Skip to main content

House Republicans are pushing hard to prevent the defense cuts under sequestration in the wake of Super Congress failure. They're running this ad, because, well, because it's Reagan and it's what they do.

Which makes things like this, from Super Congress member Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), kind of stupid and dangerous.
Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), a member of the failed Congressional supercommittee, said Tuesday that he would be open to negotiating the sequestration process and scaling back some of the massive mandatory budget cuts—even if this puts him squarely at odds with the White House.

Asked on MSNBC whether he would consider redoing the mandatory reductions of $1.2 trillion in spending as some Republicans are reportedly suggesting, as a part of negotiations to extend the payroll tax holiday, the South Carolina Democrat answered, "Yes, I would be."

Republicans have two priorities: protecting defense contractors and protecting the 1 percent (which is actually pretty much the same thing). With that as their bottom line, the bottom line taken by President Obama and even Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of no changes to the sequestration is the better negotiating position for the moment. The price Democrats would have to pay to get the payroll tax cut, if they try to negotiate it within the sequestration framework, would likely be too high.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 11:18 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

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

  •  Tip Jar (18+ / 0-)

    "There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning." —Warren Buffett

    by Joan McCarter on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 11:18:34 AM PST

  •  David Dayen was prescient. (9+ / 0-)


    ....However, Clyburn did seem fearful of the trigger scenario, particularly the cuts to the defense budget that would ensue. He preferred to “use a scalpel” with the defense budget than the automatic, across the board cuts that would come from the trigger. “As someone who lives in the shadow of Ft. Jackson, born and raised in Sumter, site of the Third Army, I am interested in getting something done to avoid drastic cuts” to the defense budget, he said. In reality, the cuts to defense are in line with Bowles-Simpson and less than the Frank-Paul report, which showed that the military could handle twice as many cuts as in the trigger with no effect on military readiness.

    So there ought to be a concern that Clyburn, artificially constrained by the threat of defense cuts, will go along with some plan that makes real holes in the social safety net. Of course, he could also opt to undermine the trigger cuts in the ensuing year between enactment and implementation.

  •  Gives a nice talking point to the WH (6+ / 0-)

    Congress agrees to the sequester, then when it fails to do its job of finding a deal, and now wants to back out.

    •  It's always Obama's fault, y'know. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      divineorder, joe wobblie

      Congress -- Boehner & McConnell -- always figured on welshing, I'm pretty sure.

      However, I do have a theory that by agreeing to the 'sequester' deal while dangling the possibility of a "Super" deal some time in the future (last week), Boehner and Obama designed a "no fault" program of Pentagon cuts that'll take place gradually, all the while knowing that the Super Committee was designed to fail, thereby triggering the cuts.

      Now the Rethugs want to go back on the political deal that neither side would have to bear the blame for military trimming.


  •  4 mos ago Kos said they would roll back DoD Cuts (6+ / 0-)

    and he was, of course, absolutely right.  

    80 % of success is JUST SHOWING UP! Tin Soldiers & Nixon's Coming, We're Finally on our own...

    by Churchill on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 04:34:45 PM PST

  •  Well, since the Dems haven't kept a (5+ / 0-)

    negotiating position of strength yet for anything else, how do we lose this one?

    •  The whole question: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fwdpost, Into The Woods

      How do we lose this one while maintaining the illusion that politics is happening?

      All the best and most sophisticated adult minds are working on that one.

      Look!  Theres Rick Perry!


      Super Congress!

      ..Michele Bachmann!

      Please don't feed the security state.

      •  From the 'Drunken Master' School of Negotiating (0+ / 0-)

        Imagine if the Democrats said:  

        If you expect us to vote for health reform, you have to agree to increase taxes on the Top 1%.


        If you expect us to vote to repeal DADT, you have to agree to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.  

        It's so outrageous, so unexpected (though by now one wonders why) that it sucks in the Dems and media every time (assuming the Dems actually believe what they tell us they believe.)  

        It's from the "Drunken Master" school of negotiating.

        Someone in a very expensive suit is at the front door and says he wants to foreclose on our democracy. Where should I tell him he can put his robosigning pen?

        by Into The Woods on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 06:38:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Clyburn has me shaking my head a lot (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Churchill, Into The Woods


    And, there's always something to give away in negotiations to Republicans isn't there? Why do you need to give away somethin in order to NOT CHANGE SOMETHiNG???????????????????????????

