July 31, 2011

"Deal" Still Being Negotiated; Seems To Involve A Two-Step Process: First, A Soft Republican Capitulation, Then, A Hard Republican Capitulation
— Ace

The Republicans have demonstrated that they will not shut down the government under any circumstances. So the Democrats continue to hold the trump card, because there is a step they will take which Republicans will not.

This "compromise," which isn't even agreed to, but is being negotiated as to its major details, simply delays the timing of Republican capitulation until closer to the elections.

Jen Rubin explains the triggers and the sticking points on them:

The second tranche works like this: If a new congressional commission introduces a plan totaling at least $1.5 trillion in cuts by Thanksgiving and it’s passed by Christmas there are no across-the-board cuts. Or, if a balanced budget amendment is passed and sent to the states, then across-the-board cuts are avoided. However, if there is no commission package passed AND the BBA is not passed and sent to the states, then across-the-board cuts of $1.2 trillion including Medicare and defense (the details of which aren’t final) go into effect. If the across-the board-cuts go into effect, the debt ceiling is only raised $1.2 trillion (likely insufficient to keep the government operating for long), meaning “we could do this all over again, depending on economic growth.” In other words, if we went to sequestration the total debt ceiling increase would be $2.1 trillion in two doses.

...

GOP leaders are convinced that the triggers are so scary that it will in fact force the commission to reach agreement. The president at that point will be rooting for a deal as well, since the alternative across-the-board cuts would yield only $1.2 trillion in a debt ceiling hike and would set up another round of this insanity depending on economic growth.

The threat of drastically slashing Defense will cause Republicans to vote for tax increases. Democrats will not identify additional money to be cut, because they don't want to, and they don't need to -- Republicans will cave, as they have caved since the 2011 budget fight, and will agree to tax increases to avert devastating cuts in Defense.

So they're just pushing this off to closer to the election.

If they're going to capitulate, why not do it now?

Without the willingness to shut the government down, they have no leverage. Most of them don't even pretend at the fiction that they're willing to do that.

So Democrats continue dictating the terms of "negotiation." Furthermore, Republicans are simply trading an early capitulation for one closer to the elections, which doesn't even make sense to me.

And: I am still hearing nothing at all about a bill to dictate the procedure and priority of bill-paying in the event of a shutdown -- something that could greatly increase the Republicans' leverage in such an event.

But they don't even want to seem to want the leverage, because they don't even want to contemplate that option.

Another Possibility: Republicans let the automatic cuts happen, but then immediately propose reinstating most of the money to Defense.

This winds up causing automatic cuts to domestic discretionary, but no big cuts to Defense; most Democrats would probably have to vote for this.

But it has a bad effect: We'd have approved $2.1 trillion in debt ceiling increase while only (guestimating) cutting, say, $1.6 - $1.7 trillion in cuts.

Who knows, maybe that's a decent deal. Doesn't seem that decent, though.

Posted by: Ace at 08:12 AM | Comments (497)
Post contains 597 words, total size 4 kb.

1 So, it's the usual?

Posted by: huerfano at July 31, 2011 08:14 AM (aZLY2)

2 superb headline
and foist?

Posted by: some dope at July 31, 2011 08:14 AM (+kznc)

3 Shit like this does not help. The GOP has effectively won.

Posted by: Chris R at July 31, 2011 08:15 AM (QiNmA)

4 so doom is still the rage .

Posted by: willow at July 31, 2011 08:15 AM (h+qn8)

5 Guess who's on the Super Committee, hobbits?
heh  heh   heh

oh and, Jen Rubin is a big government hack.

Posted by: Juan McVain at July 31, 2011 08:16 AM (+kznc)

6 Chris won what?
not snark, just articulate it so that i can understand

Posted by: willow at July 31, 2011 08:17 AM (h+qn8)

7

Extremist.

So Plouffe is still saying the WH won't accept a short term deal. In which case, I fully expect McConnell to march in lock-step and propose a deal that gets it beyond the elections.

These idiots don't know how to play this game.

I mean just the idea that they might allow themselves to be boxed into a corner of either choosing defense cuts or tax increases tells me all I need to know about their negotiating skills.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:17 AM (OX4OZ)

8

I've stocked up on KY-Jelly in case its needed.

Posted by: American Conservatives at July 31, 2011 08:17 AM (Lt/Za)

9 Ace you need to think seriously about getting out of NYC. In fact, out of the entire NE. When hyper-inflation hits that area will be a huge death trap.

Posted by: Vic at July 31, 2011 08:17 AM (M9Ie6)

10 Shit like this does not help. The GOP has effectively won.

Posted by: Chris R at July 31, 2011 01:15 PM (QiNmA)

Yeah but too bad the public lost and the country will collapse in less than two years.

Posted by: Vic at July 31, 2011 08:19 AM (M9Ie6)

11 The whole committee idea is a total loser for the Rs. The Dems can just pack that bitch with hardcore socialists who will agree to nothing, and nothing is their best option. Then they get across the board cuts which mostly effect defense. They win. Oh, and Obama doesn't actually have to show his face during this whole fiasco.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:19 AM (OX4OZ)

12 fox has said Moodys will likely not downgrade. I am trying to understand why. Were the demands met that we would deal with 4 trillion number> ?
It is said not and over ten years Obama will raise the debt 10 trillion?

did i understand this incorrectly?

Posted by: willow at July 31, 2011 08:19 AM (h+qn8)

13 So the RATS just sit back and let the Reflubs fall all over themselves to "deal". Is that about right?

Posted by: USS Diversity at July 31, 2011 08:20 AM (KbEJl)

14 If you see winning as further pushing us over the cliff, so they can get re-elected then it is a win.  The debt ceiling was always going to be raised, but the only question was what were we going to get in return for it.  It seems like we either get serious defense cuts or tax increases, sounds about right for this particular group of career criminals.  The only question is how many of them can be replaced next year, so we can get some real solutions.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 08:20 AM (iGZkF)

15
So Democrats continue dictating the terms of "negotiation." Furthermore, Republicans the Stupid Party are simply trading an early capitulation for one closer to the elections, which doesn't even make sense to me.

fify

Posted by: The Stupid Party at July 31, 2011 08:20 AM (F2lG1)

16

I fully expect apologies from the WSJ, Kristol, and most at NRO who were claiming things like: Boehner's plan would pass the Senate and be signed into law or that not voting for Boehner's plan would be a vote for Obama.

Boehner's plan passed, and here we are with an absolutely horrible plan that is being negotiated on.. Tell, how did that Boehner plan help us? The only thing it did was get too many decent conservatives to sell-out so they could be team players. It didn't help us at the negotiating table one bit. The ONLY thing that would have helped us was the willingness to go the distance. That's it. Without that, we had no power. No plan was going to give us leverage. Our leverage was shutting it down, and we have once again chosen to not use it.

Brilliant strategy.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:24 AM (OX4OZ)

17 We.are.all.going.to. DIE!!!!!11!!!!!

Posted by: Isaiah Hobbit at July 31, 2011 08:24 AM (TEgVw)

18 and they wonder why the tea party formed.......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 31, 2011 08:24 AM (eOXTH)

19 >>>Boehner's plan passed, and here we are with an absolutely horrible plan that is being negotiated on.. Tell, how did that Boehner plan help us? That's not true, really. They claimed the original Boehner bill would create some leverage. Some argued the bill that passed Boehner + BBA -- actually reduced leverage because the BBA part was viewed as a nonstarter. I'm not saying they're right; I'm saying that's what many argued.

Posted by: ace at July 31, 2011 08:25 AM (nj1bB)

20

But it has a bad effect: We'd have approved $2.1 trillion in debt ceiling increase while only (guestimating) cutting, say, $1.6 - $1.7 trillion in cuts.

Who knows, maybe that's a decent deal. Doesn't seem that decent, though.

Considering those "cuts" are probably more of this over ten years bullshit, it's not decent at all.

Posted by: blue star at July 31, 2011 08:27 AM (lofS9)

21

I would just like to add Ace's name to the growing list of of conservatives who have been on the side of the crazy extremists during this thing. That list now inclues Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Jeffrey Lord, Andy McCarthy, Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin, Erick Erickson, and now Ace.

You see, it isn't just the crazy back-country hicks who are "extremists." It's becoming very mainstream.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:27 AM (OX4OZ)

22 Ace - " drastically slashing Defense" ????

Gates already went on the record that he could cut a 100 billion per year.. That's $1 Trillion over ten years from defense alone!  Even if half the cuts came from defense (and that will never happen) no one would even notice.. there might be a few less really expensive toys the generals have to play with.

I love you guys that call for cuts, cuts, cuts.. but never 1 goddamn cent from defense.  It's a bloated beauracracy.. it could stand to go on a diet.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at July 31, 2011 08:29 AM (Wm4Mf)

23

That's not true, really. They claimed the original Boehner bill would create some leverage. Some argued the bill that passed Boehner + BBA -- actually reduced leverage because the BBA part was viewed as a nonstarter.

I'm not saying they're right; I'm saying that's what many argued.

--------------

Yes, and I said that's exactly what they would do in order to give themselves cover when the Boehner plan didn't work out like they hoped in the Senate.

The Boehner plan + the BBA at least gets us a vote in the Senate on the BBA. So how they can logically argue that it hurt us in the long run is beyond me. The only ok thing about this whole deal is the vote on the BBA. That's it. And that's solely because of the hold-outs who forced Boehner to do something a little more.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:29 AM (OX4OZ)

24 . seems congress is easier to deal with then a citibank rep.

Posted by: willow at July 31, 2011 08:30 AM (h+qn8)

25 One of the checks and balances in the Constitution is the power of the purse, which is vested in Congress, with the House having the lead role given that all spending measures must originate there. That power is only meaningful if Congress (in this case, the House) is prepared to cut off funds. If the House Republican leadership is too gutless to do that, then the system of checks and balances is seriously broken.

Posted by: ManeiNeko at July 31, 2011 08:30 AM (TiE76)

26 ....i have a feeling the new word in town is going to be "tranche"

Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 31, 2011 08:30 AM (eOXTH)

27 3--The GOP has effectively won.

LMFAO. You are insane if you think you have "won" anything.  Your party and leadership are weak, a laughingstock. More importantly, if your "win" has come at the cost of my childrens' economic future and their freedom, you deserve far worse than I can post on this blog without getting banned.  Dumbfuck.

Posted by: some dope at July 31, 2011 08:31 AM (+kznc)

28 The only question is how many of them can be replaced next year, so we can get some real solutions.

You are correct.  That is the only question.  We were never going to get it all, or even much of it, this year. 

Our leverage was shutting it down, and we have once again chosen to not use it.

Either you accept this premise or you don't.  I don't, and that apparently is something that we'll simply have to wait to find out.  The Dems were hoping that we would shut it down, because that's their best remaining option.

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 08:31 AM (6TB1Z)

29

John Boehner just e-mailed out to Republican members and staff: 

Discussions are underway on legislation that will cut government spending more than it increases the debt limit, and advance the cause of the balanced budget amendment, without job-killing tax hikes. Those talks are moving in the right direction, but serious issues remain. And no agreement will be final until Members have a chance to weigh in. I would expect a conference call for Members later this afternoon. – Speaker Boehner

Posted by: My Sharia Moor at July 31, 2011 08:31 AM (BWccY)

30 But it has a bad effect: We'd have approved $2.1 trillion in debt ceiling increase while only (guestimating) cutting, say, $1.6 - $1.7 trillion in cuts.

Or one years deficit, spread over 10, and I assume these are mostly imaginary cuts in the out years.

Again I say, a better deal would be a clean increase of 1.5B and a minor adjustment to the arcane budgeting procedure by eliminating the baseline budgeting mechanism.  How could the Democrats vote against that? 

Let's debate the next years budget in real terms.

Posted by: toby928 at July 31, 2011 08:32 AM (GTbGH)

31

Question. As with all government institutions, I'm sure the DoD could cut metric shit tons of cash out of the budget which I'm guessing wouldn't be in the operational theater but in the Pentagon. Is there a stupid amount of redundancy and duplication?

Strictly a matter of curiousity, BTW. I'm not questioning y'alls patriotism or shit like that.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 08:33 AM (Vj0AA)

32 the "infrastructure" of the "tranche" remains securely in the "lockbox"......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 31, 2011 08:33 AM (eOXTH)

33 We are so boned.

Posted by: DelD at July 31, 2011 08:33 AM (Q14+m)

34 They're ruining Xmas.

Made a lovely tranche cake this morning. Good eating! Very pretty, too.

Posted by: Lizbth at July 31, 2011 08:34 AM (JZBti)

35 You know what's not helping? Bankrupting the country, that's what's not helping. The GOP keeps saying it needs to maneuver so they can win the next election, all they're convincing me of is that they're not going to *achieve* anything worth my vote. I sure as hell am not going to throw away my vote with a third party, and I'm not going to vote for a damned commie, but when my last choice is weaksauce, I see it as an all-around loss. All the GOP seems to have learned from the only two times in the last 23 years that they *did* stand up and do something is that it's "too risky" to try again. Stand the Hell up, do your damned job, and every time a reporter asks you a misleading question have a list ready of lies they've told to throw back at them, then frame the question honestly and answer it. Don't be controlled by the lying MBM anymore, dammit!

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 31, 2011 08:34 AM (bxiXv)

36 Eliminating the baseline budgeting mechanism.  How could the Democrats vote against that?

Responsible, sane people with a sense of shame couldn't.  Assumes facts not in evidence.

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 08:34 AM (6TB1Z)

37 Geesh,

Remember everyone, we ONLY control 1/3 of government.  Yes, we have more than 1/3 leverage after 2010 and a weakened POTUS, but we cannot expect a deal where we get everything we want right now.  The Dems are willing to go scorched earth because they have nothing to lose and they know they have the MSM to heap blame on Republicans.

So, since complete victory is not a possibility here, what do we go for?  Leverage in 2012.  We motivate our base by showing them just how important 2012 is if they want real change and we keep independents in our camp by not shutting down the government.

This is not a perfect victory, but it is the right victory for now.

I am glad that the Tea Party has brought gravity on the far right and moved the entire conversation to the center right from the left.  Remember, like it or not, America is a center-right country.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at July 31, 2011 08:35 AM (uVlA4)

38 I have not yet begun to surrender!

Posted by: John Paul Boehner at July 31, 2011 08:35 AM (FBr/C)

39

Another reason McConnell's proposal of doing this in two stages, only setting it up where it takes a super majority to vote against a debt ceiling raise to override the Obama veto, sucks.

It gives cover to the phony moderates in the Senate. Now, the Nelson idiots, the stupid woman from Lousiana, and McCaskil, all get to vote no on th raising debt ceiling at least one time knowing full well it will still easily get raised. Not only that, it puts them in direct opposition to Obama.

So now they get to run a campaign ad that says "I voted against the raising the debt ceiling and Obama voted for it. I think for myself, blah blah blah." It's like the phony moderate Democrat's best wish come true. A way they can oppose Obama w/o actually ruining the chance of him getting his way.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:36 AM (OX4OZ)

40 C-Span...Boehner up

Posted by: As IF... at July 31, 2011 08:36 AM (piMMO)

41 Jeebus, defense is over $700 Billion a year. If we want that much defense we are going to have to get our checkbooks out and pay for it. If you want to have that debate fine but don't think we can have defense at it's highest level ever without increasing taxes to pay for it.

Posted by: robtr at July 31, 2011 08:36 AM (MtwBb)

42 All the GOP seems to have learned from the only two times in the last 23 years that they *did* stand up and do something is that it's "too risky" to try again.

Or maybe they've learned that a banzai charge is futile and a waste of resources.  Prep the battlefield, then make the other guy charge.

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 08:36 AM (6TB1Z)

43 This is not a perfect victory, but it is the right victory for now.

I agree!

Posted by: George B. McClellan at July 31, 2011 08:37 AM (FBr/C)

44

I tire of this bullshit, at no point do they even attemt to address the only problem we have...spending.  As far as Moodys and S&P and their 'ratings', STFU &  DIAF. That is all

Posted by: Red Shirt at July 31, 2011 08:37 AM (FIDMq)

45 Responsible, sane people with a sense of shame couldn't.  Assumes facts not in evidence.

I would just like to hear them explain why they would actually shut the government over a budgeting mechanism that the voters have probably never heard of, and would not approve of if they, in fact, understood it at all.

Posted by: toby928 at July 31, 2011 08:37 AM (GTbGH)

46 All the GOP seems to have learned from the only two times in the last 23 years that they *did* stand up and do something is that it's "too risky" to try again.

Well, we learned how to get re-elected!

Posted by: The Republican establishment at July 31, 2011 08:38 AM (FBr/C)

47

Question. As with all government institutions, I'm sure the DoD could cut metric shit tons of cash out of the budget which I'm guessing wouldn't be in the operational theater but in the Pentagon. Is there a stupid amount of redundancy and duplication?

Strictly a matter of curiousity, BTW. I'm not questioning y'alls patriotism or shit like that.

----------

I'm not against a defense cut here or there, but when the option is "cut defense or raise taxes" then it's an option that has been solely created by the other side. Now, if this stupid stuff makes it in, how can we possibly claim with options like this that we actually "won" this debt ceiling fight. I mean look at that. That's a liberals dream come true. Cut defense or raise taxes. That's everything they've ever wanted and all before Thanksgiving. It takes away even the faintest of hopes that we won this fight and turns it into a solid "no, we didn't."

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:39 AM (OX4OZ)

48

As I said on a parallel thread:

FOLDARAMA coming to a Congress near you!!! Hurry... hurry get your popcorn and front row seats now.

"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a Hamburger today." - Popeye's Wimpy aka Teh Dhimmeroids

Posted by: chuck in st paul at July 31, 2011 08:39 AM (EhYdw)

49 37Remember, like it or not, America is a center-right country.

Bill,

In reality, America is a socialist country--it is no more center-right than is France or Britain. Like it or not.

Posted by: some dope at July 31, 2011 08:40 AM (+kznc)

50 Sounds like fucking retard Rubin still ecstatic that the GOP "extremists" have been thwarted, allowing her pal Barky the Spendaholic to continue aiming the ship of state at full speed towards the field of icebergs.

Posted by: Waterhouse at July 31, 2011 08:40 AM (P57Q4)

51 Anyone who is looking for a complete far right victory at this juncture is just foolish and short sighted.  If we are going to reform entitlement spending and runaway government, we are going to have to boil the frog by turning up the heat slowly.

In this entire process, we have managed to move the standard to the right.  The conversation is now ours.  Cutting spending and smaller government is the new normal.  That is a HUGE victory by any measure.

Now if Rush Limbaugh and all the other non-elected (unaccountable) talking heads out there go trashing this deal and saying we lost they are only playing into the left's hands.  What good does it do for the quarterback to publicly criticize the coaches playcalling in the middle of the game?

We must stand together or we will most assuredly hang separately.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at July 31, 2011 08:40 AM (uVlA4)

52 3 Shit like this does not help. The GOP has effectively won. Posted by: Chris R at July 31, 2011 01:15 PM (QiNmA) Can't tell if trolling, or just stupid.

Posted by: Old grizzled gym coach at July 31, 2011 08:40 AM (QBQcg)

53 I have no problem making some cuts in the defense budget. I'll even propose some: 1) cut the spare engine program for the F35 2) cut the C-5A modernization program (keep the C-5B) 3) eliminate the Marine Expeditionary Vehicle 4) slow the pace of replacing carriers 5) downsize the Army by a brigade I'll trade each of these for a verifiable cut of equal size in domestic discretionary spending. Put some of these into Boehner IV and start getting cuts NOW. Start cutting in the 2012 budget, not in the mythical 2019 budget.

Posted by: Steve White at July 31, 2011 08:41 AM (D14J4)

54 The GOP didn't propose to end baseline budgeting because they like to spend money too.  They know if they don't have any money to spend, they don't have any power, and they like power.

There is too much power to lie in baseline budgeting, and along with that every increasing supply of other people's money, the temptation is too great.

Posted by: cranky-d at July 31, 2011 08:41 AM (sNyNR)

55

And to think the TP and new blood thought they had a chance, I came riding in and saved the day and pwned all of them bitches!

