Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Crafty? Or what????????cnreddPolitical Wrinkleshttp://politicalwrinkles.com
Crafty.It will still be turned down because the Obama/Soros gang wants to pin their carefully crafted world crash financial coming at us like a tsunami on the American right wing.McConnell just handed the ticking bomb right back to the bomb's designer.
Both. It's Lucy van Peltian in that he wants POTUS to momentarily grab the purse strings, only to be later shown that he can't, and have them "snatched" away.
Crafty.Also crassly political. But in that he's just fighting fire with fire.I don't think the conservatives in the House are going to go with it, though. Both they and Obama want a collision. They each think they will gain from the crash.We will see.
I would call that more of a blink than principle.
Does anybody else have problems with the TPM website? Everytime I go there, it locks up my browser.
pusillanimous adjcharacterized by a lack of courage or determination[from Late Latin pusillanimis from Latin pusillus weak + animus courage]"He who fights and backs away, lives to fight another day."This is the top of the first chukker, folks.
In a battle of wits between McConnell and Obama Mitch is unarmed. Sheesh.
McConnell....meet my little friend.Bunch of pussies who won't stand up and do what the voters told them to do. NO MORE SPENDING.When we are all eating dirt and paying $15 for a gallon of milk....if you can find any....remember these traitorous cowards.At least I will have cherries. Just pitted about 25 pounds. Made jam, pie fillings and froze the rest.:-D
pusillanimous.given other craven examples of republican greed/stupidity/selling out of supposed first principles, i expect this to be just more of the same.he probably thinks he's being crafty. more's the pity.
pusillanimous....you're just pulling out old word verifications, and giving them new meaning.No?
"Crafty? Or pusillanimous?"Either or both, politics ain't beanbag and the stakes are high on both sides for the win.If Boehner caves he will open the door wide for a third party candidate.Obama needs this win desperately to quiet his base with $Trillions more in taxes and seem like the centrist above it all for the rubes that don't really know what the heck is going on.
I'd like to say it's crafty, but if I think about it further, I'd have to say neither. The republicans and democrats have spun themselves dizzy and they can't seem to find a way out of the negotiating room. This let's everyone lie down and get their bearings. Huge crisis averted, no one "loses".However, in the long run, the major republican rhetoric was "its a big concession just to get us to vote for the debt ceiling". Have you just given up your biggest bargaining chip without addressing a single concern other than saving face? At the end of the day though, the fundamental misunderstanding of the debt ceiling vs. the deficiet vs. the debt will result in few people understanding what actually happened and people will incorrectly use this against the president. (DBQ's post is a good example of this)p.s. I had to luck up pusillanimous. What an excellent word.
In the words of the world's great philosopher, Forrest Gump:"Stupid is as stupid does."
Pusillanimous.If I understood correctly debt limit increases would go into effect unless overridden by 2/3 of both houses.There's no way the Democrat-controlled Senate would override a spending limit increase, even if House Republicans stand firm.This is a terrible deal, and we're being played for rubes.
p.s. Sorry about the spelling/typo fails by the thousands in that post. I hate when I forget to proof before posting.
Gee. Giving the Executive branch ever-more power because the Legislature is too fracking timid to pull up its skirt and deal with our country's finances like men. What could possibly go wrong? Bomb Libya, raise the debt ceiling. Is there anything the Executive can't do on its own?(P.S. I like how "pusillanimous" appears to, but probably doesn't in fact, share its root with 'pussy.' Everyone in government right now is acting like a giant, collective, two-chamber, three-branch pussy.
The question is what hill is the best hill to fight on. I've been skeptical from the start that the debt ceiling is the right hill. Compared to a government shutdown, the consequences of not raising the debt ceiling may be too dire to make a threat credible. It seems to me that if you don't raise the ceiling, the President is put in the position of someone who has $x a month coming in, owes a certain amount to bondholders, a certain amount to social security recipients, a certain amount to health care providers, and so on. The amount coming in is certainly enough to pay off bondholders, but it probably isn't enough to pay off all monthly "obligations" that Congress has given the executive to discharge. So it seems unclear to me how a president is supposed to act when the law says something like "pay $1 to Joe, and $1 to Sue, and $1 to Bill, but don't spend more than $2." We are in unchartered territory.So McConnell is essentially saying let's fight on another hill. Make Obama own the debt increase and then fight over the next budget. Here, the consequences of no agreement, shutdown, are more predictable and thus less dire. I'm not sure I see this as selling out.
Crafty.McConnell is offering Obama the ability to raise the debt ceiling as much as he wants, provided that(1) Each increase is accompanied by a proposal for corresponding spending cuts, and(2) Ever member of congress is forced to go on record as for, against, or scared.Then, when the smoke has cleared in 2012, the voters get to decide how they like the results.