    "I'm sculpting now. Landscapes mostly." ~ Yogi Bear

    by eXtina on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 04:37:13 PM PST

  •  Panetta soiling his shorts in public without first (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    divineorder, Bob Love, cybersaur

    Conducting his own 18 month plus review was irresponsible.

  •  I can't wait! (3+ / 0-)

    We'll finally get to see a veto!

    I wonder if Obama has a stamp, or if he'll just put a big size 12 footprint on it and send it back...?

  •  Undoing the cuts AND extending the tax holiday? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Churchill, Native Light

    I'm not sure how good an idea either of them are, but I'd be much more inclined to support both ideas if anyone in Congress who votes for them both has to wear a sign around his or her neck for the next year reading "I SAID I CARED ABOUT THE DEFICIT BUT I REALLY DON'T."

    I could maybe get behind that.

    Fight until we win. Then we can begin arguing about the details. - Kwickkick (RIP) 2009

    by RickMassimo on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 04:37:52 PM PST

  •  So republicans want to... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Churchill, CentralMass

    1.  Take in less revenue via the Payroll Tax Cut

    2.  Increase government spending

    And they believe this will, combined, help to reduce the deficit.

    They truly are the Know Nothing Party.  And we're all paying the price for their moronitude.

  •  No changes - cut the military! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Churchill, divineorder

    You can start by bringing the troops home sooner from Afghanistan.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

    by noofsh on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 04:41:06 PM PST

  •  Military budget doubled (6+ / 0-)

    in the last decade, almost.

    Why can't we cut it in half?  We'd still be spending more than any other country or region on this planet.

    We kidnap. We torture. It's our policy. Embrace it or end it!

    by Mosquito Pilot on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 04:42:25 PM PST

    •  DOD budget since WW2 (1946) 20 TRILLION (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      divineorder, Into The Woods

      This is 1948 to 2009.  There is 1946 & 1947; and 2010 & 2011 not on this table

      Table 4. Budget Authority for National Defense, FY 1948-2009
      (in billions of constant FY09 dollars; includes war & nuclear funding)Fiscal Year Funding Fiscal Year Funding Fiscal Year Funding
      1948 $171 1969 $497 1990 $492
      1949 $160 1970 $454 1991 $447
      1950 $181 1971 $411 1992 $443
      1951 $460 1972 $398 1993 $416
      1952 $604 1973 $378 1994 $383
      1953 $504 1974 $362 1995 $381
      1954 $385 1975 $352 1996 $371
      1955 $343 1976 $357 1997 $367
      1956 $347 1977 $383 1998 $358
      1957 $363 1978 $377 1999 $375
      1958 $361 1979 $378 2000 $387
      1959 $376 1980 $385 2001 $426
      1960 $364 1981 $428 2002 $448
      1961 $366 1982 $470 2003 $547
      1962 $416 1983 $502 2004 $570
      1963 $418 1984 $522 2005 $565
      1964 $404 1985 $557 2006 $605
      1965 $390 1986 $536 2007 $660
      1966 $458 1987 $519 2008 $709
      1967 $510 1988 $508 2009 $687
      1968 $513 1989 $502  

      80 % of success is JUST SHOWING UP! Tin Soldiers & Nixon's Coming, We're Finally on our own...

      by Churchill on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 04:47:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And the cuts don't reduce that #, just future (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:


        I seem to remember hearing that POS POV when it came to 'cuts' to Social Security or Medicaid or Medicare.

        It's not really "cuts" it's just lower future increases.

        So we're not talking about getting 'back' to anything.  

        Someone in a very expensive suit is at the front door and says he wants to foreclose on our democracy. Where should I tell him he can put his robosigning pen?

        by Into The Woods on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 06:43:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Why? Because. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Into The Woods, cybersaur

      1) Because all that money goes into someone's pocket.

      2) Because framing issues and constructing a world in military/security terms does powerful political work.

      Win/win.  Militarism is always a worthwhile play for fascists.

      Why anyone else would play along is the real question.

      Please don't feed the security state.

