I don’t have the constitution to watch the bobble heads, but I hope it is clear now that the Republicans are not serious about the debt and the deficit. It might even be obvious enough for the beltway bobbleheads to figure it out.
Oh, they are serious about cutting social programs and gutting the safety net, but that is because they are serious about gutting social programs and cutting the safety net- not about deficit reduction. Deficits don’t matter to these guys- they are just horseshit they throw out there to get their way. After exploding the budget during the Bush years, they’ve done nothing but concern troll about the mess they made, and used it to attempt to achieve more of their goals. That is it.
But the deficit and the debt? They don’t care about it and never have.
WereBear
But they say all the time they care care care about fiscal responsibility!
I do think the electorate have not caught on that they are the battered partner in this relationship. But they love me! means nothing to the black eye they gave you.
Montysano
I think the GOP debt tantrum has been a trial balloon for trying to eliminate SS as the “third rail” and replacing it with tax increases/revenues. Good luck with that. Anecdotal evidence from wingnut friends suggests that it’s a major fail.
The GOP has painted itself into a very tight corner. My hope is that Obama is simply handing them a brush and more paint. Time will tell.
The Dangerman
It would appear that the Right has a choice of either raising the ceiling and piss off their rabid base or raising the ceiling with some sort of tax increase and REALLY PISS OFF their rabid base. I don’t see their out.
different church-lady
It has been obvious for years that terms like “deficit reduction” and “balanced budget” have been Republican code words for gutting social programs. Of that there’s no doubt. The bobbleheads are either ignorant or play along for their own reasons.
The question I do have, however, is: have Democrats/liberals latched onto the code usage so thoroughly that they now reflexively reject either concept on the merits of fiscal sanity?
Example 1: there seems to be a meme I see more-than-occasionally that indicates that deficits are inherently good. And sometimes not just good during recessions, but always good. I don’t think that makes any more sense than believing that deficits are inherently bad. Deficits are a tool, and it all depends on how you use it.
Example 2: If spending could be reduced without reducing services, would some on the left reject the ideas to do so before hearing them out, simply on “principle”?
I’m sorry I don’t have concrete examples of these at my fingertips, but maybe I’ll dig some up.
slag
This just in: the anti-choice, anti-gay, pro-spying, pro-torture GOP aren’t serious about individual freedom either. Feedom, on the other hand…
different church-lady
@ Dangerman (#3): Their out is the Armageddon option. I’ll bet at least half the caucus drools at the thought.
JonF
Jmo, but this was Obama’s strategy. Throw out a bigger figure than the GOP would ever do with cuts that made the left howl and force the GOP to reject it so that Obama can claim to be a bigger deficit hawk. FWIU, Obama bait and switched Boehner where he retracted the tax “increases” for a commitment to end the Buh Tax cuts to increase revenue dramatically.
PaulJ
They aren’t serious about the deficit and the debt, and no one with any sense would believe otherwise.
There isn’t any debt, deficits are required in order for the economy to grow and no one with any sense would believe otherwise.
http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/08/13/monetarily-sovereign-the-key-to-understanding-economics/
If you don’t get this you are wasting your time even talking about it.
The Dangerman
Fair enough, but that option means shit gets blown up and someone will have to take the blame; right now, it would appear the blame would almost HAVE to go to Boehner and company. They’ve clearly been negotiating in bad faith.
Lolis
Our media is such a failure. If they were real journalists they would be educating voters about Grover Norquist and his influence over the Republican Party.
mellowjohn
“It might even be obvious enough for the beltway bobbleheads to figure it out.”
oh john, you are a dreamer!
slag
@Lolis: Colbert did a great job with Norquist a little while ago. He made it clear that all you need to do with Norquist is let the man talk, and then ask him a single question at the end of his talk that utterly explodes all his bullshit. That’s it. Just one question. Colbert makes it look so easy that even a journalist might be able to do it.
moonbat
JC @ top: Thanks for front paging this. It cannot be said too often or too loudly.
