• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

with the Kraken taking a plea, the Cheese stands alone.

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

Boeing: repeatedly making the case for high speed rail.

No one could have predicted…

Republicans got rid of McCarthy. Democrats chose not to save him.

Relentless negativity is not a sign that you are more realistic.

Everyone is in a bubble, but some bubbles model reality far better than others!

It is possible to do the right thing without the promise of a cookie.

It’s easy to sit in safety and prescribe what other people should be doing.

I conferred with the team and they all agree – still not tired of winning!

We still have time to mess this up!

There are more Russians standing up to Putin than Republicans.

Roe isn’t about choice, it’s about freedom.

Narcissists are always shocked to discover other people have agency.

“That’s what the insurrection act is for!”

One of our two political parties is a cult whose leader admires Vladimir Putin.

“But what about the lurkers?”

Be a traveling stable for those who can’t find room at the inn.

Balloon Juice has never been a refuge for the linguistically delicate.

DeSantis transforming Florida into 1930s Germany with gators and theme parks.

Never forget that he train is barreling down on Trump, even as he dances on the tracks.

Following reporting rules is only for the little people, apparently.

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Economics / C.R.E.A.M. / Debt Supercommittee, Ex-Parrot

Debt Supercommittee, Ex-Parrot

by Anne Laurie|  November 21, 201110:05 am| 40 Comments

This post is in: C.R.E.A.M., Election 2012, Republican Venality

FacebookTweetEmail

Steve Benen at Washington Monthly points out that the Repub’s not-so-hidden agenda — their real goal — ensured this camel was never going to leave the quorum:

… [A] deal would have required Republicans accept some tax increases. Indeed, the basics of a debt-reduction deal have always been painfully obvious: Dems would accept spending cuts, Republicans would accept new revenue, and the two sides would haggle over the ratio.
__
Except that proved impossible, not only because Republicans refused to consider any tax increases on any one, but because those same Republicans actually decided to use the super-committee process as a vehicle to push for more tax cuts — which necessarily would have created more debt, not less, and make the goal harder, not easier, to reach.
__
At a certain level, the very idea of including Bush-era tax breaks in the discussion probably seems bizarre to anyone outside the GOP caucus. The panel’s members were given one task: reach a deal on debt reduction that totaled at least $1.2 trillion over the next decade. With this assignment in mind, Republicans on the committee, from the outset, decided that their principal goal was locking in tax cuts that (a) are largely responsible for the massive debt; and (b) would make the debt much worse going forward.
__
This underscores why failure was inevitable: the parties can’t reach an agreement if they’re not even having the same conversation.
__
What was the purpose of the super-committee? Ostensibly, it was supposed to reach a bipartisan agreement to reduce the debt. That was the description on the page, and that’s the mandate that drove Democratic efforts.
__
Republicans saw it differently. The point, they said, is to reduce the size of government…
__
The conventional wisdom tells us Republicans are desperate to reduce the deficit and address the debt. This obviously isn’t true — if it were, they would stop demanding more tax breaks and start accepting more increases.
__
Rather, Republicans are desperate to reduce the size of government, and are using a massive deficit — which the GOP is largely responsible for creating — as an excuse to do what they want to do anyway.

My emphasis. Way I see it, this would be a textbook example of the Republicans acting in bad faith… which has been, in the nearly 50 years of my political awareness, pretty much what Republicans do. To extend the religious analogy, “acting in bad faith” probably appears as an article of faith in the Republican liturgical handbook.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Checking In With Statler and Waldorf
Next Post: They took it all too far »

Reader Interactions

40Comments

  1. 1.

    Punchy

    November 21, 2011 at 10:17 am

    I always found it hilarious that, in the obvious inability to get a full Congress (with all the Blue Dogs and other spineless Dems) to agree to a debt deal, they thought that 6 handpicked, hard-core idealogues from each side were going to somehow agree to something. I’m guessing they couldn’t even agree on the color of chairs to sit on and the toppings on thier work-ordered Papajohns…

  2. 2.

    Yutsano

    November 21, 2011 at 10:19 am

    The committee did exactly what it was designed to do: fail. Now that the total mishegas is out of the way, can they do some actual WORK?

  3. 3.

    Dork

    November 21, 2011 at 10:21 am

    @Punchy: Would have been much more interesting if each side picked the 6 committee members from the opposite team. Are there even 6 reasonable Republicans in the entire House?

  4. 4.

    Schlemizel

    November 21, 2011 at 10:26 am

    What is going to be interesting is to see how they walk back the forced cuts in 2013. We can all rest assured that they will never cut a dime from DoD’s budget (apparently there is not fraud waste or abuse in that one). But how they are going to justify the walk back should be mildly entertaining – not unlike the orchestra playing on the Titanic as it went down.

