Showing posts with label sequester. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sequester. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Beleaguered Boehner Agrees to Senate Deal

photo End.png

Previous Related Post:
Tea Party Pushes U.S. Towards Default Brink

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


























































































Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Tea Party Pushes U.S. Towards Default Brink

photo o-NEW-YORKER-570.jpg

Previous Related Posts:
Confederate Tea Party Storms the Washington Barricades
GOP Sinks to Historic Lows in Polls

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Epic Rant about Ted Cruz On Morning Joe 10-15-2013
Mika Brzezinski: Later this morning Senator Mitch McConnell will present a bipartisan plan to fellow Republicans that could end the shutdown and extend the nation's borrowing limit for at least a couple of months.

Joe Scarborough: Yay! (laughter)

Mika: Haven't we heard this before? . . . The Senate could vote on the bill as soon as tomorrow, however the deal does not include any language to dismantle Obamacare, nor would it include a repeal of the medical device tax - two sticking points for the Tea Party Caucus.

photo SenateProp.png

Mika: Senator Ted Cruz says he is still unsure whether or not he'd block a vote on the bill - come on.

Joe: Lots of Luck, Pal. You go ahead and do that.

Mika: It's unbelievable.

Joe: Just try it, Buddy. Go ahead ... (laughter) Go ahead, Big Shot. You put the full faith and credit of the United States of America on your shoulders. Have fun with that. Good luck. Do it. Do it. I dare you. I'm daring you right now. Go ahead and do it, Hot Shot.

Or are you gonna just sit in the back? And when people are responsible and actually give a damn about this country, and give a damn about the full faith and credit of the United States, and actually care about the people who are working day in and day out hoping to keep their job. You're going to keep posing and hurt those people? I don't really get it -

It's kinda like - it's great for you, I know. I know it's really great for you politically, but it's just like the Veteran's Memorial that you used as a political backdrop. It's a great backdrop until the next day, the Vets who actually organized the rally came out and were really upset that you had used their rally for your own political points.

So you guys go ahead. Just go ahead. Just keep using America as your political backdrop. And hurt all the people you want to hurt. Hurt, by the way, small government conservatives. Republicans. Working class Americans that actually used to support our party, but are now wondering what in the world - keep doing it. And I hope it really helps you out because it's sure not helping the conservative movement. It's not helping the Republican Party, and it's not helping this country, but go ahead, go ahead.

. . . This isn't about conservatism. This is about tactics. What makes me so angry is some Republicans are going to have to step up and they see that 24% conservative approval rating and they know it's going to go lower. They know the Senate's now in jeopardy. They know that the White House could be in jeopardy down the road. ...Independents who broke for Romney last time have even moved away from him (Cruz).
. . . So now a few Republicans are going to save the full faith and credit of the nation either on the day of the Default or a few weeks later, and a few guys are going to sit in the back and throw potshots at them because they know they have to do it. And they don't have the guts to stand up and say 'You know, we're the ones who screwed this up. We're the ones who screwed up the Republican Party's ability to do well during this time.'

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

. . . we’re watching now, what might be called the Koch Brothers’ “Samson Option,” pulling down the temple to destroy their enemies even if doing so is also destructive to them and their fortunes.
~ Robert Parry on TruthOut

We face a mutated GOP. Ted Cruz is the leader of the dominant faction in this amalgam of what I call totalitarian Christians (their interpretation of the Bible supersedes the US Constitution), racist white Southerners (whose DNA contains the slavery gene), Ayn Rand dystopian ideologues...and plutocrats.
~ Shockwave on Daily Kos

. . . you know at every stage, my prayer to God is that His will be done. As it will be.
~ Senator Ted Cruz, R-TX, Tea Party architect of the Government Shutdown

What planet are you living on here?!
~ Reporter Chuck Todd on MSNBC's Morning Joe speaking of Senator Ted Cruz

We are now five days away from a very dangerous moment.
The closer we get to the deadline the greater the impact will be for the developing world.
Inaction could result in interest rates rising, confidence falling and growth slowing.
If this (U.S. Default) comes to pass it could be a disastrous event for the developing world and that will in turn greatly hurt the developed economies as well.
~ World Bank President Jim Yong Kim via BBC News