JonF: This is the issue that has been in Obama’s back pocket all along, though no one has seemed to notice. He has sworn (and I believe him) that the Bush tax cuts will not be extended any further. If he can force Boehner to accept the closing of tax loopholes on the wealthy in the debt ceiling deal AND then the tax cuts expire at the end of this year, he will have all of the “fiscal responsibility” high ground staked out at relatively little political cost. By making the deficit their primary issue and making so much noise over it all summer, the Republicans have handed the issue over to Obama. I don’t know about chess, but the president plays poker pretty well…
harlana
Yah, what about the Bush years when they just coasted along, increased the debt ceiling regularly, with nary a peep? I have yet to hear a bobblehead bring this up, but then I don’t watch them regularly and am only forced to when visiting my folks and my dad has the remote, which is 95% of the time. :)
moonbat
I guess I should have said “card game” because the other is a no-no word Something has me in moderation @13.
Rick Taylor
__
You do that. Back here in the real world, Democrats have been bending over backwards to show they’re interested in finding savings, sometimes too far in my opinion (Obama’s pay freeze for example). The Democratic party is now the only home for sane fiscal conservatives, and some insane ones as well.
WereBear
19 times, Harlana! They raised the debt ceiling 19 times while Bush was in office.
harlana
: Colbert has big ole brass balls. Never will I forget the WH correspondents dinner. To me it was absolutely astounding to watch. To me, it was a historical moment.
Didn’t he say something to Norquist about setting seniors on fire?
kay
I think it’s great that Cantor is running Boehner. Cantor choked first, on Thursday, and Boehner followed. Boehner was on board Thursday, because only Kyl and Cantor bolted on that first vote.
Uh, oh. I wonder what they did to get Boehner to fall into line with Grover between Thursday and Saturday, and how he now pretends he’s “leading” or “running” anything, off the golf course.
Bruce S
Actually, as has been well documented in both words, actions and clear results of policy over the years, the Republican’s ideological core cares very much about deficits.
They care about them because creating deficits – manifested in politics by pandering to the public with “tax cuts,” which are never a very difficult sell to the average Joe – has been their not-so-secret strategy to create fiscal paralysis and an atmosphere where their hate-the-government agenda – focused on taking out programs like Medicare and “privatizing” Social Security – begins to seem plausible or even “necessary” as policy. They could never go for this stuff if they didn’t create fiscal havoc first. It’s a strategy of destruction and deficits are essential.
I actually don’t think this is analysis is “opinion” anymore, they have been so blatant and – I hate to say it – successful at the level of pushing the country, or at least the “Serious People” including most Democrats, into a debate framed by deficit hysteria.
It’s been one of the most indecent and dishonest – and anti-conservative in its fiscal profligacy – concerted political strategies we’ve ever been subjected to. Sort of on the order of those John Birch Society “secret Communist conspiracy” theories in its magnitude. But the ideologues of the Right, dangling tax cuts as the hammer for every nail, have managed to pull it off.
vtr
GOP probably figured that if they didn’t win a single argument, at least they wasted two or three months.
glutton
This was mentioned on NPR this morning, in their usual low-key way.
Zach
I don’t think many Republicans actually want to gut the safety net; they just want to keep revenues at or below their current levels and reducing Medicaid/Medicare spending is required to do that.
Edit: Well, that or “widen the tax base.”
different church-lady
I haven’t dug ’em up yet, but I think you’ve identified my problem: rather than the real world, all of my examples would come from political blogs.
This really ought to give me a wake up call regarding my choice of reading materials.
Skippy-san
AMEN AND AMEN.
These assholes want to see the economy tank-just so they can blame it all on Obama in 2012. I’ve had it with them and their whole approach. Obama has already given Boehner everything he asked for-and he has yet to go in front of the country and call them the evil pigs they are.
Obama should be out there telling people the facts-the debt ceiling issue is contrived, the cuts that are coming will be draconian and worst of all they are unecessary, provided the stupid Bush tax cuts would be repealed.
Time to start torching cars on PA avenue.
