Skip to main content

View Diary: Abbreviated Pundit Round-up: Congress isn't the problem, House Republicans are (170 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Here's where I think you're wrong (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DRo, Greg Dworkin, Laconic Lib, MPociask
    Read the last line of the two posts above: "The vast majority of the Republican Party is incapable of being scared by public opinion." and "I suspect he will wish he had ripped off the Band-Aid all at once, holding firm on tax cuts and daring House Republicans to defy public opinion." Both can't be right.
    You don't need a vast majority.  You only need 17 of them.  Considering there were about 30 who barely won this time (5% or less) I think we could have found 17 or so with the courage to tell Cantor to go fuck himself.  Maybe a few who are on their way out the door anyway.  Instead we're headed into what is going to be a real ugly fight with nasty cuts to the New Deal programs that OBAMA HIMSELF put forth like means testing and chained CPI and we have no real leverage.  Military spending is no leverage.  $50B a year is nothing especially when backloaded and even more so if those cuts come from benefits.  Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will be the prime targets.  All you have to do is watch CNBC to get a feel for what they want.  Entitlement cuts.  Which means we're fucked.

    This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

    by DisNoir36 on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 04:57:03 AM PST

    •  fair argument (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DRo, a gilas girl

      but a very tight path to victory. I think those who suggest that no amount of public opinion influences House radicals are correct.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 05:04:29 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It may be a very tight path (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pelagicray, MPociask

        but as we saw the last few days, there are enough when properly squeezed who will buck their party.  The House radicals may make up a majority of the majority but they don't make up a majority of all members of congress.  

        With the new house their influence is diminished somewhat.  Some of the more radical ones are gone and others are somewhat tarnished.  Bachmann for example almost lost last time around.  Even the people in her beat red district are tired of her antics.  I think their power is overblown.  Especially when you consider there are over twice as many progressives as tea baggers in the House.  Gerrymandering only protects them so much and most are nothing more than overbearing bullies.  If you punch them in the nose or raise your fist to do so they will back down.  Many aren't interested in protracted fights.  They just want to raise money and continue in their cushy jobs.  The last thing they want to do is work or fight.

        This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

        by DisNoir36 on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 05:29:39 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think their power is overblown (0+ / 0-)

          They have the majority in the House, and the only reason you didn't see Republicans voting against the fiscal cliff deal was they weren't going to be able to go on Fox News and defend raising taxes on everyone, when they'd been running on cutting taxes since 1980.
          Only 85 Republicans voted for the deal, while 172 Democrats voted for it.
          Those 85 Republicans represent the 80 Tea Party caucus members and Eric Cantor and a few of his minions.
          Don't think because we got one bill passed that they're suddenly going to want to get things done.

          “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

          by skohayes on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 07:14:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I'd agree with you (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Greg Dworkin

        This is not a "politics as normal" type of situation.  This is "heels dug in" extremism and so the regular assumptions probably do not hold.

        Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

        by a gilas girl on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 07:49:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'm wondering if the argument against.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tb mare

      .....means testing is becoming passe.

      It's always been that the rich old people will turn against the system if they don't get the same benefits as the poor old people.

      Yet, the rich old people support pols who want to take apart medicare and social security anyway.

      "Michael Moore, who was filming a movie about corporate welfare called 'Capitalism: A Love Story,' sought and received incentives."

      by Bush Bites on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 05:30:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No... (0+ / 0-)

        I think it's actually more the poor old (white) people who support those pols.  That's the Thomas Frank deal coming back to haunt us, again.

        Rich old people don't get social security benefits.

        Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

        by a gilas girl on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 07:51:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site