Call. His. Bluff.
By Ken Falkenstein | Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 | Policy
From USA Today:
While waiting for Congress to make its next move, the Obama administration today threatened to veto the two-step debt reduction plan put up by House Speaker John Boehner . . . .
Obama said he objected to Boehner’s temporary extension of the debt ceiling, saying it would “force us to once again face the threat of default just six months from now.”
So Obama wants us to believe that he would veto the Boehner plan, and thereby cause a default next week, because he is opposed to the possibility of a default in 6 months?
This one is a no-brainer: Call. His. Bluff.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Ken Falkenstein has been a staffer in the United States Senate and the Virginia House of Delegates. He has managed political campaigns. He was a military intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army in West Germany during the Cold War. He is currently the Vice President of the Down Syndrome Association of Hampton Roads and practices as a civil litigation attorney with the law firm of Poole Mahoney PC in Virginia Beach. His concern for his kids' future is what most informs his writing.
Comments
46 Responses to "Call. His. Bluff."
Well Ken, that is not necessary as it appears that Boehner/Cantor cannot pass their own proposal in the House because the cuts are not deep enough for those who would put the nation back into recession. Frankly, the nation is now held hostage by those threatening a deep economic crisis that as a minimum will increase interest rates and unemployment, hold up social security and veterans checks, and in general, inform the entire world that we want to self destruct. Why these nuts want to create another great recession because the President has asked the rich who have greatly benefitted in the last decade, to share just a tiny bit of their wealthh to assist this nation to continue the recovery is beyond me.
Mike,
What is beyond me is why the President wants those who already pay 60% of all income tax dollars, the top 5%, to pay more while telling the bottom 48% who pay no income tax at all that they are somehow “paying more than their fair share.” That does not compute, unless you translate it into Newspeak. Many of these freeloaders are earning more than the local median income where they live and some are contributing to the estimated $24B annually in Medicare/Medicaid fraud, taking even more dollars out of the public treasury that they never paid in.
Call. His. Bluff.
Amen, brother. And I mean that in the nicest, most affirming sort of way.
Mike said: “Why these nuts want to create another great recession because the President has asked the rich who have greatly benefitted in the last decade, to share just a tiny bit of their wealthh to assist this nation to continue the recovery is beyond me.”
Because the rich don’t have enough money to balance the budget, that’s why. And because of something called “capital flight,” which I’m sure the socialists could and would outlaw if they had the power (still hoping the repubs don’t do so as well…). Hong Kong is booming, with a 16% corporate tax rate. Or didn’t you know?
Well HisRoc, we have always had a progressive tax code, just not as progressive as it used to be. Even since President Reagan, the code has been revised to benefit the rich over the rest of us. The Code use to acknowledge that those with less income pay many regressive taxes just to live, and the income tax should reflect that fact. The fact that income disparity had increased dramatically is an indication of the unfairness of the current rates. But of course, the President is more concerned with closing corporate loop holes that have benefitted the super rich, yet for the republican caucus, even that is not acceptable, even though polls show most americans agree with the President.
Mike,
When almost half of all wage earners pay no income tax at all and many of them get an Earned Income Credit handout from the government, the polls show that “most Americans” think that “the rich” should pay more tax?
I’m shocked.
And, BTW, who do you think owns all those corporations with tax “loop holes?” Primarily, pension funds for people like school teachers and middle class 401k account holders like you and me who pay capital gains taxes on the after-tax corporate profits. And then, if we have the anti-social audacity to accumulate more than $1.5M, the Federal government taxes those earning a third time with the Estate Tax.
I’m having a hard time believing that you actually own a business.
Mike, define rich. someone who employs others? someone who works hard & is paid a commensurate wage/salary? someone who takes financial risks?
Business owners who are honest about their success acknowledge that success is based upon the contributions of their workers, and of course, upon the public infrastructure and business environment created by the public sector. In fact, the tax rates published for corporations are rarely paid in full as deductions and loop holes abound. The case this year of GE paying no corporate income tax, and in fact, receiving money back from the government, is just another reason why the Presdient’s stance is the correct one. Afterall, if deficit reduction is actually what the republicans want and insist upon, let’s do it with both reduced expenditures and increase revenue.
You didn’t answer my somewhat implicit question, Mike.
