Shutdown/debt ceiling reveals groups who are NEVER going to give up

15 Oct 2013 12:07 pm
Posted by: Donna

I’m encouraged at reports that Democrats are not only not backing down to GOP demands in the current economic standoff, but are actually going on the offense a bit and demanding a discussion about reversing sequester cuts.

“Senate leaders attempting to avoid a U.S. debt default remained at loggerheads Sunday and escalated the standoff by reopening the contentious issue of automatic spending cuts, damping hopes that some of Congress’s most canny negotiators would break the impasse,” the Wall Street Journal reports.

New York Times: “Senate Democratic leaders — believing they have a political advantage in the continuing fiscal impasse — refused Sunday to sign on to any deal that reopens the government but locks in budget cuts for next year.”

Washington Post: “Rather than making concessions that would undermine Obama’s signature health-care initiative, as Republicans first demanded, Democrats are now on the offensive and seeking to undo what has become a cherished prize for the GOP: deep agency spending cuts known as the sequester.”

I’m not so sanguine, however, about how the Deficit Hack Industrial Complex is using the emergency to push granny starving.

As I noted last week, one unfortunate aspect of the current political crisis in Washington is that the country’s best-financed purveyors of centrist economic policy wisdom at Fix the Debt are essentially egging on hostage tactics by urging politicians to take advantage of this crisis to engineer a “grand bargain” on fiscal policy.

The granny starvers are like a chronic rash that re-erupts the minute your immune system is the slightest bit compromised. David Atkins has a concise explanation of why they are wrong:

It’s theoretically possible for debt to take on problematic levels at some point in the medium to far future. But the easiest and best way to reduce debt is by growing the economy. And if we know that low consumer demand is the reason for weak economic performance, it’s insane to hurt consumer demand now by reducing government spending ni order to “solve” a possible long-term problem later. It makes no sense at all.

Whenever you see someone claiming that “reducing entitlements” now is the key to economic recovery, it’s important to know that that person is either economically ignorant or deliberately conning you. More likely the latter.

They know that income inequality and corporate profits are at all time highs, and that maintaining current Medicare and Social Security obligations 20 years from now will likely mean higher taxes on them in the future. That’s undoubtedly true, and entirely appropriate given rampant inequality. They also know that a much more progressive Millennial generation of voters won’t hesitate to raise those taxes in 20 years.

So these people are lying to you, pretending that cutting “entitlements” will improve the economy today. They know it won’t. They know it will do the opposite.

Exactly. But even if they are unsuccessful in extracting a pound of Granny’s flesh in these negotiations, do not for one second expect these greedy selfish shitheels to go away for long. They will keep coming back and need to be defeated every time they do.

Speaking of that which never goes away, the recurring vaginal infection known as the “pro-life movement” has (shocker!) inserted itself into the budget fight. Because where’s the fun in turning the United States into a cruel backwater fiefdom if you can’t force women to produce an endless abundance of serfs?

According to two Republicans familiar with the exchange, Ryan argued that the House would need those deadlines as “leverage” for delaying the health-care law’s individual mandate and adding a “conscience clause” — allowing employers and insurers to opt out of birth-control coverage if they find it objectionable on moral or religious grounds — and mentioned tax and entitlement goals Ryan had focused on in a recent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.

Man, that is some impressive persistence. I’d almost admire it, except that they’re willing to destroy the country over their bizarre obsession with ladyparts.

2 Comments

  1. Comment by Timmys Cat on October 15, 2013 5:48 pm

    But but but but… both sides are responsible.

    House Democrats are fuming about a rule change adopted by Republicans just before the government shut down on Oct. 1, arguing it shows GOP leaders closed agencies intentionally.

    Under long-standing House rules, any member of the chamber can bring a measure to the floor. But Republicans altered the rule governing legislation to fund the government so that only House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) holds the power to make such a motion.

    Seee, the Republicans were FORCED by Dems to change the rules the day before the shutdown because otherwise an open floor vote on a clean CR could have won. If it won the tea partiers would be mad and in revenge they would primary incumbent Republicans and they might lose their seats!!!!!!!!
    SEE ” ” the DEMS forced this “upon” us!!!! ” ”

    OBAMAMUSSOLINIATTILA

  2. Comment by John Dreyfus on October 15, 2013 6:23 pm

    “The Rules Committee, under the rules of the House, changed the standing rules of the House to take away the right of any member to move to vote to open the government, and gave that right exclusively to the Republican Leader,” said Van Hollen. “Is that right?”

    “The House adopted that resolution,” replied Chaffetz.

    “I make my motion, Mr. Speaker,” said Van Hollen. “I renew my motion that under the regular standing rules of the House… that the house take up the Senate amendments and open the government now.”

    “Under section 2 of H.R. 368, that motion may be offered only by the majority leader or his designee,” Chaffetz said.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a comment