Skip to main content

(Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi's choices for the Catfood Commission II are being characterized as party stalwarts which is, for the most part, true.
Pelosi's picks: Democratic whip James E. Clyburn, caucus vice chair Xavier Becerra of Los Angeles and Chris Van Hollen, ranking Dem on the Budget Committee. Becerra voted against the recommendations of the Bowles Simpson deficit commission last year, and Clyburn and Van Hollen are loyal Pelosi lieutenants.

Pelosi said in a statement that the committee must focus on jobs and economic growth, time any spending cuts and tax increases in a way that does not further hamper short-term growth, and "ensure that wages grow with productivity."[...]

She laid out her bottom line for a "grand bargain" that "reduces the deficit by addressing our entire budget" i.e. tax increases, "while strengthening Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security," i.e. no benefit cuts in entitlements.

Those are the marching orders for these three, apparently, but they'll have to contend with the less-than-always-stalwart Democratic senators and the six Republicans who have sold their souls to Grover Norquist. So how do these three look when it comes to potential capitulation to the unmoveable no taxes coalition? Not bad.

Rep. Clyburn, number three in Democratic leadership in the House, has previously been problematic for progressives, since he has advocated for a retirement age increase and the chained CPI fairly recently. But according to this report from a local news source, he's backed off, saying that "he would be unwilling to support increasing the retirement age for Social Security and he doesn't think the government's spending problem is entitlement programs."

Clyburn said GOP demands for entitlement reductions and tax cuts are dishonest.

"This is just blaming poor people for the problem ...while fat cats get another tax cut," he said, adding that the argument that raising taxes kills jobs is a "fiction. It just is not true."

That's good news. As is the pick of Becerra, who Pelosi also chose for the original Catfood Commission, where he was a "no" vote, and also a member of the leadership, the Vice Chair of the House Democratic Caucus. Meteor Blades has noted of Becerra, "[h]e is the highest ranking Latino in the Democratic caucus and is its vice chair. He is a member of the Progressive Caucus and the Hispanic Caucus, and is a strong ally of Nancy Pelosi. He has backed increased benefits for the poor."

Van Hollen, as former DCCC chair and the ranking member on the Budget Committee is a solid partisan who undoubtedly understands just how critical it is to Democratic prospects in 2012 to protect social insurance programs. But he's also got a solid record of supporting workers and the middle class. As MB noted, he was one of just a handful of members who accepted "a Philadelphia group's challenge to try to live on a food-stamps budget for a month." So he gets it, as much as any Democratic member.

There's a strong push by Democratic members in both the House and the Senate for a real push for jobs, including a Super Congress to focus just on jobs creation. That jobs message is one President Obama is hearing from Democrats outside of Congress as well. Even from the bond market (h/t dday).

That might be enough to turn the tide for Democrats, including the president who will have plenty of pressure points on the commission, into holding a tough line on revenues and whatever stimulative drops they could squeeze out of this mess they've got themselves into. It'll mean keeping Baucus and Kerry in line, which is faint hope, but better than no hope.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 10:54 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Finally, a commission that looks like America! (5+ / 0-)

    Well, it looks like America at an NFL game: 11 men, 9 of whom are White, and one White woman.

    I'll Rochambeau you for it.

    by Rich in PA on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 10:57:54 AM PDT

  •  That's very nice. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoasis, Bensdad

    However, the math is still bleak. The Republicans are all Hessians, so that's 6 against our best possible scenario of 6.

    We lose.

  •  My take on where this is headed-- (7+ / 0-)

    Something with structural changes in Social Security that don't affect benefits, and some sort of revenue tweaks in the tax code that don't affect basic rates so the Bush Tax Cuts can expire.

    Look for Kerry, Baucus, and Portman to come up with this plan.

    Kind of a "Gang of Three" within the Super Congress.

    Make of it what you will.

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White

    by zenbassoon on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 10:59:00 AM PDT

    •  This is headed to a simple resolustion. (12+ / 0-)

      Democrats cave... just like they always do.

