More accurate

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Comments

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

This debt ceiling crisis? Not the fault of the Republicans

And that's really how you see it? Congress has never had a problem with this debt ceiling business until now. This has always been automatic under Bush, for instance, when the budget was really being blown out. And it wasn't a problem before. The sorts of political issues dealing with spending are better handled when they do the budget, not when it comes to the good faith and credit of the United States. The 'Tea Party', I take it, are the ones who wanted to try some new politics and to play chicken.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

And that's really how you see it?

I see the Republicans going into this wanting bigger cuts and not wanting to raise the debt ceiling at all. Now they've compromised on both and have actually passed bills to deal with it.

I see the Democrats in Congress showing some interest in compromise, but not nearly as much. Their idea of spending cuts for the debt ceiling bills include the wars ending, for instance.

Then I see a President who seems uninterested in any of it, holding tight to tax increases to preserve a spending situation that he's blown out of proportion. When you say things like...

This has always been automatic under Bush, for instance, when the budget was really being blown out.

...this, it doesn't make a ton of sense - Bush added a ton to the deficit, no doubt. Obama's highly likely to duplicate that in half the time. No one forced Obama to continue to increase spending, especially as much as he has and especially in the face of temporary revenue reductions due to the economy.

The sorts of political issues dealing with spending are better handled when they do the budget, not when it comes to the good faith and credit of the United States. The 'Tea Party', I take it, are the ones who wanted to try some new politics and to play chicken.

Indeed. But the Democrats didn't pass a budget last year, and the Democrats in the Senate have yet to approve a budget for this coming fiscal year, either.

To blame the Tea Party for what the Democrats have been doing seems way off. I'm no Tea Party guy, but they definitely don't seem at fault.

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

I see the Republicans going into this wanting bigger cuts and not wanting to raise the debt ceiling at all.

They voted for the budget, they can vote to pay for it, too.


Their idea of spending cuts for the debt ceiling bills include the wars ending, for instance.

Is that bad?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

They voted for the budget, they can vote to pay for it, too.

Which they did. Then the Senate decided they didn't want to pass a budget. *shrug*

Is that bad?

In that it masks the size of the spending cuts being talked about, absolutely.

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

In that it masks the size of the spending cuts being talked about, absolutely.

So when the Republicans were proposing smallish spending cuts a couple months ago, those were touted as at least a step in the right direction. But cuts to the military, even with small cuts in other areas, that's not at least a step in the right direction?

Or do you support a complete teardown of the budget right now and anything other than a balanced budget is a no-go?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

So when the Republicans were proposing smallish spending cuts a couple months ago, those were touted as at least a step in the right direction. But cuts to the military, even with small cuts in other areas, that's not at least a step in the right direction?

You're misunderstanding me. The GOP plans for this increase do not include the wars ending because the wars are simply going to be ending. It's not a cut to anything, as those decreases in spending are already going to happen. The Democrats, to make their cuts look similar, are including those wars ending.

It's not about cutting or not cutting the military. Even Paul Ryan's long term budget plan included military cuts above and beyond the wars ending.

Or do you support a complete teardown of the budget right now and anything other than a balanced budget is a no-go?

I see a balanced budget as unrealistic at this point. I also think that an average of $200-250b a year in "cuts" (i.e.: more slowing the growth of spending as opposed to actually shrinking the size of the overall budget) is not nearly enough to get things in order.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, Senator DeMint doesn't see it that way. (http://news.yahoo.com/tea-party-bandwagon-demint-drivers-seat-170506301.html;_ylt=ApV05wlnHnvkvAtvFXuR.JWyFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTM5MDY5YW5zBHBrZwM4ZDMyNTNmZS1hOWY2LTM4MjgtYmRkZC0xZGI4NmQzMGIwZjEEcG9zAzMEc2VjA01lZGlhVG9wU3RvcnkEdmVyA2Y2ZDQ5ZTcwLWJhZDMtMTFlMC1iZGI3LWJmMjY0M2JjYTU5OA--;_ylg=X3oDMTFtYmZwZDAzBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljcwRwdANzZWN0aW9ucw--;_ylv=3) And since he's calling the shots with the Tea Party frosh, I don't see the deal that's on the table this afternoon passing. (http://news.yahoo.com/snapshot-expect-sunday-u-debt-crisis-045619208.html;_ylt=Ao6Eu0CYwWnXR1Iukc2Ke4myFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTNhbHJpNnAyBHBrZwNhMTcxYTc5My0wYzc2LTMxNDktOWQzNS1hMTJjYWU2NTQxNGIEcG9zAzEEc2VjA01lZGlhSnVtYm90cm9uBHZlcgM2MzRkMmIzMC1iYjdlLTExZTAtYmFiZS0zYjMwZDNlZWViYWE-;_ylg=X3oDMTFtYmZwZDAzBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljcwRwdANzZWN0aW9ucw--;_ylv=3)