  •  If republicans didn't want it... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    divineorder, TDDVandy, Into The Woods shouldn't have been an automatic condition of supercongress failure (which was practically inevitable)

    "And, spite of pride in erring reason’s spite, One truth is clear, whatever is, is right." Alexander Pope -Essay on Man

    by DawnG on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 04:46:21 PM PST

  •  How much do we pay the contractors? (4+ / 0-)

        Halliburton?  Blackwater/Xe?  to do the jobs our military use to do?

        Billions upon unnecessary billions.  Let the mercenaries pan for their Pentagon gold in South Africa and etc.

        There are your defense cuts, Congress.  Not a single ship, not a single aircraft lost.

  •  Let's Hope Obama drinks from the Keg of Glory (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Into The Woods

    And actually does Veto the republicans' plans to mitigate Defense spending cuts.

    The payroll tax holiday? I'll pay my share if the military largesse gets cut (mine works out to about 600 bucks, since my wife and I are in the lower tax bracket). That's like, a whole month's rent for us.

    But you know what? Republicans made this happen, because they don't understand the meaning of compromise. They were willing to reject a 10:1 ratio in spending cuts to tax increases. F*** them.

    Above Grecian mantles were chiseled these words... Know Thyself... Nothing in Excess... the pop philosophy of its day.

    by ravagerofworlds2 on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 04:52:28 PM PST

  •  There is no urgency to 'negotiate' the tax (4+ / 0-)

    Straight up "pass it or else" from the White House (so far) is the only required or even desirable stance viz. the payroll tax cut.  Either the Republicans oppose it and get creamed over raising taxes on the Middle Class, or they pass it.  Politically, that's a "win-win" for the Democrats.

    Of course, it's a drag for households if the Republicans block the extension of the "holiday", but losing the extra $20 a week for a person with a job making $50,000/yr isn't going to shake the earth -- there's no comparison to the extension of unemployment benefits the Rethugs were holding hostage last year.  There's little reason to cave to Jon Kyl on this issue.

    Clyburn is out-Obama'ing Obama on this one, sounds like.

    •  There's no reason to make this complicated, and... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eztempo, Into The Woods

      ... plenty of reasons not to make it any easier for Republicans. They are getting us all right up to the threshold - tax increases on families and households right after the holidays. Great concept, GOP! Doesn't that just show concern for the people you represent, as well as the rest of us!

      Keep at it! A recent Pew Research poll shows you slipping, even in the strongest Tea Party areas in 2010. (New York Times, November 29, 2011: "Support for Tea Party Drops Even in Strongholds, Survey Finds" by Kate Zernike)

      Once again, you're doin' it to yourselves. I'll be happy to hold your coats while you do it.

      Obama and strong Democratic majorities in 2012!

      by TRPChicago on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 05:06:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  OT, something else Reagan said (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Into The Woods

    Reagan Campaigns for Truman in 1948.

    •  This Is Incredible. Reagan, Giving Our Message. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Not just talking up Truman and Hubert H. Humphrey, but laying out the message that applies as much today as it did back then.