There's an expectation that has to change and that sometimes takes attempting to do things that won't work. It's a tough vote, but the fact is all of us have to realize the reality of the situation, and that is that two months have been blown on the wrong subject.
~ Senator Bob Corker, R-Tennessee

They had the gun to our head because of Obamacare. They gave up on that, so why is the gun to our head still? Now it's like we have the gun to our head and we have to figure out why.
~ Bill Maher, Friday, 10/11/13

We'd better wake up. Defunding Obamacare is not achievable. So let's not delude our supporters by telling them that it is under the present circumstances, because elections have consequences.
~ Senator John McCain on Fox News



. . . there are some tactics that go too far, alienating even voters who are ideologically or politically sympathetic to the GOP. And, unfortunately for Republicans, one of those tactics was extortion. Going into the shutdown, more people opposed Obamacare than supported it. But the idea of shutting down the government or threatening a debt default to undo Obamacare was massively unpopular.
. . . The polls trickle in and they are horrific. The pragmatic wing of the party is completely demoralized. It lashes out more violently than before. The national media both encourages and adds to their derision of conservatives. Suddenly every Republican in town is shopping his own terms of surrender. The biggest challenge for Democrats isn’t getting their way. It’s that there are so many offers, it’s hard to know which one to take. Politico labeled the spectacle a “buyer’s market” for Barack Obama, massively understating the point. It is a buyer’s market in the sense that the day after the Super Bowl is a buyer’s market for pork rinds.
~ Noam Scheiber on New Republic

We gave the Democrats one incredibly early Christmas gift. I’m not going to fault Ted (Cruz). He believes what he was doing was going to be helpful. But at the end of the day, you look and you ask, ‘Are we any close to defunding Obamacare are ridding ourselves of it than we were?’ The answer is no.
~ Conservative Radio Host Mike Huckabee, possible 2016 GOP Primary contender against Cruz

So you have this neighbor who has been making your life hell. First he tied you up with a spurious lawsuit; you’re both suffering from huge legal bills. Then he threatened bodily harm to your family. Now, however, he says he’s willing to compromise: He’ll call off the lawsuit, which is to his advantage as well as yours. But in return you must give him your car. Oh, and he’ll stop threatening your family — but only for a week, after which the threats will resume.
Not much of an offer, is it? But here’s the kicker: Your neighbor’s relatives, who have been egging him on, are furious that he didn’t also demand that you kill your dog.
And now you understand the current state of budget negotiations.
~ Economist Paul Krugman in NYT

Representative Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, on Young Turks via Raw Story
The Young Turks caught up with the Texas Republican on Friday at the Values Voter Summit and asked him if he would vote on any deal to raise the debt ceiling.
“It just depends on what it is,” he replied. “The word ‘deal’ concerns me… if it’s good for America.”
“Would you allow us to default on our debt?” a reporter from The Young Turks wondered.
“No, that would be an impeachable offense by the president,” Gohmert declared.


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, March 2, 2013

The Sequester Happens

photo tumblr_mj1ylfrPGU1qeic05o1_500.jpg

Full Transcript of President Obama's Sequester Speech
. . . let’s be clear. None of this is necessary. It’s happening because of a choice that Republicans in Congress have made. They’ve allowed these cuts to happen because they refuse to budge on closing a single wasteful loophole to help reduce the deficit. As recently as yesterday, they decided to protect special interest tax breaks for the well-off and well-connected, and they think that that’s apparently more important than protecting our military or middle-class families from the pain of these cuts.

. . . the good thing about America is that sometimes we get to these bottlenecks and we get stuck, and you have these sharp, partisan fights, but the American people pretty steadily are common sense and practical, and eventually, that common-sense, practical approach wins out. And I think that's what will happen here as well.

And, in the meantime, just to make the final point about the sequester, we will get through this. This is not going to be a apocalypse, I think as some people have said. It's just dumb. And it's going to hurt. It's going to hurt individual people and it's going to hurt the economy overall.

