 1 on the talking points issued by the Republican Party," Carney said Tuesday.

    "It's not a talking point," responded Ed Henry, Fox News' White House correspondent. "That's unfair. Where is the plan?"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 4:34 PM GMT
    It is apparent riddler does not understand the division of powers between the Executive (The President), and the Legislature (Congress).

    It is the latter that drafts laws, not the former, so any failure to draft laws" cannot be ascribed to the President.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 4:51 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian saidIt is apparent riddler does not understand the division of powers between the Executive (The President), and the Legislature (Congress).

    It is the latter that drafts laws, not the former, so any failure to draft laws" cannot be ascribed to the President.


    Exactly. And 70% of the American people already blame the Congressional Republicans for the debt "crisis".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 4:56 PM GMT
    It is axiomatic that to eleminate debt one must increase revenue and/or expenses - preferably both. Only the Republicans refuse to accept this.

    Only the Republicans feign blindness to the completely unrelated coincidence of the shortfall being about the same as the Bush tax cuts; that just letting those fiscally irresponsible cuts that pandered to bush/Cheney's corporate backers expire would have averted this "crisis."

    And only their brainwashed and dulled sheeple have managed to force themselves to turn a blind eye to the basic fact that the entire economic mess in the USA is founded upon a hugely expensive war that was foisted upon the world based on the Bush administration's deliberate lies, bringing your economy to the brink of collapse, costing thousands of dead Americans, Iraqis and other innocent allies made part of the lie that cost lives today and has insired tomorrow's terrorists bent on avenging their dead, killed all because of a lie.

    While we tuck that into that back of our collective memory, it is at the forefront of theirs and it is a raw painful wound.

    That is the kind of blood feud that never dies. (consider the pockets of the Old South that still resent the war of Northern Aggression.)


    Such an enmity once earned cannot easily be changed. GWB may well have sown the seeds for the most horrific acts of retribution. that would not otherwise have been motivated.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 4:59 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian saidIt is apparent riddler does not understand the division of powers between the Executive (The President), and the Legislature (Congress).

    It is the latter that drafts laws, not the former, so any failure to draft laws" cannot be ascribed to the President.


    Lol - as SB points out, apparently this only applies for Democrats when President.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 5:03 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Upper_Canadian saidIt is apparent riddler does not understand the division of powers between the Executive (The President), and the Legislature (Congress).

    It is the latter that drafts laws, not the former, so any failure to draft laws" cannot be ascribed to the President.



    Then how come so many of you liberals are always blaming Bush and Reagan for "out of control spending" and "doubling and tripling the debt?" You admit that the President doesn't dictate spending (which is just another law drafted by Congress), nor does he have much input if the opposition party controls the House.



    Often Bush (or another president's name) is used in place of their administration and its policies. As I, and others, have pointed out, the primary drivers of $9.4 trillion of the debt results from Republican policies and priorities. Tax cuts, disproportionately benefiting the wealthy, Medicare Part D, and two wars (one of which was a complete war of choice).

    And the debt ceiling was raised 18 times under the "sainted" Reagan and 7 times under Bush. No Republican in the House balked at those 25 increases.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 5:18 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Upper_Canadian saidIt is apparent riddler does not understand the division of powers between the Executive (The President), and the Legislature (Congress).

    It is the latter that drafts laws, not the former, so any failure to draft laws" cannot be ascribed to the President.


    Lol - as SB points out, apparently this only applies for Democrats when President.


    How much infuence a President has on Congress has more to do with whether the same party holds the Executive and the individual houses of the Congress (which has two chambers - "bicameral", each with different responsibilities and powers defined by the Constitution, and both of which guard those powers jealously.

    GwB was particularly noted for accumulating power into an enhanced Executive - which he was only able to do in the wake of the panic after 9/11, issuing an extraordinary number of so-called Executive Statements overriding the will of Congress, to the consternation of some Consitutional and government sholars.

    The circumstances faced by every President will differ according to the make-up of the Congress, so it is not as simple as SouthBeach is able to perceive it, riddler.