Posted by: The Status Quo at July 31, 2011 08:41 AM (FIDMq)

56 Since this keeps getting brought up, we weren't going to get a BBA.  We definitely need more cuts--we need cuts that actually decrease the national debt, but a BBA was never going to happen (we weren't going to get 2/3 of the Senate to vote for it) and I'm not entirely sure it should happen, at least not without being heavily modified.  Just about every major war we have fought has required us taking out a large amount of debt and ending that option would severely hamstring our national security in the future.

Posted by: AD at July 31, 2011 08:42 AM (tZyw2)

57

I tire of this bullshit, at no point do they even attemt to address the only problem we have...spending.  As far as Moodys and S&P and their 'ratings', STFU &  DIAF. That is all

--------

They lost that fight from the word go.

They immediately started playing by the Dem's rules, that this was a "debt ceiling crisis." As in, the crisis would occur if and only if the ceiling wasn't raised.

Instead, what the Rs should have been hammering home was that we have a spending crisis, and that if we just raise the ceiling without getting serious, serious cuts, it would put us in a crisis situation.

But, nope. They can't even manage to get the lingo right for a few weeks.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:42 AM (OX4OZ)

58 The real solution would be to put all the Dims and the RINOs into a nuclear class submarine, send it out to the Marianas Trench, then make it go into a deep dive with the hatch open.

Posted by: TexasJew at July 31, 2011 08:43 AM (qSoqy)

59 Cutting spending and smaller government is the new normal.

HAHAAHAHAAHAHA!

Posted by: Waterhouse at July 31, 2011 08:43 AM (P57Q4)

60 Or maybe they've learned that a banzai charge is futile and a waste of resources. Prep the battlefield, then make the other guy charge. Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 01:36 PM (6TB1Z) 1995 and 2005-6 were not "banzai charges," they were limited attempts to control spending that actually kind of worked, except for the fact that they subsequently got scared. Other than that, it's been spend spend spend, and then spend some more. WE CANNOT AFFORD IT. PERIOD. People keep acting like we have a backup plan for the economy, there isn't one. Also the squishes keep saying "we can't get everything we want," dammit, I want just SOMETHING I want, a tiny percentage. Those of us who don't want collapse are getting nothing, they're still operating on a steep baseline, still increasing the debt just about as rapidly, and still kowtowing to the backstabbing MBM and taking a "hands-off" approach to the message.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 31, 2011 08:43 AM (bxiXv)

61 In this entire process, we have managed to move the standard to the right.  The conversation is now ours.  Cutting spending and smaller government is the new normal.  That is a HUGE victory by any measure.

I'm just not seeing it.  At best, we are slowing the rate of increase, maybe, in the out years, maybe.  We're not cutting anything.  We will spend more next year than this, and more the next year etc.

Posted by: toby928 at July 31, 2011 08:43 AM (GTbGH)

62 58 The real solution would be to put all the Dims and the RINOs into a nuclear class submarine, send it out to the Marianas Trench, then make it go into a deep dive with the hatch open.

Then can we nuke it?

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 08:44 AM (6TB1Z)

63 See how pissed off most of you are?  Does this motivate you to get out and fight for an even more Conservative POTUS and Congress in 2012?  You bet it does.

Do you think this deal motivates the Left's base in the same measure?  no, it does not, it discourages them because they are pure idealogues and thus more emotional in their response.  Their allegiances are a mile wide and an inch deep.

So, we keep the country going, super-motivate our base, discourage Democrats and expose them for tax and spenders.  I am telling you, this is a win.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at July 31, 2011 08:45 AM (uVlA4)

64

Get your US Dollar shitpaper rolls here!

100 rolls for only 5 Swiss francs!

Posted by: TexasJew at July 31, 2011 08:45 AM (qSoqy)

65

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 01:39 PM (OX4OZ)

I asked this question at the wrong time, I think. I just wanted to know the meat-and-potatos of the defense budget and what could be cut without relation to anything else.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 08:45 AM (Vj0AA)

66 "Cut defense or raise taxes. That's everything they've ever wanted and all before Thanksgiving. It takes away even the faintest of hopes that we won this fight and turns it into a solid "no, we didn't.""


X1000

Posted by: Lauren at July 31, 2011 08:46 AM (frrvB)

67 If they're going to capitulate, why not do it now?

The later the Republicans capitulate, the harder it is to develop a Republican candidate to primary them out.

The entrenched Republicans are just like Obama:  they want to kick the can into 2013.

Posted by: Johm P. Squibob at July 31, 2011 08:47 AM (kqqGm)

68 Also the squishes keep saying "we can't get everything we want," dammit, I want just SOMETHING I want, a tiny percentage. Those of us who don't want collapse are getting nothing, they're still operating on a steep baseline, still increasing the debt just about as rapidly, and still kowtowing to the backstabbing MBM and taking a "hands-off" approach to the message.

So, I'm a squish now?  Tell me, which of the things you've mentioned do I disagree with?  Do I want collapse?  Do I want to increase the debt?  Do I like the MBM?  I think you know that I don't, but my likes aren't the point.  Victory is, and IMHO, that won't happen your way.  Please remember that we are all on the same team.

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 08:47 AM (6TB1Z)

69

Anyone who is looking for a complete far right victory at this juncture is just foolish and short sighted.  If we are going to reform entitlement spending and runaway government, we are going to have to boil the frog by turning up the heat slowly.

In this entire process, we have managed to move the standard to the right.  The conversation is now ours.  Cutting spending and smaller government is the new normal.  That is a HUGE victory by any measure.

Now if Rush Limbaugh and all the other non-elected (unaccountable) talking heads out there go trashing this deal and saying we lost they are only playing into the left's hands.  What good does it do for the quarterback to publicly criticize the coaches playcalling in the middle of the game?

We must stand together or we will most assuredly hang separately.

---------------

So when the coach continues to fuck up, we should just nod our heads in agreement? This isn't go along, get along here. We are trying to make an actual difference in the direciton of this country, and if we leave that in the hands of Boehner and McConnell and just stand in line behind them, we are totally screwed.

Furthermore, there is no cutting of spending and smaller government. None. Zero. It's growing government. The only thing we've managed to do is claim that growing government and a slight (and I do mean slightly) slower pace is the right thing to do. Forget about actual CUTS. No, no. Can't do that. It still needs to grow. Just..you know, 1% slower. Color me unimpressed.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:47 AM (OX4OZ)

70  I am telling you, this is a win.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at July 31, 2011 01:45 PM (uVlA4)

Tell us about it, Prime Minister Tojo..

Posted by: TexasJew at July 31, 2011 08:47 AM (qSoqy)

71 A) I am a "yellow dog" independent, I will enthusiastically vote for a yellow dog, if I believe he can win, to get "the one" out of office. That has to happen or none of this circus matters. B) In all of the spending cut plans, don't we need a budget from which to cut??

Posted by: jpintx at July 31, 2011 08:48 AM (qiO8E)

72 See how pissed off most of you are?

Being pissed off is hardly a sign of victory.

Posted by: Waterhouse at July 31, 2011 08:48 AM (P57Q4)

73 Boehner cried, the US died.

Posted by: TexasJew at July 31, 2011 08:49 AM (qSoqy)

74

See how pissed off most of you are?  Does this motivate you to get out and fight for an even more Conservative POTUS and Congress in 2012?  You bet it does.

-----------

I'm motivated to primary our own guys. Particularly the leaders of the party.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:49 AM (OX4OZ)

75 If you like your tranche, you can keep your tranche.


Posted by: Faptain America at July 31, 2011 08:49 AM (ECjvn)

76 Victory is, and IMHO, that won't happen your way. Please remember that we are all on the same team. Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 01:47 PM (6TB1Z) Then don't even START that "must have everything" shit with me. YOU started that, I'M asking for a *PITTANCE* and we're getting nothing. You heard me, this deal is nothing - increased spending, dubious cuts in the out-years, and kicking the can down the road until after the election. It's a shit sandwich. I'm not asking for everything and I never was, I'm SICK of every damned post from the "moderates" being a misrepresentation. Either deal with it honestly or just stay the Hell away from me.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 31, 2011 08:51 AM (bxiXv)

77

I will remind everyone that the "cuts" are only cuts to the baseline.  Not cuts at all.  This deal ensures that we will increase the deficit by 10 Trillion over the next 8 years, and not 12 Trillion.  Some deal. 

Posted by: Truck Monkey at July 31, 2011 08:51 AM (yQWNf)

78 At Thanksgiving, the campaigning for the Iowa caucuses will be in full swing.  No candidate will be advocating tax increases. Romney won't be campaigning there, but he will make himself heard so that the rest don't get as much attention.

I'm sorry, but I don't see tax increases coming later.

Look, this is what we wanted, more debt discussion before 2013.  It's Obama that wanted this whole thing over with.

Posted by: AmishDude at July 31, 2011 08:51 AM (73tyQ)

79 70  I am telling you, this is a win.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at July 31, 2011 01:45 PM (uVlA4)

Tell us about it, Prime Minister Tojo..


Let's continue the WW2 analogy.  The Russians didn't quit after Stalingrad even though it didn't result in their immediate capture of Berlin.  We didn't quit after Midway or Guadalcanal despite the fact that Tokyo was still standing.  Those were both Allied victories, but without the longer term strategy and a will to continue the fight, they would have ultimately been futile..

The Dems worked for 80 years to get OCare.  Don't give up on the cusp of our first victory, no matter how flawed.

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 08:52 AM (6TB1Z)

80 63 Bill--you and your GOP pals go on a massive spending spree, make the few remaining Americans who didn't previously hate you hate you, thereby motivating the voters to sweep you into power.  Winning. Got it. You're a frickin genius. May I send your contact info to the RNC? Rinse Peinus could use talent like yours.

Posted by: some dope at July 31, 2011 08:52 AM (+kznc)

81 stay the Hell away from me

Done

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 08:53 AM (6TB1Z)

82 I could be mistaken, but this is how I remember it: The Gramm-Rudman act had such "triggers" by another name ("sequestrations").  The Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional.

Could it be that the moment this sort of deal gets inked, we find ourselves in court and all these things get thrown out?

Posted by: Cowboy at July 31, 2011 08:53 AM (So+7G)

83 le barf. Why not also negotiate the results of 2012 too? You know, certify the electoral college count to Obama at this stage, just because, you know, compromise?

Posted by: joeindc44 at July 31, 2011 08:54 AM (QxSug)

84 Well, we learned how to get re-elected!

Posted by: The Republican establishment at July 31, 2011 01:38 PM (FBr/C)

Yeah, obviously.

By the way, 2006 and 2008 just e-mailed to say, "BWAAAHAHAAA!"

Posted by: blue star at July 31, 2011 08:54 AM (lofS9)

85 I am just so far beyond sick of the LIES I probably should just avoid politics for a while, like THAT'S going to happen.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 31, 2011 08:54 AM (bxiXv)

86 This entire scenario perfectly positions us for a solid conservative candidate with a set of balls like Perry.

I swear some of you would probably never punt the whole game just out of principal.  You would also lose 35-0.  The Democrat brand has been badly weakened in this process.  The POTUS has been badly weakened and demonstrated a complete lack of leadership.

Face it, a Tea Party Bill will NEVER make it through the Senate and if by some miracle it did, would never be signed by the president.  So, we have to find something that will work and positions us well with independents for 2012.  America isn't looking for idealogues here, they are looking for pragmatic solutions to real world problems.

We cannot shut down the government.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at July 31, 2011 08:55 AM (uVlA4)

87

I asked this question at the wrong time, I think. I just wanted to know the meat-and-potatos of the defense budget and what could be cut without relation to anything else.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 01:45 PM (Vj0AA)

The list is very fucking long on what we could cut.

1. We could stop paying 70% of the cost of NATO to defend Europe.

2. We could maybe decide that Hitler is really dead and pull out of Germany.

3. We could decide that the 40,000 troops we have in South Korea would only be a speed bump if the North attacked with 2 Million troops.

4. Do you think we are doing any good with 100,000 in afghanistan? We've already announce we are leaving so my opinion is that we are not but I could be wrong about that.

5. Do we need 50,000 in Iraq?

If you think we need all these things and the $700 Billion a year budget that goes with them then you may be right and I may be wrong. If we need them then we should be willing to pay for them. The defense budget has gone up because we are doing more. If we are going to be at perpetual war we have to come to the table and pay for it.

Posted by: robtr at July 31, 2011 08:55 AM (MtwBb)

88 The fact that some folks are still advocating trust and total support for the current GOP "leadership" no matter how much they fuck up is just sad.

You may not want to believe it, but your wife is cheating on you. Go ahead and get pissed and rant and rave about how she could never do that in a million years. Tell us all that we are just stupid and jealous of your perfect marriage. It may even help you feel better. But she's still cheating.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 08:55 AM (ECjvn)

89 Whorehouse Harry is a domestic enemy that the Founders warned us about.

Posted by: torabora at July 31, 2011 08:55 AM (fw+mU)

90 I think my rep said it best.

Time to pass that legislation to cover the moon with yogurt for $5 Trillion. Then we can cut back 1 Trillion and only cover 4/5ths of the moon and SAVE that $1 Trillion for something we REALLY NEED.

I am thinking Obama needs another 757, maybe get one for Michelle also.

Posted by: David Kramer at July 31, 2011 08:56 AM (tyLgY)

91  "As was entirely predictable, the second tranche of the debt increase has been de-coupled from any cuts, according to numerous press reports. But the special committee lives on. Democrats are very cleverly trying to create a situation where the committee might recommend tax increases and the alternative if Republicans vote it down will be automatic disproportionate defense cuts, as :

Two sources briefed on the framework say the automatic cuts would hit Defense spending harder than Medicare.  A Republican briefed on the framework says this will be unacceptable to many Republicans because it could force them to face a choice between accepting tax increases (if that is what the committee recommends) or automatic cuts that would gut the Pentagon’s budget.

If Republicans must agree to a special committee in any form–some conservatives in the House think it represents John Boehner’s continuing hankering for a Grand Bargain, which has sometimes been referred to as “Jason” because it seems so un-killable–the automatic trigger should be genuinely across-the-board cuts." -Rich Lowry, NRO

Man, this victory sure feels a lot like defeat.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:56 AM (OX4OZ)

92 Just one last thing, pep. I am not so offended by your fiscal position - I think it is wrong but not indefensible. I am *OFFENDED* by the lies told about me and others - it's a long list but right now the big one is the "you want everything right now" crap. It's just straight up lying to someone's face about THEM, and that *IS* indefensible. If that's truly the way of both sides then there is no hope.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 31, 2011 08:57 AM (bxiXv)

93 We cannot shut down the government.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at July 31, 2011 01:55 PM (uVlA4)

Sure we can. And we should.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 08:57 AM (Vj0AA)

94 86 This entire scenario perfectly positions us for a solid conservative candidate with a set of balls like Perry.

My guess is, Perry isn't appreciating your endorsement.  And what do you mean, "us?"

Posted by: some dope at July 31, 2011 08:57 AM (+kznc)

95

Uh... folks??? We ALREADY have the tool to balance the budget... because only Congress can create US Debt...

Please explain how a Balanced Budget Amendment 5 years from now, would be different than NOT raising the Debt limit NOW?  They would still have to make those hard choices... they would still have to cut spending...

But even the Repubs can't seem to cut spending NOW, even when we are historicly high levels, and just Grossly increased Government spending (last few years)....

Do you really think these same Repubs, even WITH a Balanced Budget Amendment in place, would balance the budget????

This BBA vote is nothing more than a guy in a Kabuki Mask, coming onstage and kicking a can down the road...

Posted by: Romeo13 at July 31, 2011 08:57 AM (NtXW4)

96

We cannot shut down the government.

-------

Why?

If you can't shut it down, don't play the game.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 08:58 AM (OX4OZ)

97 Hey LOOK, something shiny!

Posted by: Clueless taxpayers trusting politicians to not spend us into more debt. at July 31, 2011 08:58 AM (tyLgY)

98
In the near future this will be a distant memory about Congressional posturing, and we will meekly watch our children's future disappear, the standard of living decrease dramatically, interest rates rise exponentially, and declare to one and all that the boning is only a minor inconvenience.

Posted by: Bufford W. Pussy, GOP Athletic Supporter at July 31, 2011 08:58 AM (Lt/Za)

99 So now all we'll have to worry about is the ding to our credit score because our debt limit is too high?

Posted by: joeindc44 at July 31, 2011 08:58 AM (QxSug)

100

 

Hmm, an immediate 2 trillioan addition to our creidt card (whever the cash comes from) in exchange for 1.6T in cuts over ten years.

man, that should help the fuck out of us!

Check this shit out...wanna be scared? Hide the decline!

GDP via google graphs

Good job GOP, you trash us left and right. this is your legacy assholes.

 

Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Miller at July 31, 2011 08:59 AM (s5aNX)

101 So, are we boned?

Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 08:59 AM (GKQDR)

102 You would also lose 35-0.

You're already losing 15,000,000,000,000 - 0. Now you're going to lose 18,000,000,000,000 - 0, and counting.

What a victory.

Posted by: Waterhouse at July 31, 2011 08:59 AM (P57Q4)

103 If you thought bell-bottoms sucked the first time, just wait till you have to buy them with a $1Million bill.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 08:59 AM (ECjvn)

104

If you think we need all these things and the $700 Billion a year budget that goes with them then you may be right and I may be wrong. If we need them then we should be willing to pay for them. The defense budget has gone up because we are doing more. If we are going to be at perpetual war we have to come to the table and pay for it.

Posted by: robtr at July 31, 2011 01:55 PM (MtwBb)

I got a better idea.  How's about we make the Iraqis pay for their freedom and the Afghans pay (mineral rights) for their freedom and the deadbeat, thankless europeans pay for their freedom (65 years is a long time) and the SoKos pay for their freedom (50 years) etc.......... The time for the world sucking on Uncle Sugars tit is over.  If they don't pay up we are out.  For problem areas of the world we can ensure our interests remotely and violently.  We need a president to say this and mean it. 

Posted by: Truck Monkey at July 31, 2011 09:00 AM (yQWNf)

105 robtr at July 31, 2011 01:55 Our troops in S Korea has been pissing me off since they decided to screw us on a trade deal. They want to screw us on a trade deal? They pay for a fraction of their defense, reinvest in their economy, and want to screw us while lecturing us? FK them, if they want to be big boys they can defend themselves like big boys.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 09:00 AM (ZDUD4)

106 man, getting rolled, time to invest in gold.

Posted by: joeindc44 at July 31, 2011 09:01 AM (QxSug)

107

Honestly, the thing that offends me the most is the pretending that this is some great victory.

It's one thing if you think this is all we can get. Fine. It's all we can get and we got it.

But don't tell me that a cut that amounts ot jack is a "great victory." It's just another bill being passed. We didn't win shit.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:01 AM (OX4OZ)

108 105--our troops screwed us on a trade deal?

Posted by: some dope at July 31, 2011 09:01 AM (+kznc)

109 103 If you thought bell-bottoms sucked the first time, just wait till you have to buy them with a $1Million bill.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 01:59 PM (ECjvn)

Only half a million more for the 'distressed' look

Posted by: Red Shirt at July 31, 2011 09:02 AM (FIDMq)

110 Reguardless of what the "plan" is, it still has to pass the House- which has been held HOSTAGE by immature Tea Party extremists. Dingy Hairlip messed up not passing a modified bill that coulda went thru conference.

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at July 31, 2011 09:03 AM (bZ8J6)

111

ok...need some grim statistics here...how much does the gov't spend a month?

Posted by: Red Shirt at July 31, 2011 09:03 AM (FIDMq)

112 I got a better idea.  How's about we make the Iraqis pay for their freedom and the Afghans pay (mineral rights) for their freedom and the deadbeat, thankless europeans pay for their freedom (65 years is a long time) and the SoKos pay for their freedom (50 years) etc.......... The time for the world sucking on Uncle Sugars tit is over.  If they don't pay up we are out.  For problem areas of the world we can ensure our interests remotely and violently.  We need a president to say this and mean it.