  5. 5.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    November 21, 2011 at 10:27 am

    @Yutsano: No.
    SATSQ.

  6. 6.

    Schlemizel

    November 21, 2011 at 10:28 am

    @Dork:

    The rethuglicans would have a much easier time finding 6 Dems who would give them everything they wanted & then apologize for not being able to do more damage than Dems would have in finding 6 not-insane Rs.

  7. 7.

    bin Lurkin'

    November 21, 2011 at 10:29 am

    If they enforced bank regulations like they do park rules, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place..

    Oops, posted in the wrong thread.. Oh well.

    Oops, posted in the wrong thead.. Oh well.

  8. 8.

    Stan of the Sawgrass

    November 21, 2011 at 10:32 am

    The Reboobs are looking at the polling numbers that show Obama losing to a generic Republican– and with the Presidency, the Congress, and the Supreme Court in their hands, with the Senate checkmated, the Reeps figure they’ll roll right over what’s left of the Dems in the 2012-’16 sessions.
    Trouble is, once you put a name to that “generic Republican,” they don’t do so well anymore. And “no taxes on the rich, no way, never, no how,” isn’t a winning message. If the Dems can manage to get that message past the Fox News spin, they should at least be able to get the ‘independents,” maybe even 13 or 14 Reep votes out there.
    But (sigh) we all know the Dems will probably fuck it up trying to run away from OWS, especially after the rest of the media fall into line behind Fox in demonizing those DFH panhandlers and rapists.

  9. 9.

    Schlemizel

    November 21, 2011 at 10:32 am

    Anybody see the 60 Minutes piece on Grover Fucking Norquist? I wonder if he could be more smarmy if there was money in it for him.

    But he was right about 1 thing: branding. The Rethuglicans are the no tax increase no matter how much damage we do party. What is the Dems brand? It used to be helping the working class and the disadvantaged but so many of them have gotten on board the money train the brand is gone. Its no wonder it is so easy to paint them as tax-n-spend when they have given up their own brand.

  10. 10.

    ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©

    November 21, 2011 at 10:38 am

    The entire idea was a complete and pathetic joke.

    We’ve got ridiculously high unemployment for an extended period of time, so lets focus on cutting the deficit?

    This is what happens when the people who run the Democratic party adopt Republican framing.
    ~

  11. 11.

    Nutella

    November 21, 2011 at 10:38 am

    @Schlemizel:

    If they had any sense (!) they’d be the ‘protect Social Security no matter what’ party.

  12. 12.

    Mnemosyne

    November 21, 2011 at 10:40 am

    @Schlemizel:

    It used to be helping the white working class and the white disadvantaged but so many of them have gotten on board the money train the brand is gone.

    Fix’d. That was the diabolical scheme of Lee Atwater and his minions — they took the traditional strength of the Democrats and twisted it into Us vs Them.

    That’s why Democrats can’t talk about helping out the disadvantaged anymore — the Republicans have successfully made that mean “taking money from white people and giving it to undeserving black and brown people.” And, as Davis X. Machina so rightly said, there are a whole lot of people in this country who would be content living under a bridge and roasting sparrows over a fire as long as Those People one bridge over didn’t even have a sparrow.

    ETA: Not that the Democrats didn’t manage to shoot themselves in the foot by chasing after the big money guys. But, still, I think a lot of people underestimate just how broad the Republican scheme to exploit racial animosity really was.

  13. 13.

    Culture of Truth

    November 21, 2011 at 10:40 am

    Indeed, but in their minds it makes perfect sense: tax cuts lead to economic growth, which lowers the debt. Dems on the committee likewise should have countered with a massive stimulus and the committee could have compromised on doing nothing, although that is what they are doing anyway.

  14. 14.

    ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©

    November 21, 2011 at 10:41 am

    @Schlemizel:

    Exactly. As Taibbi said:

    The Democrats aren’t failing to stand up to Republicans and failing to enact sensible reforms that benefit the middle class because they genuinely believe there’s political hay to be made moving to the right. They’re doing it because they do not represent any actual voters.

    ~

  15. 15.

    Stan of the Sawgrass

    November 21, 2011 at 10:42 am

    Always amazed at how durable that “tax-and-spend” tag is, even after Clinton’s surplus, and Reagan-Bush-Bush II’s massive “borrow and spend” deficits. There has to be a simple slogan that can be attached to them, if we can repeat it enough to stick. Nominations open…

  16. 16.

    gene108

    November 21, 2011 at 10:44 am

    @Stan of the Sawgrass:

    And “no taxes on the rich, no way, never, no how,” isn’t a winning message.