Tea Party Republicans are crowing about the “sequestration” cuts beginning today (Friday). “This will be the first significant tea party victory in that we got what we set out to do in changing Washington,” says Rep. Tim Huelskamp (Kan.), a Tea Partier who was first elected in 2010.
Sequestration is only the start. What they set out to do was not simply change Washington but eviscerate the U.S. government — “drown it in the bathtub,” in the words of their guru Grover Norquist – slashing Social Security and Medicare, ending worker protections we’ve had since the 1930s, eroding civil rights and voting rights, terminating programs that have helped the poor for generations, and making it impossible for the government to invest in our future.
~ Robert Reich

This has to stop.
Ever since they took control of the House of Representatives in 2011, Republicans have made journeys to the fiscal brink as commonplace as summertime visits to the beach or the ballpark. The country has been put through a series of destructive showdowns over budget issues we once resolved through the normal give-and-take of negotiations.
The air of establishment Washington is filled with talk that Obama must “lead.” But Obama cannot force the House Republican majority to act if it doesn’t want to. He is (fortunately) not a dictator.
. . . What Obama can do is expose the cause of this madness, which is the dysfunction of the Republican Party.
Journalists don’t like saying this because it sounds partisan. But the truth is the truth, whether it sounds partisan or not.
~ E. J. Dionne

. . . it’s unpopular for Republicans to simply say they won’t agree to any compromise and there’s no deal to be had — particularly since taxing the wealthy is more popular than cutting entitlements, and so their position is less popular than Obama’s. That’s made it important for Republicans to prove that it’s the president who is somehow holding up a deal.
. . . There’s no deal even if Obama agrees to major Republican demands on entitlements. There’s no deal because Republicans don’t want to make a deal that includes taxes, no matter what they get in return for it.
. . . as long as the GOP’s position is they won’t compromise, there’s not going to be a compromise.
~ Ezra Klein on Washington Post

















Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, March 1, 2013

Obama's "Jedi Mind Meld" Meme - Updated with Real Trekkie Stars

photo BESYAxQCEAAaVP5-1.jpg

"I am not a dictator. I'm the president. So, ultimately, if Mitch McConnell or John Boehner say we need to go to catch a plane, I can't have Secret Service block the doorway, right?" He also declared he couldn't perform a "Jedi mind meld" to sway opponents, mixing Star Wars and Star Trek as he reached for a science fiction metaphor.
~ President Obama in remarks on Sequestration Day via Seattle Times

When talking about Republican leaders, Obama said he couldn’t do a “Jedi mind meld” to persuade them into a budget agreement.
Fans were quick to point out that the “Jedi mind trick” comes from Star Wars, while the Vulcan mind meld is a Star Trek reference.
~ CBS Boston

UPDATES:





“Jedis are the guardians of peace and justice. And mind meld is the Vulcan way of having the force of pure, clean communication between one mind and the another,” Takei said on “The Ed Show” on Friday. “Well, that’s what the president is trying to do–bring those two forces together.”
Takei also compared Republicans with Klingons, recurring villains in the Star Trek franchise, but predicted “the force of the mind meld and the force of Jedi power” will eventually produce the common ground that’ll be required for a resolution.
~ Mr. Sulu on MSNBC's The Ed Show









photo tumblr_mj0b8pZPe71qzlc1ro1_400.gif







photo tumblr_mj0b8pZPe71qzlc1ro2_400.gif










Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, February 28, 2013

GOP Hack Bob Woodward Self-Destructs While Jumping the Shark ~ UPDATED with Debunkery

Photobucket


Related Post:
Snark Amendment: Republican Hack Bob Woodward Blames Obama for the Sequester

UPDATES:

The full text of the e-mail exchange has been leaked and is available at Politico. Word for word, it is loyal to Woodward’s recitation. But its tone is toothless. Sperling closes this way: “My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.” Woodward pings back: “Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them.”
So much for the White House “threatening” Woodward, as the Internet would have us believe. Nor does the you-will-regret-this language look like part of a communications policy on part of the White House. It looks like a reporter and a source disagreeing on some really tedious, really important policy points.
~ Eric Wemple on Washington Post