Amen. All these fuckers who hate us yet hide behind our tanks when the wolf comes to the door need to fork over some money.

NASA's new mission should be to install the Rods from God. You harm US interests? Wait 15 minutes. You and a few miles of your palace real estate are about to be erased.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:03 AM (ECjvn)

113 108, Yeah, that's what I meant, goofball.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 09:04 AM (ZDUD4)

114 We cannot shut down the government.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at July 31, 2011 01:55 PM (uVlA4)

How many times must it be said?

This is NOT shutting down the Government... this is NOT a Spending Bill, or budget bill (like the last time)...

There are still moneys coming into the Federal Government, that they can use to pay bills... they just have to decide WHICH bills..

Lets see... a few billion to the world bank? out... UN Dues? Kaput... Foreign Aid? buh bye..... Social programs like funds to Community organizer crap? gone... Grab back the TARP funds? check...

Lots of things they can do... but NOT raising the debt ceiling is a DE FACTO Balanced Budget Amendment... it just means the Feds must live within what they are taking in.

Posted by: Romeo13 at July 31, 2011 09:04 AM (NtXW4)

115
man, getting rolled, time to invest in gold.

Posted by: joeindc44 at July 31, 2011 02:01 PM (QxSug)

Gold continues to be a very poor investment, and when I suggested it was a scam at $850/ounce that was the truth.  Just because it has almost double to $1618/ounce doesn't mean it was a good investment.

Posted by: Anthony Weiner, Private Citizen at July 31, 2011 09:04 AM (Lt/Za)

116 105--our troops screwed us on a trade deal?

When I was stationed at Camp Humphreys I once bought knock-off Nikes. Sorry. I'll pay it back.

Posted by: Not Drinking Nearly Enough at July 31, 2011 09:04 AM (JEvSn)

117

NASA's new mission should be to install the Rods from God. You harm US interests? Wait 15 minutes. You and a few miles of your palace real estate are about to be erased.

Alas, the Chi-Coms will probably build this awesome weapon before us.   

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 31, 2011 09:05 AM (9hSKh)

118 ugh .

Posted by: willow at July 31, 2011 09:05 AM (h+qn8)

119 113, oh, you meant the SoKos  ; )

Posted by: some dope at July 31, 2011 09:05 AM (+kznc)

120 Let me sit my dumb, phony, ignorant ass down and enjoy a cool glass of Ice Tea. I get tired shining up these bars of gold.

Posted by: Glenn Beck at July 31, 2011 09:06 AM (ZDUD4)

121 damn, 115, that was good.

Posted by: joeindc44 at July 31, 2011 09:07 AM (QxSug)

122 Alas, the Chi-Coms will probably build this awesome weapon before us.  

Once you accept that, you have to think of this as glass half-full. Washington DC would be top of the target list.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:07 AM (ECjvn)

123

This is NOT shutting down the Government... this is NOT a Spending Bill, or budget bill (like the last time)...

---------

Make no mistake, they are barely taking enough to cover the interest and the three major entitlements. Throw in some basic defense, and the rest of the government is going ot be shut down.

Now, I'm ok with that, especially in the short-term. Others here apparently think the world will implode if the ABC departments are closed for a little bit.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:07 AM (OX4OZ)

124 Yep, it is all my fault and people like me. We got those people in 2010 and we retroactively caused that $100+ Trillion dollar liability.

I also think it is those kids fault, you know the ones to be born in 2012. Let's stick them with the bill.

I mean, indentured servitude and slavery is fine and dandy for punishment for crime. To be born in the US is now a crime..............right?

Posted by: Bomb throwin, extremist, Taliban like, hostage taking Tea Partier at July 31, 2011 09:08 AM (tyLgY)

125 2trillion - 4trillion  X   y # of years = Utopia

Posted by: Shiggz at July 31, 2011 09:08 AM (v8Pb8)

126 "Another Possibility: Republicans let the automatic cuts happen, but then immediately propose reinstating most of the money to Defense."

There's another quirk that could be a positive feature for Republicans -if- they can manage to actually let the automatic cuts happen before turning around to "fix" them.

They can run "Medicare refunding bills" ... that fundamentally implement Ryan's plan as an "increase". Yes, an increase from whatever level it was cut to. But an -increase-. The restructuring is probably going to be more worthwhile than the actual cuts (knowing how minimal any cuts will end up actually being).

But you'd have -Democrats- refusing to support bills named "Medicare Refunding Act of 2012", and you might even have veto threats, etc. 

Posted by: Al at July 31, 2011 09:08 AM (MzQOZ)

127 Once you accept that, you have to think of this as glass half-full. Washington DC would be top of the target list.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 02:07 PM (ECjvn)

Nah.... the ChiComs are pretty smart... they know that Washington HINDERS our war fighting ability... they'd leave it alone...

Posted by: Romeo13 at July 31, 2011 09:09 AM (NtXW4)

128

 Bomb throwin, extremist, Taliban like, hostage taking Tea Partier

------------

You forgot to add hobit.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:09 AM (OX4OZ)

129
if I read "1/2 of 1/3" one more time...

Posted by: soothsayer at July 31, 2011 09:09 AM (7lPnF)

130 Let's go back and blame those ignorant, simple-minded, immature Tea Partiers like Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams and Alexander Hamilton.

Those fuckers got us into this.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:09 AM (ECjvn)

131 Well who are we to question Jen Rubin's judgment? The last time she went kookoo against conservatives, it was because they wouldn't support TARP, for which she was a big advocate. And hey, she was right about TARP, since it not only prevented a second great depression (we did avoid a depression, didn't we?), but it also averted nuclear holocaust, the bird flu pandemic and a world series victory by the Cubs.  Yeah, Jen really knows her shit.

Posted by: some dope at July 31, 2011 09:09 AM (+kznc)

132

Posted by: robtr at July 31, 2011 01:55 PM (MtwBb)

Good shit.

Isn't Germany a strategic base, tho? I agree that we should pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan but until then, Rammstein is an important waypoint, no?

I don't know dick about the current Korean standoff but it seems to me that the South could benefit from having extra security there.

Again, I'm just a civvy. Y'all are welcome to edumacate my ass.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 09:10 AM (Vj0AA)

133 WSJ, The average household debt is 112% of their income. The Gov. taught us well.

Posted by: Glenn Beck at July 31, 2011 09:10 AM (ZDUD4)

134 Nah.... the ChiComs are pretty smart... they know that Washington HINDERS our war fighting ability... they'd leave it alone...

They probably assume Harvard is the capitol of America now anyway.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:10 AM (ECjvn)

135

Posted by: Al at July 31, 2011 02:08 PM (MzQOZ)

Federal programs, without a Real Budget or Spending Bills (which have NOT been produced for a couple of years) grow at 7% annualy...

These cuts are 5%.

Thus... they still grow..... once more they are only slowing the rate of growth... not performing actual CUTS.

Posted by: Romeo13 at July 31, 2011 09:11 AM (NtXW4)

136
The GOP is about to lose the 2012.

2012 will be 1948 all over again.

Posted by: soothsayer at July 31, 2011 09:11 AM (ibo8U)

137 134, Maybe they will target it with a nuke.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 09:11 AM (ZDUD4)

138

I think I finally figured out that Ace is not a RINO squish. He just has a crappy lock on his basement door. Every once in a while, one of the hobos gets loose and starts posting shit. It's gotta be the hobo that's limp, right? I mean, everyone knows conservatives want to stop subsidies on hobos' shopping carts.

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at July 31, 2011 09:12 AM (bZ8J6)

139 Just checking in.  Has it been pointed out everyone here is just a bunch of dim-bulb teabaggers who can't possibly appreciate the depth and complexity of this eleventh-dimensional chess game yet? 

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 31, 2011 09:12 AM (GOXeN)

140 There is no part of our government that could not survive quite nicely after a 20% decrease in their budget.
At a minimum.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 09:12 AM (nQR0p)

141 So, the "long-gammers" get their wish and now, we'll see if their all-in on 2012 is a wise play.

Here's my prediction(s):

1.  We don't get to 2012 before a complete meltdown occurs due to the only laws that really matter in this...the laws of economics.  They can be bent, but we're, IMO, out of elasticity and the reckoning is coming one way or another.

2.  If Scenario 1 doesn't materialize, the R's make little or modest gains in 2012 and BO remains POTUS, effectively becoming king for 4 years, as he'll have no reelection gambit to negotiate.  He'll rule by fiat, agency, and congressional end-runs, and we'll never recover.

3.  If the R's make significant gains, we'll find out just how squishy they really are, as they won't find the stones to actually cut when they could.  Afterall, 2014 is just 2 years away and they have to get re-elected.  They'll play another couple of rounds of kick the can and we'll get the "long game" speeches anew.


Too many on our side want to spend, want to tax, and see bigger intrusive government as a good thing.  It's undeniable and until we get those R's out, we'll slide (faster and slower at times) into the abyss. 

Our leadership is going to agree to go $2.7T further in debt, for a six pack of PBR, 2 slim jims, 8 twinkies, and a pack of exotic colored condoms.

They want to spend, and won't cut ever.  That's the bottom line. 




Posted by: The Hammer at July 31, 2011 09:12 AM (09U5d)

142 The whole "you want everything now" argument is a transparently dishonest attempt by one faction to discredit another by making them look stupid. People do not do that to people "on the same side." I just won't let that slide by without comment, I'm sure it is offensive to call a liar a liar these days.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 31, 2011 09:13 AM (bxiXv)

143

Ahh Scott Brown.

Apparently Reid held a vote on his own bill earlier. It wasn't brought to the floor because it didn't get 60 votes for cloture. It went down 50/49.

But, guess what, Reid was one of the 49 (for some parliamentary reasons) as well as Bill Nelson and Joe Manchin. So that means three dems voted against it, which begs the question of how they got to 50.

Scott Brown is how. Three Dems say no to a cloture vote and all of the Rs...except Brown. What an ass.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:13 AM (OX4OZ)

144

Let's just cut all congressional salaries and benefits and apply that to our debt.  When the president or his wife want to go somewhere we have them figure out how much it would have cost and then apply that to the debt and they can stay the hell in the White House. 

The 'geniuses' in Congress have shown us over and over and over and over that they are not competent enough to balance our national checkbook and they need to pay until they do.

 

Posted by: AdamPM at July 31, 2011 09:13 AM (/83rF)

145 @92
I have deliberately and consistently avoided the overheated rhetoric from both sides in these threads, because it is ultimately counterproductive.  In fact, I have asked on numerous occasions that folks tone it down and consider the greater good and our shared common goals. 

Disagreement is not lying.  All the squish, RINO, commie, wuss, purist, liar etc. stuff is exactly why the Dems have pursued the strategy they have.  It divides us, and that is their only chance.

I will give this a rest though for awhile, though, because further engagement right now is changing nobody's minds, and frankly, I'm tired of it.

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (6TB1Z)

146 You forgot to add hobit.

Rich, McAmnesty was sooo stupid, he did not realize that the hobbits were the heroes in that storyline.

Actually being called hobbits was a blessing in disguise. He probably thought the eye of Sauron was the good guy being they have one on the dollar bill!

Posted by: Bomb throwin, extremist, Taliban like, hostage taking Tea Partier at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (tyLgY)

147 As much as I'd like to see MASSIVE cuts, the one thing the GOP cannot do is allow Obama to wriggle off the hook. Keep giving him enough rope to hang himself so that his penchant for being anti-business and completely out of touch prevents him from being re-elected. That is, simply, priority #1, #2, and #3. Nothing else, honestly, even comes close to the importance of getting that moron out of the White House.

Posted by: deadrody at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (GJhuj)

148 139 Just checking in. Has it been pointed out everyone here is just a bunch of dim-bulb teabaggers who can't possibly appreciate the depth and complexity of this eleventh-dimensional chess game yet? Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 31, 2011 Yes.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (bxiXv)

149 Just checking in.  Has it been pointed out everyone here is just a bunch of dim-bulb teabaggers who can't possibly appreciate the depth and complexity of this eleventh-dimensional chess game yet? 

Jeff B will be administering the punishment for bad-crazy mind-thoughts a little later between squash games.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (ECjvn)

150 really do not understand the bashing of the tea party within our own party.
well i do with our betters i guess, as the light is shone on their financial conduct . but i don't from taxpayers worried about the debt and the looming fincacial crisis.

Posted by: willow at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (h+qn8)

151 139, I suppose your right undead, let me lube up my ears and stick my head back in my ass so I can join the Democrat party.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (ZDUD4)

152 Automatic cuts to Defense with the World as it is today is insane and suicidal.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (7wmOW)

153 141--thasch a great deal. Ill take it.

Posted by: John Bonehead, Schpeaker of the hic at July 31, 2011 09:14 AM (+kznc)

154 Automatic cuts to Defense with the World as it is today is insane and suicidal. Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 02:14 PM (7wmOW) Oh and it puts to the rest any doubt about how much "democrats" love the Military?

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:15 AM (7wmOW)

155 The best part about this defeat, when we have the winning hand and popular support, is that we know, similar to how they're using TARP and other democrat spending under Boooosh against us now, and how they use our shutdown and balanced-ish budget under clinton as their own, is that the disaster caused by the insane spending spree will have the blame planted on our doorstep.

Posted by: joeindc44 at July 31, 2011 09:17 AM (QxSug)

156 And lets not forget the GOP currently controls 1/2 of one branch of government that matters in this case. Regardless of the Nov 2010 "mandate", its hard to argue that not getting what we want faced with the other 1 1/2 branches is "capitulating". They really have very limited leverage, much as we'd like to believe otherwise.

Posted by: deadrody at July 31, 2011 09:17 AM (GJhuj)

157 Disagreement is not lying. All the squish, RINO, commie, wuss, purist, liar etc. stuff is exactly why the Dems have pursued the strategy they have. It divides us, and that is their only chance. Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 02:14 PM (6TB1Z) Saying I'm claiming one thing when I open claim the reverse is, however, a lie. You have *not* avoided the overheated rhetoric. But now you're claiming the middle ground after having delivered the payload. gee, where have we seen that before? I'm tired, too, but I'm not too tired to point out the obvious.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 31, 2011 09:17 AM (bxiXv)

158 153 Automatic cuts to Defense with the World as it is today is insane and suicidal.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 02:14 PM (7wmOW)

Like all government, Defense is ripe for a decent audit.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 09:17 AM (nQR0p)

159
Reid and Obama will agree to $10 quadrillion in cuts. They don't care.

All they care about is getting enough of an increase in debt to get past Nov 2012, which is exactly what you don't give them.

Posted by: soothsayer at July 31, 2011 09:17 AM (4o/yn)

160

The whole GOP caucus in the Senate and House vote against the Reid bill...except Scott Brown. Hell, even some Dems in both Houses voted against it. Man, I wish we had Mike Castle in there to set him straight and keep him in line.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:18 AM (OX4OZ)

161 do the rating houses now fall under some new type of legislative oversight in the Senate b/c of the Frank/Dodd bill?

Posted by: x11b1p at July 31, 2011 09:19 AM (nVLlM)

162 156 And lets not forget the GOP currently controls 1/2 of one branch of government that matters in this case. Posted by: deadrody at July 31, 2011 02:17 PM (GJhuj)   There it is. You did that on purpose

Posted by: Red Shirt at July 31, 2011 09:19 AM (FIDMq)

163 If they're going to capitulate, why not do it now? If they're going to capitulate, they should have just done it months ago and not even bothered with any of this shit. Now, when the tax increases re-tank the economy, the dip will be blamed on the nasty evil partisan Republicans dragging this out for so long.

Posted by: Brendan at July 31, 2011 09:19 AM (2jQGY)

164 The Democrats never got the modern Dien Bien Phu or another phony ass Tet Offensive they were hoping for to end the Iraq war, and they didn't get it in Afghanistan.

The commies and jihadis cannot defeat the American military on the battlefield so they rely on their paid stooges and plants in Washington to do starve it into irrelevance.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:19 AM (ECjvn)

165 Like all government, Defense is ripe for a decent audit. Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 02:17 PM (nQR0p) I may not be and English Major, but automatic blind cuts seem a whole lot different than a "Decent Audit". It should be rather obvious to anybody that the Democrats are holding a knife to the Defense of our Country.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:19 AM (7wmOW)

166 153 Automatic cuts to Defense with the World as it is today is insane and suicidal.   Agreed, especially on the heels of the "resignations" of the main Turkish Armed Forces military heads.  

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 31, 2011 09:20 AM (9hSKh)

167

I heard on Fox News a few minutes ago that Boehner said he was still fighting for the best deal!  Congress holds the purse strings, they had the upper hand. 

I'm tired of we only control 1/3 of the government, money is the most important.  Who elects these leaders?  We need new leadershp. 

Obama looks weaker and weaker every time I hear him. I watched last Friday's temper tantrum, it was funny. It's the first time I have been able to watch him. I've avoided the others. I had enough that one day.  He he had an epic fail the other days when he started twittering all his supporters, they started to report them as spam. I do not twitter.

Posted by: Carol at July 31, 2011 09:20 AM (z4WKX)

168 Man, I wish we had Mike Castle in there to set him straight and keep him in line.

I could be fun to deal with too!

Posted by: RINO Squish Strawman #48 at July 31, 2011 09:21 AM (GOXeN)

169 Personally I would not vote for automatic blind cuts to Defense and I have a feeling the Congress may not also.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:21 AM (7wmOW)

170 Someone asked if we were in a depression.

hmmmm, let me put on my economics hat.

Some facts first.

A depression is defined as 4 or more contiguous quarters of declining GDP.
2010 US Federal deficit spending was 9.6% of GDP
2010 stated GDP growth was 2.6%

Opinion, if deficit spending actually worked, this would not be a problem. Therefore, the EFFECTIVE or ACTUAL GDP growth was a NEGATIVE 7% in 2010. 2009 was worse and 2011 is looking to be worse also.

Posted by: someone smarter than Paul Krugman at July 31, 2011 09:21 AM (tyLgY)

171 Defense is ripe for a decent audit.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 02:17 PM (nQR0p)

Can you imagine the results of a full gov't audit....pretty sure it would be instant revolution and Washington in flames

Posted by: Red Shirt at July 31, 2011 09:22 AM (FIDMq)

172 Or maybe they've learned that a banzai charge is futile and a waste of resources.  Prep the battlefield, then make the other guy charge.

Posted by: pep at July 31, 2011 01:36 PM (6TB1Z)

Except that they have used this excuse every single damn time they could've pushed conservative shit, but no, it's always "next time".

Posted by: KG at July 31, 2011 09:22 AM (LD21B)

173 I can't believe we have senators from 57 states and none of them can give us a decent deal.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:22 AM (ECjvn)

174
32 the "infrastructure" of the "tranche" remains securely in the "lockbox"......

So what you are saying is that the chalice with the palace holds the brew that is true?   Or will you at least agree that it rubs the lotion on its skin or it gets the hose?

Posted by: kurtilator at July 31, 2011 09:22 AM (juh4Z)

175 Did you all see where a half dozen Syrian Generals have gone agaist Assad, banded their forces together and decided not to kill their own citizens? I wonder what our generals are thinking right now?

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 09:23 AM (ZDUD4)

176 Except that they have used this excuse every single damn time they could've pushed conservative shit, but no, it's always "next time".

Yup. The same people will be saying the same thing next time we get a raw deal.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:23 AM (ECjvn)

177 I can't believe we have senators from 57 states and none of them can give us a decent deal. Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 02:22 PM (ECjvn) What we need is a Senator Corleone

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:23 AM (7wmOW)

178 Some jerk in the comments keeps saying there are actually no cuts.  over and over again.  cause ya know there aren't any. cuts.


ever.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at July 31, 2011 09:23 AM (0f7gD)

179 To the people saying we only control one half of 1/3 of the government...

We control the only branch that matters in spending.  The house initiates the bills.  Fuck the courts and fuck the presidency.  The courts got no say in this.  If the president wants to veto, fuck it, it's on HIM.  If the senate won't pass the house finance bill, fuck it, it's on them.