Why should the same income be taxed three times? First, when the corporation earns it. Second, when the shareholder shows a capital gain. And third, when the shareholder dies and his estate is taxed.
What is the difference between a vampire and the IRS? A vampire will stop sucking your blood when you die.
“Afterall, if deficit reduction is actually what the republicans want and insist upon, let’s do it with both reduced expenditures and increase revenue.”
Well of course it isn’t what they care about. If you offered them a deal that had $5 trillion in cuts and $47.62 in tax increases on people making over $1 million a year, they wouldn’t take it. Because the GOP doesn’t currently have any value that overides “no tax increases, ever.” Not the financial security of the country. Not the defense of the country. Not the survival of the country itself. All are hostage to “no tax increases, ever.”
Well of course it isn’t what the Dems care about. If you offered them a deal that had $2 trillion in taxes and linked a cut cap and balanced budget that shrank government spending and regulation, they wouldn’t take it. Because the Democratic party doesn’t currently have any value that overrides “no reduction in government spending and power, ever.” Not the financial security of the country. Not the defense of the country. Not the survival of the country itself. All are hostage to “no pain to the government and their cronies, ever.”
Steve,
I tend to agree with you more often than not, but both you and valentinus are spot on. The fault is clearly on both sides. The Democrats and the Republicans are playing chicken with the American economy at stake. The losers are going to be us and the winner is going to be the first successful Third Party movement since 1856.
I hate to think that it had to come to this to break the partisan gridlock in Washington and there is no doubt that all of us will suffer great pain in the fallout. But in the long run, it just might be worth it if we can get true reform of our broken Congress.
HR-We certainly agree that our Congress is broken. Not sure I think the cure you’re proposing won’t be worse than the disease though.
I’m a for a Third Party that recognizes that political parties have no role to play in our system. Suprised that the Tea Party folks haven’t realized this is the most “unconstitutional” thing about our current government — the legislature organizes itself on the basis of what are, in constitutional terms, two private social clubs.
Steve,
You will get no argument from me on that point. That is why I went in my adult lifetime from being a Southern Democrat to a Reagan Democrat to a Rockefeller Republican to an Independent.
George Washington got it right in his Farewell Address of 1796:
20 I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.
21 This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
22 The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
23 Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
24 It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
25 There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
Man, I like that picture at the beginning of Ken Falkenstein’s article where US Representative John Boehner is not taking his eyes off Obama…never take your eyes off your opponent when your dealing with him. That picture is worth a million dollars in what it says.
For the first time in a long time (and it still may too early} I’m beginning to feel a little better about our congressman doing their job. Maybe Eric Cantor (VA), Jim Jordan (OH), John Boehner (OH), Paul Ryan (WI) and many others who were elected to get the spending down, and the taxing under control and balancing a budget will actually do their job and get it done.
I’ve been waiting a long time to say…”Way to go congress.” Our guys in the field are dying for our nation. And you too, congress, are going into harms way to get the job for our country done.
It’s great to see men not caring if they lose their job…as long as they do their job. I am beginning to see some congressman more concerned in getting the job done for what the voter elected them to do than becoming one of the “good ol’ boys” looking to fill their own pockets or more interested in their own future than the country’s.
These men are not letting the tactics of intimidation such as misguided boobs hollering out…”Oh, woe to us, economic destruction is upon us all” or parroting class warfare rhetoric, “the rich are being mean to us poor people” and recalling other “bumps in the night” so a few can keep control with their own designs. And believe me, their are such as Obama and others that would like to control and to dictate to others “what should be”.
Go congress…call Mullah Obama’s hand.
Well HisRoc, because taxes are the price we pay for civilized society. The rich pay more because they have more to pay, and they have gained more from the society we all share. The rich and wealthy pay higher tax rates on the income above that which they need to live very comfortable lives, and in the past, the large majority did so easily and with compassion, perhaps willingly, in full knowledge that they needed the middle and lower classes to make them successful. Now, regretfully, a selfishness, and a notion that they did it themselves, and should have much higher rewards has set in, most obvious by the salaries of CEOs that used to be 20 times the average worker, and now are, what 150 times on average? If that trend continues, and if the financial condition of even the middle class continues to deteriorate, our civil society will not long be without civil unrest and perhaps even rebellion. Even Europe has surpassed us on its rates of upward mobility, and if the advocates for the rich and selfish, that is, the republicans, don’t realize this, they will be the most surprised by the backlash.