      Baucus defects and the grown-ups in the rooms join with the GOP to pass their recommendations, followed by a quick Obama signature and declaration of bipartisan common sense solutions.

      I agree that it's not particularly courageous to solve a problem on the backs of people who are poor, or people who are powerless, or don't have lobbyists, or don't have clout.

      by teknofyl on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 11:03:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So, US has an aggregate demand problem..... (5+ / 0-)

      ....and the way to address it is by cutting demand???!!!!

      (i) chained CPI will result less demand, by materially cutting social security benefits.

      (ii) allowing all the Bush tax cuts to expire will result in a 3T income tax hike for households earning less than US$ 250K a year.

      Meanwhile, Jeremy Grantham, who manages over US$ 100B, today calls for tax cuts, including sales tax, for the working and middle class.

      How is it possible that this man, Grantham, is calling for a more progressive "Grand Bargain" than President Obama and the Dems.

      One thing is clear to me.  If Obama and the Dems agree to middle-class tax hikes or Safety Net cuts, then 2012 becomes a race between GOP and GOP-Lite.

      And we lose.

      Indeed, Intrade has President Obama's reelection probability at 50.3%.  Two months ago, it was 62.3%.

      Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. http://www1.hamiltonproject.org/es/hamilton/hamilton_hp.htm

      by PatriciaVa on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 11:31:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Letting ALL the Bush tax cuts expire (4+ / 0-)

        would be a very smart policy move - and the only realistic way of getting the deficit under control if combined with an end to war spending.

        Besides, who would you rather have re-writing the tax code - A Boehner-led House in 2011-2012, or a Pelosi-led House in 2013?

        Anything that will pass the current House would be unacceptable to most Democrats.

        "Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle." Franklin D. Roosevelt

        by bear83 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 11:47:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  40% Turnout, Republican Rout nt (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pinto Pony

        We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

        by Gooserock on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:10:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  President Obama agreed to extend all the tax cuts (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PatriciaVa

        precisely because he didnt want the middle class tax cuts to expire.

      •  And exactly who is it that will beat Obama? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        crystalboy

        Perry?  A regional candidate.  Do we really want another Texas Governor?  Bush without the brains.  The slogans write themselves.

        Romney?  He cut jobs to make millions.  He's taken every side of every issue.  Plus he's weird in person.

        Bachmann?  Really?  Because God said so?

        Pawlenty?  Why pick Boring when you can get even more boring.  Plus he's white.

        Seriously.  He'd be in trouble if they had a candidate, but they don't.

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

        by Mimikatz on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:54:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  if they're smart enough, they will pick Romney (0+ / 0-)

          Democrats will not be energized to go out, and Republicans will vote because they hate Obama.

          But I think they're not smart enough. Think we're looking at a Perry or maybe a Bachmann nomination, unless someone else pops up unexpectedly (getting a little late though)

          The heart is a bloom, shoots up through stony ground/But there's no room, no space to rent in this town

          by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 01:34:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  yes. yes. yes. (0+ / 0-)

        it's not supposed to make policy sense, PatriciaVa.
        it's all about the economic blackmail, and keeping the rich folks happy and the crazies from blowing up the global economy.

        politics of appeasement.

        in plain English, "Please don't hurt me."

        The heart is a bloom, shoots up through stony ground/But there's no room, no space to rent in this town

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 01:32:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  No way any kind of tax increase results (0+ / 0-)

      The repubs are not going to come up with any kind of tax increase proposal and are most certainly won't work toward any kind of bipartisan proposal that has tax increases for anyone in any way, shape or form.  

      Now, saying this...I'm thinkin' they could very well go along with some kind of "down the line" ending of the Bush-era tax reductions...especially on the more wealthy in our society.  

      But, what impact will that have, actually, on our debt and deficits?  How much more will the "rich" have to pay to show a significant impact on America's debt and deficits?  I'm sure that's out there somewhere...might very well have been presented here along the line...and I missed it, which I hate :-(.  