McConnell has been in the senate far too long. He should listen to Tea Party freshman Rep. Mike Lee(R-UT).
debt ceiling vs. the deficiet vs. the debt will result in few people understanding what actually happened and people will incorrectly use this against the president. (DBQ's post is a good example of this)I understand perfectly.Understanding the economics of the US Government, the machinations of the Federal Reserve System, Monetary Policy, as well as being able to take advantage of currency manipulations between US and foreign currencies were a big part of devising portfolios that were protected. If I do say so myself, I did a damned good job and my customers rarely ever lost money.I also understand that when a politician's lips are moving he/she is telling lies and trying to cover their own asses.The politicians are contingently unable to cut spending. Giving them more latitude in raising the debt ceiling will just increase ....duh....debt. They will never ever cut spending unless we force them.
Talk about getting lost in the weeds-The "debt limit" is a limit the Congress has set on how much "money" the United States can borrow-We've already borrowed $14+TRILLION-This year, as last year, we exceeding our yearly budget by $1.5 TRILLION.NO, you can't 'borrow' any more "money"....PERIOD.
Why should republicans question the debt limit democrats set in their wisdom when they had absolute power?
Screw McConnell. He is the problem. Another RINO. If Boehner had any testicles first thing out his mouth after no tax increases is that the house will impeach Obama and the secretary of the treasury if they sell any bonds not authorized by congress and also explicitly state that the congress will vote to repudiate those bonds. No one will buy them if the house makes that declaration unless the rates paid are usurious to induce the buyers to take the risk. Yes the senate will not vote to convict the president or the secretary of the treasury but the live show on national television of democrats trying to justify undermining the constitution will be very educational for the American people.As a practical matter if the government shuts down, who cares other than those who live off other people's taxes? The government doesn't stop collecting taxes so it can always pay its constitutionally required obligations, bonds and contractual debt. It collects enough for those requirements that are constitutionally required and the rest of the spending is optional and can wait. They aren't doing the taxpayers any favors with their money and piling on more debt is not the solution. By doing nothing the house will instantly force the government in to balance and when the sky doesn't fall the public that is privately employed and pays taxes will say WTF was all the fuss about and that is what scares the crap out of the democrats.
Dust Bunny Queen,The politicians are contingently unable to cut spending.Whazzat?Congenitally? If so I agree.
And as a parting shot, Boehner should consider a list of tax deduction and credits eliminations along with new taxes that hit primarily democrat areas and the repeal of the Davis-Bacon Act and offer it to Obama while absolutely saying no to a debt increase. Consider those taxes as a paying down the national mortgage for the good of the today's children and tomorrow's grandchildren.
KenK, you think Obama is smart? Really? Old 57 states. Come on, man.
It's pussy luminous.
cubanbob,Yes the senate will not vote to convict the president or the secretary of the treasury but the live show on national television of democrats trying to justify undermining the constitution will be very educational for the American people.And that, sir, is precisely why such a live show will never happen.Democrats and Republicans are collaborating against us for their own benefit.
Is the GOP the party of bullshit? Because that's what this is!All this talk about being responsible and how we need to deal with our problems instead of kicking them down the road, and they even THINK about doing something like this?McConnell should be kicked out of his leadership position for even mentioning it.
He blinked.Didn't see a way out and didn't want to upset the global economy. With Italy looking not so good this week, probably a good idea.
mariner said... cubanbob,Yes the senate will not vote to convict the president or the secretary of the treasury but the live show on national television of democrats trying to justify undermining the constitution will be very educational for the American people.And that, sir, is precisely why such a live show will never happen.Democrats and Republicans are collaborating against us for their own benefit. 7/12/11 5:29 PM As it stands you are probably right. However if the house were to vote to impeach, the senate would have no choice but to vote yea or nay and any republican senator that votes no in such a circumstance is either not running again or won't be running next year because those that are running next year will almost for sure get a primary fight if they were to vote not to impeach and remove the president and the secretary of the treasury. And the same applies to members of the house. If Boehner had the stones it would be a win for country and a win for the nation.
Mitch started out as a moderate reform Republican. He wants to be Majority leader more then he wants anything else.Game of Thrones, baby.Winter is Coming
TPM broke this story? Before you get lathered, consider the source.
The other option was sell-out, which is running hot with people like Michelle Malkin.tg may be right; handing responsibility back to Dr Evil and Mini-Me makes Little Zero the one who has to make a decision.And that sort of thing bores him.Be interesting to see how he punts it.Even more interesting to see the reactions of people like Chuckie Schumer and Slobbering Barney once they find they've gotten what they thought they wanted.
Crafty? Or pusillanimous?Regardless of which (if any) of these two descriptions is best, it sounds like a pretty good option for the country. It would prevent the financial chaos that would come from not raising the debt limit in August, and would set the stage for the 2012 election to be a referendum on which path to take regarding the federal budget in general. I'll give McConnell some credit for this one.
Pusillanimous.I'm not saying that the Republicans should hold out for everything they're currently asking for, but they should get as much as they can.Selling out now for political advantage later may work to get them reelected, but it's certainly not why they were sent there.
Give Obama authority to raise the debt limit? That's like giving an arsonist an can of gas. Not only no, but HELL NO. See what Obama is doing is not letting a crisis go to waste. Remember who said that a few years ago?
Michele Bachmann says she would consider debt limit increase — in exchange for Obamacare repeal.Now that is some change I can believe in!