Mike,
Your argument brings a tear to my eye and the thought of guillotines on the National Mall is chilling.
None of that, however, is relevant to the American Experience. Our country’s exceptionalism has always been based on two realities: that there is an American Dream where hard work and sacrifice can lead to a better station in life and that every American has “skin in the game.” When you choke off the American dream with confiscatory taxes on the middle class (yes, people with a net worth of $1M today are middle class) while providing free bread and circuses for the lower classes, then you have reached the point of the last law passed in Rome.
Mike, there you go again…class warfare. A false, malicious report that Obama’s problems (and the Democrats and the Republicans who are imitating them) are the rich and many other such canards.
It’s the VOTERS that are causing so much grief to the commander in failure and his troops. Or as it is said to the uniformed (paraphrased that is)…”It’s the VOTERS, stupid.” They are not buying what Obama has to sell them. It’s not the rich that stand in his way. It’s every one of us patriots that are not buying into the sins of the past about the bad old rich. Or other bug a boo’s.
So many votes trusted in Obama in 2008 only to find out that he was putting out hot air. Obama not only lied to the Americans about how he was going to rein in the economy, but just made it worse by out of control spending. And he wants more spending.
Hell, he would not only not salute or put his hand over his heart or even stand at attention when the American flag would go by but put his hands over his genitals. Is he a foreign national? Does he want to destroy our country in more ways than one? Has he showed us his true colors?
The VOTERS are saying…NO MORE. And after this next election, I don’t think they will trust him even if he ran for Dog Catcher. And the voters are going to turn out even more of his “troops” in the US Senate (Democrat or Republican) and perhaps a few more in the US House.
IT’S THE VOTERS AND NOT THE RICH…THAT OBAMA NEEDS TO BE WORRIED ABOUT. So stand tall new and old congressman…the people were behind you in 2010 and will be there to increase your ranks in 2012–minus one Obama.
Pat,
“President Obama’s approval rating is so low now that even the Kenyans are claiming that he wasn’t born there.”
-Jay Leno
HisRoc, now you got me to laughing. Jay Leno is right on target.
Of course the far right, intent on protecting their wealthy corporate masters and hedge fund operators as the price of averting default, does not want to talk about class warfare. It is adopting a budget worse than Ryan’s that cuts government only and does not provide for tax reform; default may be the better option. Either way, everyone but the top 2% will suffer if default occurs or if the republican budget, if there is one as of this writing, is ever adopted in the House, passes the Senate, and is signed by the President. Of course the President’s plan which cuts the deficit by $4 trillion by cutting expenditures and raising revenue, has been abandoned by the Speaker, clearly demonstrating that this was never about the debt and deficit; it is strictly a political act to ensure the defeat of the President because we will have slipped back into recession. Our only possible chance is that moderate republicans and democrats join together on a compromise that the President can sign to avert default. The intrasigence of the far right about debt that their party incurred is astounding, and the fact that they will plunge the nation into the status of a dead beat debtor is a true indication that they have broken their oath of office.
Mike- President Obama’s spokesmouth, Jay Carney, admitted yesterday that Obama doesn’t have a plan. Until he decides to start leading by offering a plan of his own, he has no credibility. The congressional leaders were right to send him to his room while the adults worked on finding a solution.
Well Ken, I know that is the approved republican take on the matter, but of course, it is simply false. I know the President and the Speaker were very close to agreement on the Plan to cut $4 trillion by reducing expenditures by $3 trillion and increasing revenue by $1 trillion. In this package, the President offered entitlement reform and tax reform, and he and Boehner were in agreement on the main points although some details were still to be resolved. Then, unexpectedly, Boehner left; he simply abandoned the negotiation, I suspect because it actually dealt with deficit reduction, it reformed entitlements, and it did so on a time table that did not force us back into recession. Most Americans support compromise, support a balanced plan, and adamantly do not want our nation labelled as a bad credit risk. If you truly believe this Nation is better than that, tell your congressman to act as outlined above.
Guys and gals,
Got popcorn?