      What if there was a plan to have everyone in America pay some amount of taxes into the Fed?  I mean, what's it up to now...51% of Americans don't pay ANY federal taxes?  What would that mean...how popular would that be if they agreed to get a huge % increase on the uber-rich but then asked for a little bit from "everyone"?  

      It's a question...not an opinion, so don't start the bashing posts, okay?

      -- **Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you realize you're wrong.**

      by r2did2 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:03:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Stop spreading right wing bullshit (4+ / 0-)

        51% of don't pay income taxes because 51% of us HAVE NO INCOME!!!!

        What do you suggest we do, put children to work so they can pay income tax?

        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 Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:19:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Excuse me? (0+ / 0-)

          I have four children.  Two of them have two children and both adults in the family work.  Because of their income, they not only don't pay income taxes but realize an "earned income credit" that sees them getting back money from "us" at the end of the year.  

          Yes...I know the "reason" for that...how that came to be.  But, not everyone "HAS NO INCOME" like you're trying to present here.

          It was just a suggestion...a point to consider...something we might, maybe, need to do besides taxing the rich...which I'm all in favor of in a big way.  But, fact is...like it or not...just taxing the rich more won't solve our fiscal problems.  It'd make them a bit better....but won't actually solve any of our economical or "fiscal" problems in our country.

          A year and a half ago the % of people not paying any taxes into the fed was 47%.  Now, from what I'm seeing, it's 51%.  Who knows the truth in what the number truly is...

          Again, it was just something to put out there.  Hey, if we could take all the money away from our richies and put it into the fed...I'm okay with that.  But, here again, I've read even that wouldn't solve our desperate problems.

          -- **Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you realize you're wrong.**

          by r2did2 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:42:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's right wing bullshit (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            aliasalias

            they use that 50% stat to make their case but that 50% is of the WHOLE US POPULATION.  That means children,  elderly, sick, dying, homeless, EVERYONE!!!

            Last I checked 10 year olds do not have a fucking income to tax.

            So stop spreading that lie.

            As of August 5 the employment population ratio was 58.1%.  That means of everyone who is old enough to work, only 58.1% are working and thus have an income to tax and 41.9% who do not have a job and thus do not pay income tax.  When you add in the children who are not old enough to work you get over 60% of the population that does not pay any income tax.  

            That's how the GOP gets that number.  They actually underestimate it but they use the lie that 50% of us don't pay taxes.  First of all it's FEDERAL INCOME TAXES ONLY because everyone pays taxes when they pump gas or shop or pay their phone bill.  Second OF COURSE over 50% don't pay FEDERAL INCOME TAXES.  Over 60% of ALL AMERICANS do not work and thus have no income TO tax unless they have some investment income which is taxes at half what earned income is taxed at (15% as opposed to 28% to 35%).

            As for those who get credits and a refund, unless you claim 10 dependents on your W2 you STILL pay income taxes.  You may get most of it back but you still in effect did was give the govt an interest free loan.

            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 Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 02:28:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Truth isn't right or left wing (0+ / 0-)

              http://finance.yahoo.com/...

              I don't know who is right...what is right.  I am not advocating the poor or those that are suffering pay additional taxes.  

              I do know that there has to be some adjustment in taxes...and I'm all about the wealthy paying their "fair share".  

              But, we're in trouble, folks.  We have to do what we have to do.

              -- **Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you realize you're wrong.**

              by r2did2 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 03:11:28 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  They will raise revenue, but it will be disguised. (0+ / 0-)

        Cutting subsidies and loopholes in exchange for some minor changes to SS and Medicare that don't affect benefits, or at least not very much and only over time, and hit high earners the most.

        The Bush tax cuts will be left for a separate fight.

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

        by Mimikatz on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:58:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  "Structural Changes" And "Don't Affect Benefits" (0+ / 0-)

      Good luck with seniors not being impacted by structural changes to Social Security.

      •  Structural changes are always phased in over years (0+ / 0-)

        Like the 1983 changes, which raised the full benefit age by one month a year for 24 years  or something like that.    It would not affect anyone over 55 (i.e., would apply to those born after 1956).  The chained CPI would, if it was phased in starting soon, but at may not be either, and it hits high income people harder, because they live longer and their base benefits are higher.  By the time my parents died, they got more from COLAs than their original benefits.  Died at 91 and 96.
        Personally I think life expectancy will drop, not rise, because of diet, poor health care, and climate change.