    (He is still at the developmental cognitive stage of 4 legs = dog; wings = duck.
    It is not a very sophisticated way of perceiving the world but it is sufficient at this level to know the world has people in it, dogs and ducks - and you never eat the former.


    We are proud of our SB. He now recognizes there are dogs we eat and dogs we don't eat, and the same with the ducks.


    Thanks to the SB-Whisperer we hired.

    He taught us not to hit SB with a rolled up newspaper any more.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 5:22 PM GMT
    The weasel word is "compromise". In this context it's rather like someone proposing to saw off your leg rather than your head. Perhaps you don't want your leg (or your head) sawn off? Shame on you for not agreeing to "compromise"!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 5:24 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said As I, and others, have pointed out, the primary drivers of $9.4 trillion of the debt results from Republican policies and priorities. Tax cuts, disproportionately benefiting the wealthy, Medicare Part D, and two wars (one of which was a complete war of choice).


    Due to the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives. The President / Administration of the Republican presidents you cited had no control over what the Democrat-controlled House gave them.

    Oh, and the "two wars" - those were approved by Democrats in Congress, who had access to the same intelligence as the Bush administration did - unless you are so deluded to believe that the Bush administration "altered" or "held back" information from Congress (which would probably have been an impeachable offense).




    That "intelligence" was false. The President sand his cronies knew it.

    They sent the General in to the hearing with the "anthrax" bullshit.

    The Congressmen believed them.

    And yes, Bush should be tried as a war criminal for it, not just "impeached."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 5:26 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian said
    riddler78 said
    Upper_Canadian saidIt is apparent riddler does not understand the division of powers between the Executive (The President), and the Legislature (Congress).

    It is the latter that drafts laws, not the former, so any failure to draft laws" cannot be ascribed to the President.


    Lol - as SB points out, apparently this only applies for Democrats when President.


    how much infuence a President has on Congress has more to do with whether the same party hold the Executive and the individual houses of the Congress (which has two chambers - "bicameral", each with different responsibilities and powers defined by the Constitution, and both of which guard those powers jealously.

    GwB was partcularly noted accumulating power into an enhanced Executive - which he was only able to do in the wake of the panic after 9/11, issuing an extraordinary number of so-called Executive Statements overriding the will of Congress, to the consternation of some Consitutional and government sholars.

    Their circumstances faced by every President will differ according to the make-up of the Congress, so it is not as simple as SouthBeach is able to perceive it, riddler.


    Nice try. Not only did Obama accept the increasing powers of the Executive under Bush, he went for more. Sadly, what you seem to willfully forget is that not only have the Senate Democrats voted down the Republican proposal from Congress at the behest of Obama who has rejected the idea of a short term compromise in order to allow for more time to negotiate.

    This is an utter failure of leadership on his part. In the same evening Harry Reid chose to defer a vote on his own plan so that at least they could go to conference to settle out a compromise. The Republicans have shown they are willing to compromise. Too bad the Democrats are unwilling to do the same which is why if the US defaults most of the responsibility will rest on them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 5:30 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidThe Republicans have shown they are willing to compromise. Too bad the Democrats are unwilling to do the same which is why if the US defaults most of the responsibility will rest on them.


    They have shown no such thing. Even with the revenue increases taken out of the McConnell and Reid plans, the House Tea Baggers wouldn't vote for it. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 5:33 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 saidThe Republicans have shown they are willing to compromise. Too bad the Democrats are unwilling to do the same which is why if the US defaults most of the responsibility will rest on them.


    They have shown no such thing. Even with the revenue increases taken out of the McConnell and Reid plans, the House Tea Baggers wouldn't vote for it. icon_rolleyes.gif


    And yet they did when the latest Boehner bill was passed which was already a diluted version of their earlier bill. Where is Obama's plan? Surely you don't suggest that the White House press corps doesn't understand US civics given they have been asking the same thing?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 7:21 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said As I, and others, have pointed out, the primary drivers of $9.4 trillion of the debt results from Republican policies and priorities. Tax cuts, disproportionately benefiting the wealthy, Medicare Part D, and two wars (one of which was a complete war of choice).