For those saying we have to prepare ourselves for the next election... OK, fine, but that same thinking is going to reassert itself in 2012.  In 2012, we will control the White House.  And then everyone will say, well, we have to position our self for the next election, in 2014 to control the senate.  When we control the senate, then will will say "well, we can't cut spending now, we're going into a presidential re-election.  We'll have to wait until after the re-election.

There will never be a "right time" to cut the spending if you are just worried about the next election.  If we controlled every branch of government, do you think the GOP political class would then embrace spending cuts?  Hell no.  They would fear them more than ever because they would then own them 100%.

Fuck the next election.  The fight is here and now.  I am so tired of hearing people say "this isn't the hill to fight and die on."  We gotta save our powder for the upcoming, hypothetical fight.  Fuck that.  This is the fight.  When Boehner was talking about 100 billion in cuts last year, then a pro-rated 60 billion, then 30 billion, and then 100 million in cuts in the end... I heard all the same arguments.

Save your powder for the fight over the debt limit.  Boy, we'll really hand it to them then.  Now?  Save your powder for the 2012 elections.  Don't blow it all on this fight....

Fuck that shit.

Stop trying to fool the U.S. public.  Level with them.  The cuts are here and now.  They're gonna hurt.  Bad.  But if we don't cut now, the cancer will spread and instead of cutting, we will be amputating.  And if we don't amputate later, we are all dead.

Posted by: ed at July 31, 2011 09:23 AM (Y2WVW)

180 We need a wartime consigliere.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:24 AM (ECjvn)

181

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 02:14 PM (7wmOW)

There's a new Middle East Hydra, with the heads comprised of Turkey, Iran, and Syria. 

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 31, 2011 09:24 AM (9hSKh)

182 Did you all see where a half dozen Syrian Generals have gone agaist Assad, banded their forces together and decided not to kill their own citizens? I wonder what our generals are thinking right now? Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 02:23 PM (ZDUD4) They are probably scratching their heads wondering why, in all their wisdom, obama isn't giving Syria the Libyan treatment?

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:25 AM (7wmOW)

183 God bless you ed, you crazy Tea Bagger. I couldn't agree more.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 09:26 AM (ZDUD4)

184 There's a new Middle East Hydra, with the heads comprised of Turkey, Iran, and Syria. Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 31, 2011 02:24 PM (9hSKh) Compliments of barak obama

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:26 AM (7wmOW)

185 >>The threat of drastically slashing Defense will cause Republicans to vote for tax increases. Democrats will not identify additional money to be cut, because they don't want to, and they don't need to -- Republicans will cave, as they have caved since the 2011 budget fight, and will agree to tax increases to avert devastating cuts in Defense. With all due respect to Jen Rubin, sometimes its good to listen to the actual players. People like Thune have been all over the tube today suggesting that tax increases will never be acceptable. They are looking at tax reform, lowering the rates, removing loopholes and broadening the base. Major Garret has been reporting the same thing. And if you think people here are upset, you should read some of the lefty blogs. They view this as a complete and total defeat of Obama and the left. Both things can't be true.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 31, 2011 09:27 AM (TMB3S)

186

Without the willingness to shut the government down, they have no leverage. Most of them don't even pretend at the fiction that they're willing to do that.

 

That right there sums everything up. None of this is going to be solved without the Democrats rending clothes and knashing teeth at the inhumanity of the Republicans cutting spending, if that ever happens again.

If we're not going to shut down government now, then we're not going to shut it down during future budget talks.

The spending will continue.

$1.6+ Trillion a year on the national credit cards, every year.

And maybe none of the Republican's have been thinking about this but with all those missing trillions the Democrats can bribe, give raises to, hire, award contracts to countless Democrats. Don't the Republicans imagine some of that $4 Trillion put on the national credit cards and unaccounted for just might be making it back into the 2012 Democratic election funds. That's going to be one hell of a Democratic war chest.

But at least by capitulating now and not really scaring people, we can win back the Senate and the House in 2012 and then set everything right - with no complaining from the Democrats!!!

Perfect.

 

Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 09:27 AM (GKQDR)

187 Is anybody else besides me thinking this is being used by the Democrats as a purposeful distraction from other matters, like Fast And Furious, EPA mandates, and the just general SHITTIEST! ECONOMY! EVAH! For my money, Obama, Pelosi, Reid and company are fiddling while Rome burns, and the GOP is the fiddle. It's time to move on. We don't need this distraction as a major political issue, not now and for damn sure not during the election.

Eyes on the prize, people.

Posted by: ThePaganTemple at July 31, 2011 09:27 AM (iJ488)

188 The welfare state is on the way out.    Economic reality is the tail that wags the political dog.   The Democrat support has been slowly and inevitably bleeding.   Another year of governing with double dip recession, flat or negative job growth, and someone like Perry or Palin to confront Obama with his reckless and atrocious record could be the equivalent of 1932 in terms of long standing political realignment.


Posted by: Late to the Party at July 31, 2011 09:28 AM (0b17P)

189 178 Some jerk in the comments keeps saying there are actually no cuts.  over and over again.  cause ya know there aren't any. cuts.


ever.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at July 31, 2011 02:23 PM (0f7gD)


Don't you have to go to the Bailey or something?

Hey look, a mask!

Posted by: some person behind a V mask at July 31, 2011 09:28 AM (tyLgY)

190 KARMA is a bitch?

Posted by: Tea Party Senate Candidates That Lost In 2010 at July 31, 2011 09:28 AM (nVLlM)

191 "Our leadership is going to agree to go $2.7T further in debt, for a six pack of PBR, 2 slim jims, 8 twinkies, and a pack of exotic colored condoms."

Gimme a bottle of anything,........and a glazed doughnut,...........to. go.

Posted by: Modgi at July 31, 2011 09:29 AM (Vrb/j)

192 And if you think people here are upset, you should read some of the lefty blogs. They view this as a complete and total defeat of Obama and the left. Both things can't be true. Posted by: JackStraw at July 31, 2011 02:27 PM (TMB3S) And 4 years ago today I would have bet anything that the County would never elect a commie bastard with no record to the Presidency? So go figure

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:29 AM (7wmOW)

193 Your meth addicted brother shows up at your door every Tuesday asking for money.

Every Tuesday he asks for 10% more than the last time.

You have maxed out your credit cards and borrowed money from people who can hurt you and take your stuff in order to give this money to your brother.

You have no idea what he does with the money.

You finally threaten to give him no more money.

He threatens to burn your house down.

You compromise and agree to get a new credit card and give him only 9.5% more every week going forward.

You have not made a "cut" in your spending.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:29 AM (ECjvn)

194 193, Great analogy, perfect.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 09:31 AM (ZDUD4)

195 It'll be nice when this shit is over so Fox News Sunday won't be pre-empted.

Ah well, guess I'll go out and enjoy the first sunshine we've had in a while until there's actual news on this.  You guys keep the defeatist echo chamber ringing till I get back.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 31, 2011 09:31 AM (GOXeN)

196 @22 Actually, more than that could conceivably be cut from defense, Mr. Moral Arbitrator.  The real problem some of us have with Defense cuts is that they are always the ONLY cuts.

Get it?

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 09:31 AM (agD4m)

197 Like all government, Defense is ripe for a decent audit.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 02:17 PM (nQR0p)

I may not be and English Major, but automatic blind cuts seem a whole lot different than a "Decent Audit". It should be rather obvious to anybody that the Democrats are holding a knife to the Defense of our Country.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 02:19 PM (7wmOW)

For sure but I think you might be missing the point, never.

I don't wish to see any cut that would handicap our folks who serve and protect us but it's obvious that spending on military bureaucrats can be trimmed WAY the hell back.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 09:31 AM (Vj0AA)

198 Andrew McCarthy had a great piece on why the Boehner deal was a bad deal...and it's just getting worse.

If they believed the problem of spending was real, they'd do something.  They just don't believe big government and more spending is an issue, regardless of their rhetoric.

And, Scott Brown needs to be primaried.  I don't care if he is from MA.  That's an idiotic vote. 

Posted by: The Hammer at July 31, 2011 09:31 AM (09U5d)

199 And if you think people here are upset, you should read some of the lefty blogs. They view this as a complete and total defeat of Obama and the left. Both things can't be true.

Since when are Lefty blogs worth a shit as an accurate reading of anything even close to reality?

They are fucking retards or they wouldn't be lefties.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:32 AM (ECjvn)

200

 

 

I have an idea. The GOP representatives, all of them, and Senators, all of them, plus GW Bush and the fat nmoron Rove should all fire their economic advisors.

They should be replaced with life-size cardboard cutouts of Michael Richards as the insane pick up artist on that old tv show Fridays.

 

Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Miller at July 31, 2011 09:33 AM (s5aNX)

201 In the end it does not matter who looks politically good or bad, what matters is both sides will spend up to the new debt limit and then they will raise it again.

btw, I would argue any new debt = new taxes, it has to be paid for sometime.   So when someone says no new taxes in this deal, the real answer is increased taxes are on the way.

oh, and inflation is a tax.  just hidden.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at July 31, 2011 09:33 AM (0f7gD)

202

And if you think people here are upset, you should read some of the lefty blogs. They view this as a complete and total defeat of Obama and the left. Both things can't be true.

------------

I take the Mark Levin approach on this. I don't judge victory based on what the  lunatic left likes or doesn't like. These people wanted tax increases on the rich. If the deal was "tax increases on everyone, including the poor" then they would be angry. However, just because they are angry doesn't mean I'm going to say that's a victory for us. They are so far gone that it's no longer possible to judge our victories based on what they want and how they react.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:33 AM (OX4OZ)

203 I'll see you guys next year - maybe!

Posted by: Jello-Pudding at July 31, 2011 09:34 AM (nVLlM)

204

So they're just pushing this off to closer to the election.

If they're going to capitulate, why not do it now?


They want to rub conservatives' noses in the fact that we have to vote for a bunch of retarded pussies who make the French look like stalwart allies.  The GOP gets a kick out of this.  They used to do it, with a bit of fear before, but since they've seen the way Barky likes to antagonize America, the Vichy Right thinks they're allowed at least the same slack with conservatives.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 31, 2011 09:34 AM (G/MYk)

205 Look, we'll give you the $2.4 Trillion, but you'll settle for George Lopez at your birthday gala and you will like it!

Posted by: Hardnosed Republican Legislators at July 31, 2011 09:34 AM (p2IBw)

206 I don't know if it's a google driven ad or not but that gout ad that scrolls seriously slows the site down.

PIA plus I hate these google info driven ads. It's creepy looking something up on the internet and then being deluged EVERYWHERE YOU GO from then on with an ad related to your search.

If there was a handier search engine I'd use in a second but for now google's got the edge. (sigh)

Also is it just me but since they did their search tweaking has it been harder to find relevant (meaning useful) results?

Now when I search for something with the goal of maybe purchasing one, I find more stuff that TALKS about what I'm searching than SELLING it.

I suppose that's a good thing as too many sales sites used to flood the zone if you wanted info but comeon there needs to be a way to search for sales separate from a search for info.

/rant off

Posted by: The Law of Entropy. Learn it, love it, live it. at July 31, 2011 09:34 AM (zPb4d)

207 I am more than willing to cut defense, especially all those extra flags that we now have that we didn't need to win WWII.  The military is a bloated joke of the mean lean fighting machine it needs to be.  We should be isolationist when it comes to wasting our tax dollars defending Germany and South Korea, since they are big kids and capable of taking care of their own problems (just like every other nation on the planet).  If you want US defense forces then pay for them just like every American should.  We need to end the free ride both foreign and domestic.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 09:34 AM (iGZkF)

208 Should the Colts save Peyton for the Super Bowl? I mean, they wouldn't want to tire him out before then, right?

Posted by: KG at July 31, 2011 09:35 AM (LD21B)

209 Oh well, like Pelosi said, they will have to pass it to see how the US taxpayers are going to get screwed.

Just think, in 2013 when all those tax increases are going to really hit.

Posted by: Some intelligent guy at July 31, 2011 09:35 AM (tyLgY)

210 For sure but I think you might be missing the point, never. I don't wish to see any cut that would handicap our folks who serve and protect us but it's obvious that spending on military bureaucrats can be trimmed WAY the hell back. Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 02:31 PM (Vj0AA) I'm not missing anything. From what is being reported, if they can't agree on cuts there may be automatic blind cuts to defense. That in no way is "trimming" or a "decent audit" and is obviously the dems holding the Military Hostage in order to raise taxes.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:35 AM (7wmOW)

211 They are fucking retards or they wouldn't be lefties.

+2.4 trillion

Posted by: Waterhouse at July 31, 2011 09:35 AM (P57Q4)

212 Anything less than a hammer and sickle flag flying from the White House is a defeat worthy of teeth-gnashing and rock throwing for lefties.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:35 AM (ECjvn)

213   Senate Dems seem pissed that Obama "caved" on taxes, "withholding judgment" on final plan. 42 minutes ago

  Durbin says Obama assured Reid and Pelosi that he won't sing off on a deal without their support, but Boehner and McConnell running the show

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 09:35 AM (o2lIv)

214 206, I only use Google for pron, everything else is Bing, Bing is great.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 09:36 AM (ZDUD4)

215

Who knows, maybe that's a decent deal. Doesn't seem that decent, though.

Considering those "cuts" are probably more of this over ten years bullshit, it's not decent at all.

Exactly.  So what's the total nation debt gonna look like in 10 years?  $20 trilliion, $25 trillion? $30 trillion?  Nice work there fellas.  You saved us!

Posted by: rockhead at July 31, 2011 09:37 AM (ZMHGo)

216 WSJ, The average household debt is 112% of their income.

WOOT. I've never been average before!

My house and one of my cars are each only about half paid off, and the remaining total balance = slightly more than I get paid every year.

I can't find the story you're referencing, but since it's WSJ, their ever-so-timely point must be that it's totally right and awesome—yet somehow still illustrative of Average Household's moral failings—that the government is about nine hundred gazillion and fuck times as indebted as any of us is, and always increasingly so, forever and ever amen.

Good ol' J.

Posted by: oblig. at July 31, 2011 09:37 AM (xvZW9)

217 >>Since when are Lefty blogs worth a shit as an accurate reading of anything even close to reality? >>They are fucking retards or they wouldn't be lefties. They also happen to be The Ones base. You think its a win for the left when his base is even more depressed than the right?

Posted by: JackStraw at July 31, 2011 09:37 AM (TMB3S)

218  
Reid admits "we had a message from the House" that his plan wasn't acceptable. I guess it wasn't just a huge waste of time, huh?
1 hour ago

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 09:37 AM (o2lIv)

219 The Tea Party Republicans should raise Hell, both Holy and Unholy.
This is an outrage. Why are we caving? It makes no sense. So the polls will dump on you now, when the economy starts to rebound, no one is going to care. Stand up and do the right thing.

Posted by: Iblis at July 31, 2011 09:37 AM (Gqhh2)

220 @207 wait until you see our new line item cost associated with the new consultants we hired (Queer Eye for the Straight Guy) they are fabulous and will fix the barracks and uniforms by bringing in colors and appeal.

Posted by: Pentagon Official at July 31, 2011 09:38 AM (nVLlM)

221 See this? They STILL want tax increases. You cannot negotiate with these people. Can't do it. Unless, of course, you just give them what they want.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:39 AM (OX4OZ)

222 They also happen to be The Ones base. You think its a win for the left when his base is even more depressed than the right?

Posted by: JackStraw at July 31, 2011 02:37 PM (TMB3S)

Barky doesn't care.  He holds his base in almost as much contempt as he holds the rest of us.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 31, 2011 09:39 AM (G/MYk)

223 I'm not missing anything. From what is being reported, if they can't agree on cuts there may be automatic blind cuts to defense. That in no way is "trimming" or a "decent audit" and is obviously the dems holding the Military Hostage in order to raise taxes.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 02:35 PM (7wmOW)

Indeed and that's my bad. I was speaking from a different perspective. I was trying to think rationally.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 09:40 AM (Vj0AA)

224

In terms of South Korea, why the hell don't they have nuclear weapons yet? Or are they considered to be underneath a US nuclear umbrella where a nuclear attack on them generates a response by the United States.

I'm still going. In any event, I'd like US troops home and South Korea with nuclear weapons.

Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 09:40 AM (GKQDR)

225 And fuck the WSJ. It's one thing to call disagree. It's another to call names. And then it's another to disagree and call names while not actually putting your name on it. "The Editors" somehow wrote both columns in which they called the Tea Partiers hobbits. Cowards. At least Bill Kristol put his name on his "with Boehner or with Obama" piece.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:41 AM (OX4OZ)

226 This is what happens when when the people making the laws have spent their entire careers twisting them to suit their own needs.

fuck these people....

I'm fucking voting for Ron Paul

Posted by: +1 Ghost Touch Nail Clippers at July 31, 2011 09:41 AM (rGyXf)

227

Who knows, maybe that's a decent deal. Doesn't seem that decent, though.

 

The Republicans have a tough line to walk:  They have to look like they're trying to cut spending so that their base will be placated, but actually spend a buttload of money, so that they can keep all their power.

I think the GOP won this one.  Too bad the voters lost.

Posted by: Truman North at July 31, 2011 09:42 AM (K2wpv)

228 The Dems remain upset on several fronts, the key element being lack of taxes.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 09:42 AM (o2lIv)

229

The difference in their "base" is that they will still fall in line come election day. They might not make as many phone calls or what have you, but they'll all still vote for Obama.

Us? We might vote for some third party guy.

Why is this? Because their party is a lot closer to their base than our party is. Has Obama gone full on communist? No. But he's a lot closer to it than our party is to going full on constitution.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2011 09:44 AM (OX4OZ)

230 In terms of South Korea, why the hell don't they have nuclear weapons yet? Or are they considered to be underneath a US nuclear umbrella where a nuclear attack on them generates a response by the United States. I'm still going. In any event, I'd like US troops home and South Korea with nuclear weapons. Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 02:40 PM (GKQDR) Because of many reasons, not the least of which is that Nuclear Wars are bond to be hard to contain and before you know it, the entire Pacific Basin could be a nuclear wasteland and it only get's worse from there

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:45 AM (7wmOW)

231 >>Barky doesn't care. He holds his base in almost as much contempt as he holds the rest of us. Yep. But he needs them, he was never going to get us. All of this is a little premature until we see the final deal but if we turn back the clock a tad and remember that Obama wanted a clean debt ceiling bill and his budget called for a doubling of the national debt in 10 years. What he is looking at is spending cuts that are equal to his increase, having to put entitlements on the table which is the only way we really solve this problem and neuters one of the most powerful liberal campaign themes of the last 50 years and tax reform which lowers rates and no new taxes. I'm still not sure how thats a lose but we'll see.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 31, 2011 09:45 AM (TMB3S)

232 Too bad the voters lost.

Posted by: Truman North at July 31, 2011 02:42 PM (K2wpv)

When it comes to the gov't vs voters, I bet the voters have one shitty record

Posted by: Red Shirt at July 31, 2011 09:45 AM (FIDMq)

233 @225 - sorry, I have been distracted and my d-bag staff knows it.

Posted by: Rupert Murdoch at July 31, 2011 09:45 AM (nVLlM)

234 RE upset Dems, I'm referring to the Dem lawmakers.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 09:46 AM (o2lIv)

235

 

Gotta new deal here.

2.4T in debt limit increases effective immediately, or even back dated to 2008.

All that in exchange for the opportunity to fellate Rosie O'Donnell every year for ten years.

If that's not acceptable, let me sweeten the pot.

First year: Rosie

Second year: Brett Butler and Rosie

Tthird year: unlimited sex for a year with Bret, Rosie and Roseanne Barr

Fourth: A Richard Simmons blow up doll, plus the the women mentioned previously.

Fifth year: Richard, plus Jm J Bullock, plus the three women

Sixth: all that, plus a trip to Cabo san Lucas

Seventh to tenth: Well, does it matter now?

 

 

Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Miller at July 31, 2011 09:47 AM (s5aNX)

236 House and Senate Democratic leaders meeting soon at the Capitol.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 09:47 AM (o2lIv)

237 I can use a Patronus Charm to keep the Dem-entors away!

Posted by: Harry Potter at July 31, 2011 09:48 AM (nVLlM)

238 House and Senate Democratic leaders meeting soon at the Capitol. Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 02:47 PM (o2lIv) It's Sunday afternoon and the baseball trade deadline is 4:00PM. What have they been doing for the last 6 months?