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

        by Mimikatz on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 01:09:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  With Baucus in there, Pelosi's picks don't matter (7+ / 0-)

    Ladies and Gentlemen, please welcome your new overlords... the six Republicans and Max "I will fuck you so hard you'll cry out for mercy" Baucus.

    I agree that it's not particularly courageous to solve a problem on the backs of people who are poor, or people who are powerless, or don't have lobbyists, or don't have clout.

    by teknofyl on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 11:00:50 AM PDT

  •  Sorry, but you're only as strong as your (16+ / 0-)

    weakest link. As long as Baucus is there, I don't see any good coming from this.

    Battleground Wisconsin: Fascism has come to America

    by jhecht on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 11:03:53 AM PDT

  •  Faint hope indeed nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    joanneleon
  •  I don't see how (4+ / 0-)

    this is strengthening anything.

    Clyburn liked the chained CPI idea.  Van Hollen?

    It only takes one Democratic vote to let the right-wing side get what they want.

    Plus, Pelosi's statement was... I don't know, from some other universe, not reflective of the real situation.

    I usually support mcjoan's diaries but this one is just way off.

    •  Van Hollen is my rep (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joanneleon, SouthernLiberalinMD

      and the best way to describe him is milque toast. He won't come out with any opinions unless he's told what to say. He will vote against the repubs if he already knows that Baucus is voting with them. He was chosen because he won't upset the apple cart and go rogue - the POTUS wants cuts and cuts he shall have.

      •  that's a bit unkind, but not way off the mark (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MrJersey

        Chris does have principles, but tends to be willing to fight mostly for the environmental and energy principles he has, and maybe a bit on transparency and voting rights and electoral cleanliness issues. On other things--he's mostly going to quote the party line.

        He is in leadership and he is very focused on being a good team player so that he can continue to advance/climb.

        In general, I am very glad he's my rep, but he is no firebrand.  Still, I'm glad he's on there.

        The heart is a bloom, shoots up through stony ground/But there's no room, no space to rent in this town

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 01:42:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Does the Speaker's office (0+ / 0-)

    give you suggestions for titles?

    David Dayen chose this title:
    Pelosi Rounds Out Super Congress with Leadership Selections

    You chose this one:
    Pelosi strengthens Democratic Super Congress team with leadership picks

    Is that a coincidence?  

    •  Looks like the shill hunter has bagged (2+ / 6-)
      Recommended by:
      raptavio, mr crabby
      Hidden by:
      Uberbah, priceman, triv33, Agathena, frandor55, PhilJD

      another shill, albeit not the White House but Speaker Pelosi. How many is that now?

      McJ a shill for Pelosi.  Who'd a thunk it?

      •  Don't you have anything (0+ / 0-)

        better to do than to follow people into different threads trying to start an argument?  Geez, you couldn't even think of a new name to call me?

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

        Back to ignoring.  You're not worth my time.  See you in the next thread where you drag your shit around trying to stir it up.

      •  Uprated (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mr crabby

        because Southside didn't say anything HRable unless you count a sarcastic response to a ludicrous suggestion that Joan McCarter is in cahoots with the Minority Leader's office...

        Well, that and calling her (wistfully, I assume) the Speaker.

        We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another. -- Jonathan Swift

        by raptavio on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:33:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Cahoots (0+ / 0-)

          That's funny.  Of course they get correspondence from the Speaker's office. Nobody denies that nor should they.  That's what press releases and correspondence are for.  My question was about whether or not they make suggestions for headlines.  But the next time you decry uprating insults, look in the mirror because you do it more than the vast majority of people on this site.

          •  What insult? (0+ / 0-)

            It was sarcastic. And certainly no more offensive than the comment which preceded it.

            And since when do they get correspondence from the Boehner?