    Due to the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives. The President / Administration of the Republican presidents you cited had no control over what the Democrat-controlled House gave them.

    Oh, and the "two wars" - those were approved by Democrats in Congress, who had access to the same intelligence as the Bush administration did - unless you are so deluded to believe that the Bush administration "altered" or "held back" information from Congress (which would probably have been an impeachable offense).




    That "intelligence" was false. The President sand his cronies knew it.

    They sent the General in to the hearing with the "anthrax" bullshit.

    The Congressmen believed them.

    And yes, Bush should be tried as a war criminal for it, not just "impeached."





    Yup.
    Plus SB's claim that Bush had a Democratic controlled House is BS.
    Bush had a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED House and a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED Senate for six out of the eight years he was in office.
    And the Repubs in the Congress did what ever Bush asked them to do.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jul 30, 2011 7:31 PM GMT
    It's one sorry-ass excuse of a "compromise." And if you think Obama is unwilling to compromise, then apparently you failed to acknowledge how he was willing to bring Social Security and Medicare into the mix.

    But of course your reputation riddler78 is based on your fondness for half-truths and self-deluded fantasies.

    Another point: President Obama, as it was recently pointed out by Senator Harry Reid, has spent more time meeting with members of congress on raising the debt ceiling than any President before him. McConnell who didn't want to meet with Obama when invited over now wants to meet with him and, just like you're doing, is attempting to twist the narrative.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Jul 30, 2011 7:56 PM GMT
    the Republican party is in SERIOUS trouble today.

    they made a "deal with the devil" (AKA "TEAbaggers") in order to get control of part of congress....now they are paying the price for this deal.

    these nutjob TEAbaggers will be the demise of the Republican party.

  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Jul 30, 2011 8:25 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]rickrick91 said.... SB's claim that Bush had a Democratic controlled House is BS.
    Bush had a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED House and a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED Senate for six out of the eight years he was in office.
    And the Repubs in the Congress did what ever Bush asked them to do.[/quote]



    southbeach jane has never allowed correct facts to get in the way of her spewing of GOP dogma...




    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jul 30, 2011 8:40 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    creature saidIt's one sorry-ass excuse of a "compromise." And if you think Obama is unwilling to compromise, then apparently you failed to acknowledge how he was willing to bring Social Security and Medicare into the mix.

    But of course your reputation riddler78 is based on your fondness for half-truths and self-deluded fantasies.

    Another point: President Obama, as it was recently pointed out by Senator Harry Reid, has spent more time meeting with members of congress on raising the debt ceiling than any President before him. McConnell who didn't want to meet with Obama when invited over now wants to meet with him and, just like you're doing, is attempting to twist the narrative.



    Are you aware of the numbers in play?

    Boehner: $1.7 trillion in cuts (over 10 years, $170 billion in cuts per year, $1.48 trillion added to the debt each year.)

    Reid: $2.2 trillion in cuts (over 10 years, $220 billion in cuts per year - though they are mostly cuts in spending that already would have been cut, $1.43 trillion added to the debt each year.)

    Neither plan is a serious way to deal with the nation's financial mess.


    Are you aware that nothing you posted relates to "compromise" that riddler78 foolishly believes existed in Boehner's plan?

    Unless I'm reading something wrong in your post, Reid's plan does more than Boehner's. Maybe not to the extent you like, but it looks like Democrats did more of the compromising.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 10:55 PM GMT
    creature said
    southbeach1500 said
    creature saidIt's one sorry-ass excuse of a "compromise." And if you think Obama is unwilling to compromise, then apparently you failed to acknowledge how he was willing to bring Social Security and Medicare into the mix.

    But of course your reputation riddler78 is based on your fondness for half-truths and self-deluded fantasies.