I can't quite understand the McConnell proposal, but it looks like it might be a legislative veto.
I actually think its a stroke of genius, to be honest. Right now, if the "negotiations" force a default, Obama can simply nail it on the GOP for refusing to negotiate. And the media would lick it up for all its worth.But, after McConnell does this, Obama has no "out" here, to use a poker term. He either has to negotiate an agreement, which his Democratic base will hate, or he will have to raise the debt limit, which the public in general will hate. Either way, its "officially" Obama's decision. McConnell is forcing the president to actually make a choice and make a decision.Solid stroke by McConnell. And, to be honest, the only real card the GOP had to play here.
When danger reared its ugly headHe bravely turned his heel and fledBrave, brave, brave, brave Sir Robin
I think Krauthammer has the best handle on this. Obama and the libs desperately need a way get out from under the poorly performing economy before the election in Nov/12. Right now Obama and the libs own the economy but if they can hang it on the GOP by letting default happen because the debt ceiling was not raised … Obama’s re-election looks good. And the House and the Senate. The MSM will of course flog the meme of GOP responsibility 24/7. It’s a win-win situation for Obama. If any deal is made the GOP owns the economy at least partially AND alienates some of the base – if no deal is made the GOP owns the economy, period.McConnell’s proposal is neither crafty nor cowardly – it’s desperation. Obama and the libs hold the winning hand.
Pusillanimous--Neville McConnell offers peas in our time.Look. None of the bastards can be trusted on either side of the aisle. The Dems will gladly take and waste every dollar we give them. The Rinos, still a majority, will fake and spend. I've already prepared my twenty something year old kids. They are fucked. Washington will not address the deficits. Financial reality will--sometime in the next ten years. Hunker down. Very bad weather ahead.
I was at the Oval Room this afternoon for lunch with K-street consultants (across the WH). Well, it seems there is unanimous consent that the GOP does not even know what they are up against. They starting the chess game, and the WH is playing the end game. This is so bizarre that the K-street people are now betting the margin of the GOP defeat. The majority felt that OB2 will be any GOP team more than what Reagan did to Mondale.
McConnell needs to go.
Jason,But, after McConnell does this, Obama has no "out" here, to use a poker term. He either has to negotiate an agreement, which his Democratic base will hate, or he will have to raise the debt limit, which the public in general will hate. Either way, its "officially" Obama's decision. I don't see how you figure this. Obama can simply continue to demonize Republicans for not agreeing to everything he wants, and the media will shout it from the rooftops.
McConnell: cowardice masquerading as cleverness.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!Um, that's my vote for crafty - let him hang himself - because I don't know (or care) what that other word means.
Reality check time.How many Senate votes to over-ride vetoes does McConnell have?And how does Mutiny the night before Agincourt figure as being smarter than McConnell?
It is brilliant. It takes away the only tool Obama has which is calling 'present' and taking the credit when something works or pointing the finger when something does not. Let the pea dispenser own up to his peas.
What a stupid fucking plan. We didn't send Mitch McConnell to Washington to give this fucking guy the powers of a dictator.Time for Mitch McConnell to retire or be retired.
I thought having eunuchs run the government went out of fashion with the last of the Chinese emperors. What is Mitch thinking? Never give up control like that, it might be too difficult to regain control. Here is the story: We owe too much money because we have spent too much. We must reign in spending. Every department needs to cut personnel by 10%, some departments and agencies need to be eliminated all together. There is no reason for Social Security recipients or military personnel to do with out their monthly checks. Somebody needs to tell Obama to stop, and then to stop him. The promise by the Secretary of the Treasury to make the country suffer if Obama doesn't get his way is pretty serious. They are going to make things worse than they need to be in order to gain more power. Stop spending!Start by eliminating the Department of Education. Do we have any educational gains to show for having such a department?
Crafty? Pusillanimous? How about . . . Unconstitutional?Also, how about just plain stupid?
yet another example of the legislative branch ceeding power to the executive branch--the fiscal equivalent of the war powers act, and how has that worked out.Mr Mcconnell should read the constitution and the federalist papers. There is a reason why article one is much longer than the other articles are much shorter regarding the exective and the courts.I do fear the republic is truly fucked. The poltical class is abomindable.
During the last Presidential election, CSpan2 Book TV aired a program where the author discussed the results of his or her research, which suggested that something like 5-10% of Democrats , and 5-10% of Republicans, essentially debated and defined the ideological constructs of each party. The point was that the vast, vast, vast majority of the citizens of this country have their lives dictated by the most active and vocal members of society, who also happen to be more privileged .I strongly suspect that the same thing is occurring with the debt ceiling debate. The debate is not really about the debt ceiling per se, but rather a very deep, long-standing debate about the role and size of government. It’s never been resolved, and never will be resolved in our representative democracy. However, in the mean time, the regular folks in our society run the risk of being irreparably damaged. The elites (the upper and upper middle socio-economic classes) on each side of the fence have theirs, their corporate contributions, decent jobs and income, and will fare just fine economically. It’s the ordinary citizens (lower middle socio-economic class) who will most likely get screwed, no matter which side ultimately prevails in the short term.
Post a Comment