Skip to main content

View Diary: Mr. Turtle cluelessly clamors for debt limit debate that President Obama says he won't get (213 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  kos (14+ / 0-)
      But the fact that he would even consider offering something like a Social Security benefits cut is disappointing, and without the tax rate issue as leverage, Obama will have little to pressure Republicans into making major concessions of their own.

      So this is all fantastic for Republicans. They extract major concessions on the Bush tax rates, and in two months they get to go after government spending in a major way holding the nation's economy hostage, negotiating with a president who has zero history of standing up to this sort of economic terrorism. All of this just months after getting their asses kicked in the election

      Move Single Payer Forward? Join 18,000 Doctors of PNHP and 185,000 member National Nurses United

      by divineorder on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 07:49:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He just has to keep asking them what cuts they wan (5+ / 0-)

        This may not be as difficult as people think.  The main reason the negotiations with Boehner fell apart is that Boehner, when his bluff was called, really didn't know or couldn't say what cuts he wanted to Medicare.  All Obama has to do is to keep saying, "Congress passes spending bills, not the President.  You detail what cuts you want.".

        They are basically out of ideas except deeply unpopular things like raising the Medicare age and privatizing SS and Medicare, all of which would shift costs to their constituents.  And they want these in order to preserve a bloated defense budget.  The real trap for the  Dems is to get sucked into proposing cuts that are acceptable.  The Dems need to remember the fight against SS privatization in 2005, which Nancy Pelosi led.  The Dems just refused to propose a counter to Bush's privatization scheme and it fell of its own weight.  The same can happen here too.

        Meanwhile Obama should concentrate on ideas for tax reform, closing loopholes that benefit the rich.  And gun violence reduction.  And immigration.  Let the Turtle talk about cutting entitlements all he wants.  It is sure to get lots of support out in the country. And the media to the contrary notwithstanding, I think people are really, really tried of cliffhangers.

        The scientific uncertainty doesn't mean that climate change isn't actually happening.

        by Mimikatz on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 08:40:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Climate change not important? (0+ / 0-)

          President said recently he would study it, but did not know if Republicans and Democrats wanted to ?

          Perhaps the President has already  joined those  who are making this NY Resolution?

          Liked · Monday

          Need a New Year's resolution? Help us make 2013 the year we start to turn the climate crisis around!

          SHARE if you're with us: this year, we're fighting climate change with everything we've got.
          Like · · Share

              1,298 people like this.
              View all 39 comments

          Photobucket Pictures, Images and Photos

          Move Single Payer Forward? Join 18,000 Doctors of PNHP and 185,000 member National Nurses United

          by divineorder on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 09:36:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  cuts.... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          recontext, divineorder, Panama Pete

          30% defense
          eliminate oil subsidies
          eliminate farm subsidies
          close corporate tax loopholes

          nets $379 billion a year, $3.79 trillion over the ten year period.

          after this, real tax reform and medical cost reduction, likely another $1.5 to $2.0 trillion over ten years.

          these are done before any discussion of earned benefits.

          there is no reason to consider cutting programs that help individual citizens over rather than protect the wealthy ones.

          mittens=edsel. no matter how much money is spent to promote it, if the product sucks, no one will buy it.

          by wewantthetruth on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 09:46:28 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Kos has been right about the president's risk (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Panama Pete

        aversion since it became apparent.  

        Obama has NEVER really had to "negotiate" with a Republican House about paying the national debt (just as he didn't really over the "cliff") because the House ultimately had no other option.  

        But he did anyway (and almost certainly will again) out of fear of the "unknown" things they could POTENTIALLY inflict.  

        It's been a little like begging a suicidal neighbor, whose been threatening your life for years, to come down off their roof.

        And then giving them your new bike as a reward when they saved themselves.

        Obama has such fear of the "new neighbor" that he'd rather keep the old one alive, rather than be rid of them forever.  That fear is so predictable, it's almost neurotic at this point.  And the Republicans have no qualms about exploiting it.

    •  well (4+ / 0-)

      I still haven't heard why the trillion dollar coin dodge won't work.

      •  Because Obama has publiclly said (4+ / 0-)

        That he won't go for that dodge.  Of course he's said he won't negotiate on the debt ceiling either, so...

      •  While president could invoke 14A, Jay Carney ruled (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        it out on 12/7/12 and on prior occasions.   In all honesty, accordingly, I have no clue as to what the president means at this point.  He either has to negotiate w/ GOP over debt ceiling, he has to invoke the 14A, or he has to mint a trillion $ coin.  He has expressly ruled out the first 2 options, and, if he won't invoke the 14A, I can't see him ordering the coin's minting.

        Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

        by RFK Lives on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 08:13:28 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think he's trying to intimidate them before (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          the negotiations start.  However, I can't see how anyone would take that seriously.  He's repeatedly gone back on promises for what he sees as the good of the country.  He's going to break that rule and let the country default?  I don't buy it, but more importantly, I'm quite sure the Republicans won't buy it, which means he'll either have to accept default or break this promise.

          To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

          by sneakers563 on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 08:23:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  he has to do nothing (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          threatening to hold debt limit hostage violates the 14th amendment of the Constitution which was written to specifically present this during Reconstruction.

          if they do anything, they have done that to themselves. both parties agree they do not want to default so it's not really a negotiation point. all the GOP has is threats.

          mittens=edsel. no matter how much money is spent to promote it, if the product sucks, no one will buy it.

          by wewantthetruth on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 09:51:41 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Because simply creating an extra trillion dollars (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SoCalSal, AmericanAnt

        in US currency every time bills come due devalues the dollar.  In addition to inflation, in signals to other countries that the US will resort to "dodges" and make no effort to keep its currency stable.  If you want to see the dollar replaced as the global currency, there is no better way.

        The 14th Amendment argument is a much better approach.

        To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

        by sneakers563 on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 08:19:05 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  In theory it inflates the dollar, but not lately. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sneakers563, MPociask

          Currency-dog whining sounds very much like gold-bug whining. WE MUST HAVE A SOUND DOLLAR at all costs. It was bunk in 1886 and it is bunk now. When monetarist theory such as "trickle down" have been tested in the real world and they have failed.

          The tentative march toward replacement of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency has begun. Sadam Hussein actively pushed for it. The Euro was created to be and, despite its manifold problems, is an increasingly strong contender.  But what really moved the world toward abandoning the U.S. dollar as its reserve currency was the 2011 Debt Ceiling debacle. The world began to realize that there were U.S. "leaders" who would hold the "the full faith and credit" of the United States of America hostage to their own narrow ideology. In 2011 the U.S. Dollar weathered that attack with a minimum of damage, but we are about to consider yet again whether or not to raise the debt ceiling and THAT is the next point of risk. Will ideologues choose yet again to tell the WORLD that the American people, through their government, is considering whether or not to repudiate their existing debt obligations?

          We shall see, but if the right-wing radicals force debate of whether or not we will pay our bills, THAT may well make the abandonment of U.S. Dollar by the world inexorable.

          •  We don't need to have a sound dollar "at all costs (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            but that doesn't mean that devaluing the currency willy-nilly is a good thing, either.

            I agree with almost all of your second paragraph.  If however, you believe that's a problem, then shouldn't the solution seek to avoid that outcome?  Otherwise it's a case of destroying the village in order to save the village.

            To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

            by sneakers563 on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 08:55:26 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  because he can't dodge budget bills... (0+ / 0-)

        The federal budget still has to be signed into law, or a continuing resolution issued, by a set date.

        If neither of those happens, the government shuts down.  It's not a debt ceiling issue, it's how the government works.  Or doesn't.

        In the past, the congress has always issued continuing resolutions and then passed a budget largely like its predecessor.

        That is not a guarantee.   If O issues the magic coin to dodge the debt ceiling and default, he is still trapped by the budget.

        And if the house NEVER signs a bill to fully fund agencies like the fda, epa, education, noaa, atf, hud, or a dozen others, they will have to shut down.

        As the crazy man with ridiculous hair says, it's a nuclear option.  

        Does anyone really trust the house with a weapon?

        So they need to solve this at some point, might as well be now.

        •  government shutdown (0+ / 0-)

          is a hit to demand which is a hit to the economy and will throw the country and world into recession.

          D&B issued warning this AM that just the contentious discussion and dragging of feet on the subject could have a negative impact on the US credit rating.

          with then less than two years before midterms when this all hits, it would be political suicide for the GOP to go that route......and they know that. boner will not be able to hold his fragile caucus together over this one.

          mittens=edsel. no matter how much money is spent to promote it, if the product sucks, no one will buy it.

          by wewantthetruth on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 09:57:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Can you seriously see the house passing (0+ / 0-)

            A budget bill without huge slashes to spending?  They need to act by the end of March.

            On July 31, 2012, a tentative deal was announced to fund the government from October 2012 through March 2013 through a continuing resolution, with spending rates slightly higher than the FY2012 levels. The deal was reached because Republicans were eager to avoid a prolonged dispute that could threaten a government shutdown just before the upcoming 2012 general elections.[12] The bill, the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2013, was passed in the House 329–91,[13] passed in the Senate 62–30,[14] and signed by President Obama on September 28, 2012.[15]
            I don't think they care about a shutdown this time, because they know O will cave and negotiate.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site