Monthly Archives: July 2011
“Despite good-faith efforts to find common ground, the White House will not pursue a bigger debt reduction agreement without tax hikes. I believe the best approach may be to focus on producing a smaller measure, based on the cuts identified in the Biden-led negotiations, that still meets our call for spending reforms and cuts greater than the amount of any debt limit increase.”
That’s Speaker Boehner’s statement after deficit talks with the administration seem to have hit an impasse over tax increases.
It seems there were basically two deals under discussion. The “big” deal was in the neighborhood of $4 trillion and the “small” deal was in the area of $2 trillion. Bascially Boehner and the House GOP weren’t willing to go for the extra $2 billion if a substantial part of it was from increased taxes.
The things that were going to be need for the “bigger’ deal (lower tax rates in exchange for closing “loopholes” and doing something about entitlements) were and are never going to happen with Obama in the White House.
I think raising the debt ceiling with greater offsets in spending is a bankable, though unsatisfying wing. Welcome to divided government.
The question is…are these cuts in the bank? There’s an old saying in DC that “nothing is settled until everything is settled”. Is Obama going to let the GOP walk away from the agreed to spending cuts without giving anything back on revenue?
I doubt it.
I think Boehner’s statement is a pre-emptive strike to make it look like those $2 trillion in cuts are in the bank and make Obama look like he’s the one reneging on a deal.
It’s a clever ploy that would work for a Democrat but the MFM won’t play it that way.
Still, it’ll be a win (again imperfect) for Boehner with the base.
Now we see if Obama will play the 14th Amendment card and just keeping borrowing with no spending cuts.
The bipartisan consensus on tax reform (broader base & lower rates) was championed by President’s fiscal commission, and yet now is being rebuked by the President. Lowering top rates that would help make America more competitive was too large a leap for a true class warrior.
Leaders, er, reject the recommendations of their own commissions or something.
Now the posturing begins.
Obama is undoubtedly going to come out swinging accusing the GOP of putting the economic health of “corporate jet owners” over the that of the country. Remember when people wondered if Obama would move to the center like Clinton did after the GOP landslide of ’94? I guess this doubling down on class-warfare is his official answer.
I really can’t wait to see how Obama positions himself as the defender of the public fisc when we’d only be sorta screwed without his spending spree but are totally doomed because of it.
If he can pull that it, he’ll really will have done something unprecedented.
Pulling up the Washington Post and seeing a column by E.J. Dionne entitled “What our Declaration Really Means” is not a good way to start the 4th off July off.
My first thought after reading the piece was I wanted to recast this scene with Dionne and Jefferson instead of an obnoxious professor and Marshall McLuhan.
Without reading the piece, I knew what Dionne was going to do….twist the plain meaning of the Declaration and all we know about the Founders to serve his liberal agenda. Shouldn’t someone occupying some of the most valuable opinion real estate in the media at least occasionally have the ability to surprise their readers or viewers?
I remember during the summer of 09 when the health care reform town halls were heating up Charles Kruathammer said the tactic would backfire and basically went after the protesters as being too obnoxious. From memory, he latter admitted he’d misread the situation. A lot of people in Krauthammer’s target audience didn’t like him saying that but at least he took an honest look at the situation and called it like he saw it.
George Will used to be the gold standard of conservative columnists. These days, conservatives are just as likely to annoyed or enraged by Will as they are to agree with him.
What liberal writing in the Washington Post, New York Times or one of the news weeklies can you say that about?
Op-ed writers need to question themselves if they find that every event, every piece of evidence, every historical perspective conforms to their worldview and comforts their ideological brethren. Sure commentators like Dionne, Paul Krugman and Eugene Robinson will say they are neither or liberal nor conservative. Of course that’s silly but even if it were true the most diligent scientists question results that are too perfect, too expected. That never seems to occur to the likes of professional liberals.
Always writing from the same, unquestioning point of view shows how little thought actually goes into what passes for “thinking” in elite circles. A bit of heresy (and attacking liberals like Obama from the left doesn’t count) would go a long way to taking the rest of what they say seriously. If guys like Dionne aren’t going to take their job seriously, I see no reason why we should treat what they write as anything but what it is…partisan hackery.
My first reaction to the NY Rangers signing Mike Rupp to a 3 year deal was decidedly meh. After checking out his Twitter feed, I feel a little better
Heading on vacation @ airport. Flight cancelled lost a day of trip, wasn’t happy! While waiting to re-book I witnessed one of the greatest
things I’ve seen! Troops getting off plane with their kids/families anxiously waiting! Huge cheers, emotions were crazy through all the
airport! Glad I missed my flight! http://t.co/Fv232nb
Here’s the photo that links to:
Any player who is happy to miss a flight because he got the chance to see some troops welcomed home is ok with me.
Welcome to the Rangers…now go block some shots, win fights and chip in a couple of goals.