WaterGirl
For more reasoned discussion on this topic, and less panic and hopelessness, check out Booman Tribune, particularly comments by TarheelDem.
gogol's wife
#16 Harlana: I will never forget Colbert at the WH correspondents dinner. Every once in a while I watch it again to remember what a morally courageous comedy performance is — to be doing it in the physical presence of your satirical target, and not to flinch a single time. I don’t think I’ve seen anything like it ever.
PurpleGirl
Zach @ 20: The Republicans have been wanting end Social Security since it was started. They added in the other safety net programs over time. They are serious about hating Social Security. Oh, they take the money (after all it’s their money, confiscated by the government) but they keep believing that it is evil.
Bruce S @ 18: That’s a very good analysis of their “care and concern” about deficits.
lacp
different church lady
sorry i’m late to the party, but here’s one of my favorite economist’s explanations of why deficits, properly managed, are good things.
http://www.columbia.edu/dlc/wp/econ/vickrey.html
Bruce S
Great link – lacp #26 – thanks.
Elizabelle
NYTimes story: Geithner on Face the Nation
Geithner Pushes for $4 Trillion Deal on Deficit
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/11/us/politics/11debt.html?hp
Kane
Republicans attempted to dismantle Medicare under the guise of an urgent need to get our fiscal house in order, but walked away from President Obama’s $4 trillion deficit reduction proposal so that they could protect the richest two percent from reasonable tax increases and eliminating special-interest tax loopholes.
Good luck with defending that in November.
PaulJ
@#24
Sorry, but Booman is clueless about the monetary system and is thus unqualified to talk about anything to do with economics.
As far as his political analysis, maybe he does have something to say, but if a person can’t define a problem he can’t come up with a solution.
I have tried to discuss monetary issues with him before and he is as impervious as any right-winger I have ever talked to. As are many liberals.
Things you’ve heard all of your life tend to get internalized, and it’s hard to change your views. The leadership class counts on this.
PaulJ
“Geithner Pushes for $4 Trillion Deal on Deficit”
I hope everyone realizes how disastrous cuts of this size would be to the economy (us).
Our only hope is that they are back-loaded so they don’t affect the economy right away…
At least future Congress’ will have a chance to roll the cuts back.
Trouble is, a lot of potential Dem voters will see these as a stab in the back because the party didn’t put up a fight against them. Doesn’t bode well for 2012.
RossInDetroit
@Kane:
All they have to do is use the words “Obama” and “tax increase” in a sentence and their base will ignore the fact that it was someone else’s taxes being increased and the GOP’s cuts hurt them.
It’ll work like a charm.
Kane
What does this do to the tea party hopes and dreams of a default and a government shutdown?
Rock
The Republicans have won the media battle already. In the Chicago Tribune today, the story is written as follows:
1) Republicans walked away from the $4T deal because they would not raise taxes in a recession. They would be a “job-killer”.
2) The White House wanted to cut Medicare.
Who wins the next election with that story in place?
Rick Taylor
@PaulJ
__
I’m reduced to hoping that Republican intransigence saves us all.
Judas Escargot
@Rock:
I think that the GOP just lost many, many white Gen-X independents (ie just about the only over-30 white votes that he lost in 2010 that he has a chance of re-capturing in 2012).
Being able to say, honestly and in 10 words or less, “Hey, I offered $4T in cuts, and they said no.” during the debates will be a hard message to counter (for once).
Especially with Mr. Murdoch currently occupied with… other business.
Dennis SGMM
Not serious? That’s putting it rather mildly. A substantial number of Republicans have reached the point where they consider any revenue enhancement; ending subsidies, closing tax loopholes, etc., to be a “tax increase” and therefore off the table. They ignore the facts that personal income tax rates are at historic lows, loopholes result in zero or even negative effective corporate tax rates, and that lowering taxes has signally failed to create jobs.
In view of the above, I can see no good outcome, other than appearing to be “reasonable” from negotiating with them. Negotiating is a matter of give and take. For the Republicans it’s “You give, we take.”
