dagblog - Comments for "Bluffing for Dummies: Republicans Hit Their Heads on the Debt Ceiling"

The fact that we are even

Dan Kervick — Thu, 12 May 2011 03:51:05 +0000

The fact that we are even talking about debt ceilings, debts and deficits while we are still plunged deep into the pit of an historic economic downturn, and still plagued by massive joblessness and wretched stagnation, is a symptom of the catastrophic failure of the Obama administration to establish a clearly understood and coherent progressive message to counter the reactionary wingnut tea party surge of 2009 and 2010, or to take the golden opportunity offered him by the spectacular flame-out of deregulated, laissez faire, Ponzi capitalism in 2008 to push for real progressive reform organized around a vision of hope, a fair shake and broad prosperity.

Obama also helped set the political stage for the bizarro world we find ourselves in by appointing that crackpot Deficit Reduction Commission, brainchild of conservative budget hawk Pete Peterson and headed by the most conservative Democrat Obama could find along with the ridiculous vaudeville act named "Alan Simpson." One take is that Obama is an utter fool and incompetent on the economy. But, at least where macroeconomic issues are concerned, he's either a closet conservative or the most incompetent liberal in history. And it's pretty clear he despises the economically progressive wing of the party, and doesn't belive they even deserve a seat at the table when the most momentous decsions are being made on America's economic future.

The reason the Republicans are even bothering to negotiate over something they have already said they will go along with in the end is because they know that Barak Obama has made a religion out of giving in to Republican desires. They will get something out of this one too, no matter how weak their negotiating position. But their position is unfortuantely not as weak as it should be, since Obama himself has helped promote the message that our debt is an impending disaster, and a more important issue than employment and prosperity.

The original version goes

Beetlejuice — Wed, 11 May 2011 11:52:19 +0000

In reply to Bluffing for Dummies: Republicans Hit Their Heads on the Debt Ceiling

The original version goes like this ...

Humpty Dumpty sate [sic] on a wall,
Humpti Dumpti [sic] had a great fall;
Threescore men and threescore more,
Cannot place Humpty dumpty as he was before.

Interesting that a children's nursery rhyme spells out exactly what would happen if the GOPer's in the House refuse to increase the debt ceiling, eh?

The BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) are anticipating Bonehead follows thru with his threat...not increaseing the debt ceiling. They are eager to replace the dollar with their own universal currency standard that shifts the global financial power into their court...Sarkozy in France has been beating the drums too. Bonehead would only be facilitating their wishes. In fact, just riding it up to the finish line before capitulating and going along with a debt increase may give BRIC the leverage they are looking for to usurp the dollars' dominate position in the global financial markets.

I personal hope he does. It seems the only way to make the GOPer's responsible for their actions is for them to bring the economy down hard. Once done, Obama and the Democrats will have no choice but to publicly place the blame squarely on the backs of the GOP.

The Democrats needs to start playing the political game using the same rules the GOPers are using if they want to re-establish their political base with the public.

...And add to that the TP

stillidealistic — Wed, 11 May 2011 00:37:25 +0000

In reply to We have 2, count 'em, 2, TP

...And add to that the TP idiot who said he'd vote to raise the debt ceiling if they put DADT back in place...wtf?

This country is going nuts at a breakneck speed!

Boehner certianly is

synchronicity — Tue, 10 May 2011 23:30:20 +0000

In reply to Bluffing for Dummies: Republicans Hit Their Heads on the Debt Ceiling

Boehner certianly is an unconvincing novice in the art of political theater.

I find it interesting that he takes his 'tax hikes are off the table' stance when he had recently acknowledged that America 'needs revenues'. I was quite suprised that the media didn't pounce on his having said so after he had so many times said that 'America does not have a revenue problem it has a spending problem'.

In this clip he says ''we are at a time when the federal government is short on revenues. we need to control spending but we need to have revenues...'

I could only find the clip included in this one at about 1:12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUL_OrT2XYE”

We have 2, count 'em, 2, TP

wabby — Tue, 10 May 2011 19:53:39 +0000

In reply to Bluffing for Dummies: Republicans Hit Their Heads on the Debt Ceiling

We have 2, count 'em, 2, TP nuts (Camp & Upton) here in Michigan who have already gone on record opposing raising the debt ceiling.