      This is Ronald Reagan, speaking to you from Hollywood.
           You know me as a motion picture actor.
           But tonight I'm just a citizen.
           Pretty concerned about the national election next month and more than a little impatient with those promises the Republicans made before they got control of Congress a couple of years ago.
           I remember listening to the radio on election night in 1946.
           Joseph Martin, the Republican Speaker of the House, said very solemnly, and I quote,
         "We Republicans intend to work for a real increase in income for everybody by encouraging more production and lower prices without impairing wages or working conditions."
           Remember that promise.
           A real increase in income for everybody.
           But what actually happened?
           The profits of corporations have doubled, while workers wages have increased by only one quarter.
           In other words, profits have gone up four times as much as wages.
           And the small increase workers did receive was more than eaten up by rising prices, which have also bored into their savings.
           For example, here is an Associated Press dispatch I read the other day about Snip Al Carpenter, a craftsman in Union Springs, New York.
           Seems that Mr Carpenter retired some years ago thinking he had enough money saved up so he could live out his last years without having to worry.
           But he didn't figure on this Republican inflation which ate up all his savings.
           And so he's gone back to work.
           The reason this is news is Mr. Carpenter is 91 years old.
           Now think of the contrast with the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, which reported a net profit of $210 million dollars, after taxes, for the first half of 1948.
           An increase of 70% in one year.
           In other words, high prices have not been caused by higher wages, but by bigger and bigger profits.
           The Republican promises sounded pretty good in 1946.
           But what has happened since then?
           Since the 80th Congress took over?
           Prices have climbed to the highest level in history, although the death of the OPA was supposed to bring prices down through quote,  
           "The natural process of free competition", unquote.
           Labor has been handcuffed by the vicious Taft-Hartley Law.
           Social Security benefits have been snatched away from almost a million workers by the Gerhart Bill.
           Fair employment practices, which have worked so well during wartime, have been abandoned.
           Veterans pleas for low cost homes have been ignored.
           And many people are still living in made over chicken coops and garages.
           Tax reduction bills have been passed to benefit the higher income brackets alone.
           The average worker saved only $1.73 a week.
           In the false name of economy millions of children have been deprived of milk once provided through the Federal School Lunch Program.
           This was the payoff of the Republicans' promises.
           And this is why we must have new faces in the Congress of the United States
           Democratic faces.
           This is why we must elect not only President Truman, but also men like Mayor Hubert Humphrey of Minneapolis, the Democratic candidate for Senator from Minnesota.
           Mayor Humphrey, at 37, is one of the ageless men in public life.
           He's running against Joe Ball, who as a member of the Senate Labor Committee, helped write the Taft-Hartley Law.
           The Republicans don't want to lose Ball, and they're spending a small fortune on his campaign.
           They've even sent Dewey and Warren out to Minneapolis to speak for him.
           President Truman knows the value of a man like Hubert Humphrey in the Senate.
           And he has been in Minneapolis, too, campaigning against Joe Ball.
           Mayor Humphrey and Ball are the symbols of the political battles going on today.
           While Ball is a banner carrier for Wall Street, Mayor Humphrey is fighting for all the principles advocated by President Truman.
           For adequate low cost housing.
           For civil rights.
           For prices people can afford to pay.
           And for a Labor movement freed of the Taft-Hartley Law.
           I take great pride in presenting my friend, from Minneapolis, Mayor Hubert H Humphrey, candidate for United States Senator.

      From kafkanada's 2010 diary:

      Someone in a very expensive suit is at the front door and says he wants to foreclose on our democracy. Where should I tell him he can put his robosigning pen?

      by Into The Woods on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 06:54:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tax The Rich (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TDDVandy, jack 1966, cybersaur

    Let's not buy into the false-framing of the needs for budget cuts., let's tax the rich like back in the good old days. Everybody wants to go back to the good old days.

    Then we can discuss cutting the military budget because it's the right thing to do, not because we don't have the balls to tax the rich.

    "Political ends as sad remains will die." - YES 'And You and I' ; -8.88, -9.54

    by US Blues on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 05:00:12 PM PST

  •  We spend close to $700 billion annually (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fwdpost, Into The Woods, cybersaur

    on our "defense" budget.  The rest of the world spends something like $900 billion a year, total.  What exactly do we need that big of a defense budget for?

    Oh, yeah, to line the pockets of defense contractors.

    27, white male, TX-26 (current), TN-07 (originally), liberal-leaning independent

    by TDDVandy on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 05:05:30 PM PST

    •  It's The Cost of Class Warfare. Ask GE. (0+ / 0-)

      The war being waged against the middle class, lower income and poor.

      The war that threatens our representative democracy.

      The war that has not been going well for us the past couple of decades.

      When they say "its not the money for the wealthy defense contractors" its 'the money for the wealthy defense contractors'.  

      ...For five years running, two presidents have tried to eliminate funding for a backup engine on a fighter jet, a program Defense Secretary Robert Gates calls unnecessary.

      Congress, however, has rebuffed the White House and continues to fund the $465-million-a-year alternate engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, amid intense lobbying by General Electric, the corporate giant working with Rolls-Royce to develop that engine.

      General Electric's aggressive outreach ranges from running ads on the subway cars that congressional staffers take to work to deploying dozens of well-connected lobbyists to Capitol Hill and the Pentagon.

      In recent weeks, as President Obama has readied a fiscal year 2012 budget that is likely to provide no funding for the second jet, managers from GE plants around the country have swarmed congressional offices to argue their case before dozens of new senators and House freshmen, many of whom were elected on a wave of voter anger with Washington's big-spending ways.