Bob Woodward trolled us (and we got played)
Bob Woodward revealed that White House official had warned him he would “regret” saying Obama had moved the goal posts on sequestration.
Predictably, conservatives latched onto this, as it confirmed our suspicion about the Obama Administration’s “Chicago-style” of politics. A lot of mainstream journalists bought into this, too — reflexively believing anything the great Bob Woodward says.
Of course, Woodward (who was expert at trolling for publicity before the internet even existed), benefits greatly from the publicity (nothing sells books like controversy).
But today, things look different. P0litico has posted the exclusive email from Gene Sperling to Woodward. It begins, “I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today.”
(Frightening, I know!)
~ Daily Caller



















~~~~~~~~~~~~Original Post Below~~~~~~~~~~~~

From Business Insider
The Washington Post's Bob Woodward ripped into President Barack Obama on "Morning Joe" today, saying he's exhibiting a "kind of madness I haven't seen in a long time" for a decision not to deploy an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf because of budget concerns.

"Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying, 'Oh, by the way, I can't do this because of some budget document?'" Woodward said.

"Or George W. Bush saying, 'You know, I'm not going to invade Iraq because I can't get the aircraft carriers I need?'" Or even Bill Clinton saying, 'You know, I'm not going to attack Saddam Hussein's intelligence headquarters,' ... because of some budget document?"

. . . "Under the Constitution, the President is commander-in-chief and employs the force. And so we now have the President going out because of this piece of paper and this agreement. 'I can’t do what I need to do to protect the country,'" Woodward said.

"That’s a kind of madness that I haven't seen in a long time," he said.



CNN Transcript Wed. 2-27-2013, Woodward and Wolf Blitzer
BLITZER: It's getting pretty nasty. Take us behind the scenes a little bit. The allegations being hurled against you right now.
WOODWARD: Well, I mean...
BLITZER: You're used to this kind of stuff, but...
WOODWARD: I am.

BLITZER: ... share with our viewers what's going on between you and the White House.

WOODWARD: Well, they're -- they're not happy at all, and some people kind of, you know, said, "Look, we don't see eye to eye on this."
They never really said, though, afterwards -- they've said that this is factually wrong, and they -- and it was said to me in an e- mail by a top...

BLITZER: What was -- what was said?
WOODWARD: It was -- it was said very clearly, "You will regret doing this."
BLITZER: Who sent that e-mail to you?
WOODWARD: Well, I'm not going to say.

BLITZER: Was it a senior person at the White House?

WOODWARD: A very senior person. And just as a matter -- I mean, it makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters, "You're going to regret doing something that you believe in, and even though we don't look at it that way, you do look at it that way."
And it's, I think if Barack Obama knew that was part of the communication's strategy -- let's hope it's not a strategy, that it's a tactic that somebody's employed -- and said, look, we don't go around trying to say to reporters, "If you, in an honest way, present something we don't like, that, you know, you're going to regret this." And just -- it's Mickey Mouse.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~


The White House official whom Bob Woodward charged had crosssed a line by saying he would "regret" printing his version of a set of Washington negotiations was Gene Sperling, the director of the White House Economic Council, a source familiar with the exchange told BuzzFeed Wednesday.
. . . The aide "yelled at me for about a half hour," Woodward said, and then sent a follow-up email that read, in part: "You're focusing on a few specific trees that give a very wrong impression of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here. … I think you will regret staking out that claim."
Officials often threaten reporters that they will "regret" printing something that is untrue, but Woodward took the remark as a threat.
~ Ben Smith on Buzzfeed

Sperling wasn't even saying that Woodward would "regret" publishing whatever he planned to publish because Sperling would get him back for it later. He was saying Woodward would regret it because Woodward would be proven wrong.
~ Henry Blodget on Business Insider

Inside the Woodward Fainting Couch!
So was Sperling threatening to sic the black helicopters on Woodward and like fully take him out? The blog and twitter-hordes of the right think so. And they’re circling round Woodward tonight in a glorious defense.
The White House denies it. A White House official tells us: “Of course no threat was intended. As Mr. Woodward noted, the email from the aide was sent to apologize for voices being raised in their previous conversation. The note suggested that Mr. Woodward would regret the observation he made regarding the sequester because that observation was inaccurate, nothing more. And Mr. Woodward responded to this aide’s email in a friendly manner.”
~ Josh Marshall on Talking Points Memo

Bob Woodward is officially shaming himself trying to prove that the sequester standoff is President Obama’s fault. First he blamed Obama for the failed debt ceiling deal of July 2011, proclaiming in his incredibly biased book: “[P]residents work their will—or should work their will—on the important matters of national business. Obama has not.” How the president could have worked his will on the crackpot Tea Party GOP caucus, he doesn’t say.