            As to abusive ratings, I believe it's your leader of Erase the Hate who's had her ratings ability removed, not lil' ol' me.... so mind your finger-pointing, dear.

            We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another. -- Jonathan Swift

            by raptavio on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:53:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I'm happy with Nancy Pelosi's choices. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, crystalboy

    Each one has his strengths.  Go Nancy!  And all the ones chosen (not happy about Baucus but he is a detail data man who can catch the GOP in any shenanigans), are good people.  I love Van Hollen, so that made me scream with delight when Nancy chose him.  He has been on camera from the get-go slamming the T-Pubs.  

    Look guys, we can continue to be down in the mouth or we can bolster our Reps chosen and continue to send them letters to work this right.

    Or, we can just give up, like many of you keep saying our Prez is doing.  NOT!

  •  I don't believe anything is strengthened unless (4+ / 0-)

    there are six Bernie Sanders' types who aren't members of the Democratic Party.

    I don't think it makes a difference what Dems are on the Dirty DC Dozen. If the leader of the Democratic Party, the head of the DNC, head of the DCCC, the head of the DSCC (oops, already on there) tell them how to vote for the goof of the Party, that's it, and if they don't go along, i.e., Kucinich, there will be a lovely plane ride on Air Force One.

    I believe it's just a dog and pony show to even discus who is picked for the Dirty DC Dozen.  The outcome will still be as bad IMHO.

    Obama still has time to announce he's not running for a second term. THEN we could have a productive and meaningful Democratic Primary. We desperately need that.

    by gooderservice on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 11:56:56 AM PDT

  •  Now if we can only arm 'em with (0+ / 0-)

    Sock'em Boppers and let 'em loose...

  •  we (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bensdad

    are going to get the horrible triggers.

    I can't see us getting anything other than that.

  •  The least they could have done is picked (5+ / 0-)

    Sen. Sanders instead of Baucus.  

    It's never a good idea to take away hope from the people whom who want to vote for you.

    Obama still has time to announce he's not running for a second term. THEN we could have a productive and meaningful Democratic Primary. We desperately need that.

    by gooderservice on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 11:59:18 AM PDT

  •  Better off Sen. Reid's initial reaction (5+ / 0-)

    Don't send anybody.

    Catfood Commission II
    Pain Commission
    "This is gonna hurt all of you more than it's gonna hurt us"

    Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

    by Simplify on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:00:35 PM PDT

  •  I will all work well for Dems & Obama in 2012 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, KayCeSF

    Obama did better in the polls for not getting down and dirty like the republicans. Polls show the majority support both cuts and raising taxes. The majority support keeping SS, Medicare safe.

    If the republicans keep up giving no taxes 'talking points' press conferences through these negotiations this it will play out badly for them. Meanwhile Obama will not be involved in the committee and he get on the bully pulpit to push for the Democrats.

    The majority of people who vote most often are already on SS & Medicare or will be going on it in the next few years, so no one wants to piss them off.

    If young people get out from behind thier keyboards and marched  on the streets for military cuts that might help.

    •  Already one man screamed at Romney (4+ / 0-)

      in Iowa about what he's going to do to save SS, etc. They showed the video of it on Andrea Mitchell's segment. He was loud and Romney was lost for words.  One GOP pundit described him as a "trouble maker" but you gotta know the people in that crowd listening to that man's outrage over entitlements being threatened were listening to him, and wondering about it.  

      We should hope for more "trouble-makers" in those GOP candidates' crowds.

      •  That's what the Republicans have come to, to them, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KayCeSF, crystalboy

        people wishing to save Social Security and Medicare are "trouble makers!"  Perhaps when the reality of what their elected Representatives want to do sinks in on some Republican party members, they will turn out to be "trouble makers" too.

        And it feels like I'm livin'in the wasteland of the free ~ Iris DeMent, 1996

        by MrJersey on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 02:31:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The only good thing here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell

    is that no future Congress is bound to follow the recommendations of the Gang of 12.

    It's still going to be all about 218 votes in the House, and 60 in the Senate.

