dagblog - Comments for "McConnell unveils debt limit ‘Plan B’" http://dagblog.com/link/mcconnell-unveils-debt-limit-plan-b-11046 Comments for "McConnell unveils debt limit ‘Plan B’" en McConnell comes from the http://dagblog.com/comment/127801#comment-127801 <a id="comment-127801"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/127798#comment-127798">Maybe this was the WH plan</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>McConnell comes from the Great Welfare State of Kentucky, which receives $1.51 for each dollar it sends to DC, and may lead the country in Medicare funded Hoverounds. The fact that Senator Kyl is in on this shows it's more rigged than a Goldman Sachs CDO.</p> <p>Comment from <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/07/12/267031/new-mcconnell-plan-we-get-everything-we-want-on-debt-ceiling-plus-12-opportunities-to-bash-obama/">Thinkprogress</a>: <em>Obama should say he was born in the US, and it wasn't yesteday.</em></p> <p>The GOP left one thing out though, I'm surprised they didn't require that a large chalkboard be erected on Capitol Hill and either Obama, Reid or Pelosi would have to go there every day and write<em> 'I will never end the Bush tax cuts on millionaires'</em> one hundred times.</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 12 Jul 2011 22:13:55 +0000 NCD comment 127801 at http://dagblog.com Maybe this was the WH plan http://dagblog.com/comment/127798#comment-127798 <a id="comment-127798"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/127796#comment-127796">Yes. These were the scummy</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Maybe this was the WH plan too. Repugs tried to bluff with a busted flush.</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 12 Jul 2011 21:07:02 +0000 cmaukonen comment 127798 at http://dagblog.com Yes. These were the scummy http://dagblog.com/comment/127796#comment-127796 <a id="comment-127796"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/127795#comment-127795">It&#039;s not about</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Yes. These were the scummy bastards talking about the dire need to reduce 'uncertainty' to 'create jobs'! So playing politics with billions in funding cuts, and the debt month after month reduces uncertainty? What two faced bastards, if this doesn't 'fire up' Obama to show some backbone I don't know what will.</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 12 Jul 2011 20:49:34 +0000 NCD comment 127796 at http://dagblog.com It's not about http://dagblog.com/comment/127795#comment-127795 <a id="comment-127795"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/127793#comment-127793">The GOP &#039;Plan&#039; for perpetual</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>It's not about responsibility. It's about getting re-elected.</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 12 Jul 2011 20:45:40 +0000 cmaukonen comment 127795 at http://dagblog.com The GOP 'Plan' for perpetual http://dagblog.com/comment/127793#comment-127793 <a id="comment-127793"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/mcconnell-unveils-debt-limit-plan-b-11046">McConnell unveils debt limit ‘Plan B’</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>The GOP 'Plan' for perpetual partisan brinksmanship up until the election of 2012, from the conservative site of the <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/271706/more-contingency-plan-rich-lowry">National Review</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>The initial legislation would authorize the President to submit a request to Congress asking to increase the <a class="itxtrst itxtrsta itxthook" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/271706/more-contingency-plan-rich-lowry#" id="itxthook0" rel="nofollow" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 100%; text-decoration: underline; border-bottom: 0.075em solid darkgreen; padding-bottom: 1px; color: darkgreen; background-color: transparent;"><span class="itxtrst itxtrstspan itxthookspan" id="itxthook0w0" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% transparent; font-size: inherit; font-weight: inherit; color: darkgreen;">debt</span></a> limit by $700 billion, and would require submission of a plan to reduce spending by a greater amount.</p> <p>Upon receipt of the President’s request, the debt limit would be provisionally increased by $100 billion to provide breathing room and avert an August 2nd default.</p> <p>The <a class="itxtrst itxtrsta itxthook" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/271706/more-contingency-plan-rich-lowry#" id="itxthook1" rel="nofollow" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 100%; text-decoration: underline; border-bottom: 0.075em solid darkgreen; padding-bottom: 1px; color: darkgreen; background-color: transparent;"><span class="itxtrst itxtrstspan itxthookspan" id="itxthook1w0" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% transparent; font-size: inherit; font-weight: inherit; color: darkgreen;">House</span></a> and Senate would have 15 days to disapprove of the request.</p> <p>Within three days of the President’s request, it would be in order for the House and Senate to introduce a joint resolution disapproving of the President’s request.</p> <p>Under expedited consideration of the Resolution of Disapproval, the resolution would be placed directly on the Senate calendar; the Motion to Proceed to the resolution would be privileged; there would be 10 hours of debate and passage would require a simple majority.</p> <p>If either chamber defeats the resolution, the remaining $600 billion increase would be allowed.</p> <p>If both chambers pass the resolution, it would be sent to the President for a veto or signature.</p> <p>If vetoed, debate on an override would be limited to one hour.</p> <p>If the veto is overridden (which would require a 2/3 vote) in both chambers, then the request would be denied and the provisional $100 billion increase revoked.</p> <p>If the veto is sustained in either chamber, the remaining $600 billion increase would be allowed.</p> <p>For the second and third requests in fall 2011 and summer 2012, the President could request an increase of the debt limit by $900 billion once the Treasury Department determines that the country is within $100 billion of the debt limit. The President would also be required to submit a plan to reduce spending by a greater amount.  Each of these subsequent requests would be subject to the same disapproval process outlined above.</p> </blockquote> <p>These are the irresponsible nitwits who rubber stamped the War President on all 7 debt ceiling hikes, and his rush into two wars, his surge, his PATRIOT Act, and every other boondoggle and crime over The Decider's 8 years. They have no interest in solving any problems facing the country, doing so would be anathema to their key principle and mission, which is re-election on the premise that government doesn't work (except for the rich, of course)</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 12 Jul 2011 20:43:14 +0000 NCD comment 127793 at http://dagblog.com This sounds like the repubs http://dagblog.com/comment/127791#comment-127791 <a id="comment-127791"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/mcconnell-unveils-debt-limit-plan-b-11046">McConnell unveils debt limit ‘Plan B’</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>This sounds like the repubs trying to save their sorry asses and cover themselves for the bat shit crazy constituents.</p> <p>And NCDs article <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-debt-limit-deal-your-investments-plummet-2011-07-12">http://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-debt-limit-deal-your-investments-plu...</a> maybe why they are coming up with this.</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 12 Jul 2011 19:59:05 +0000 cmaukonen comment 127791 at http://dagblog.com