Mike: I am one of the alleged minority who adamantly hold the position that a credit downgrade would be the best thing that could happen to the U.S. Nothing short of that will make them slow down their borrowing. Until then, they will continue to borrow money in my name and use the money to bribe the electorate to vote for still more borrowing, as you come here to advocate for only slightly different reasons (to enhance your own wealth). The ever-shrinking working middle class gets to pay for it.
Understand that what I want to achieve is to make them stop borrowing in my name and signing my name on the loan papers. It is immoral and would under any other circumstances be illegal and unenforceable. You can say that this is the price of civilization. I say the price, my forced virtual enslavement to the votes of the now-majority nonproducers, is too high. If this is how you define “civilized” I want no part of it.
Where are the ships to take me to the New World where I can take my life into my own hands and build my own future?
The President can’t let this go beyond 2 August because on 3 August he will be in Chicago for his Birthday party and campaign fundraisers. Not having a deal by that time won’t do Obama well in the polls.
Damn, Playing a round of Angry Birds under the influence of strong coffee is talking.. Listen upo Rino and liberal alike..
President Obysmals concern in this matter is the same concern Allen had in 06 and Bush had in 04.. re-election.. country be damned, taxpayers be damned. Being suspicious of anyone who aspires to be a “dedicated public servant” has gone mainstream for a reason. In spite of their election promises, our lawmakers mostly yearn for money, power, prestige and privilege.
Few lawmakers will risk reasonable compromise for fear that it may damage their chances for re-election yet every career lawmaker asking for a debt increase is asking for compromise on American principles.
A few observations:
1. Career lawmakers are not normal. In no way do I intend that as a compliment. You people should be suspicious of anyone who aspires to a job where someone will be given broad powers to alter the lives of hundreds of millions. Do you have the supreme intelligence to think you’re wise enough to accomplish this? Your congressman does. Anyone who is truly wise enough to do this job is wise enough not to want it for too many terms.
2. While some lawmakers have only limited assets when they enter office, most of them leave rich. The longer they remain in office, the richer they become.
If you’re like most voters you probably think your choice for president, congress and senate are OK. It’s the rest of them who are the problem.
Your President, Congressman or Senator who votes for a debt increase is a liar.
Actually, those who vote for the debt ceiling increase are simply law abiding americans; that is, Congress having appropriated funds for government obligations, is obligated to pay for those obligations. To renege on debt payments and obligations entered into fairly and squarely is a failure to abide by their oath of office. To subject americans to this failure to do their job means to me they are unfit for office. Now if those right wing republicans who are holding this up wish to pass legislation cutting the budget in half, and if they are successful in doing so through the processes for legislation, then fine, that will be the law. But to fail to cover existing lawful obligations by failing to raise the debt ceiling as required by Congresses own actions, is a despicable act for which they should be impeached and convicted.
Mike- Obama’s spokesmouth, Jay Carney, admitted that Obama does not have a plan. Throwing out arbitrary numbers with no specific cuts is not a plan.
This is consistent with Obama’s entire presidency: He has never offered a plan on any subject. His “leadership” style is to state what he wants and then demand that someone develop it and bring it to him. See, e.g., the “stimulus” bill and health care take-over, both of which were crafted by Congress with no meaningful input from Obama.
And that’s why the congressional leaders were correct to kick him out of the discussions. Obama’s cowardly refusal to lead (or lack of ability to do so) has rendered him utterly irrelevant. So, Congress will pass what it will, and Obama, regardless of his veto threats that everyone knows are bluffs, will sign whatever arrives on his desk – like he always does.
Next year we will have the chance to elect a president who is both qualified and competent to lead. Until then, Congress will continue to do Obama’s job for him.
Mike,
Another false argument. The president has already indicated he would not sign a “short term” increase, such as one that would be required to get us to end of the fiscal year in October. You also fail to mention that the Democrat controlled CONgress had been running the government without passing a budget, so it is more than disingenuous of you to come here and tell us about meeting
“budget” obligations.
David Beers of Standard and Poor’s was on CNBC recently (the interview clip is available on Market-Ticker dot com) and he noted that the ratings agencies rate debt, and as long as the debt payments continue that would not constitute default.
Shumer and Durbin were on TV just a few minutes ago and they both used the word “default” as something that would happen in a few days. Are they stupid, or liars? How do such men get to hold elected office? Certainly not by being stupid.