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:49 AM (7wmOW)

239

Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 02:40 PM (GKQDR)

Look up the Sunshine Policy. If I remember right, there's a strong cultural bond between the two disparate states.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 09:49 AM (Vj0AA)

240 So the tea party sweeps in the GOP to control the house in an historic landslide, and now the House with tea party freshman is giving Obama the largest increase in the debt ceiling in history! HMMMMMM

Posted by: Dan at July 31, 2011 09:49 AM (mXBxH)

241 Fuck the next election.  The fight is here and now.  I am so tired of hearing people say "this isn't the hill to fight and die on."  We gotta save our powder for the upcoming, hypothetical fight.  Fuck that.  This is the fight.  When Boehner was talking about 100 billion in cuts last year, then a pro-rated 60 billion, then 30 billion, and then 100 million in cuts in the end... I heard all the same arguments.

Save your powder for the fight over the debt limit.  Boy, we'll really hand it to them then.  Now?  Save your powder for the 2012 elections.  Don't blow it all on this fight....

Fuck that shit.

Stop trying to fool the U.S. public.  Level with them.  The cuts are here and now.  They're gonna hurt.  Bad.  But if we don't cut now, the cancer will spread and instead of cutting, we will be amputating.  And if we don't amputate later, we are all dead. Posted by: ed

Fuck the next election? That's some cool reasoning right there. Why, yes! Let's hand the keys over to the Left for the next 6 years. That's how we get closer to a constitutionally sound republic!

Fooling the public? Wait I thought we were to 'fuck the next election?' At what point is the voting public going to pick the right path, when they punish us in 2012 for a shutdown or when we decide not to 'fool them?'

This public you have in mind is an amazing creature.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at July 31, 2011 09:49 AM (DEcmU)

242 87

I asked this question at the wrong time, I think. I just wanted to know the meat-and-potatos of the defense budget and what could be cut without relation to anything else.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 01:45 PM (Vj0AA)

The list is very fucking long on what we could cut.

 

Posted by: robtr at July 31, 2011 01:55 PM (MtwBb)

 

Add to this the bullshit items that Congress puts into the DOD budget that has nothing to do with defense bot only serves some Congressman's pet project like green energy, education, environmentalism, or some kickback to a constituency or other crony through things like MilCon.  I'm sure you could go line by line and rate the things according to the value added for our troops ability to kick ass and take names and find 30% that is waste. 

Posted by: Minuteman at July 31, 2011 09:51 AM (hbAPu)

243 Honestly, the thing that offends me the most is the pretending that this is some great victory.

Kristol said today that it is a small victory for the Rs and they should be happy about it while being very careful not to oversell it because it wasn't a big victory.

Posted by: As IF... at July 31, 2011 09:51 AM (piMMO)

244

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 02:49 PM (Vj0AA)


Hey did you catch what I said about First Tee back there on the other thread?

Posted by: NC Ref at July 31, 2011 09:52 AM (/izg2)

245

>>"Stop trying to fool the U.S. public.  Level with them.  The cuts are here and now.  They're gonna hurt.  Bad.  But if we don't cut now, the cancer will spread and instead of cutting, we will be amputating.  And if we don't amputate later, we are all dead.

YES! This government has not improved and is not improving its fiscal sustainability at all!  We thus cannot go "down to the wire" before we decide to take on this insane liberal spending orgy (of both political parties) and rectify it.  If we do delay we will blow up for certain. 

 

 

Posted by: Commissioner Gordon at July 31, 2011 09:53 AM (L00d6)

246 I'm sure you could go line by line and rate the things according to the value added for our troops ability to kick ass and take names and find 30% that is waste. Posted by: Minuteman at July 31, 2011 02:51 PM (hbAPu) 30% would be a disaster and something that would take decades to recover from.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:53 AM (7wmOW)

247 Let the Democrats have their damn tax increases. When they fuck up the economy then people will vote Democrats out in even higher numbers. Nobody, but nobody, will buy that it's "Bush's fault". We might even have a super majority in the Senate, one that can override a presidential veto in the very unlikely event Obama does manage to pull his re-election out of his hat, or his ass, and also one that can end filibusters by what few Democrats are left, and any other procedural moves they pull. Republicans are already starting to pull defeat out of the jaws of victory.

Another thing the Tea Party Republicans are doing, and they are going to find this out the hard way I'm afraid, is they are going to make it impossible for a real conservative to get the nomination. By the time the primary season is halfway over, Mitt is going to have the nomination all sewed up. Right now he looks like the only real adult among the GOP. A very quiet adult for the time being, but an adult all the same.

Posted by: ThePaganTemple at July 31, 2011 09:53 AM (iJ488)

248 Should my tranche be oozing?

Posted by: jeannebodine at July 31, 2011 09:54 AM (nvlAW)

249   Boehner note to GOPers says "serious issues remain" and that "no agreement will be final until Members have a chance to weigh in." 1 hour ago



I know this was from an r ago but some Rs been saying that for awhile now. What are these issues?

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 09:54 AM (o2lIv)

250 as if.... that was might big of mr. kristol....what an ass.........

Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 31, 2011 09:54 AM (eOXTH)

251

 They  have .60 cents. They spend a dollar. They borrow the .40 cents to spend a dollar. The Democrat's argument has been that we need to borrow.40 cents. The Republicans say that we only need to borrow .30 cents. Those are the 'cuts' they're arguing about. They aren't cutting employees at the federal level. They aren't cutting departments and bureaucracies. They aren't cutting their own paychecks, travel expenses, staffing or anything else.

 What they ard also arguing about is whether you and I have to come up part of that .30 cents or that .40 cents they're borrowing.

 Oh, btw that money the government took out of your checks for your retirement? That's not an entitlement. That was a loan to the government. Admitedly, it was a loan made at the point of a gun. The goverment is threatening to renege on that loan unless you give them even more of your money.

 If you can't understand that both political parties are screwing you to death, this country is lost.

Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at July 31, 2011 09:54 AM (E7Z1r)

252 86 This entire scenario perfectly positions us for a solid conservative candidate with a set of balls like Perry.

Palin has a bigger set than Perry. 

Posted by: Quequeeg the harpooner at July 31, 2011 09:55 AM (hZqYp)

253 What are these issues? Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 02:54 PM (o2lIv) Come on you know. We have to pass it find out what's in it?

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:55 AM (7wmOW)

254 I'm trying to figure out exactly how I feel about the Tea Party reps, such as Tim Scott, who would've voted for the Boehner bill but asked to be one of the last votes cast so that he could still vote no if enough of the house said yes before him.

I'm sorry, but I'm leaning towards cowardly.

It reeks of I like it enough to vote for it but not enough to risk my seat over it.

I had higher hopes for him than that.

Posted by: As IF... at July 31, 2011 09:56 AM (piMMO)

255 The debt limit issue involves more of a trench than a tranche.



I really hate it when elitists learn a new word.  The first thing they do is go out and abuse it.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 31, 2011 09:56 AM (G/MYk)

256 Let the Democrats have their damn tax increases. When they fuck up the economy then people will vote Democrats out in even higher numbers.

Sure thing, Coach. Except we have no fucking money to pay the taxes. You gonna pay them for me? In the interest of your super-dooper electoral chess game a few million people will be a little closer to sleeping in their cars.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 09:56 AM (ECjvn)

257

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 02:49 PM (Vj0AA)

I'm reading now. Thanks.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 02:45 PM (7wmOW)

Just as India has nukes as a counter to Pakistan, I'd like South Korea to have them since North Korea is actively working on nukes. I'd also want every nation on the planet to know that if South Korea is ever attacked by North Korea, both North Korea and China get nuked.

Which, I guess leads to that nuclear wasteland scenario you mentioned...

It's still something I hope they're working on getting....

Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 09:56 AM (GKQDR)

258

Hey did you catch what I said about First Tee back there on the other thread?

Posted by: NC Ref at July 31, 2011 02:52 PM (/izg2)

No! I've heard of it.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 09:57 AM (Vj0AA)

259 Ah, thank you Rep. Robert Andrews -D! This brave American wants to balance the budget for future generations...amen, amen! He's thinking about my future...ah, they finally get it! But, what's this...he doesn't want an amendment for a balance budget...the fuck...??

Posted by: Pissed off 26-year old with three part-time jobs at July 31, 2011 09:57 AM (e2VMT)

260 the hole congress has dug is bigger than you think......

Posted by: mariana trench at July 31, 2011 09:57 AM (eOXTH)

261 224 South Korea is under our nuclear umbrella, so all the more reason not to have our troops hanging around.  The same for most of Europe, which can also take care of themselves in my opinion.  We can't afford to be the world defense force unless the world pays for it.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 09:58 AM (iGZkF)

262 as if....

that was might big of mr. kristol....what an ass.........

I forgot to add that opinions are like, well, you know....

Posted by: As IF... at July 31, 2011 09:58 AM (piMMO)

263 "Trish Turner reports that Durbin says POTUS assures Pelosi and Reid nothing's agreed to until they're on board."

That's an interesting statement to make.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 09:58 AM (o2lIv)

264 Which, I guess leads to that nuclear wasteland scenario you mentioned... It's still something I hope they're working on getting.... Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 02:56 PM (GKQDR) Well while I don't agree with your basic concept, I have no doubt that both South Korea and certainly Japan could put together a working Nuke in no time. If that makes you feel any better?

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 09:59 AM (7wmOW)

265
This Congress with its useful idiots have come closer to instituting my dream for economic Utopia than any Congress in the nations history.

I applaud these patriots who have learned the intricacies of Keynesian economics, and fully accept its preeminence over capitalism.  

PS  Still love you Karl!

Posted by: Ghost of John Maynard Keynes at July 31, 2011 09:59 AM (Lt/Za)

266

No! I've heard of it.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 02:57 PM (Vj0AA)


I figured you might have.  They advertise during tournaments but they focus on teaching character and sportsmanship in addition to the golf skills.  I'd like to get involved with them too.

Posted by: NC Ref at July 31, 2011 10:01 AM (/izg2)

267 So the guys on Commentary are trying to spin this as "Containment" Using the "Rollback vs. Containment" debates of the cold war. They say we can't get our true goal now, and that we have to wait. But we tried that and look what we got. Squishes. Why should we be panicked and stampeded into a good deal for the democrats? Barry likes to mock our principles. Let him choke on them!
But I don't think they the Commentary guys truly understand what the true goal is. I think they want to slow the growth of government, and we want to shrink it drastically. I mean aside from Defense, and Roads, there's not really much I want the feds to do. I know I'm never gonna see any social security or medicare benefits. I'm never going to be able to retire. Its that simple.

Posted by: Iblis at July 31, 2011 10:01 AM (Gqhh2)

268 WASHINGTON -- The Republicans are killing Keynesian economics with their attempt to cut spending as the economy rebounds from a recession, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said in a floor speech on Sunday. "I would say ... that symbolically, that agreement is moving us to the point where we are having the final interment of John Maynard Keynes," he said, referring to the British economist. "He normally died in 1946 but it appears we are going to put him to his final rest with this agreement." http://tinyurl.com/3ckea55

Posted by: JackStraw at July 31, 2011 10:01 AM (TMB3S)

269

Posted by: JackStraw at July 31, 2011 03:01 PM (TMB3S)

I'm not seeing a downside.

Posted by: blue star at July 31, 2011 10:02 AM (lofS9)

270 Biggest danger in giving South Korea nukes is the substantial minority of South Koreans who would like nothing better than to join arms with their Northern Revolutionary Comrades and fuck the US in the squeaker.

South Korea already has all the nukes protecting them they could ever need. They are our nukes loaded on US submarines.

You don't arm a child with a weapon you wouldn't want used against you until you know how they will behave when they grow up.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:03 AM (ECjvn)

271 I wouldn't doubt that Japan has couple dozen or so warheads. They have less love and trust of the Chinese that we have for Obama. Maybe not, but I wouldn't bet against it.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 10:03 AM (ZDUD4)

272 can we at least all agree that nothing sounds more stupid than... well that cut only equals $xx.xx so it's not really worth it.....

Posted by: mariana trench at July 31, 2011 10:03 AM (eOXTH)

273
Well while I don't agree with your basic concept, I have no doubt that both South Korea and certainly Japan could put together a working Nuke in no time. If that makes you feel any better?

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 02:59 PM (7wmOW)

I'd be shocked if they aren't armed already.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 10:03 AM (Vj0AA)

274 I do love how some are so willing to put Defense spending under a microscope while the progressive caravan moves on, unmolested.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 10:03 AM (agD4m)

275 The same for most of Europe, which can also take care of themselves in my opinion. We can't afford to be the world defense force unless the world pays for it. Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 02:58 PM (iGZkF) You may or may not be aware, but we have drastically paired down our overseas basis. And those we have left are vital to both defending our Allies ( which is still important if we intend to have any) and to also providing forward operating basis for our Military. It would be VERY difficult for us be fighting these Wars in the Middle East without our Basis in Germany.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 10:03 AM (7wmOW)

276 By the time the primary season is halfway over, Mitt is going to have the nomination all sewed up. Right now he looks like the only real adult among the GOP.

Good lord.

Posted by: toby928 at July 31, 2011 10:05 AM (GTbGH)

277 253 Come on you know. We have to pass it find out what's in it?

I think it's more than that, as it appears there are some items being discussed. From the Dem side, it's odd to me that Obama is reassuring San Fran Nan and Reid over this tentative agreement.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:05 AM (o2lIv)

278 Our nuclear policy has been and should be to prevent new members into the club, but we don't need ground troops to provide the nuke umbrella.  Of course, the nuke umbrella only works when aggressive actors know you are willing to use them.  Hence that is why Iran has nukes and continues to make more.  Obambi will never pull the nuclear trigger, so South Korea and Germany are already swinging in the wind.  We need to stop wasting money we don't have supporting countries that refuse to protect themselves with their tax dollars.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 10:05 AM (iGZkF)

279 I do love how some are so willing to put Defense spending under a microscope while the progressive caravan moves on, unmolested. Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 03:03 PM (agD4m) Amen.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 10:06 AM (7wmOW)

280 Eventually the budget is going to blow the hell up.  We are very close to that point.  When that inevitability finally takes place no one is going to look back and say the Republicans got the best deal they could at the time.  They are going to say that they were every bit as bad as the Democrats and that they did not fight hard enough to be trusted with putting things back together.

This isn't about getting elected or getting enough people on your side in power to change things at some date down the road.  That ship has sailed.  There is not enough time left.  Either we rein in spending now or there won't be a road to kick the can down.  Shut the government down and make it live within its means.

The Republicans can get something structural or something significant if they play hard ball.  They will not and thus they are useless and will need to be replaced when this is all over.  It is Tea party or bust.  The nation quite literally cannot afford establishment Republicans anymore.  The media knows this.  The left knows this.  That is why they attack the Tea Party.  It is the only threat to the status quo, the only hope for change.  The only ones who think there is some third way are mental midgets like McCain and the Republican party establishment.

Posted by: Voluble at July 31, 2011 10:06 AM (JKX4x)

281 Our nearest neighbor is a nation with 127 million hentai fans, the capability to build nuclear weapons, and a fondness for surprise attacks.


Posted by: Red China at July 31, 2011 10:06 AM (agD4m)

282 WASHINGTON -- The Republicans are killing Keynesian economics with their attempt to cut spending as the economy rebounds from a recession, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said in a floor speech on Sunday.

I see we've never met....allow me to introduce myself.

Posted by: Reality at July 31, 2011 10:06 AM (X6akg)

283

"I would say ... that symbolically, that agreement is moving us to the point where we are having the final interment of John Maynard Keynes," he said, referring to the British economist. "He normally died in 1946 but it appears we are going to put him to his final rest with this agreement."

Well, no shit Mr. Genius-Senator. The fact we're in this fucked-up situation because of the fucked-up so-called economic policies of Mr. Keynes, should have given you a hint that they didn't fucking work! But, hey, I'm just a pissed off 26-year old with three part-time jobs in the real fucking world.

Posted by: Pissed off 26-year old with three part-time jobs at July 31, 2011 10:06 AM (e2VMT)

284 Right now he looks like the only real adult among the GOP

Then I'd rather have a child.

I guess the word "adult" is the new fucking "maverick" for 2012.
Meet Mr. Narrative, he's here to fuck you.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:06 AM (ECjvn)

285 Everything needs to be cut, and that includes defense.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 10:06 AM (nQR0p)

286 Obambi will never pull the nuclear trigger, so South Korea and Germany are already swinging in the wind. We need to stop wasting money we don't have supporting countries that refuse to protect themselves with their tax dollars. Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 03:05 PM (iGZkF) I assume your not in the Military and are therefore not aware how vital those bases in Germany are to us

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 10:07 AM (7wmOW)

287 Well while I don't agree with your basic concept, I have no doubt that both South Korea and certainly Japan could put together a working Nuke in no time. If that makes you feel any better?

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 02:59 PM (7wmOW)

Actually, it does. And  I love your Japan idea.

No nation should be reliant on another nation for their self defense. It leads to complacency, weakness, and even hostility towards the protecting nation. (I can say that as a Canadian seeing what my *country* has devolved into).

South Korea is the proxy of the last superpower facing a proxy of an emerging superpower in China. It still can't be reliant on the United States protection. Could you imagine living somewhere else and knowing your protection is largely in the hands of Barack Obama?

Thanks for the answers. Have a great day!

Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 10:08 AM (GKQDR)

288 Everything needs to be cut, and that includes defense. Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 03:06 PM (nQR0p) All cuts are not equal and blind cuts are for the ignorant

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 10:08 AM (7wmOW)

289 >>I'm not seeing a downside. Yeah, when one of the Senates leading douche bags says the pet economic theory of the left is dead it's a pretty happy thing.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 31, 2011 10:09 AM (TMB3S)

290 Let the Democrats have their damn tax increases. When they fuck up the economy then people will vote Democrats out in even higher numbers.

Posted by: ThePaganTemple at July 31, 2011 02:53 PM (iJ48

When?  When!?  Take a look around.

Posted by: Count de Monet at July 31, 2011 10:09 AM (4q5tP)

291 274 I do love how some are so willing to put Defense spending under a microscope while the progressive caravan moves on, unmolested. Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 03:03 PM (agD4m) ya, the people who keep us safe and actually work get thrown under the bus...but we must continue giving benefits to people who never worked a day in their life...reward people who have destroyed our educational system....pay for NONE CITIZENS healthcare..... subsidize a car industry that is going to now be further hurt by new cafe standards that will make it impossible for them to make any kind of profit......protect trees, bugs, fish, birds and animals at the expense of HUMANS.....but what ever......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 31, 2011 10:09 AM (eOXTH)

292 Congressional D leadership holding a meeting right now

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:09 AM (o2lIv)

293

 

Taxpayers provide millions of Americans with enough money to afford to eat crappy food and buy cell phones and tvs.

How does that feel in light of these assholes fucking taxpayers over even harder.

This economy that the idiots have created has only one way to go, down.

Learn Chinese.

 

Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Miller at July 31, 2011 10:11 AM (s5aNX)

294 286, I assume your not in the Military and are therefore not aware how vital those bases in Germany are to us OK, I'll bite. Other than pumping billions into the German economy. Why are they vital?

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 10:11 AM (ZDUD4)

295 288
All cuts are not equal and blind cuts are for the ignorant

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 31, 2011 03:08 PM (7wmOW)

So let's spend three fucking years deciding which "sacred cows" are going to get a hair cut.

Feel better?

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 10:11 AM (nQR0p)

296

Sorry, Ace is a sellout.

H.L. Mencken??????

Just another bullshit pick up line.

Once this blog started making it, slowly but inexorably the knife has been turned to his own throat.

Indeed, word on the street is he and Allahpundit are virtually locked in a 69 position.