[madscience.livejournal.com]

"...the wars are simply going to be ending. It's not a cut to anything, as those decreases in spending are already going to happen."

This has to be one of the most epically ignorant statements you've ever made in this comm.

The Afghan war alone is probably going to last 100 years. The war profiteering will never stop until we cut off the flow of cash.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Agreed. The wars on whatzit where they kill us for pennies on the dollar will not end until we make them end. McCain casually proclaimed we'd be there for a thousand years, while campaigning for the GOP nomination. Which he got.

Support our troops.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Indeed. It was also a much longer-term outlook.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

In what sense? Glad to answer, but I don't know what you're asking.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

That is the Canonical BDJ answer. Behind the aw shucks plain dealing of a Palin, BDJ shows us that there is in fact, no there there.

[blueduck37.livejournal.com]

I see the Republicans going into this wanting bigger cuts and not wanting to raise the debt ceiling at all. Now they've compromised on both and have actually passed bills to deal with it.

So, simply in agreeing not to send the nation into default... they are the true compromisers. Genius! Jeff, you are the best.

PS- When these cuts that the GOP has now succeeded in forcing through damage the economy and recovery, as is expected, will the GOP be honest and accept responsibility and blame for that? Or will they just pin it on Obama?

PPS- Still waiting on the jobs that renewing the Bush tax cuts to give more "certainty" to the "job creators" last year were promised to give us.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

So, simply in agreeing not to send the nation into default... they are the true compromisers. Genius! Jeff, you are the best.

Their position was that they should simply cut spending as opposed to raise the debt limit. A smarter solution, but not entirely politically viable.

PS- When these cuts that the GOP has now succeeded in forcing through damage the economy and recovery, as is expected, will the GOP be honest and accept responsibility and blame for that? Or will they just pin it on Obama?

I wouldn't expect that at all. Not that any of these cuts are actually cuts in spending as much as slowed growth in spending, it appears.

Regardless, there's no chance it could do as much damage as Obama's agenda has to this point.

PPS- Still waiting on the jobs that renewing the Bush tax cuts to give more "certainty" to the "job creators" last year were promised to give us.

Unfortunately, the health care bill has fucked that up worse than we thought. And a two year deal isn't much certainty, as I noted at the time.

[blueduck37.livejournal.com]

Me: "When these cuts that the GOP has now succeeded in forcing through damage the economy and recovery, as is expected, will the GOP be honest and accept responsibility and blame for that? Or will they just pin it on Obama?"

You: "there's no chance it could do as much damage as Obama's agenda has to this point."

OMG... you're already pre-blaming him. That is genius!

Moving on to....

Unfortunately, the health care bill has fucked that up worse than we thought.

GOP 2010: "Renew the tax cuts! It will create jobs!"

GOP 2011: "Still no jobs, huh? Okay, that's because.... umm, OBAMACARE!!! Job-killing! Marx! Engel!"

Jeff, here is why I love you. Unlike some of the conservatives on TV, I think you actually believe all this BS. And, frankly, that's really precious and warms my cholesterol-filled heart.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

OMG... you're already pre-blaming him. That is genius!

"Pre-blaming" assumes we're not already in a bad situation thanks to him.

Jeff, here is why I love you. Unlike some of the conservatives on TV, I think you actually believe all this BS. And, frankly, that's really precious and warms my cholesterol-filled heart.

Of course I do. There's no way I couldn't, unfortunately.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Confirmation Bias is a strong taskmaster, innit?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Indeed. It's hard to fight that problem in this community.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Find your own solution.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Working on it.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Good.