No Ken, it is a simple fact that it is republican dogma that they will do nothing if it in any way increases the chances that the President will be reelected. In that context, they must do all they can to defeat him, even if that means opposing initiatives which republicans first proposed. This is certainly true in the House, and the Senate leader has said that specifically in public. So anything the President proposes is DOA in the House, and will be opposed in the Senate by republicans. So whatever happened to doing what is best for America?
Mike- What are the specific cuts that Obama is proposing?
Well Ken, President Obama’s proposed cuts of $3,000,000,000,000 are based upon the Commission’s work, the bi-partisan proposals by the gang of six, including cuts in defense and entitlements. Same with the $1,000,000,000,000 in added revenue, for a total reduction of the deficit of $4,000,000,000,000. This is a commitment that he and John Boehner, Speaker of the House, were very close to signing until Mr. Boehner left the talks. But I digress from my main point; that is, in my view, the raising of the debt ceiling was made a requirement by the votes in the House and Senate that created these obligations and required this action. I do not for one moment believe that the U.S. Government, which I took a sworn oath to uphold and to do those things required by the office to which I was appointed, should be held hostage by any group in Congress, left or right wing, and made to suffer the outrageous possibility that we will be a common debtor that fails to make payments it is obligated to make. This sickening prospect is brought to you by the right wing of the republican party, not the President of the United States of America.
Mike- Stop regurgitating Democrat talking points and answer the question: Other than throwing out some arbitrary numbers, WHAT IS OBAMA’S PLAN?
Regretfully Ken, you fail to see that the President has proposed a grand plan that does exactly what the republicans said they wanted; that is, significant reduction in the deficit. The republicans have walked away, because if they approved the President’s Plan, it will have increased the President’s chances for re-election, and that is taboo for republicans. So all that republican fuss about deficits has been shown to be one big smokescreen.
Mike- Stop regurgitating Democrat talking points and answer the question: Other than throwing out some arbitrary numbers, WHAT IS OBAMA’S PLAN?
Mike, you can’t say it but privately you know it.. Obama did not get elected to make something out of himself. Obama was supported by liberals like you to bring Change.. including dismantling capitalism.
Ken, the President has done all he can to facilitate a deal which is in fact the responsibility of the Congress, not the executive branch. The fact that both Boehner and Cantor got to the edge of a deal, and then fled, does not say much about your leadership. Of course, given the Speaker’s difficult task of placating members who actually welcome default, his is a difficult task. And James, yes, of course I wanted change; the republican administration of George W. Bush had created the Great Recession in which the world financial system was within a day of total collapse. Who in their right mind would want those bozos back in charge?
Mike- Your canard about Republicans wanting a default makes having a discussion with you difficult. I’m dealing in facts, while you’re spewing dishonest spin.
The fact is that Boehner has offered a plan with specific cuts. Other Republicans in both houses of Congress have offered different plans with specific cuts. Even Harry Reid, whose majority Democrats in the Senate have not passed a budget in 3 years, grudgingly offered a plan with specific cuts (although his “cuts” consist of spending that was not going to occur anyway).
Barack Obama is the President of the United States, but he has never – not once – ever offered a specific plan on any policy. His “leadership” style is to announce a result that he wants and demand that Congress bring it to him on a silver platter. Even when his party had supermajorities in Congress and could anything they wanted with the Republicans lacking the number to stop them, Obama never offered a specific plan. On “stimulus” and the health care take-over, he sat on his hands and waited for the Democrats in Congress to send him something.
Now, after he and his cohorts in Congress increased the national debt by 60% in 2 years and thereby CREATED this debt ceiling “crisis,” Obama STILL refuses to offer a plan to get us out of the mess that he intentionally created. Instead, he’s doing what he ALWAYS does: He’s sitting back and demanding that Congress send him something to clean up his mess.
So, the President has rendered himself irrelevant, and we are now waiting for the adults in the House of Representatives to lead the country out of Obama’s mess.
Ken, we simply disagree on fundamental issues. The republican majority in the House doesn’t even have a plan. You keep saying they do, but as of this hour of this day, they are in total disarray. They are set to plunge this nation into a trillion dollars of additional debt payments because they caused us to default and our credit rating to be reduced. Their irresponsibility is astounding, and as they drag the reputation of the U.S. government through the mud, all of us ought to condemn them for bringing us to the brink of a ruinous default.