 

Posted by: Hobbit of Doom at July 31, 2011 10:12 AM (TEgVw)

297 Congressional D leadership holding a meeting right now

That's not a meeting, it's a methadone clinic.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:12 AM (ECjvn)

298 it's nice to know that sexual performance drugs are covered by medicade......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 31, 2011 10:12 AM (eOXTH)

299 298, And birth control isn't.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 10:13 AM (ZDUD4)

300 Time to start hunting squishes.

Posted by: Hobbit Hobo at July 31, 2011 10:14 AM (TEgVw)

301 OK, I'll bite. Other than pumping billions into the German economy. Why are they vital?

We need the base hospitals in Germany for our wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We need pre-positioned ammunition and equipment of all types in the event of war.
We need lift capability and refueling bases on the continent for disaster relief and other humanitarian needs.
Russia and China could take Europe in three weeks without us. (I don't see a problem with this anymore, but our official policy says that France, Poland and England and all the rest should stay free).

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:15 AM (ECjvn)

302 282 WASHINGTON -- The Republicans are killing Keynesian economics with their attempt to cut spending as the economy rebounds from a recession, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said in a floor speech on Sunday.

I see we've never met....allow me to introduce myself.

Posted by: Reality at July 31, 2011 03:06 PM (X6akg)

It's amazing how free-spending libs worship at the feet of Keynes.

Keynes was already supposed to work.  The economy was supposed to be saved by the stimulus.

Period.

That's it.  Keynesianism works RIGHT NOW!!!! Not later.  Now.  Right now. That's the whole damned point. If it takes 2 years to work, you were better off doing nothing at all.

It was Keynes who said "In the long run, we are all dead."

Posted by: AmishDude at July 31, 2011 10:15 AM (73tyQ)

303 Actually, I was in the military and those bases are currently just stop-over airports.  Do you really think that we need to spend billions on bases, when we could spend millions on renting airport space?  It is nice to have a military hospital only six hour flight away, but how big a difference is it to keep them flying the additional hours to the US?  I am aware that time does mater, but we don't need thousands and thousands of troopers stationed in Germany or Korea to do the work, which you describe.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 10:17 AM (iGZkF)

304

So let's spend three fucking years deciding which "sacred cows" are going to get a hair cut.

Feel better?

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 03:11 PM (nQR0p)


Three fucking years?  How slow are you?

Department of Education.  There's a shitload of savings right there.  Your turn.  Or should I wait three years for your decision?

Posted by: NC Ref at July 31, 2011 10:17 AM (/izg2)

305   So all top House and Senate Democratic leaders now huddling in Pelosi's office. Still no official word on a potential GOP conference call.


Make that 'leaders', for my part.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:18 AM (o2lIv)

306

Well here is the opposite take. That the Democrats had to capitulate because Republicans have no fear of a default.

 

http://wapo.st/q76RUX

DrewM retweeted this from PlumLine

Posted by: TendStl at July 31, 2011 10:18 AM (GiF31)

307

Yeah, a new post.

And a new plan: "Republicans in 2012 - 'A balanced budget by 2077'"

Posted by: Stateless Infidel at July 31, 2011 10:19 AM (GKQDR)

308 this argument ( among us ) is what the Left wanted; hoped for; planned for

depended on.....

Posted by: Aldo Moro at July 31, 2011 10:19 AM (UqKQV)

309 That the Democrats had to capitulate because Republicans have no fear of a default.


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Deep into fire can't melt steel territory there.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:20 AM (ECjvn)

310 285 Everything needs to be cut, and that includes defense.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011

No shit, Captain Obvious.  Thank you for that cliche.

Seriously, it is not an issue of Defense cuts vs. No Defense cuts.  Guess what? We are ALREADY cutting Defense.  And we will get more cuts as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Defense Cuts are already in the bank. 

Can any of you fearless budget cutters in your green-eyeshades maybe take a look at something other than Defense?  Point me to the cuts in other spending?

Uh, the Pentagon has, like, a lot of waste, duh, and we can, like, cut that or something?  OK, now what about the rest of the government?

crickets

Some of us seem so willing to seem "reasonable and sane," we just consign Defense spending to a Democrat anal exam in exchange for what, exactly?  Could we maybe get the progressives ante up something of theirs before we just toss the military under the bus?  Just this once?



Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 10:21 AM (agD4m)

311 306 Well here is the opposite take. That the Democrats had to capitulate because Republicans have no fear of a default.

 

http://wapo.st/q76RUX

DrewM retweeted this from PlumLine


The libs started their whining and crying last night, particularly over spending cuts and lack of tax increases.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:21 AM (o2lIv)

312 this argument ( among us ) is what the Left wanted; hoped for; planned for

depended on.....


Lock step makes for pretty parades but shitty government.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:21 AM (ECjvn)

313

'Department of Education. There's a shitload of savings right there. Your turn. Or should I wait three years for your decision?'

No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Think of the children!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who will think of the children!!!!!!

Posted by: Pissed off 26-year old with three part-time jobs at July 31, 2011 10:21 AM (e2VMT)

314 To answer the question about the fact that if the Russians decided to push West that the US troops would stop them, right.  If the conventional Russian forces head West the troops would only play a delaying motion until the civilians could get off their asses and nuke them.  Why feed the lie, remove a ground forces and let the world know that if you try something stupid then you risk becoming a smoking hole.  But as previously stated that since Obambi will never pull that trigger the Germans are fucked anyway, so why waste the money.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 10:22 AM (iGZkF)

315 Where's my cargo man..?? Come on now. Where the f%ks my CARGO!! Don't you know the price of boxed wine and cocain have gone up sharply?

Posted by: Dimocrat Voter at July 31, 2011 10:22 AM (EhYdw)

316 Even Keynes is rolling around in his grave. What these people today are doing is not Keynesian Economics, his philosophy of government spending in times of bad economic output was through surpluses gained during good times. I don't believe he ever espoused deficit spending. Maybe a moron can put me some knowledge if Im wrong.

Posted by: TendStl at July 31, 2011 10:22 AM (GiF31)

317 304Three fucking years?  How slow are you?

Department of Education.  There's a shitload of savings right there.  Your turn.  Or should I wait three years for your decision?

Posted by: NC Ref at July 31, 2011 03:17 PM (/izg2)

I was referring to Defense Dept. cuts. Nobody wants "their" thing cut.

DOE, EPA, Labor, DHS. Gone, gone, gone, gone.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 10:23 AM (nQR0p)

318 Department of Education. There's a shitload of savings right there. Your turn. Or should I wait three years for your decision? Amen, 4000 employees, 47 billion. Every state in the union has a DOE. The fedral Gov. Has turned into a Sopranos episode. We send them money, they skim off the top and send us back what they think we need/deserve.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 10:23 AM (ZDUD4)

319 Cancel my F22?

Cancel your remaining Stimulus.

Cancel my space program?

Cancel your Pell Grants.

Cancel my Future Soldier program?

Cancel your green energy programs.

Cancel my new body armor?

Cancel your AIDS give-away in Africa.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:24 AM (ECjvn)

320 Y'all going to put some more money in Obama's stash, right?

Posted by: A minority voter, and I will vote twice at July 31, 2011 10:24 AM (4ChWr)

321

DOE, EPA, Labor, DHS. Gone, gone, gone, gone.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 03:23 PM (nQR0p)


Good answer. 

Posted by: NC Ref at July 31, 2011 10:25 AM (/izg2)

322 How about a nice game of Risk?

Posted by: Count de Monet at July 31, 2011 10:25 AM (4q5tP)

323 To answer the question about the fact that if the Russians decided to push West that the US troops would stop them, right.

Our role would be dealing with the herding of millions of allied refugees (men women and children) and the biggest evacuation under fire since Dunkirk.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:26 AM (ECjvn)

324

'Department of Education. There's a shitload of savings right there. Your turn. Or should I wait three years for your decision?'

No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Think of the children!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who will think of the children!!!!!!

Posted by: Pissed off 26-year old with three part-time jobs at July 31, 2011 03:21 PM (e2VMT)

Like the way you are thinking.  Say here are the non-Constitutional departments, you guys pick. We trim a little from Defense you cut Education, HUD, Energy, or whatever.  Seems like a fair deal to me.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 10:27 AM (iGZkF)

325 133WSJ, The average household debt is 112% of their income. The Gov. taught us well.

Posted by: Glenn Beck at July 31, 2011 02:10 PM (ZDUD4)

 

PRETTY MUCH!

Posted by: jaimo at July 31, 2011 10:27 AM (8Mnyu)

326 The only actual and tangible cuts to anything so far have been in Defense.  Defense is already being cut.

It's not a case of my stuff or your stuff.  It is a case of my stuff and your stuff.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 10:27 AM (agD4m)

327 298 it's nice to know that sexual performance drugs are covered by medicade......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at July 31, 2011 03:12 PM (eOXTH)

But NOT by Champus, or by the Vet Dept Hospitals...

 

Posted by: Romeo13 at July 31, 2011 10:27 AM (NtXW4)

328 The best definitive thing that happened all day is that Harry Reid voted against cloture on his own plan.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:27 AM (o2lIv)

329 305   So all top House and Senate Democratic leaders now huddling in Pelosi's office. Still no official word on a potential GOP conference call.

This is the meeting where they tell the Dems to vote for it and try to see how many votes they can get for it.

Posted by: AmishDude at July 31, 2011 10:27 AM (73tyQ)

330 Progressive Caucus Chair Grijalva:
"[Deal] is a cure as bad as the disease. I reject it."

[crafted for] "right-wing radicals."

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:29 AM (o2lIv)

331 The best definitive thing that happened all day is that Harry Reid voted against cloture on his own plan.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 03:27

Not really.  By voting against something that was losing already, he retains the right to bring it up again for a vote later.  Arcane rules of the world's greatest deliberative body or some B.S. like that.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 10:29 AM (agD4m)

332 The best definitive thing that happened all day is that Harry Reid voted against cloture on his own plan.

The little poofter probably got confused. Been hitting the Tanqueray and Ensure pretty hard throughout this mess.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:30 AM (ECjvn)

333 They advertise during tournaments but they focus on teaching character and sportsmanship in addition to the golf skills.  I'd like to get involved with them too.

Posted by: NC Ref at July 31, 2011 03:01 PM (/izg2)

I looked it up, there's a couple chapters in Central Ohio but they are WAY on the other side of town in the older, affluent neighborhoods. I live out in the country on the opposite side of town, unfortunately.

Speaking of sportsmanship and character, those are the qualities that I've been trying to impress upon my niece. Always be kind and always be honest. Never, ever let any thought of cheating enter your mind.

 

 

 

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 10:32 AM (Vj0AA)

334 Wouldn't the Germans be a better choice to handle their refugees? How about those other countries that lay in the path?  Last time I checked they are sovereign nations with a responsibility for their people.  If the would like our help then they can pay like you and me for the privilege of living under the safety of the greatest and best military on the planet.  Freedom isn't free and bullets have never been free either.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 10:33 AM (iGZkF)

335

Raul Grijalva?

Yep, he's a paid up member.

Posted by: Communist Party of USA at July 31, 2011 10:33 AM (4ChWr)

336 Tanqueray and Ensure? Or as they call it on the hill, a gin and colonic.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 10:33 AM (ZDUD4)

337

'Like the way you are thinking. Say here are the non-Constitutional departments, you guys pick. We trim a little from Defense you cut Education, HUD, Energy, or whatever. Seems like a fair deal to me.'

I'd prefer trimming from entitlements. I by trim I mean taking a huge fucking saw and decapitating those muthafucker of a drag on our society

Posted by: Pissed off 26-year old with three part-time jobs at July 31, 2011 10:34 AM (e2VMT)

338 331 Not really.  By voting against something that was losing already, he retains the right to bring it up again for a vote later.  Arcane rules of the world's greatest deliberative body or some B.S. like that.

I'm speaking of the positioning side of it. It made him look weak.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:34 AM (o2lIv)

339 Tanqueray and Ensure? Or as they call it on the hill, a gin and colonic.

Posted by: Oldsailors poet at July 31, 2011 03:33 PM (ZDUD4)

Very funny!!!

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 10:34 AM (iGZkF)

340 The other problem with Defense spending is that one must also have the moral courage to reduce one's commitments to match one's willingness to take funding away, which rarely, if ever happens.

Another problem is that sort of wants to have a military capable of meeting and defeating foreseeable threats, something which seems unmentioned by those who are fap-fap-fapping over further Defense cuts.

It seems that for some who slept through the 1990s, 9/11 and its aftermath was only that brief interval it takes to hit the snooze button and roll back over.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 10:35 AM (agD4m)

341 The best definitive thing that happened all day is that Harry Reid voted against cloture on his own plan.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 03:27 PM (o2lIv)

Yes, should be a moment captured in the highlight reels.

Posted by: Count de Monet at July 31, 2011 10:35 AM (4q5tP)

342 If we could just get those millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share we could get some cash money.

Posted by: Claire McCaskill at July 31, 2011 10:35 AM (4ChWr)

343 #331 Not really.  Even the MSM usually manages to report why majority leaders and house speakers do it.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 10:36 AM (agD4m)

344 A significant draw-down in US Defense strength always leads to a large war. Every time.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:36 AM (ECjvn)

345 More about the thinking in Pelosi's caucus right now, via The Hill:

"The Reid plan is the outer depths of hell, but still hell," Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said. "I voted for it to strengthen Reid’s hand so it doesn’t get worse, but it doesn’t mean I’ll vote for it in the end."

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D) also held her nose to support the Reid bill. But the California liberal also warned that she would oppose any plan that moves further to the right.

"I cannot vote for anything worse,” she said.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:38 AM (o2lIv)

346 brb, going to give my Fantasy Football team roster to ESPN

Posted by: Precedent Obama at July 31, 2011 10:41 AM (4ChWr)

347 Low-grade Mystery Science Theater-level acting form Democrats.

Everyone has their scripts.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:42 AM (ECjvn)

348 The tentative deal is a definite move to the right (in its current form), so how would they vote? Will they take orders or refuse on socialistic principle?

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 10:43 AM (o2lIv)

349 @344 Yup, I wonder where my then-grown children will be deploying to in ten or fifteen years while all these pious "Let's cut defense spending EVEN MORE to show how reasonable we are!" twats are waving their flags and putting new "support our troops" bumper stickers on their cars.

Been there.  Done that.  See: Peace Dividend 1990-2000 and; Consequences 2001-2008.

I don't know which is ultimately worse: The progressives who fap-fap-fap over Defense cuts or the purported conservatives who are willing to go along in exchange for...nothing, really, when the budget actually gets marked up and voted.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 10:43 AM (agD4m)

350 No snooze button here, I spent most of my adult life living with the actions from the 90's.  That said, it doesn't change the fact that we had huge increases in defense spending in the last decade, with little to show in the way of new materials.  Do we have a new tanker plane yet? How about that new DDG? How about two subs a year? How about replacing those aging fighters? 

There is plenty of bloat and waste in Defense, so stop pushing how gutted we were in the 90's and how it caused 9/11 because that is bullshit.  9/11 was a failure of domestic departments not defense.  Piss poor immigration control was the one of the biggest contributors to 9/11 and how is that the military's fault or how could they have prevented it? 

There is plenty in the government that needs to be cut and I am all for 10% across the board cuts every year until the budget balances and the national debt pays off.  We waste more and lose more money then the total economies of 90% of the nations on Earth.  Between defense and medicare there are billions unaccounted for each and every year, so why don't we start with some accountability and work from there for each and every department/agency.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 10:44 AM (iGZkF)

351 I still hold out the slimmest possible hope that no deal gets made and we see how far down the rabbit hole goes.  I know its like trying to stop the wind, because they will always give us more debt.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at July 31, 2011 10:46 AM (0f7gD)

352 350  Between defense and medicare there are billions unaccounted for each and every year, so why don't we start with some accountability and work from there for each and every department/agency.

Posted by: Sandy Salt at July 31, 2011 03:44 PM (iGZkF)

Pretty much on point here.

Posted by: ronno at July 31, 2011 10:47 AM (nQR0p)

353 um. I don't think anyone is arguing against making smart cuts to everything.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:48 AM (ECjvn)

354

"And: I am still hearing nothing at all about a bill to dictate the procedure and priority of bill-paying..."

There are three bills stuck in the Ways & Means Committee that do precisely that:

Tom McClintock's "Full Faith & Credit Act" (HR 421), with 101 co-sponsors.

HR 568

HR 728

Maybe there would be more talk about these bills if those with prominent forums would give them the promotion and exposure they obviously need.

Posted by: Bill at July 31, 2011 10:49 AM (TfpAP)

355 @350 we had huge increases in defense spending in the last decade, with little to show in the way of new materials... so stop pushing how gutted we were in the 90's

You just asked and answered the question yourself, and sorry, we are already cutting defense, so get back to me on further cuts to Defense AFTER you have done the "why don't we start with some accountability and work from there" song and dance with those other government departments you to which you only nod.

Defense is already being cut.  It is very odd that we cannot seem to cut anything else.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 10:51 AM (agD4m)

356

There should be a national broadcast on all the networks during primetime where McConnell and Boehner on one side of the table and Reid and Obama on the other with 2 big hats on the table between them.

In the hats are pieces of paper with each parties sections of government that they don't want cut. Then they take turns pulling out a piece of paper from each others hats.

Of course our hat would have one piece of paper, Defense.

Might need 2 hats for theirs.

Posted by: TendStl at July 31, 2011 10:52 AM (GiF31)

357 Let's cut some of the Democrat vote buying programs.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 10:52 AM (ECjvn)

358 brb, going to give my Fantasy Football team roster to ESPN

Will there be a moron league this year?

Posted by: As IF... at July 31, 2011 10:53 AM (piMMO)

359 A:"We need to cut defense.  A lot of waste there."

B:"OK.  Let's cut some other stuff too."

A:"We need to cut defense.  A lot of waste there."

B: "You said that.  We do not dispute that.  Why not cut some other stuff concurrently?"

A: "We need to cut defense.  A lot of waste there."

B: "Got it.  Already making cuts.  Are we going to cut anywhere else?"

A: "We need to cut defense.  A lot of waste there."

B: "Yeah, we're doing it.  We probably ought to proceed cautiously, what with the potential future consequences and all."

A: "We need to cut defense.  A lot of waste there."

Posted by: Conversation with a Broken Record at July 31, 2011 10:57 AM (agD4m)

360 This is outrageous particularly in light of the fact that a republican congressman was on one of the sunday shows saying that timmmmaaay can prioritize so SS, Medicare, Medicade, welfare and the military would get paid in addition to servicing the debt.  link

Posted by: shady at July 31, 2011 10:59 AM (k1rwm)

361 I am sick of Political theatre.  And that's all this is.  The Debt ceiling will be raised, there will be cuts so obscure and timed out they will make no difference.  And as time goes on, the debt limits will become crisis fodder again and again.  When in reality, the political elites on both sides will continue to line their pockets and those of the big banks until it all collapses.  And it will collapse. Until we get the collective "American" ideology of a Government that serves the people, not people to serve (financially support) the Government, will we have a chance of saving this republic.  Nobody is gonna win here.  The Republic is fucked either way.  John Stossel just did a report on Fox and most of the folks on the street did not even know what the Debt Crisis was. 

Posted by: DailyDish at July 31, 2011 11:02 AM (Qagzd)

362 John Stossel just did a report on Fox and most of the folks on the street did not even know what the Debt Crisis was. 

Posted by: DailyDish at July 31, 2011 04:02 PM (Qagzd)

ah good so we are doing a good job you say?

Posted by: the MSM at July 31, 2011 11:05 AM (k1rwm)

363 When was the last time Republicans came out on top in a midnight, back room deal? For that matter, when was the first time?

Posted by: Jay at July 31, 2011 11:05 AM (Vyhz6)

364 Posted by: Jay at July 31, 2011 04:05 PM (Vyhz6)

the evil republicans can't come out on top, they BO won't enjoy a second term and we need him to have a second term.

Posted by: Ms. I am poor at July 31, 2011 11:07 AM (k1rwm)

365 OT - The Yankees Win...The Yankees Win!

Posted by: garrett at July 31, 2011 11:10 AM (jC3Pd)

366 Since I feel that the RINOs have sold my children and grand-children into debt slavery, I wonder if it would be racist to say that I think they and the Democrats have sold us down the river?