    "Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle." Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by bear83 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:06:26 PM PDT

  •  Haha. 'Catfood commission' is hilarious. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Southside, MrJersey

    Because calling something so important a dismissive name is such an effective means to diminish it. Just like the Repubs calling the health care law Obamacare. Hahaha, that still makes me laugh every time as well.

    Well, its good too see that we are capable of raising the level of public discourse as well. Seriously, if you can't approach this committee with anything but snarky sarcasm, just don't write about it.

  •  But the Committee's Intended By Design to Fail No? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    left of center

    So that the entitlement cuts can be triggered in?

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:07:32 PM PDT

  •  We should match up "Super Congress" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nicethugbert

    members with super villains.

    "I am the Underminer! I may be beneath you, but nothing is beneath me!"

    Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

    by Simplify on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:09:50 PM PDT

  •  Norquist: 6 Obama: Compromise (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Timothy J

    How many times do we have to suffer wounds before we figure out that we're at war?
    Lincoln did the same thing with the south. It took Ft. Sumter to wake him up.
    Will this be our Sumter?

    •  I urge you to go watch the speech he has just gave (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jerry056

      Since the debt ceiling he has been talking about jobs, closing tax loopholes, increasing revenues, ending political shows, making Washington do the right thing etc etc..

      you can sit and whine and be pessimistic or you can get involved. Our President just urged us to contact our representatives and let them hear our frustrations. Personally, I think that is a better use of our time rather than trying to figure out how everything is Obama's fault. I will leave that to the Republicans to try to do. The Democratic Party knows that the public is behind them.

      •  His wordy track record is pretty good. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Timothy J, aliasalias

        The results of those words put the lie to them.

        Until his rhetoric starts matching his actions, I'll take them as the usual FUD bullshit they've been in the past.

        Obama is "a good man" to many democrats like Bush was "a good man" to republicans.

        by The Dead Man on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:43:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Can you please provide some examples? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jerry056

          No bill is perfect, and I don't like some of these compromises. But I don't really think its fair to call him a liar like you just did. He hasn't kept all promises, however your argument that he has not kept any of them is a flatout lie.

          The reality of the situation is that he is dealing with a group of people with lots of money and influence who have admitted the number one goal is to obstruct and prevent him from being re-elected.

          a few quick examples of why I think this:

          He said he would pass a health care reform bill, he did.

          He said he would end don't ask don't tell, he did

          He said he wasn't going to raise taxes on the middle class, he has not raised those taxes.

          He said he would double foreign aid, he did

          He said he would stop development of Nukes, he did

          He said he would make it easier to go to college, he did

          He said that he could not do this alone, he is right about that. I think to many people were expecting the magic wand.

        •  Ha, great line! That's the problem, no matter how (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Dead Man

          Well you speak, if people think you're full of it, who's going to listen?  

          Until his rhetoric starts matching his actions

          Word.

      •  Since when is stating facts "whine?" (0+ / 0-)

        Is this some kind of neo-thought process?
        I urge you to read all of his speeches and rationally determine the difference between say and do.
        What is with this, "contact your representative" every five minutes. That's being done; has always been done. It's beginning to sound like, "Don't call us...directly." Well, excuuuuse me! Mr. President, you may not realize it, yet, but you ARE one of my representatives.
        815Sox, since you, evidently, have so much time on your hands from not checking out the president's words and actions, you might check out my words. You won't find me, "trying to figure out how everything is Obama's fault." What you will find is my belief that, except in ideology, real progressive Democrats' are not lock-step.

      •  it's Candidate Time! (0+ / 0-)

        without the ants the rainforest dies

        by aliasalias on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 08:35:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Pelosi is a slender reed, but she's all we have (0+ / 0-)

    to cling to at this point.

    Hang tough, Nance!  Barring the unforseen, you're the only one who might save us.

    Well ... there is another path....If Catfood Redux starts looking like a wake-up call to the American populace, what are the chances of massive grass-roots action, including marches on Washington and in other cities?

