Skip to main content

View Diary: Super Congress Republicans dig in on no tax increases, Democrats still talk concessions (111 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  where are the concessions? (3+ / 0-)

    all we have is Hensarling saying what the Dems won't agree to, and Panetta can talk all he wants, but Obama's already said he'd veto an attempt to walk back the triggers.

    Besides, if the GOP reneged on the triggers, the net result would be a clean debt ceiling bill which was what liberals wanted in the first place.  If they don't renege now, they renege after the next election anyway.  If people talk up democrats instead of ripping them, there might even be a decent chance of retaking the House, at which point the deficit can be addressed on closer to fair terms, such as letting the bush tax cuts for the rich expire on their own terms.

    "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

    by Loge on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 09:11:47 AM PST

    •  Democrats laid out a proposal. (9+ / 0-)

      They  are discussing backing off the demands in their proposal in order to "get something."  That's called concessions.

      So far, Republicans have not offered any serious concessions whatsoever.

      •  where is that in this diary? (0+ / 0-)

        i understand that democrats have offered concessions that were conditional on republicans also making concessions, but (a) the GOP hasn't, and (b) democrats knew they wouldn't.  Even if not, Kerry votes for the majority proposal then joins the rest of senate democrats in voting no -- we've seen that movie before.  It's just illogical to worry about Democrats agreeing to cuts when there's no risk of default that the didn't agree to when there was such a risk.  

        "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

        by Loge on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 09:28:28 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  We are talking about Democrats here. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          vigilant meerkat, dewley notid

          You never seen Seneca Doane's chart:

          And Congressional Dems are pretty uniformly on the "compromise" end of things.

          Joan's covered this issue very well.

          •  i've seen the chart (0+ / 0-)

            but the question asked is impossibly vague and is internally contradictory.  It asks about issues that are not binary in a binary manner.   To the extent the stories rest on implications and interpretations, they're reflecting confirmation bias.  You've said as much.  The details of the negotiations are somewhat interesting as a psychological exercise (how to pretend to negotiate with crazy people for 90 days), but i don't think they play out in a way that's bad.  In crass political terms, Obama could have gotten away with signing away various cuts to avoid debt default; there's not 66% of dems or 53% of independents who'd back it now.  How anyone might vote on a hypothetical grand bargain might make the chart more relevant, but the second either side's proposal moves away from that, it's a net win for those opposed, given there would be two democratic-controlled bodies it would first have to pass and no countervailing justification, like a debt default or else the ability to raise taxes without actually holding the House of representatives.  The republicans would always be acting in bad faith, and if the democrats wanted a vote on a proposal they'd gain more by voting against than the republicans would by voting for, that'd be another form of bad faith.

            "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

            by Loge on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 09:51:23 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I wonder (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ferg, Johnny Q

            what that chart would look like if the question was more specific, for instance, if it asked about cutting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid vs. cutting defense and raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires.

            I know it would look a lot different.

            There are some things that Americans want more compromise on but grossly unfair austerity programs aren't one of them.

        •  How conditional are they? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dewley notid, Johnny Q

          Really, how conditional?

          At least one (Baucus) is already indicating that he will settle for kicking the can down the road on some vague tax revenue deal with no specifics on whose taxes will be raised or how the revenue will be raised.  And the revenue deal is something that will be a year away and it has to pass Congress! Has to pass these same creeps who refuse to budge now.  We're really supposed to believe that they're going to do something decent a year from now when they are not under the pressure of an election and triggers?

          This is a joke.  A face saving ploy for Democrats so it can look  like they at least got something for selling out the American people in the worst way that I have ever seen in my lifetime, for undermining some of the best programs ever put in place in this country's history, and for serving their 1% masters.

          •  that story was apparently misreported, (0+ / 0-)

            but if any sort of lopsided deal did go to the floor, for the very reasons you articulated about necessity, the senate would reject it.

            I keep going back to the point that if they were going to cut medicare without offsetting tax increases, why not do it when on verge of default?  But the supposedly spineless ones wouldn't even cut planned parenthood, either.  If it's for show, it's to let the republicans support what will net out to be a clean debt ceiling increase, once the bargains fall apart and the triggers are ignored.

            "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

            by Loge on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 09:55:27 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  And concessions in the face of an obdurate (4+ / 0-)

        adversary who ignores concessions or takes advantage of them is called "caving" or "capitulating" or "appeasing."

        The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

        by accumbens on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 09:35:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site