      Obama releases his budget today. The survival of the engine, first targeted for elimination by President George W. Bush in his 2007 budget, demonstrates the challenge of slashing government spending — even as the federal debt skyrockets.
      The F-35, a jet that is the Pentagon's biggest weapons program, is set to make up the lion's share of the USA's jet fighter force in the coming years. The stakes are high for General Electric and Rolls-Royce. Stopping development of the second engine would knock them out of the $100 billion market for the F-35 engines.


      Against this backdrop, General Electric is working hard to make its voice heard on Capitol Hill.

      Total lobbying by GE and its subsidiaries soared to $39.3 million last year, a nearly 50% increase over 2009 levels. A team of 21 in-house General Electric staffers, including former Capitol Hill and Pentagon officials, lobbied on defense issues for the company during the last three months of 2010, congressional records show.

      The company also paid outside lobbyists, including former senator John Breaux, D-La., to lobby on the alternate engine last year. Breaux did not respond to interview requests.

      Kennedy, the GE spokesman, says the company also has spent millions on its advertising campaign but would not disclose the dollar amount. ...

      Meanwhile they pay no income taxes and push austerity on their workers.

      Last week, the New York Times reported that, despite making $14.2 billion in profits, General Electric, the largest corporation in the United States, paid zero U.S. taxes in 2010 and actually received tax credits of $3.2 billion dollars. The article noted that GE’s tax avoidance team is comprised of “former officials not just from the Treasury, but also from the I.R.S. and virtually all the tax-writing committees in Congress.”

      After not paying any taxes and making huge profits, ThinkProgress has learned that General Electric is expected to ask its nearly 15,000 unionized employees in the United States to make major concessions.


      Someone in a very expensive suit is at the front door and says he wants to foreclose on our democracy. Where should I tell him he can put his robosigning pen?

      by Into The Woods on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 07:06:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sequestration (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jack 1966, TomFromNJ

    Is the best outcome of the stupor-committee's failure.

    Any Democrat who doesn't realize that, and wants to attempt to trade it away (at the direct polar opposite of the President, it would appear) for, anything, an idiot, and a poor Democrat.

    Yes, I'll apply that to James Clyburn. Nobody is sacred anymore.

  •  Congressional Dems will not be happy... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Into The Woods, cybersaur

    ...until they have capitulated completely.

    •  Previous Democratic "Leadership" Approach (0+ / 0-)

      A quote I've heard attributed to a 'leader' inthe French Revolution:

      There go my people. I must find out where they are going so I can lead them.

      Congressional Democrats Version:

      There go the Republicans.  I must find out what they want so I can give them a compromise to give them it twice.

      Someone in a very expensive suit is at the front door and says he wants to foreclose on our democracy. Where should I tell him he can put his robosigning pen?

      by Into The Woods on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 07:11:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Dumbass. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    The revolution will not be privatized.

    by Bush Bites on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 05:23:02 PM PST

  •  What dumbass Congress put us in such danger? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Throw those weenies out and replace them with LIBERALS!

    "I was a big supporter of waterboarding" - Dick Cheney 2/14/10

    by Bob Love on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 05:32:34 PM PST

  •  Hey Clyburn your super powers expired when (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    the supercommittee deadline passed. NOw you are only one voice amoung 435, like you used to be.

    "I'm sculpting now. Landscapes mostly." ~ Yogi Bear

    by eXtina on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 05:32:59 PM PST

  •  Obama's last chance to stand tall. Get reelected. (0+ / 0-)

    Standing up for the budget cuts is going to be Obama's last chance to demonstrate leadership and political courage.  Likely his last chance to show his alienated former supporters that he can take a stand.

    The defense cuts are the single most important thing the US needs to do in terms of budget and national priorities. US total defense spending is over $1T. Russia, the supposed big threat, spends $100B.  China, the other big threat for which Obama is permanently stationing troops in the Australian outback, spends $200B.  US could cuts its defense spending by 50% be spending as much as Russia and China combined.

    The other cuts would be painful but consider that we can eliminate Obama "Race to the Bottom" and Bush/Obama's "No Child Left a Dime" as the $10B reduction for Education.