    The Republican message on taxes is more nuanced.

    No taxes on Job Creators.

    A flat tax (or expanding the tax base) to get those stinking, lazy, good for nothing 47%-ers, who do not pay Federal income taxes to start getting off their lazy butts and pay their fair share.

    You’d be surprised how many middle-class right-wingers throw mud on the concept of the 47% and defend the idea the rich pay too much in taxes.

    Divide and conquer. A strategy the rich of successfully used against everyone else, since this country’s founding.

  17. 17.

    willard

    November 21, 2011 at 10:45 am

    It has always bothered me that the national debt is frequently reported as a citizen’s share on an equal basis per capita, currently approaching $50,000. Allocating debt this way doesn’t make sense, especially since the largest beneficiary from the accumulation of that debt is disproportionately at the very top of the wealth/income scale. If the national debt was distributed based on wealth, I would like to know where I should mail my check.

    Also, we need better job creators. We keep giving them more money in terms of tax breaks and frankly they aren’t doing a very good job. I think that since teachers are being forced to have merit based pay that it stands to reason that the job creators should have merit based pay. I propose a job creator tax on all income for the top income bracket equal to the unemployment rate. This would be in addition to taxes already on the books.

  18. 18.

    gene108

    November 21, 2011 at 10:49 am

    @Mnemosyne:

    That was the diabolical scheme of Lee Atwater and his minions—they took the traditional strength of the Democrats and twisted it into Us vs Them.

    That was the basis for Dixiecrat politics for nearly 100 years, from the end of the Civil War through the Civil Rights movement; we are for protecting white working class folks and we’ll make sure no blackie gets a penny.

    Nixon, et. al. just expanded the Southern strategy employed for nearly a century, onto a national stage and found racial animosity also existed in Midwest and Northeast blue collar whites.

  19. 19.

    Zifnab

    November 21, 2011 at 10:50 am

    Rather, Republicans are desperate to reduce the size of government, and are using a massive deficit — which the GOP is largely responsible for creating — as an excuse to do what they want to do anyway.

    We’re spending $900 billion this year on military discretionary spending. What’s got the GOP absolutely flipping a gasket as the deal moves forward? Cuts to military spending.

    This whole “reduce the size of government” argument – while ideologically accurate – is still total bullshit. McCain and Graham are going to shit bricks if their states lose that precious, precious military spending money.

    Republicans tried yet again to put a bullet in Social Security/Medicare, and yet again they failed. That’s all this Super Committee was ever about for them. That, and maybe raising taxes on poor people, a la Pat Toomey.

  20. 20.

    Xecky Gilchrist

    November 21, 2011 at 10:52 am

    I’m hoping that this supercommittee farce will help kill off the centrist-fetish idea that if the opposing parties just sat down and talked it out, everything would be just peachy.

    I’m even more hoping that that was the plan all along.

  21. 21.

    RossInDetroit

    November 21, 2011 at 10:57 am

    @willard:

    Also, we need better job creators. We keep giving them more money in terms of tax breaks and frankly they aren’t doing a very good job.

    Locally, that’s true. But they’re employing millions outside the country at the expense of the 9+% of our workforce that they’ve basically jettisoned.

  22. 22.

    Stan of the Sawgrass

    November 21, 2011 at 11:03 am

    gene108: Word…
    Also, note that they rely on weasel words like “job creators” when that tag is demonstrably false. They’re not called on this (because Dems can’t offend those ‘job creators’), and because their messaging discipline is tighter than a chain-gang– repeat, repeat, repeat.
    Anybody see Krugman on This Week? I’m allergic to George Will, but there was this clip on Raw Story:

    Also– not surprised at how many struggling, just barely middle-class white voters defend not taxing the ‘job creators.’ We’re talking my entire extended family, welders and nurses and tractor drivers too. Looking forward to tense times this weekend…

  23. 23.

    Stan of the Sawgrass

    November 21, 2011 at 11:10 am

    Krugman link:

    Only Fools and Clowns…

  24. 24.

    mamayaga

    November 21, 2011 at 11:10 am

    @willard: Really sick of this bogus “job creators” label. What we should be talking about are the “profit creators” — American workers who are more productive and who work longer hours than workers in most industrialized countries, creating vast new wealth that has almost all flowed into the pockets of the rich. That is the real story of the last 30 years. The people who created that wealth didn’t get any of it. Yet we have this weird idea that we have to coddle the sociopaths who look on their workforces as costs instead of the assets they are.