Posted by: Hrothgar at July 31, 2011 11:11 AM (yrGif)

367 Since I feel that the RINOs have sold my children and grand-children into debt slavery, I wonder if it would be racist to say that I think they and the Democrats have sold us down the river?

Simply having the gall to disagree with the commies and/or establishment GOP makes us racist and stupid. And bigoted.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 11:15 AM (ECjvn)

368 O/T:  Jason Matera just said if you refuse to marry a gay couple you could be sued.  Guess a lot of Catholic priests are going to be sued then.  He said this came out of Cuomo's office.

Posted by: Ms. I am poor at July 31, 2011 11:15 AM (k1rwm)

Posted by: curious at July 31, 2011 11:21 AM (k1rwm)

370 Why is Boehner letting McConnell be the primary GOP negotiator?

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 11:23 AM (o2lIv)

371 When Democrats win, Democrats get what they want.

When Republicans win, Democrats get what they want.

What's the point anymore?

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at July 31, 2011 11:23 AM (/zYUh)

372 Why is Boehner letting McConnell be the primary GOP negotiator?

One must not question John Boehner or the old-guard GOP, lest the scourge of the brilliant be laid across our ignorant backs.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 11:26 AM (ECjvn)

373 Posted by: BeckoningChasm at July 31, 2011 04:23 PM (/zYUh)

the thread I posted on Zero Hedge is really getting a response.  Think people are so pent up they are about to burst and he and ace and others are attempting to let people have an outlet to express their thoughts.  It's a good thing.

Posted by: curious at July 31, 2011 11:27 AM (k1rwm)

374 meow

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 11:28 AM (ECjvn)

375 The defense cuts do not amount to anything because they the money can always be reinstated through an emergency appropriation.

Posted by: cdm at July 31, 2011 11:29 AM (cG3U3)

376 371 When Democrats win, Democrats get what they want.

When Republicans win, Democrats get what they want.

What's the point anymore?


The liberals don't think they did [win]. Our side won more than they did by far, as least as far as the reported framework is concerned.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 11:30 AM (o2lIv)

Posted by: curious at July 31, 2011 11:33 AM (k1rwm)

378 372 One must not question John Boehner or the old-guard GOP, lest the scourge of the brilliant be laid across our ignorant backs.

He has been one step removed from this process ever since yesterday. Perhaps it is because it is easier to blame McConnell if this thing falls apart at the last minute. So, I am guessing electoral politics.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 11:34 AM (o2lIv)

379 He has been one step removed from this process ever since yesterday. Perhaps it is because it is easier to blame McConnell if this thing falls apart at the last minute. So, I am guessing electoral politics.

You know the yappy dog or crying baby that always seems to start up whenever you get on the phone and will not shut up until you hang up?

That's Mitch McConnell and John McCain.




Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 11:39 AM (ECjvn)

380

A deal of heartache.

Ace, the GOP capitulated its leverage that's the salient point; that and the fact their is no discernable upside, only scenarios which portend the GOP being forced to raise taxes under the pending scheme of this deal.  

This is not leadership.  

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 11:41 AM (Fb9Q0)

381 Sifty - word brother. Word.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 11:41 AM (Fb9Q0)

382 Yup.

The GOP kicked the can down the road a little. Not as far as the Dems wanted, but they kicked it down the road a little.


huzzah.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 11:42 AM (ECjvn)

383 379 You know the yappy dog or crying baby that always seems to start up whenever you get on the phone and will not shut up until you hang up?

That's Mitch McConnell and John McCain.


...and the Democratic 'leadership'. Speaking of:

 
Reid leaves Pelosi's office. House Democratic leaders still huddling there.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 11:43 AM (o2lIv)

384

Beaten, why for
Can't take much more (herewego, herewego herewego now)

One!
Nothing wrong with me
Two!
Nothing wrong with me
Three!
Nothing wrong with me
Four!
Nothing wrong with me!

Posted by: toby928 at July 31, 2011 11:45 AM (GTbGH)

385 Reid leaves Pelosi's office. House Democratic leaders still huddling there.

Someone has to go get more Ensure.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 11:46 AM (ECjvn)

386 I never really thought we would get a deal that solved the problem, at least not this election cycle.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 11:47 AM (o2lIv)

387

Ace, you seem to be taking a luke warm approach on this.

This pending deal speaks nothing of conservatism and by transitive would never have been supported by Reagan or Buckley.

But of course we operate in a new fiction of conservatism now where we can opine with hedged caution ------on a non-conservative debt deal which essentially outsources decisions on that which the constitution charges to congress and provides within the structure of a Constitutional Republic.

This new Fictional Conservatism ----- tastes like CHICKEN.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 11:48 AM (Fb9Q0)

388 Sorry, but I need to revise my previous statement... So President Unprecedented gets his shiny new Visa card (with a $2.8T credit line), no questions asked, no strings attached. We get another "Blue Ribbon Commission" that will recommend "cuts" that will never happen from budgets that grow every single freaking year (the $1T in "cuts" are decreases from the baseline increase). Said "Blue Ribbon Commission" also however has the power to recommend tax increases that absolutely freaking will happen. The "across the board" cut trigger will be treated precisely the way it was in 1986 and 1990 - ignored if not outright repealed. Moody's and S&P get to continue to pretend we're "AAA" and, heck, solvent. The Banksters get to skim their "Holiday" bonuses from the rent all this new debt will generate. And the American taxpayer continues to be inflated and taxed into poverty. It's even more the feel-good story of Recovery Summer 2.0 Can. Kicked.

Posted by: DocJ at July 31, 2011 11:48 AM (AWzOz)

389 Right now it's really hard to tell who won and who lost in this deal. The only thing we know for sure is that it will not help the economy. It's just too squishy and business-as-usual.

Obama will claim victory for all the victims of the dastardly Repubs, but what will he say when the economy continues to tank? How will he defend this plan then? He's going to say "you're better off than you were four years ago"?

I DON'T THINK SO.

He will look bad, really bad, and probably lose in 2012. Unfortunately, it will be on our backs.

Posted by: PJ at July 31, 2011 11:51 AM (FlVA8)

390

Doc J.

You nailed it.

And I would only add that along the way, the Democrats get to define conservatism ---- as it will be the ostensible "conservatives" in congress who will be placed in a position to raise taxes.

So don't forget the demoralization factor that the dems and the faux GOP have unwittingly agreed to.

This all emanates from failed leadership within the ranks of the GOP.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 11:52 AM (Fb9Q0)

391 387 ...But of course we operate in a new fiction of conservatism now where we can opine with hedged caution ------on a non-conservative debt deal which essentially outsources decisions on that which the constitution charges to congress and provides within the structure of a Constitutional Republic.


A joint committee is constitutional:

"Committees including membership from both houses of Congress. Joint committees are usually established with narrow jurisdictions and normally lack authority to report legislation. Chairmanship usually alternates between the House and Senate members from Congress to Congress."

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 11:53 AM (o2lIv)

392 Ace, you seem to be taking a lukewarm approach on this.

I'm thinking everyone, including Ace, is now having a hard time mustering up a shit to give. The assholes in Washington have once again transformed a clear battle of spending cuts vs more borrowing into inside-baseball gimmicky bullshit.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 11:53 AM (ECjvn)

393 The liberals don't think they did [win]. Our side won more than they did by far, as least as far as the reported framework is concerned. Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 04:30 PM (o2lIv) Sorry, but WHAT? The Party of Evil gets their debt-ceiling (target, really) increase and kick the can out past Nov 2012. They get to lead everyone into believing they're "fiscally responsible" by proposing "cuts" that will never happen, and tax increases on "other people" that will. They get to make a symbolic vote on the BBA fail by thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis much. They get to watch their political opponents (The Party of Stupid) split roughly in half when the Tea contingent goes ballistic at being sold-out, again. Oh, and did I mention they get to use their shiny new credit card at the service of Organizing for America, 2012? Yeah. Epic win for the GOP, this.

Posted by: DocJ at July 31, 2011 11:54 AM (AWzOz)

394 I will back and financially donate money to the guy who proposes a spending freeze...as somebody posted above..automatic 7% increase every year. BONED

Posted by: Red Shirt at July 31, 2011 11:55 AM (FIDMq)

Posted by: toby928 at July 31, 2011 11:56 AM (GTbGH)

396

PJ, the GOP has lost in this along with the country. The GOP will be agreeing to outsource the debt reduction parameters and will be placed in a position to raise taxes pursuant to a debt commission, one that will seek compromise and will include tax increases.

If the GOP at this juncture coming off of a wave election cycle from which it gained total control of the house and near control of the senate in the midst of a financial calamity ----- and this still could not dictate terms associated with a debt ceiling increase ---- then they will not be able to stand against raising taxes when it comes up against the strictures the debt ceiling deal set in place.

This deal is very bad and removes authority and control from congress to an amorphous commission that will be able to set the agenda and momentum. The GOP will thus be rendered respondents in the matter.

Ace, this is a very bad deal and one you will be writing about once things get set in motion.

Republicans forced to raise taxes against what will then be a near 18T national debt,  a Trillions of which the result of Obama's agenda.

Raising taxes to support Obama's agenda.

The GOP is essentially agreeing to neuter itself in advance with this deal.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 11:59 AM (Fb9Q0)

397 On the upside, the only one I can think of, this might buy me another 9-12 months to try to get my and my family's financial house in further order before the can can't be kicked anymore. Not much of an upside, of course.

Posted by: DocJ at July 31, 2011 12:02 PM (AWzOz)

398 The Tea Party Wave of 2010 scared the GOP as much as the Democrats.

The next few years will be a non-stop effort by Republicans and Democrats to defame, buy off, corrupt, or marginalize and silence every Tea party candidate.

The RNC will do its best to get rid of as many as possible.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:05 PM (ECjvn)

399

Sifty, fair enough and I am not here to rip on Ace. However, I can tell you with certainty Buckley would never have supported this nor Reagan.

So where does that leave a conservative poli-blog like this?

If the fathers of true conservatism would not have supported this, should we call ourselves the sugar cake conservative club? or S3C for short?

Momentum is soon building that will be uncontained as respects the velocity of economic consequences. Things will turn on a dime in this nation where the central bank will no longer be able to contain; economic principles cannot be negotiated.

 

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 12:06 PM (Fb9Q0)

400 398 The Tea Party Wave of 2010 scared the GOP as much as the Democrats.

The next few years will be a non-stop effort by Republicans and Democrats to defame, buy off, corrupt, or marginalize and silence every Tea party candidate.

The RNC will do its best to get rid of as many as possible.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 05:05 PM (ECjvn)

Reform Party.. part II...

Posted by: Romeo13 at July 31, 2011 12:06 PM (NtXW4)

401 Owned!

Posted by: curious at July 31, 2011 04:33 PM (k1rwm)


OMG! What a pompous fucking twit!

Posted by: As IF... at July 31, 2011 12:06 PM (piMMO)

402 The GOP kicked the can down the road a little. Not as far as the Dems wanted, but they kicked it down the road a little.

Been busy most of the day. Are there still fools trying to pretend that increasing government spending by $8T over the next 10 years is a win for us? We might want to reevaluate what "us" is.

Also, I wanted to bounce a comment I made earlier off of folks who are awake.

On the humorous side, if you're in the mood for it, check my math.
7% of $4T budget increase 2011 to 2012 (baseline budgeting) is $280B
$1.7T deficit this year
means $1.98T deficit for 2012, all things being equal

All things are not equal, Q1 GDP .4% and all the indicators over the last 3 months show a slowdown from Q1, strongly suggesting Q2, when finally revised 3 months from now will be negative in a big way. There is no reason to think things are getting better, so GDP for the year is going to be negative, so less tax revenue and bigger deficit. Let's be generous and call it $2T.

Aug, Sep, Oct, to november is 1/4 of the year. So, 1 1/4 of a year from today will see deficit spending to the tune of $2.5T. Treasury has to replace $300B from federal pension funds its been raiding all summer for ...

$2.8T. So the dems have accepted a plan which ought to run out of money right around the beginning of November next year. Geniuses, all of them.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 12:09 PM (sOXQX)

403 Sifty, fair enough and I am not here to rip on Ace. However, I can tell you with certainty Buckley would never have supported this nor Reagan.

I agree. Reagan compromised when he had to in order to get something. Maintaining the status quo during a house fire is not a victory.

We didn't have to compromise this much this time and this would have been laughed at by Reagan and Buckley. But they are dead, along with great big parts of the Constitution.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:10 PM (ECjvn)

404

DocJ,

Be prepared, mentally, spiritually and physically for this nation is gonna change. Turbulence is the only known variable at this point.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 12:10 PM (Fb9Q0)

405

Sifty, well said brother.

Reagan would have controlled the table.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 12:12 PM (Fb9Q0)

406 393 We were never going to get a deal that would fix the problem, and not even CCB addresses the issue of entitlements. It's just a matter of time now.

As far as cuts are concerned, we shifted the Overton Window on that and the Dems have proven they can make some cuts-- and we already know on which items (outside defense). But you're right, we'll have to wait-and-see. It would be best to completely draft the legislation before the vote.

Regarding taxes, the baseline ensures they cannot raise individual taxes, though I'm unsure about corporate. We also have the chance that a last-minute offer on raising taxes could kill this deal, too. But it's surprising that Obama would potentially sign a revenue-neutral deal.

As for the BBA, the language in the bill very well might determine whether this passes. A number of them exist and the Dems are open to the old one which almost passed last time. Again, this will be a sticking-point in the House.

But my overall point was that, from what we've seen thus far (on paper), the Dems made more concessions than we did. That's what is so upsetting to the Dems. But I'd like to read the legislation for myself before I declare it a total and complete surrender.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:12 PM (o2lIv)

407 Chuck Todd And here we go; Reid's on board.

Here we go alright....

Posted by: Tami at July 31, 2011 12:13 PM (X6akg)

408

80's Baby, you need to understand the play concerning the super-commission and the platform of the GOP and those who made the wave happen.

Power has been ceded and a precedent set in terms of this commission.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 12:14 PM (Fb9Q0)

409 Reid just said he's a potential yes; Pelosi thus far has not said anything. No word from House GOP.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:15 PM (o2lIv)

410 Shut.  'Er.  Down!

Posted by: Michelle Bachmann at July 31, 2011 12:15 PM (zgZzy)

411 I'm thinking everyone, including Ace, is now having a hard time mustering up a shit to give. The assholes in Washington have once again transformed a clear battle of spending cuts vs more borrowing into inside-baseball gimmicky bullshit.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 04:53 PM (ECjvn)

Yeah, this.

There isn't single person here who can explain what is going on in the Gubmint right now.

We're being played.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 12:16 PM (Vj0AA)

412 Regarding taxes, the baseline ensures they cannot raise individual taxes, though I'm unsure about corporate.

Any raising of taxes on businesses is an automatic tax on consumers. Then we get to pay sales taxes on top of the higher prices caused by the taxes on the businesses.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:16 PM (ECjvn)

413

The holdup on announcing the deal appears to be uncertainty of how House gets to 216.

Posted by: Tami at July 31, 2011 12:17 PM (X6akg)

414 408

80's Baby, you need to understand the play concerning the super-commission and the platform of the GOP and those who made the wave happen.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 05:14 PM (Fb9Q0)

Enough of the turbogay commissions, cant even make the phantom 'cuts' themselves?  GROW A PAIR, people want to see somebody lead from the front for once

Posted by: Red Shirt at July 31, 2011 12:18 PM (FIDMq)

415 Stay strong, Tea Party.

Fuck this clown. - Columbus, Zombieland

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:18 PM (ECjvn)

416

ErikW,

Well then sir, we should be speaking to this instead of hedging. No?

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 12:19 PM (Fb9Q0)

417 Any GOP member who votes for our doom should be primaried and tarred and feathered.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at July 31, 2011 12:19 PM (zgZzy)

418 Forget the silliness about picking winners and losers in the budget process.  Change the budget rules so 'baseline budgeting' is based upon actual revenue from the previous year with any excess revenue going to pay down the debt.  Continue this until the debt (not deficit) reduced to a healthy level related to GDP (Perhaps 20%?)

This nonsense of deficit reductions of a trillion or more over ten years is a total farce when it allows trillion dollar deficits to proceed each year pretty much unabated.  

The Constitutions says one of this nation's goals is to preserve liberty to ourselves AND our posterity.  Deficits and debts far into the future is a direct violation of that principle... 

Posted by: drfredc at July 31, 2011 12:19 PM (iNKlO)

419 408 80's Baby, you need to understand the play concerning the super-commission and the platform of the GOP and those who made the wave happen.

Power has been ceded and a precedent set in terms of this commission.


Joint committees are nothing new and-- more importantly-- are Constitutional. They only occur when there is an impasse between both houses of Congress.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:20 PM (o2lIv)

420

Let's all have a beer for now.

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 12:21 PM (Fb9Q0)

421 No matter what the deal is it's the Democrats fault.  The democrats held our seniors, our sick, and our soldiers hostage because they would not agree to balance the budget.  That's it.  That's the narrative and we take it all the way to 2012.  We DO NOT turn on each other.  Not this time. 

Posted by: Jaynie59 at July 31, 2011 12:21 PM (4zKCA)

422 412 Any raising of taxes on businesses is an automatic tax on consumers. Then we get to pay sales taxes on top of the higher prices caused by the taxes on the businesses.

Absolutely true, which is why I want to see the bill.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:23 PM (o2lIv)

423

80's Baby,

Of course, indeed, you are correct.

No power will have been ceded and of course this is exactly what the framers had in mind.

I suspect we should then cast votes for committees next election.

What do you say?

 

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 12:23 PM (Fb9Q0)

424 Any GOP member who votes for our doom should be primaried and tarred and feathered.

Some clear revocation of consent is called for. Maybe it's time to give Karl Denninger's mass work stoppage plan some thought.

Yes I know the economy's crappy-which is both why it could have some effect and folks would be hesitant to participate. So, more thought.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 12:24 PM (sOXQX)

425

Well then sir, we should be speaking to this instead of hedging. No?

Posted by: journolist at July 31, 2011 05:19 PM (Fb9Q0)

You tell me!

I don't know dick about the market or how it works. I'm an ignoramous.

Quite frankly, I think the market is made up of assholes.

Posted by: ErikW at July 31, 2011 12:26 PM (Vj0AA)

426 This definitely calls for some nationwide protest.

If not a tax revolt, at least a general strike by producers.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:27 PM (ECjvn)

427 We DO NOT turn on each other.

That will work once the GOP establishment gets through its head the fact that they are our servants and need to be more obedient to us.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 12:27 PM (sOXQX)

428 A Day Without A Taxpayer

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:27 PM (ECjvn)

429 Ric Lowry is saying this is still completely two-tiered like in Boehner's bill instead of complete increase after passage of the legislation. The triggers would then guarantee the rest of the increase. Is he 100% sure?

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:29 PM (o2lIv)

430 What do Dick Morris and David Frum think?

Or cats in New York?

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:34 PM (ECjvn)

431 Is he 100% sure?

I hope someone is 100% sure about something up there at the Capitol.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:35 PM (ECjvn)

432 423 80's Baby,

Of course, indeed, you are correct.

No power will have been ceded and of course this is exactly what the framers had in mind.

I suspect we should then cast votes for committees next election.

What do you say?


They didn't expect our Congress to use last resort measures as their M.O. I also refuse to tell you this has never taken place previously. Whether it's right or wrong is not the point; I'm merely discussing precedence and whether it's lawful. This would not be happening if not for the hissy fit thrown by socialists.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:37 PM (o2lIv)

433   My colleague Trish Turner reports that a GOP source says "The negotiation isn’t done yet" and there will be no vote on this tonite.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:38 PM (o2lIv)

434 427  No, that's how it works now.  Don't play into the Democrats hands.  Don't use the Republican's basic sense of humanity against it.  They erred on the side of compassion.  They are not the unfeeling, uncaring, ruthless, sociopaths that the Democrats are.  The Democrats threatened our seniors, our sick, and our soldiers.  All because they can't fathom not spending our money.  They would have done it, too.  Don't blame the Republicans.  Work to get more conservative Republicans who will be powerful enough to make sure our seniors, our sick, and our soldiers are never again held hostage by Democrats.