    Energy cuts, we eliminate the $40B to nuclear industry and the $38B to oil companies.

    Ag, we eliminate the subsidies to corporate farms of Cargill and Archer-Daniels and Purdue.

    Bush/Obama tax cuts die in 2013, we can put money back into good gov. programs that hire teachers or create green jobs.

    Obama could save his presidency...but given his track record of weakness....he'll most likely have some wonderful "bipartisan" agreement that cuts Social Security and Medicare and preserves weapons spending.

  •  Kevin Drum Spelled it out: GOP plan all along (0+ / 0-)

    The GOP gets what it wanted: the Democrats are now on record proposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare in the failed Super Congress deal - just as anticipated. The fight over sequestration now puts the Democrats up against the "Weak on National Defense" charge if they push for the cuts in military spending mandated by the process.

    They'll almost certainly cave on defense cuts, the GOP gets the cuts in safety net spending they wanted all along, and the Democrats get the blame for the fallout.

    Sweet - how's that for nine-dimensional chess?

    Best outcome - agree to nothing, let the sequestration deal collapse, AND just let the damn Bush tax cuts die. Bingo - more tax revenue, including from the rich. How hard is that?

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 06:02:24 PM PST


    A Capitulation Center has been found in the human brain within the brainstem, the most primitive part of the organ that mediates many basic automatic functions and reflexes like breathing and sweating.

    Scientists were cautious about their new findings, however, because the number of subjects was small, all were men and all happened to be Democratic Congressmen.  

    The Capitulation Center appears to make an inhibitory connection with the part of the brain that secretes factors that stimulate gonadal hormone production in men.

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

    by accumbens on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 06:22:20 PM PST

  •  They completely lose track of Reagan (0+ / 0-)

    It's funny they use Reagan for everything.   Even when they are wrong.

    Reagan had a weekly meeting with Tip O'Neil.  
    One major tax cut, and then two significant tax increases.
    Reagan had a lot of faults, but he had no problem slashing dead programs at the pentagon.

    Modern "republicans" evoke Reagan a lot.   But as much as democrats bang Reagan he looks like a Middle-of-the-roader in comparison to any of these quacks.

    And I've said frequently in my blog here:   Eisenhower looks more liberal every day and wouldn't tolerate any of these fools; hell, he'd be to the left of a giant slice of the southern democrats we currently have.

    Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle

    by Chris Reeves on Tue Nov 29, 2011 at 08:06:32 PM PST

  •  There are more threats to America than terrorism.. (0+ / 0-)
  •  'Both' parties are in a bind (0+ / 0-)

    Defense contractors employee lots of people, in heavy need votes states — like Pennsylvania and Ohio. There would be little difference between our current president and a different one, if one is to decide on a party , outside Philly 4 refineries are rumored that they're closing , couple them with Boeing losing jobs and  Democrats lose Pennsylvania.
    If we are in fact to look at the reductions strictly strategically , our defense spending is a JOBS PROGRAM . Seriously, Boeing has been building a jet that DOESN'T WORK IN THE RAIN for HOW LONG ?
    But I have digressed. The Philly Inquirer did a story last week about Sunoco Eagle Point dismantling their refinery and shipping it to India and that the company will be receiving 375 MILLION BUCKS in incentives from tax payers to do so !If the other 2 Sunoco refineries in the area close along with the Conoco refinery closing on January 1 , your looking at 3000 jobs or more (including contractors).
    The residual effects in the area are devastating . NOW, imagine all that and the President and Democrats CLOSING BOEING . Forget what is fact, think about how it will be perceived and spun.
    Losing Pennsylvania and Delaware could start a domino effect . Ohio employees plenty of people in defense as well.
    And suddenly we have the more conservative wing of the ONE party winning.

    you can't remain neutral on a moving train

    by rmfcjr on Wed Nov 30, 2011 at 04:16:46 AM PST

  •  Republicans...Dinosaurs. Kind of hard to tell the (0+ / 0-)

    difference but the same fate awaits them. 2008 was their last election where they will have a real part to play. History is leaving them behind. All we are seeing now is the death throws of the party of the chicken.

    Just as prostitution is the world's oldest profession, religion is the world's oldest scam.

    by Agent420 on Wed Nov 30, 2011 at 09:22:42 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site