    The hungry judges soon the sentence sign, And wretches hang, that jurymen may dine.

    by magnetics on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:12:46 PM PDT

    •  Pelosi would disagree with that strongly n/t (0+ / 0-)
      •  with the fact that she's a slender reed? (or Reid? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        magnetics

        or with the fact that she's all we have, or the fact that we should stage a massive grass-roots action?

        The heart is a bloom, shoots up through stony ground/But there's no room, no space to rent in this town

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 01:50:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That we should hand over the WH too the GOP (0+ / 0-)

          By setting up a primary challenge. I am pretty sure you knew that is what I meant, but don't let me get in the way of your sarcastic anger. I just do not think we should give up our ideals and activity because we are not completely happy with our President that we worked hard to elect. I'd imagine people were saying the same thing with Clinton, and he has turned out to be the best President that we have had in 30 years. Do I agree with everything he did, far from it, but he sure was better than Ronnie, Dubya and Herbert...

  •  Good picks but the Senate side is weak. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Timothy J

    My country is the world, and my religion is to do good. Thomas Paine

    by irate on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:16:33 PM PDT

  •  Hold The Line (0+ / 0-)

    n/t

    This post is dedicated to myself, without whom, I'd be somebody else. Though I'd still be an asshole. [http://www.myspace.com/beetwasher My Music]

    by Beetwasher on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:16:54 PM PDT

  •  I don't want to be too pessimistic, but...... (0+ / 0-)

    I think the House Dems on the commission are certainly better than the Senate dems, but they are ultimately handicapped by their minority position.

    The House republicans can pretty easily limit the debate in terms of what will the house majority will pass. If house dems don't like it, who cares they are in the minority anyway.

    The Senate dems have the stronger starting position in terms of what can pass in the Democratic senate. That said, they are weaker in terms of their commitment to progressive/liberal solutions, and will more readily agree to compromise, especially since anything they agree to will ultimately "have" to pass with 60 votes.

    Compounding this is the fact that the commission doesn't have to actually do anything for Republicans to win. A stalemate triggers automatic social and defense cuts (which will promptly be cancelled via defense appropriations).

  •  leave it to NANCY... (0+ / 0-)

    to throw a few live grenades into the right wing ransom bag  :)

    let the stalemating begin and this time WE take the hostages...  ok?

    "Orwell was an optimist"

    by KnotIookin on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:19:02 PM PDT

  •  Our Pres. just gave a great speech in Mich. (0+ / 0-)

    Stated that he is going to be rolling out job creating initiatives over the next few days. I think he has started to turn the corner. Looks like the Democrats are about to go on the attack and dare the GOP to vote against the wishes of the majority of the American people.

    •  Will believe when the policies are implemented (3+ / 0-)

      otherwise it's the usual hot air that goes nowhere.

      Obama is "a good man" to many democrats like Bush was "a good man" to republicans.

      by The Dead Man on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:44:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  it's a good thing jobs weren't needed before now (0+ / 0-)

      and now that it's Candidate time...(drum roll, break out the check books)... "the Democrats are are about to go on the attack".
      I am so inspired.

      I guess they hadn't noticed the fight to survive in this Class War that so many are experiencing even with a job , or noticed a lack of jobs before now, but we should vote for them.
       Maybe with the House , the Senate and the Presidency  they never had to the power to 'attack', or think about creating jobs, but this time will definitely be different because they say so.

       I would have more respect for the honesty of an Official campaign slogan saying "that side is much worse".

      Maybe it's also a message to clueless oligarchs that if the wrong Party is the Chef , that flame will be turned up too quickly under the metaphorical boiling frog.
      Then maybe real change comes.

      without the ants the rainforest dies

      by aliasalias on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 09:15:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  She's a one-woman army (0+ / 0-)

    scares me that she's...what 71? Who is her protege?

    Your new addiction: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

    by Zach in Phoenix on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:29:44 PM PDT

  •  Strong push by Dems... except for Baucus (0+ / 0-)

    who is going to fuck everything up to favor the corporate party.

    The lineup is almost good enough, but this is obviously set up to fail, with just enough Hope and Kabuki to make it look good.