    Also, too, who are those boardroom geniuses who built a national economy on consumerism and who are now systematically destroying their consumer base?

  25. 25.

    Mnemosyne

    November 21, 2011 at 11:16 am

    @mamayaga:

    Also, too, who are those boardroom geniuses who built a national economy on consumerism and who are now systematically destroying their consumer base?

    I can’t help noticing that, too. Talk about the scorpion and the frog.

    I don’t know about the specific merits of what she was talking about, but the other day Jennifer was saying we should organize people to default on their consumer debt as a way of pointing out to the 1% that, without consumers, you don’t have much of a US economy left.

  26. 26.

    Frankensteinbeck

    November 21, 2011 at 11:45 am

    Schlemizel:
    There’s a fun little twist to canceling the DoD cuts. Obama’s been pushing those cuts for ages. So either the deal has to be sweet enough to convince him, or they need a veto-overriding supermajority. Even for something congress loves as much as defense spending, that is hard.

  27. 27.

    Bulworth

    November 21, 2011 at 11:58 am

    Has Heath Shuler (D-GOP) weighed in yet on this terrible failure of the Democrat Party to cut taxes in order to cut the deficit?

  28. 28.

    soonergrunt

    November 21, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    Bring on the Defense cuts!
    Do it now, and do it deep, and do it smart, because it has to be done.

  29. 29.

    Dustin

    November 21, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    @Mnemosyne: That’d be Werebear’s Occupy Credit Card idea. It was a refinement of Jennifer’s idea to default on all debts by at least 10% of the population and hope that their resulting lack of homes, cars, and jobs (because of no cars) somehow forces an economic reset.

    Defaulting on credit card and other line-of-credit debt though? Not a whole lot the powers that be can do about that, especially if every tells them to go pound sand. It’d get violent in a hurry, but a Citizen’s Jubilee might actually be possible.

    Unfortunately getting even 10% of wage earners to take that kind of risk is bound to fail, but as a thought experiment it’s exciting. Jennifer’s dead serious about her idea, and it’s basically the equivalent of financial suicide bombing. To top that off she tut-tut’s anyone pointing out that if people lose their car they’re screwed and can’t just go out and get another one. So there is that. Don’t give her too much credit here.

  30. 30.

    catclub

    November 21, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    @Schlemizel: “The rethuglicans would have a much easier time finding 6 Dems who would give them everything they wanted & then apologize for not being able to do more damage than Dems would have in finding 6 not-insane Rs.”

    Nope, each side has to have representatives who can determine what they can sell to their own party. Does no good to have lapdogs in the committee if they cannot sell the deal to their own side.

  31. 31.

    catclub

    November 21, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    @Frankensteinbeck: “There’s a fun little twist to canceling the DoD cuts. Obama’s been pushing those cuts for ages. So either the deal has to be sweet enough to convince him, or they need a veto-overriding supermajority. Even for something congress loves as much as defense spending, that is hard.”

    Important if true. I also remember approximately 90-3 votes for telling Obama he could not do certain things with the defense budget. So there may be extremely broad bipartisan agreement to NOT CUT DEFENSE. We shall see.

  32. 32.

    catclub

    November 21, 2011 at 12:28 pm

    @Schlemizel: With any luck the democrats brand will be ‘the sane party’, in contrast to the other guys.

  33. 33.

    mamayaga

    November 21, 2011 at 12:32 pm

    @Dustin:

    Unfortunately getting even 10% of wage earners to take that kind of risk is bound to fail, but as a thought experiment it’s exciting.

    My impression is that it’s not a thought experiment, but is happening in slow motion right now. People are spending only as much as they have to (thus the plaintive cried of “low demand” in the boardrooms of the nation), so the profits from credit card spending are probably not what they once were. On the debt side, those who are up against the wall may be putting necessary expenses (food, transportation) on their cards and digging a hole they can’t ever get out of. As I recall the “bankruptcy reform” passed by our Overlords during the Bush admin made it impossible to clear credit card debt through bankruptcy if your income is above a certain level. But guess what? Incomes for the people who have to keep digging that hole have fallen below that level, as they are likely unemployed or underemployed. I’d expect a wave of personal bankruptcies wiping out a big chunk of the debt on the banks’ books. Not sure if it will reach 10%, but a nice little double dip Great Recession might do that nicely.

    Note: Are there experts out there who know if the income requirement to be able to wipe credit card debt through bankruptcy is still there? I know Dems tried to reform the “reform” early in O’s presidency, but don’t recall if they succeeded.

  34. 34.