. . . Now he’s claiming the president alone has the power to avert disaster by ignoring the sequester, particularly its steep defense cuts, and doing … I don’t know what.
. . . There is madness afoot here, but it’s Woodward’s.
~ Joan Walsh on Salon





























Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, February 25, 2013

Republican Hack Bob Woodward Blames Obama for Sequester

Photobucket




Republican Bob Woodward in The Washington Post
Misunderstanding, misstatements and all the classic contortions of partisan message management surround the sequester, the term for the $85 billion in ugly and largely irrational federal spending cuts set by law to begin Friday.

What is the non-budget wonk to make of this? Who is responsible? What really happened?

. . . Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.

Nabors has told others that they checked with the president before going to see Reid. A mandatory sequester was the only action-forcing mechanism they could devise. Nabors has said, “We didn’t actually think it would be that hard to convince them” — Reid and the Republicans — to adopt the sequester. “It really was the only thing we had. There was not a lot of other options left on the table.”

. . . So when the president asks that a substitute for the sequester include not just spending cuts but also new revenue, he is moving the goal posts. His call for a balanced approach is reasonable, and he makes a strong case that those in the top income brackets could and should pay more. But that was not the deal he made.





The White House pushback is a classic case of distortion and confusion. We unfortunately have seen this too often in recent presidential history. First, the White House spent months denying paternity for the sequester. To Jay Carney's credit, he acknowledged [Tuesday] it was their ‘idea.’ [Carney: ‘The sequester was something that was discussed, and as has been reported, it was an idea that the White House put forward because it was put forward by Republican Senator Gramm and Rudman back in the ‘80s as part of the Gramm-Rudman deal -- there is a history here to this.’] But they do not want to talk about that now. The rest of the White House statement reflects a confusion of chronology. I do not think it is willful. They are just mixed up, surprisingly so.
~ Bob Woodward in an email to Politico



The argument is silly.
You can't start a discussion about the sequester without starting with the broader context. The sequester was offered during the GOP's unprecedented threat to not raise the debt ceiling, potentially putting the U.S. into default.
If offering spending cuts two years down the road is the only way to avoid such a calamity then a U.S. President should offer that 100 times out of 100. But is it really Obama's "fault"? The sequester wouldn't even be a term anyone knows if it weren't for the debt ceiling nonsense.
~ Joe Wiesenthal on Business Insider



To argue that the White House is "moving the goal posts" when it now asks for revenue in a sequestration replacement, you have to toss out the fact that the White House always wanted revenue in the supercommittee's sequestration replacement. This isn't confusing unless reporters make it confusing.
~ David Weigel on Slate







I don’t agree with my colleague Bob Woodward, who says the Obama administration is “moving the goalposts” when they insist on a sequester replacement that includes revenues. I remember talking to both members of the Obama administration and the Republican leadership in 2011, and everyone was perfectly clear that Democrats were going to pursue tax increases in any sequester replacement, and Republicans were going to oppose tax increases in any sequester replacement. What no one knew was who would win.
. . . Here in DC, we can get a bit buried in Beltway minutia. The ongoing blame game over who concocted the sequester is an excellent example. But it’s worth remembering that the goalposts in American politics aren’t set in backroom deals between politicians. They’re set in elections. And in the 2012 election, the American people were very clear on where they wanted the goalposts moved to.
~ Ezra Klein on Washington Post



. . . in this case Woodward is just dead wrong. Obama and Democrats have always insisted that a balanced mix of spending cuts and higher taxes replace sequestration. It’s true that John Boehner wouldn’t agree to include new taxes in the enforcement mechanism itself, and thus that the enforcement mechanism he and Obama settled upon — sequestration — is composed exclusively of spending cuts. But the entire purpose of an enforcement mechanism is to make sure that the enforcement mechanism is never triggered. The key question is what action it was designed to compel. And on that score, the Budget Control Act is unambiguous.
First: “Unless a joint committee bill achieving an amount greater than $1,200,000,000,000 in deficit reduction as provided in section 401(b)(3)(B)(i)(II) of the Budget Control Act of 2011 is enacted by January 15, 2012, the discretionary spending limits listed in section 251(c) shall be revised, and discretionary appropriations and direct spending shall be reduced.”
Key words: “deficit reduction.” Not “spending cuts.” If Republicans wanted to make sure sequestration would be replaced with spending cuts only, that would have been the place to make a stand. Some of them certainly tried. But that’s not what ultimately won the day.
~ Brian Beutler on Talking Points Memo















Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)