    Obama is "a good man" to many democrats like Bush was "a good man" to republicans.

    by The Dead Man on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:36:52 PM PDT

  •  Baucus is not 1 of us. (0+ / 0-)

    Pelosi deed a better job than Reid, but will it be enough?

  •  I'm glad to see the Nancy chose (0+ / 0-)

    someone other than three rich white guys.  The country has enough of them making decisions for us all.  I think they'll answer to her and hold the line.  Baucus?  I can't figure out why he has to be there leading every damn show.

    Also posted this little factoid on fb yesterday.  It's a stark reminder of what's what, when 12 people--even a few good ones--are deciding all our futures:

    Salary of House/Senate .......................$174,00​0 FOR LIFE
    Salary of Speaker of the House ............$223,500 FOR LIFE
    Salary of Majority/Minority Leaders ...... $193,400 FOR LIFE
    Average Salary of a teacher ................ $40,065
    Average Salary of Soldier deployed in Afghanistan...$38,000

    Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it. --Mark Twain

    by SottoVoce on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:40:20 PM PDT

  •  I'm so glad I spent $10 to help send roses to (0+ / 0-)

    that lady.

    Stay in there pitching, Nancy. Show 'em what tough, smart and ethical looks like.

    Freedom has two enemies: Those who want to control everyone around them...and those who feel no need to control themselves.

    by Sirenus on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 12:41:16 PM PDT

  •  er...you make it sound like the president (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aliasalias

    is going to be needed to move Kerry and Baucus to the left

    Here's your words:

    "That might be enough to turn the tide for Democrats, including the president who will have plenty of pressure points on the commission, into holding a tough line on revenues and whatever stimulative drops they could squeeze out of this mess they've got themselves into. It'll mean keeping Baucus and Kerry in line, which is faint hope, but better than no hope."

    Do you mean that Kerry and Baucus are unlikely to hold the line on revenues/taxes and unlikely to squeeze stimulative drops out of the mess without Barack Obama applying pressure?

    Because I don't know about Baucus, but Kerry was always a strong proponent of Social Security and Medicare--and a lot of other domestic non-security spending as well; left to himself, he's basically a center-left traditional Democrat who likes the military.

    So I doubt very much that Obama will be needed to keep Kerry in line on raising taxes or squeezing drops of stimulus out of the mix.  What I'm afraid of is that Obama will exert exactly the opposite influence on Kerry.  Remember that Obama has shown a remarkably Reaganesque appetite for spending cuts and seems quite happy to extend those cuts to the Big Three. Kerry only started talking about "austerity" and "putting entitlements on the table" over the past year or so, pretty much starting from when the WH started doing it.  If anything, it seems to me that Kerry has moved right in order to stay with Obama.

    If there's a problem with Kerry being on the committee, it's that he is if anything too loyal to the President, to the point of being willing to advocate for the WH's party line despite the fact that it's bad policy.  

    On the up side, we've got a basically center-left Senator who cares about the people of this country--on the down side, we've got someone who could turn into  basically Obama's voice on the committee.

    The heart is a bloom, shoots up through stony ground/But there's no room, no space to rent in this town

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 01:27:06 PM PDT

  •  Love the picks by Pelosi (0+ / 0-)

    There will be at least 3 members of the committee who will fight for higher taxes and more spending, which will really get this economy moving. Since "spending" has become a bad word in DC, I also like the focus on a jobs bill which will be parroted as such by all of the legitimate mediat outlets (sans Fox) to give a popular name to our plan to increase government spending and raise taxes under the title of a jobs bill. But this jobs bill should be as effective in our goals as the last jobs bill, i.e. these jobs should go to government sector union members first and foremost who have their union dues automatically deducted from their paychecks and sent to the union chiefs to be sent to progressive politicians.  

  •  At least no one picked Lieberman, I was worried (0+ / 0-)

    there for a while.

    And it feels like I'm livin'in the wasteland of the free ~ Iris DeMent, 1996

    by MrJersey on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 02:33:08 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site