It is true that the Speaker’s plan does not enjoy universal support among his caucus – BUT AT LEAST HE HAS PRESENTED ONE. Furthermore, the Republicans DID rally around the most responsible of all of the plans – Cut, Cap, and Balance, but the Democrats in the Senate killed it. Which brings us back to the question that I have asked repeatedly and that you will not and cannot answer: WHERE IS OBAMA’S PLAN?
The Republicans have offered several different specific plans. Your party has offered NOTHING. And you have the gall to attack us? WHERE IS YOUR PLAN?????
Well Ken, not only is it true, but it is hard to continue to say the Speaker has a Plan when he does not have the support of his own caucus. This reckless game has pushed our nation to the brink of ruinous default. By threatening a deep economic crisis, they have put our nation at great risk. None of this is the slightest bit necessary; in fact, by ensuring that those who benefitted the most over the last decade make no sacrifice at all, the republicans have once again cemented their role as the portectors of the rich, wealthy, hedge fund managers and corporate executives, at the expense of the rest of the country. As interest rates go up, as social security and veterans checks are withheld pending receipt of funds, as broad sections of the government shut down, and as millions more americans lose their jobs as businesses hold their cash, remember, this is the fault of the far right republicans in the House of Representatives who prefer fiscal chaos to negotiation and compromise.
Ken, hence you have the view of a radical leftist who doesn’t have the bandwidth to discuss a real question and continues to skip and repeat like an old vinyl record. Also be aware that Mike borrows extensively from his previous posts which are cut and pasted from the Daily Kos and other left wing sources so a sane and rational discussion about specifics is impossible.
“Mike, where are the cuts proposed by the President?” … Republicans have no support and are in disarray… “Mike, where’s the plan?”…. Republicans are ruinous, reckless, playing games, risky…. “Mike, where is your plan?”… Republicans are protecting the rich, wealthy, hedge fund managers, corporate executives…. “Mike, where’s Obama’s plan?… Republicans are going to stop Social Security and Veterans checks, shut down the government…. “Mike, where’s the Democrat’s plan?”… Republicans are causing millions and millions of people to lose their jobs and are causing fiscal chaos and our 401K plans are going to collapse…. “Mike, where’s the…….” and so it goes. Dodge, deflect and attack because you don’t have a clue about the question.
Well Tim J, I would expect no other response from you. But of course, events are moving so fast you are not keeping up. Clearly, the tounge lashing provided to the caucus this afternoon is tacit acknowledgment that the President’s message has resonated with the public, and even the few moderate republicans left in the Senate and the House have lectured the childish behavior of the freshman class and warned them they are at risk of going down with the ship. So where are we? I suspect Boehner will cobble together a majority by adding some cuts, and perhaps his bill will pass in the House. While it is DOA in the Senate, there may be enough common ground that Reid and Boehner can effect a compromise that will avoid a meltdown, a default, and a recession. I sure hope so, but I believe Americans will remember that House Republicans put our nation’s reputation at risk by their petulant behavior. We will not forget.
The Battle of Bunker Hill was an American loss, but the Americans had achieved much. They had viciously and effectively fought British regulars, the best equipped and trained army on the planet. They had both proved their mettle and inflicted on the British double the losses they themselves had suffered.
Afterwards, General Nathaniel Greene has these comments: “Upon the whole I think we have little reason to complain. I wish we could sell them another hill at the same price.”
England’s General Gage recorded these words: “The number of killed and wounded is greater than our forces can afford to lose.”
We need many more of these epic and very public political struggles. After a short while there will be no one left in the national political establishment or the MSM with any public credibility at all. Then, perhaps, we can turn off our televisions, throw out the entire lot in Washington, and begin anew.
Tim,
Excellent observation.
Mike can’t handle the plan.. Socialism, ending capitalism, etc.. You know, hope and change
I guess the posters herein will now have to label Senator John McCain as a leftist, a RINO, or a turn coat; perhaps you have noticed that in his outburst on the Senate floor, he did not mince words with his fellow republicans in the House. No one can question Senator McCain’s loyalty to the U.S., nor to the Senate. He has used strong language because that is what is required. “Crack Thinking” by ambitious politicians willing to crash the U.S. economy must stop so we can move forward again.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.