    Another point: President Obama, as it was recently pointed out by Senator Harry Reid, has spent more time meeting with members of congress on raising the debt ceiling than any President before him. McConnell who didn't want to meet with Obama when invited over now wants to meet with him and, just like you're doing, is attempting to twist the narrative.



    Are you aware of the numbers in play?

    Boehner: $1.7 trillion in cuts (over 10 years, $170 billion in cuts per year, $1.48 trillion added to the debt each year.)

    Reid: $2.2 trillion in cuts (over 10 years, $220 billion in cuts per year - though they are mostly cuts in spending that already would have been cut, $1.43 trillion added to the debt each year.)

    Neither plan is a serious way to deal with the nation's financial mess.


    Are you aware that nothing you posted relates to "compromise" that riddler78 foolishly believes existed in Boehner's plan?

    Unless I'm reading something wrong in your post, Reid's plan does more than Boehner's. Maybe not to the extent you like, but it looks like Democrats did more of the compromising.


    The Reid plan is full of cuts that don't exist - like "We'll cut funding for the war in Iraq" when the war in Iraq is over.

    There is no compromise when one side is saying let's commit suicide one way and the other side is saying let's commit suicide a different way. We can't sustain another $8+ trillion added debt between now and the end of the decade.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 11:54 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 saidThe Republicans have shown they are willing to compromise. Too bad the Democrats are unwilling to do the same which is why if the US defaults most of the responsibility will rest on them.


    They have shown no such thing. Even with the revenue increases taken out of the McConnell and Reid plans, the House Tea Baggers wouldn't vote for it. icon_rolleyes.gif


    And yet they did when the latest Boehner bill was passed which was already a diluted version of their earlier bill. Where is Obama's plan? Surely you don't suggest that the White House press corps doesn't understand US civics given they have been asking the same thing?


    The president does not create the budget; Congress does. The Republican Party, captured by the Tea Baggers has passed two extremist budgets that were never going to get through the Senate let alone be signed by the president.

    The White House Press Corps are the worst kind of idiots. And, I'm not suggesting anything. I am declaring that they either do not know US government or feign ignorance because they want "a story", and their primarily corporate masters do not allow them to cover actual news.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2011 11:57 PM GMT
    free4all said
    creature said
    southbeach1500 said
    creature saidIt's one sorry-ass excuse of a "compromise." And if you think Obama is unwilling to compromise, then apparently you failed to acknowledge how he was willing to bring Social Security and Medicare into the mix.

    But of course your reputation riddler78 is based on your fondness for half-truths and self-deluded fantasies.

    Another point: President Obama, as it was recently pointed out by Senator Harry Reid, has spent more time meeting with members of congress on raising the debt ceiling than any President before him. McConnell who didn't want to meet with Obama when invited over now wants to meet with him and, just like you're doing, is attempting to twist the narrative.



    Are you aware of the numbers in play?

    Boehner: $1.7 trillion in cuts (over 10 years, $170 billion in cuts per year, $1.48 trillion added to the debt each year.)

    Reid: $2.2 trillion in cuts (over 10 years, $220 billion in cuts per year - though they are mostly cuts in spending that already would have been cut, $1.43 trillion added to the debt each year.)

    Neither plan is a serious way to deal with the nation's financial mess.


    Are you aware that nothing you posted relates to "compromise" that riddler78 foolishly believes existed in Boehner's plan?

    Unless I'm reading something wrong in your post, Reid's plan does more than Boehner's. Maybe not to the extent you like, but it looks like Democrats did more of the compromising.


    The Reid plan is full of cuts that don't exist - like "We'll cut funding for the war in Iraq" when the war in Iraq is over.

    There is no compromise when one side is saying let's commit suicide one way and the other side is saying let's commit suicide a different way. We can't sustain another $8+ trillion added debt between now and the end of the decade.



    Which is why revenues must be raised through increased taxes and closing of loopholes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 31, 2011 2:58 AM GMT
    The repubs have not 'compromised' or there would have been some revenues included in the 'debt fix' proposals.