    Chris

    November 21, 2011 at 12:35 pm

    @Stan of the Sawgrass:

    The Reboobs are looking at the polling numbers that show Obama losing to a generic Republican—and with the Presidency, the Congress, and the Supreme Court in their hands, with the Senate checkmated, the Reeps figure they’ll roll right over what’s left of the Dems in the 2012-’16 sessions.
    Trouble is, once you put a name to that “generic Republican,” they don’t do so well anymore. And “no taxes on the rich, no way, never, no how,” isn’t a winning message. If the Dems can manage to get that message past the Fox News spin, they should at least be able to get the ‘independents,” maybe even 13 or 14 Reep votes out there.

    My old principle of “people want to get Democratic policies by voting Republican” reaching absurdly new heights. People realize that every single Republican candidate who’s been given them is so full of shit it’s coming out of his ears, that the same is true of the crop of Republican congressmen and governors they just elected, and that the same was true of the last Republican president they elected and all his buddies in Congress…

    … but they still desperately want a “good” Republican to come and save them from somewhere, because, because, freedom and patriotism and lower taxes and support our troops and, you know, those awful Democrats are just so liberal!

  35. 35.

    xian

    November 21, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    @mamayaga: that’s all true. also, frankly,those same workers are the job creators. Demand creates jobs, not wealth, and not entrepreneurship. Nobody starts a company to create jobs. Jobs are a necessary expense, clearly to be minimized.

    And if you compare the market cap of a company like Facebook to one like GE, and then compare the payrolls, it’s astounding. No wonder the few lucky ones like myself who work in the Internets can still be compensated well.

    Now, how do we give American workers their productivity dividend, and favor true job creation?

  36. 36.

    xian

    November 21, 2011 at 1:11 pm

    @Frankensteinbeck: yeah, I don’t hate this “failure” at all. Smells more like a pincer movement to me. The Dems never heard an offer from the Pubs that was any better than the triggers.

  37. 37.

    Scamp Dog

    November 21, 2011 at 2:41 pm

    @xian: The Dems ought to be pushing the line “The real job creators are customers with money to spend.” Then you can get into explanations like “With so many people out of work, and many others afraid of layoffs, most of us are afraid to spend any more than we have to, and some low-interest-debt financing of infrastructure can get more people employed, spending money and paying taxes again”.

  38. 38.

    Ruckus

    November 21, 2011 at 3:36 pm

    @Stan of the Sawgrass:

    Home Wreckers

  39. 39.

    Bill Murray

    November 21, 2011 at 4:51 pm

    Rather, Republicans are desperate to reduce the size of government, and are using a massive deficit — which the GOP is largely responsible for creating — as an excuse to do what they want to do anyway.

    Isn’t it more Republicans are desperate to reduce the size of the favored-by-Democrats part of the budget. the parts the Republicans like will not be reduced

  40. 40.

    JR

    November 21, 2011 at 6:17 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    Yes, yes, yes! Henry Ford paid his workers enough to afford a Model T, and then a Model A. Otherwise Mr. Ford wasn’t a pretty picture. He hated unions, and spent a ton of money supporting the German American Bund and Mr. Hitler’s politics in Germany during the slow run-up to WW II.

    An unappealing as Mr. Ford was politically, he was smart enough to understand that if you are going to build things en mass on an assembly line, there had to be enough people with enough money to afford those products if you also planned to make a profit.

    Who does the 1% expect will support the consumer economy that they have built? Without consumers, the fabulously wealthy will suddenly have a fraction of the cash flow they expect to live on.

    If the Repugnants manage to turn everyone into serfs, where do they think their doctors, heart surgeons, artists and films will come from? Where will their mass market profits come from?

    These people are so stupid we have to fight with all our ability to keep them from destroying the world as we prefer it, that is, with hi-tech, medicine, fast cars, slow food, etc.

    Sometimes I think we should stop, let them do as they will, and then say to them, “There, are you happy now?” No doctors, no films, art, music, no Interstate highways, no airlines safe enough to travel on…

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Mousebumples on Late Night ‘Should Be Always’ Open Thread: Librarians, Doing Civilization’s Work (Apr 18, 2024 @ 6:09am)
  • sab on On The Road – ema – 2024 AKC Meet the Breeds (Apr 18, 2024 @ 6:03am)
  • raven on On The Road – ema – 2024 AKC Meet the Breeds (Apr 18, 2024 @ 5:56am)
  • Brachiator on Wednesday News Roundup, A Little Late (Apr 18, 2024 @ 5:55am)
  • Barbara on On The Road – ema – 2024 AKC Meet the Breeds (Apr 18, 2024 @ 5:44am)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!