From Eric B, Michigan Liberal blogger:

If the Democratic leadership had any sand, it would immediately start accusing the Republican Party of putting its agenda before the fundamental fiscal health of the nation. In this case, Wall Street has as much to lose if the country defaults, and it's not going to let its ongoing fleecing of the national treasury be put at risk by money for Big Bird.

Talk about counterfactual,

NCD — Tue, 10 May 2011 17:58:14 +0000

In reply to Bluffing for Dummies: Republicans Hit Their Heads on the Debt Ceiling

Talk about counterfactual, how about the Republicans demanding federal income tax cuts before they raise the debt limit? Sound like a plan their base would support?

I't all a load of digos

cmaukonen — Tue, 10 May 2011 17:07:31 +0000

In reply to Bluffing for Dummies: Republicans Hit Their Heads on the Debt Ceiling

I't all a load of digos kidneys as Momi Prins points out here.

As of April 30, 2011 – the public debt stood at $9.63 trillion dollars and intragovernmental debt at $4.6trillion (68% and 32% respectively of the total debt of $14.24 trillion vs. a debt ceiling, or cap, of $14.294 trillion.)

In April 2010, public debt was $8.41 trillion and intragovernmental was $4.48 trillion (65% and 35% respectively of the total debt.) In April 2009, public debt was $6.91 trillion and intragovernmental was $4.27 (62% and 38% of the total debt. The debt cap then, was $12.14 trillion.

In April 2008, just after federal subsidization of the sale (read: hostile takeover) of Bear Stearns to JPM Chase, and before the rest of the big bailout began, public debt was $5.22 trillion, intragovernmental was $4.08 trillion (56% and 44% of the total debt.) The debt cap then, was $9.815 trillion.

In April 2007, public debt was $4.97 trillion, intragovernmental was $3.78 trillion (57% and 43% of the total debt.) The debt cap was $8.965 trillion.

Basically, what all these numbers show is that; public debt has nearly doubled since before the big bailout, while intragovernmental debt has increased just 15%. Some (like Geithner, Bernanke, etc.) may argue that this balloon in public debt was required to save our economy, though there’s little evidence of it doing anything but cheaply floating our financial system, not least because nearly half of the additional $4.4 trillion of public debt that was created is stashed at the Fed as either excess reserves, QE1, or QE2.

Now that the Osama drama has died down a bit, and Congress returns to economic discourse with Tim Geithner over not whether, but by how much, the debt ceiling will be raised, the partisan bickering will resume its thunderous levels of inanity.

No one on the Hill will question the true why behind the debt – because it would lead back to that mammoth fuchsia elephant - we, the elected and appointed, screwed the country to support the power banks, and we’d do it again, in fact, we already are.

It's just par for the course.

Obey — Tue, 10 May 2011 16:43:36 +0000

In reply to Bluffing for Dummies: Republicans Hit Their Heads on the Debt Ceiling

It's just par for the course. The GOP are playing it like political suicide bombers again, just as they did with TARP, with the new START treaty, and so on. Everyone seems to think it is just fine for the GOP to act that way, having their way by threatening to destroy the country. IOKIYAR.

The only thing that's surprising is the Dems handing them the grenade and pulling out the pin for them. Cue Ezra Klein last december:

When I asked Democrats about this at the time, they kept telling me that Republicans needed to learn the awful and awesome responsibility that was governing. “Let the Republicans have some buy-in on the debt. They’re going to have a majority in the House,” said Harry Reid. “I don’t think it should be when we have a heavily Democratic Senate, heavily Democratic House and a Democratic president.”

I don't know what you call a negotiation where one party ... wants to lose.

Obama would certainly suffer.

Michael Wolraich — Tue, 10 May 2011 16:41:00 +0000

In reply to The always-insightful Michael

Obama would certainly suffer. Every congressperson would suffer. Every American would suffer.

But it will not happen. There is no risk that Boehner will pull the trigger. Therefore, there is no political risk to Obama and no reason for him to negotiate.

The always-insightful Michael

brewmn — Tue, 10 May 2011 16:28:34 +0000

In reply to I doubt Obama is sweating it

The always-insightful Michael Tomasky had this to say in the NY Review of Books, and I think it's pretty correct:

"...The political risk here for the White House is that while Republicans may be saddled with much of the direct blame if the country goes into default, the consequences of that default—poor bond ratings, higher interest rates, possible foreclosures, inflation; in sum, an economy in a tailspin—would surely affect the President’s standing in the polls over time, making the outcome far more difficult for him than for any particular Republican member of Congress."