Rock
@Judas
You underestimate the power of the simple message and the desire of the white Gen X’ers (my cohort!) to believe that message:
Obama wanted to raise taxes (implied: taxes on YOU) during a recession and the Republicans stood firm and protected the economy.
Gen Xers already believe Obama raised taxes and that taxes are high both of which are demonstrably not true. And yet widely believed.
Yutsano
Just out of curiosity, are you correcting any of these misperceptions when you hear them?
Rock
@Yutsano
Yes, sure but outside of my parents most people with whom I discuss anything political already aren’t deluded that way. My reference for Gen Xer thinking on taxes are polls not personal experience.
Brian R.
As a Gen Xer, I have to ask for some proof. None of my friends believe that nonsense.
jinxtigr
I don’t believe that nonsense either, and I’m a Gen Xer.
James E. Powell
What makes you think that they haven’t figured it out? Or, put another way, that they haven’t always known exactly what was going on?
PaulJ
@Rick Taylor
Someone will have to define for me what a fiscal conservative is, because in the context of how our monetary system operates the term doesn’t make any sense.
Unless fiscal conservatism is defined as not spending money on stupid stuff like wars, war on drugs, tax credits to rich people, crony capitalism, etc.
PaulJ
Oh and seeing as the owners of this blog are driven crazy by Megan McArdle here’s another little treat for you:
http://traderscrucible.com/2011/07/10/mcardle-relies-on-tribe-gets-14th-amendment-logic-wrong/
James E. Powell
@Dennis SGMM:
A substantial number of Americans have reached the same point. In fact, they’ve been there for years. See, e.g., the way in which allowing a reduction in the California vehicle license fee was considered a tax increase at the time of the Grey Davis recall. Also too, it was a matter of a couple hundred dollars a year and it was done to address the state’s deficit “crisis.” Nobody cared. All taxes are robbery by evil government who will give the money to blacks and illegal immigrants who will use the money to purchase steaks and Cadillacs!
PaulJ
James E. Powell @ 47
Taxes aren’t used to fund anything. When they are paid the monies are effectively destroyed, annihilated into the ether, never to be seen again.
All that takes place at the Fed accounting level is that your tax liability is wiped clean.
All government spending is by creating money.
Money, either as numbers or as currency are not reused, recycled, or transferred in any way.
If you pay your taxes in cash, they shred the currency.
The requirement that all deficit spending (all new money) be offset by the selling of Treasuries is a political decision not an operational one.
In essence the government is saying if we have to finance growth in the economy, <strong which can only be done through deficit spending, then we must pay interest on rich peoples money in perpetuity as the cost of doing business.
You decide if that smells right.
Rock
It’s not confined to Xers but more people think Obama raised taxes than lowered them and most people think their taxes are too high.
Since Xers are the most Republican cohort outside of the elderly I think these numbers are probably more shifted for them.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6201911-503544.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147152/americans-split-whether-taxes-high.aspx
PaulJ
Learn more about economics than your government knows in 5 minutes:
http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/2011/07/10/learn-the-bare-fundamentals-of-monetary-sovereignty-in-just-five-minutes/
Mnemosyne
Uh, the $4 trillion deal includes tax increases in that number. It’s not $4 trillion worth of cuts. That’s why Boehner rejected it — because he didn’t want tax increases on the rich to be part of deficit reduction.
El Cid
There have been quite a lot of comments here that stopping aid to Pakistan was weirdo immature ultra-leftist and would promote a Pakistani collapse into an Islamic state and/or a Indo-Pak war and the Obama administration was right to ignore such irrational voices. Who knew?
PaulJ
Mnemosyne@53
The balance between cuts and tax increases is about 6 to 1.
Both cuts and tax increases remove money from the economy – neither is “good”, especially right now.
Small business is a main recipient of government spending…
This leads to more unemployment…
This leads to lower tax revenues…
This leads to higher deficits…
What problem were we trying to solve?
Rinse and repeat.
john b
but what if i work for the government. will a flawed logic blackhole open up?
PaulJ
@ john b
possibly