Skip to main content

View Diary: Why is Obama trying to bail out the GOP? (475 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Q: "Why is Obama trying to bail out the GOP?" (10+ / 0-)

    A: "Budget negotiation FYI: If someone “accepts” X in exchange for Y when Y was going to happen anyway, that means they want X." - Jamison Foser

    •  Dunno. Honestly, dunno. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      artmartin, Larsstephens

      Go over the cliff?  That means...
      -- ~$100B/y "sequestration" cuts 50/50 to non-entitlement discretionary (that means SO MUCH that we care about!) and to defense
      -- End of Bush-era tax cuts for all tax payers, rich and the rest of us
      -- End to extended unemployment benefits
      -- End to reduced payroll taxes (aka SS support)

      Those last two are biggies, and I suspect they may be part of what's keeping PBO at the table.

      What do we have strong evidence that Dems want?
      -- Stimulus spending
      -- Extended unemployment benefits
      -- Extended reduced payroll taxes
      -- End of the so-called debt ceiling semi-annual hostage-taking festival
      -- (maybe?) Extended Bush-era tax rates for those <$250K.

      Thus our consternation at the idiocy surrounding actual cuts to Social Security, raising Medicare entry age, etc.
      I don't mind more catfood, but there are folks starving out there, people!

      But we're Democrats, fellow Kossacks, so we're partly data-driven, partly hope-driven.  We despair easily, 'specially after we've been routinely disappointed.

      Nevertheless, if the Dude abides, so does hope!  Sending frequent emails to and my CongressCritters, and petting Milo the kitteh a bit more than he'd like.

      (-7.62,-7.33) l'Enfer, c'est les autres.

      by argomd on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 02:44:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  End to reduced payroll taxes (aka SS support) (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        those should have never been touched.

        •  Agreed. (0+ / 0-)

          Cautious folks saw that as step 1 on the slippery slope of allowing (encouraging?) Reps to say SS is insolvent.  "See?  Less revenue coming in to pay these benefits.  Just cut benefits, and all will be well."

          I admit that was my first thought, way back when PBO went that route, but I tried to withhold judgment, hoping it would be a short-lived quasi stimulus.  Now it's become expected, baked into the cake.  The 99% may justifiably see it as a tax increase.

          I'm disability retired, so it's a tax that doesn't affect me directly. Games with CPI, OTOH, hit me hard.  But I'd give that up entirely to preserve Medicaid and Medicare eligibility age.  And SNAP. And extended unemployment payts.

          Maybe we're trying to do a semi-Krugman, angry and alarmed at the capitulations, but trying to hold our invective pending the final "deal."  Hysteria is seldom persuasive.  Articulate anger, however, often makes solid dents in the thick heads of our CongressCritters.

          Ain't it sad to see PBO falling back into old, bad habits, and betraying so many of his campaign promises within weeks of re-election?

          (-7.62,-7.33) l'Enfer, c'est les autres.

          by argomd on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 08:23:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (121)
  • Community (58)
  • 2016 (45)
  • Elections (37)
  • Environment (35)
  • Media (34)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (33)
  • Republicans (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Law (28)
  • Barack Obama (27)
  • Iraq (27)
  • Civil Rights (25)
  • Jeb Bush (24)
  • Climate Change (24)
  • Culture (23)
  • Economy (20)
  • Bernie Sanders (18)
  • Labor (18)
  • White House (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site