Kicking the Can
House Republicans had suggested leveraging the debt ceiling to try to extract more spending cuts from the Obama administration, asking for one dollar of spending cuts for every dollar of increase in the debt ceiling. Late last week, however, the leadership proposed a three-month extension of the nation’s borrowing limit, a move intended to buy lawmakers more time to work out a “Big Deal” on deficit reduction.
Can anyone say Greece?
Subjecting our kids to an insurmountable debt burden and civil unrest like your standard European leftist country is immoral.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 0801 hrs
Attempting to compare the United States to Greece is like attempting to compare Johnny Manhattan’s to Dairy Queen.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 0937 hrs
What in their record would indicate the Republican establishment wants spending cuts?.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 0938 hrs
Pat,
Can I use that the next time I hear “we should be more like Europe” from the left?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1033 hrs
The debt ceiling is 100% bullshit in the first place. If congress wanted to spend less money, they should have spent less money. Since they didn’t, the president is legally obligated to spend what they decided on. They don’t get to order a meal at a restaurant and then object that the bill is more than they wanted to spend. You ordered, you pay. In fact, this whole crazy “objection” is probably unconstitutional. Isn’t it the case that the validity of the public deb “shall not be questioned”?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1041 hrs
Can I use that the next time I hear “we should be more like Europe” from the left?
Care to refute my point?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1048 hrs
What point? Data?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1109 hrs
Pat,
So we should not be more like Europe?
That’s not what my liberal friends constantly say while they beat the drum.
Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, personify the social consequences of being a socialist policy sewer on economics.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1129 hrs
So we should not be more like Europe?
That’s not what my liberal friends constantly say while they beat the drum.
Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, personify the social consequences of being a socialist policy sewer on economics.
You still haven’t refuted my point. Try again.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1135 hrs
Congress authorizes spending money, scott, under a variety of assumptions including expected revenues, expected interest rates, expected growth and a whole host of other economic expectations which it cannot know at the time spending is authorized. To argue that congress cannot impose a debt ceiling is to argue that congress cannot impose the criteria under which it authorized the spending.
Debt is not incurred until money is actually borrowed. The executive is quite capable of servicing the nations’ debt without borrowing additional money.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1137 hrs
This might be the first time that they have a coherent strategy. this focuses the public on the debt and spending while forcing out a budget that can be changed and cut. if this budget comes up and then they have to pass a debt limit every few months it makes people look at what is happening.
Who has a better idea?Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1137 hrs
BVBB, I think that’s a pretty weak argument.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 1343 hrs
I’m with Dohnal (rare, but hey, it happens). GOP messaging on this issue has been terrible and they’ve been getting killed in the court of public opinion as a result.
I know some of you like to cast spending issues as a big morality play, but most of the public either doesn’t see it that way or doesn’t consider the issue deeply enough to even appreciate your argument.
At this point, they’re trying to flip the table around and create a situation where the Senate appears obstructionist rather than the House. I don’t know if it’ll work but at least they’re showing a willingness to try a new approach. I get that some of you love to lose over and over again on principle, but that doesn’t really get a political party anything other than a permanent seat on the bench.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on January 23, 2013 at 1548 hrs
Sounds like maybe more than a can got kicked?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 23, 2013 at 2038 hrs
There you go fu, link to an article of childish glee because the President and the Left could hold their breath longer than the Right. Why don’t you take a minute out of your infantile celebration to explain in as much detail as your addled brain can how this will help the country.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 24, 2013 at 1119 hrs
Not sure where you are seeing any glee or celebration from myself?
As usual your projecting your own juvenile frame of reference onto somebody else.
Your Momma wears combat boots:)
Does that make you feel more comfortable?
As far as the link goes;
1. The plan doesn’t just allow the government to borrow more, it requires the existing ceiling to be ignored. The party that supposedly was the darlings of the Tea Party is proposing that the same federal debt ceiling that up-to-now it has likened to a tool of Satan be treated as if it’s not there and doesn’t matter.
2. The ignoring is allowed to continue until May 15. At that point, the debt ceiling will increase automatically to accommodate the additional borrowing the government has done between now and then. In this GOP-proposed version of the “look ma, no hands” theory of budgeting, House Republicans are voting to raise the amount the government borrows without anyone having to go on record to do it. They don’t even get a campaign issue to use against Democrats in 2014.
3. The bill includes a provision that requires that the salaries of representatives and senators be withheld if their respective house of Congress doesn’t adopt a budget resolution this year. But the provision doesn’t require that the two houses agree on a budget, just that each pass something of their own. No agreement on the budget resolution means that reconciliation—the procedure used in the Senate to avoid a filibuster on spending cuts and revenue increases and, therefore, makes them more likely to happen—can’t be used because that can only happen pursuant to instructions in a…you guessed it…budget resolution agreement. Therefore, the House GOP forcing the Senate to pass a budget resolution means nothing.
If the debt ceiling is the “can” then it seems like this legislation does a bit more than “temporarily” increase it.
What do you think?
Perhaps you have a counterpoint to the link you would like to make? Or do you simply disagree with it?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 24, 2013 at 1221 hrs
You still haven’t refuted my point. Try again
So we shouldn’t be like Europe?...we should get to work on cutting government spending and fixing this debt crisis.
Amen. I agree.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 24, 2013 at 1226 hrs
Total Entries: 21059
Total Comments: 146944
Most Recent Entry: 05/17/2013 05:57 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/18/2013 05:31 am
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 37
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2013 08:23 am
The most visitors ever was 663 on 09/02/2012 05:13 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).