Or make up your own damned narrative.  Just don't fall for theirs.


Posted by: Jaynie59 at July 31, 2011 12:38 PM (4zKCA)

435 hat if the Russians decided to push West

The Russians can't handle the Chechens they've got.  Why would they add a bunch of pissed off Poles & Germans who are already gas customers?

Posted by: DaveA at July 31, 2011 12:39 PM (pnDL7)

436 In my opinion, Boehner is a horrible tactician with an over-developed sense of responsibility. He has not yet learned how to handle amoral and immoral people.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:45 PM (o2lIv)

437 The Poles won't go down easy to the Russians. Old scores will be settled.

Sadly, there are way more Julian Assange-type Europeans than there are good ones.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:46 PM (ECjvn)

438 I hope someone is 100% sure about something up there at the Capitol.

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 05:35 PM (ECjvn)


I'm 100% sure that we're fucked.

Posted by: the American taxpayer at July 31, 2011 12:47 PM (/izg2)

439 Work to get more conservative Republicans who will be powerful enough to make sure our seniors, our sick, and our soldiers are never again held hostage by Democrats.

No. I will "work for" this filth when they have demonstrated they are worthy of my notice. You are a fool to go along with our establishment enemies. It will always be "work a little harder and someday will make an effort on your behalf," until they become convinced that we will burn them down if that's what it takes to end the lies.

Or go ahead and make excuses for the GOP's inexcusable fecklessness. Pretend it's only that they can't do what they want, not that they are doing exactly what they want.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 12:47 PM (sOXQX)

440 Like all government, Defense is ripe for a decent audit.

an inspection, correction, and verification of business accounts, conducted by an independent qualified accountant

Where are you going to find an independent qualified accountant for the Federal Government?  Who could inspect, correct and verify?  What would happen while all this was going on?

Nice idea in theory but completely impractical now.

Posted by: DaveA at July 31, 2011 12:50 PM (pnDL7)

441 Details?

Here’s the outline of the debt ceiling deal as of now, according to officials on both sides:

* $900 billion in the first stage of deficit reduction.

* $1.5 trillion in second stage of deficit reduction to be defined by a bipartisan special committee of lawmakers appointed by leaders of the House and Senate.

* If the special committee fails to deliver a deficit-cutting package that would trigger $1.2 trillion in cuts, half would be Defense cuts and the other half would be non-Defense cuts, exempting low-income programs Social Security and Medicaid, and only impacting providers in Medicare.

* The debt ceiling increase would be done in three phases: $400 billion initially; another $500 billion later thise year would be subject to a vote of disapproval; a third increase of $1.5 to get the rest through 2012 and would also be subject to vote of disapproval.

* There is also a provision to have Congress vote on balanced budget amendment.

* The special committee would not necessarily tackle tax reform. But Mr. Obama is threatening to veto any extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for those making $250,000 a year or more unless Congress acts on an overhaul of the tax code.


Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:51 PM (o2lIv)

442 Not this "Overton Window" shit again.  Great.  All we need now is to get inside their OODA loop and play some rope-a-dope.

And we nudged that window about 0.5 inch.  Was it worth the hernia?

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 12:51 PM (agD4m)

443   Between defense and medicare there are billions unaccounted for

And we are Trillions in debt and going deeper by billions? daily?
Accounting for things doesn't get us a refund either.

Posted by: DaveA at July 31, 2011 12:53 PM (pnDL7)

444 $900 billion in the first stage of deficit reduction.

Am I deluded, or does this number keep getting smaller? 

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at July 31, 2011 12:54 PM (agD4m)

445 Is "Overton Window" French for "Gas is $5 a gallon"?

Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 12:55 PM (ECjvn)

446 "the GOP has lost in this along with the country"

I agree, but I also think the freshmen "radicals" in the GOP do not plan to just sit back and take this. They can give speeches just like Bams, and they wont let McConnell or Boehner silence them.

It was the best that could be done without defaulting so we just have to wait and see. It certainly is not a plan I think should stand, should the GOP take the Senate or the WH next time.

Posted by: PJ at July 31, 2011 12:56 PM (FlVA8)

447 444 $900 billion in the first stage of deficit reduction.

Am I deluded, or does this number keep getting smaller?


Obama gets $400B increase first time, then $500B second. So it's a match of $900B in cuts for $900B increase.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 12:58 PM (o2lIv)

448 $1.5T in cuts for $1.5T increase the 3rd time

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 01:01 PM (o2lIv)

449 * $900 billion in the first stage of deficit reduction.

Bullshit. Is the federal government going to spend less in 2012 than in 2011? Is the deficit going to be less in 2012 than in 2011? If the answer to either question is no, this bill is a defeat for us.

and only impacting providers in Medicare.

Well I guess we can save a whole lot on Medicare if we screw the providers enough that there's no place Medicare recipients can get treatment. Not my preferred approach, but we might as well accept oblivion at this point.

But Mr. Obama is threatening to veto any extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for those making $250,000 a year or more unless Congress acts on an overhaul of the tax code.

Awesome. Do those expire this year or was that extension good through the election. Again, embracing oblivion, we might as well take the tax hike. Hey, do you notice how when democrats get exactly what they want by doing nothing-they do nothing? Some people might learn something from that.

"you's" are generic-I don't mean to direct any of this at 80sBaby (the updates are always appreciated). I'm just feeling pissy as I watch the future shrink away.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 01:02 PM (sOXQX)

450 I'm just feeling pissy as I watch the future shrink away

Ralph's grocery store is having a sale on Sam Adams Boston Lager for $9.99 a 12-pack.

It's taking a lot of willpower to keep from being a drunk again.


Posted by: sifty at July 31, 2011 01:04 PM (ECjvn)

451 439 Filth?  You sound like a Democrat.
 

Posted by: Jaynie59 at July 31, 2011 01:07 PM (4zKCA)

452 You sound like a Democrat.

Yes, because I'm the one celebrating $8T in increased government spending over the next 10 years. Not that there will be 10 years.

But by all means, you socialists can keep pretending that you've made it work this time. Until they day it all just stops. But hang on to your delusions for whatever they are worth in the weeks or months ahead.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 01:11 PM (sOXQX)

453 And we nudged that window about 0.5 inch.  Was it worth the hernia?

The Overton Window still opens to the Abyss. The view is pretty much the same.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 01:12 PM (sOXQX)

454 The Bush tax cuts expire at the end of 2012.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 01:12 PM (o2lIv)

455 We keep all the new "tea party" people, and send reinforcements.  McConnell has to go.  And we rub our "victory" in the noses of the Kos kids.  Make them hate Obama for selling them out.  It is our best chance.

Posted by: at July 31, 2011 01:13 PM (6IV8T)

456
We have to fold on the 2011 budget so we can focus on the Ryan Plan.
We have to fold on the Ryan Plan so we can focus on the 2012 budget.
We have to fold on the 2012 budget so we can focus on the debt ceiling.
We have to fold on the debt ceiling because it's time for the next election,

Repeat forever....

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at July 31, 2011 01:19 PM (EeYDk)

457 I don't think anyone is arguing against making smart cuts to everything.

I don't think it's realistic to think the broken institutions, processes and personnel that got us here to smartly fix the problem.  There's always more special interest for any dollar spent that general interest against it.  Across the board cuts might be a way to get past this.

Posted by: DaveA at July 31, 2011 01:21 PM (pnDL7)

458 Methos,

I am a 20-something who realizes that entitlement programs are a fraud and that we are about to pay for almost a century's-worth of problems. It's frightening to consider but there is so much to do to turn this country around and we simply don't have the time. In the meantime, we (from our leaders on down) give it our best fight, prepare, and pray.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 01:23 PM (o2lIv)

459 Update: Both parties in the House are demanding more details. The Blue Dogs are demanding representation on the joint committee. Some voted with the Rs on both CCB and the BB (5 and 11, respectively).

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 01:28 PM (o2lIv)

460 Lol, everyone is trying to figure out who won.  The Establishment won if this deal goes through. That includes Obama and leadership of both parties.  If they get this passed, they will be laughing their asses off at how they suckered us all into believing it was the end of the world once again.  One thing is clear, the Tea Party needs reinforcements.

Posted by: Africanus at July 31, 2011 01:28 PM (Bo13R)

461   Pelosi on the "deal": We all may not be able to support it. And maybe none of us will be able to support it." Says the caucus will meet Mon

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 01:30 PM (o2lIv)

462 The Bush tax cuts expire at the end of 2012.

Okay, then Obama is irrelevant to any discussion of them. Which naturally means Boehner/McConnell will negotiate away something in order to prolong them.

In the meantime, we (from our leaders on down) give it our best fight, prepare, and pray.

There are plenty of folks around here who want to fight-I just don't see how DC GOPers are ever going to be part of the solution. As for prayer, I pray for people regularly. I feel dishonest trying to suggest to God that what this nation has become is worth preserving.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 01:40 PM (sOXQX)

463 462 Okay, then Obama is irrelevant to any discussion of them. Which naturally means Boehner/McConnell will negotiate away something in order to prolong them.

I think the best thing to do is draft this before they pass it. If they put their minds to it, they could potentially finish the first part before the actual vote. The second part sounds like it uses the text of the Boehner bill as its base but they need to be  absolutely sure about triggers. That way, the deficit reduction items are implemented before the increase.


There are plenty of folks around here who want to fight-I just don't see how DC GOPers are ever going to be part of the solution. As for prayer, I pray for people regularly. I feel dishonest trying to suggest to God that what this nation has become is worth preserving.

Some of them are in office because they desire to be rich and/or are power-hungry, but I honestly feel some others are more sincere and have a real disagreement about what the best thing to do here is. Regarding prayer, I was taught to pray for wisdom and judgment for our leaders, as well as for God's will to be done.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 01:56 PM (o2lIv)

464   Member of GOP leadership team on why R's are moving slowly: "We must be able to answer every question fully. No room for uncertainty."

Good.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 01:58 PM (o2lIv)

465 463 462 Most and some, rather.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 02:03 PM (o2lIv)

466 House GOP schedules conference call with members at 8:30 pm et tonight.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 02:04 PM (o2lIv)

467 WSJ via ZH reporting Boehner may be balking due to potential military cuts.

Fortunately his $8T in additional spending over 10 years has been basically preserved in the deal.

Posted by: Methos at July 31, 2011 02:05 PM (sOXQX)

468 House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) appears to be balking at the debt ceiling deal that Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada has signed. Mr. Boehner is concerned about provisions in the deal that could lead to sharp cuts in military spending, say people familiar with the situation. House aides have warned that just because Mr. Reid has signed off on the deal doesn’t mean the deal is done.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 02:13 PM (o2lIv)

469 467 Sorry, Methos, should have read.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 02:15 PM (o2lIv)

470 Now it says he was but isn't.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 02:19 PM (o2lIv)

471 what happens if it passes in the senate and they send it back to the "balking boehner" house?

Posted by: curious at July 31, 2011 02:27 PM (k1rwm)

472 I have been quite impressive with your posts, keep up the great work.

Posted by: The Music Lesson AudioBook at July 31, 2011 02:31 PM (0Iz8T)

Posted by: curious at July 31, 2011 02:31 PM (k1rwm)

Posted by: curious at July 31, 2011 02:38 PM (k1rwm)

475 Not this "Overton Window" shit again. Great. All we need now is to get inside their OODA loop and play some rope-a-dope. Let us not get lost in the Meme-of-the-Day. Clever memes go entirely unnoticed by Doom, the great leveler. What a lot of silly melodrama. As others have written here and elsewhere, this is nothing but a game of political musical chairs which bears no weight upon the scales of fiscal Doom. It won't matter who perceives a "win" coming out of this entirely hysterical, artifical August deadline. Other political developments in the next six months will make this a distant memory, and events in the real, fiscal world will pass over DC in less than a few days. Remember, cutting even an outlandishly large $200 billion this year (hah!) amounts to a mere twenty days of Federal spending. In other words, more will be spent in the month of July arguing this crap than would be saved.

Posted by: George Orwell at July 31, 2011 02:40 PM (AZGON)

476 "Other political developments in the next six months will make this a distant memory..."

Exactly, and the Tea Party frosh will carry their arguments forward.

Posted by: PJ at July 31, 2011 03:00 PM (FlVA8)

477

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) and other top leaders will brief GOP lawmakers on the state of the negotiations with Democrats at 8:30 p.m. EDT Sunday, a senior Republican aide said.

An aide to Rep. Boehner said this scheduling of this call doesn’t mean there’s a debt ceiling deal with Democrats. He cited Rep. Boehner’s concerns about defense spending levels in the fiscal year 2012; Boehner has balked at proposals that could lead to sharp cuts in military spending.

Earlier, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) "signed off" on a debt-ceiling plan pending the approval of the Senate Democratic caucus, a Congressional aide said Sunday.

The broad outlines of the deal include roughly $2.4 trillion in spending cuts and increase the borrowing limit by a similar amount--enough to support federal borrowing through 2012.

This corrects a previous post that said House Republican leaders had signed on to a tentative debt deal.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 03:03 PM (o2lIv)

478

It's all about optics. Keep your eye on the long game.

The new GOP senate, and President Romney will make certain that the budget is balanced, and the debt will be paid down via a series of cuts. Without new taxes.

Pinky Promise.

Posted by: The Long Viewers at July 31, 2011 03:14 PM (X1Y8q)

479 Chuck Todd According to multiple sources, expectation at 8:30 is for Speaker Boehner to inform conference he's supporting this deal. We'll see


Posted by: Tami at July 31, 2011 03:20 PM (X6akg)

480 Fuck - why don't they just throw an amendment on the end of the bill that makes Pelosi Speaker of the House?!

Posted by: gm at July 31, 2011 03:25 PM (K0tm3)

481 Here is the only way to cut spending. Parents teach children fiscal principles, and integrity. The children are elected to congress. Done. No Balanced Budget Amendment. No Gramm- Ruddman. If someone is determined to spend less, they will. If someone is determinted to spend more, they will. It is impossible to legislate morality.

Posted by: Duhgee at July 31, 2011 03:26 PM (g+jkc)

482 Now it's back to hedging. Hard to tell whether the confusion is because the views of the pols keep shifting or if the sources have their own talking points, perhaps even trying to force something.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 03:27 PM (o2lIv)

483   getting details of a "fix" on defense cuts that gets negotiators past the last hurdle.. more soon..

Chad Pergram Presdient in briefing room at 8:40 pm et.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 03:31 PM (o2lIv)

484 Boehner will speak after the conference?

Posted by: willow at July 31, 2011 03:32 PM (h+qn8)

485 ...and then the fiscal donkey punch.

Posted by: Sgt. York at July 31, 2011 03:35 PM (QHzLG)

486

I originally posted on the wrong page.  Here it is again for those who missed it.

Barack Obama had Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen fly to Afghanistan this weekend to tell the troops serving there that their families may not get paid if a debt agreement is not reached.  Admiral Mullen was meeting with US troops serving in southern Afghanistan.

He is evil.

Posted by: DailyDish at July 31, 2011 03:36 PM (Qagzd)

487 a s.ob. with a smidge of  schmuk and  a side of jackass

Posted by: willow at July 31, 2011 03:40 PM (h+qn8)

488 Now it's back to hedging. Hard to tell whether the confusion is because the views of the pols keep shifting or if the sources have their own talking points, perhaps even trying to force something.

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 31, 2011 08:27 PM (o2lIv)

I'm starting to think they just want to report something...anything.  They'll worry about accuracy...never.

Posted by: Tami at July 31, 2011 03:40 PM (X6akg)

489 Obama just announced a compromise has been reached. 

Posted by: DailyDish at July 31, 2011 03:46 PM (Qagzd)

490

I originally posted on the wrong page. Here it is again for those who missed it.

Barack Obama had Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen fly to Afghanistan this weekend to tell the troops serving there that their families may not get paid if a debt agreement is not reached. Admiral Mullen was meeting with US troops serving in southern Afghanistan.

He is evil.

Posted by: DailyDish at July 31, 2011 08:36 PM (Qagzd)

That is fucking dispicable. I wonder if Mullen told them that the welfare checks and medicaid checks will still go out. And Planned Parenthood will still get it's checks.

Somehow I doubt it.

Posted by: The Long Viewers at July 31, 2011 03:47 PM (X1Y8q)

491 Didn't he?  Or not?

Posted by: DailyDish at July 31, 2011 03:47 PM (Qagzd)

492 They aren't dumb. They're playing big government good cop to the Democrat bad cop. And covering their asses in the process.

Posted by: MlR at July 31, 2011 04:18 PM (xZZ5K)

493 "12 fox has said Moodys will likely not downgrade. I am trying to understand why. Were the demands met that we would deal with 4 trillion number> ? It is said not and over ten years Obama will raise the debt 10 trillion? did i understand this incorrectly?" I call shenanigans on at least Moody's, and prolly the other ratings agencies as well... either: a) they were in on the take with the White House and only said the sky was falling so that Obama and the Dems could use it to Pressure the GOP (not that it gives them ANY excuse for caving, and I give no such excuses... they failed.). OR b) 'Someone' came around and said 'Nice Ratings Agency You got there... would be a shame if something happened to it.' I'm guessing b) happened, then a) occurred.

Posted by: Chaz at July 31, 2011 05:17 PM (sSNkG)

494 Thought you did a great job in getting the shoes delivered to me! You were very helpful and the process was great. I would use shop with you again!

Posted by: women lingerie at July 31, 2011 06:00 PM (LTMyi)

495 "The Republicans have demonstrated that they will not shut down the government under any circumstances."

I don't think that is true.  They demonstrated that they wouldn't shut it down while they hold only the House.  I believe if the Republicans held both House and Senate, they wouldn't have hesitated to confront Obama and shut the government down.  Right now the Republicans just don't have the political power to really do much.

Shutting down the government now would have burned up a lot of political capital.  They get a chance to shut it down again with a vote of disapproval if Obama tries to raise the debt ceiling again.


Posted by: crosspatch at July 31, 2011 07:02 PM (ZbLJZ)

496 It took me a while to read down through the 498 posts above this, and no one has mentioned one of the main ways that we are going to be further screwed by the Institutional Republican "Leadership".  We have this "Super Congress" committee that is going to be presenting cuts for an unamendable up or down vote.  Who is going to be on that committee?

If they are following the McConnell surrender plan, where this abortion was first brought up; there will be 12 members, 6 from each House, split between the parties.

They will be pretty much guaranteed to be from either super-safe seats where they cannot ever be ousted, which for the Democrats means from their most Moonbat fringe [picture Sheila Jackson Lee in the "Super Congress"] or Senators who will not be touchable for 4-6 years; or those who already are out one way or another. The Democrats will send their crazies.

The Institutional Republicans will send their own, and probably one or more DIABLO’s or RINO’s [picture John McCain reaching across the aisle, or Murkowski, Collins, Brown, Snowe, Hutchinson, or Cornyn] to “balance” the presence of any TEA Party members or Conservatives that may be appointed from either House [and you CAN bet that there will be attempts to keep them out completely]. All it takes is a one turncoat vote majority in the “Super Congress” to let the Democrats rewrite the budget forever. Remember, it was one of the Maine Twins whose vote kept Obamacare from being bottled up in Committee forever; because she did not want to offend the Democrats by voting against them. If they are still following the McConnell surrender plan, it will be a straight up or down Congressional vote on anything they come up with, with no amendments in either House allowed. And I can see the Institutionals whipping the vote in order to preserve their own “credibility” with the Democrats, regardless of where the cuts fall.

We have been, and are going to be, betrayed by the Republican Party.

Subotai Bahadur

Posted by: Subotai Bahadur at July 31, 2011 10:01 PM (K06hp)

497 A bill  only goat lovers could enjoy.

Posted by: Molon Labe at August 01, 2011 10:27 AM (g5MrG)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
407kb generated in CPU 1.27, elapsed 3.4962 seconds.
62 queries taking 2.4992 seconds, 733 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.