PDA

View Full Version : proposed debt deal complete


peacepipe
10-14-2013, 02:38 PM
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/10/14/proposed-senate-debt-ceiling-deal-complete-crushing-republican-party.html

Do you want to know what Republicans get out of the proposed Senate debt ceiling deal? Nothing, but a crushing surrender.

Republicans will get no changes to Obamacare. They will get no further spending cuts. The government will be funded until mid-late December, and here’s the kicker according to Greg Sargent, “According to the Democratic aide, Dems are likely to demand a debt limit extension into early summer — nine months, rather than six – with the idea being that the closer to the 2014 elections we get, the harder it will be for Republicans to stage another debt ceiling hostage crisis. Democrats don’t want such a crisis. They would prefer that Republicans simply agree to extend the debt limit cleanly. But by pushing this so deep into the 2014 election season, they are giving themselves a kind of insurance policy that guarantees that if Republicans do stage another debt limit crisis, Republicans will pay a serious political price for it.”

If Republicans want the medical device tax repealed Democrats are going to demand that tax loopholes be closed for the wealthy and corporations, and Senate Democrats are even going to finally get the budget conference that they have asked the House Republicans for 18 times.

What do Republicans get out of this? Nothing, but record low poll numbers.

This deal, if it survives the House, would be a major victory for Democrats. It meets every single one of President Obama’s criteria. Obamacare (the ACA) is not changed. No budget negotiations occur before the government is reopened and the debt ceiling is raised, and there will be no short term threat of default by House Republicans on the debt ceiling.

Whether or not this deal, if this does end up being the deal, can pass the House is a whole different story. Boehner and the House Republicans are still harboring delusion that they will be passing a short term six week deal.


The reason why House Republicans want a short term deal is two fold. They view the CR and the debt ceiling as their last chance to kill the ACA before it is implemented fully on January 1, 2014. Secondly, vulnerable House Republicans want to avoid another crisis during the 2014 election.

By placing the expiration of the debt ceiling extension right in the middle of the 2014 election, Democrats are setting up a lose/lose scenario for House Republicans. Boehner and company will have to fight among themselves as the election campaign is going on. Another debt ceiling fiasco could tear open all of the party wounds, or Republicans could to again threaten default and lose the House.

A group of House Republicans and their Senate leader Ted Cruz thought they could ransom their way into killing the ACA. Instead, the Republicans are being offered a series of crushing terms of surrender that will be impossible for conservative activists and the tea party House GOPers to swallow.

It’s clear that by cutting this deal with Majority Leader Reid, Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans are washing their hands of the Cruz/Boehner folly. If the country defaults, it will be because John Boehner refused to stand up to his own House Republicans and do what is right.

Democrats and Senate Republicans are sending the signal that if the country defaults, the blame should go on Boehner and his tea crazed House Republicans. Harry Reid is laying out the terms of surrender. It’s unclear whether House Republicans realize that they’ve lost the war.

Rohirrim
10-14-2013, 03:47 PM
That's where the deal should rest, on the shoulders of the Tea Party crazies. They flung the ****. Let them clean up the mess.

ant1999e
10-14-2013, 03:52 PM
But I thought it was irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling.

Rohirrim
10-14-2013, 03:54 PM
Paul Ryan is trying to kill the Senate deal.

Rohirrim
10-14-2013, 03:54 PM
But I thought it was irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling.

So now Republicans approve of Bush's drunken spending spree?

ant1999e
10-14-2013, 03:58 PM
So now Republicans approve of Bush's drunken spending spree?

Do the dems? Is there really a difference?

Rohirrim
10-14-2013, 04:00 PM
Do the dems? Is there really a difference?

Since the OMB says that Obamacare would reduce the deficit by $178b, what's the issue? Looks to me like spending will be reduced, but the Republicans want to crash the government, and the world's economy, anyway. So, it's just for yuks?

BroncoBeavis
10-14-2013, 04:05 PM
Since the OMB says that Obamacare would reduce the deficit by $178b, what's the issue? Looks to me like spending will be reduced, but the Republicans want to crash the government, and the world's economy, anyway. So, it's just for yuks?

Not sure about the OMB, since that's easily the more hyper-partisan of the two main budgeting agencies. But the "deficit neutral" ship long since sailed according to CBO.

Especially since Obamacare banked Medicare savings and physician payment cuts that everyone knew would never see the light of day (which they haven't)

Oh, along with that whole 10-years of tax increases against only 6 years of coverage subsidies. Anyway, from this point forward, Obamacare (as a whole) does nothing but cost.

Rohirrim
10-14-2013, 04:19 PM
Not sure about the OMB, since that's easily the more hyper-partisan of the two main budgeting agencies. But the "deficit neutral" ship long since sailed according to CBO.

Especially since Obamacare banked Medicare savings and physician payment cuts that everyone knew would never see the light of day (which they haven't)

Oh, along with that whole 10-years of tax increases against only 6 years of coverage subsidies. Anyway, from this point forward, Obamacare (as a whole) does nothing but cost.

Actually, the CBO says that repealing Obamacare would increase the deficit.

The CBO refused to provide a new cost estimate for repeal, saying there is too little time before the vote. But Director Doug Elmendorf pointed to an estimate from July 2012 that abolishing healthcare reform would raise the deficit by $109 billion over 10 years.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/healthcare/299895-cbo-obamacare-repeal-will-increase-the-deficit

Thanks for the bull****, but no thanks. :wave:

So, what is the good reason the Republicans have for bringing down the country?

Blart
10-14-2013, 04:27 PM
I believe the plan was to get a Republican in the white house in '16, which is easier if the economy collapses and the blame falls on the kenyan socialist.

Instead they're realizing they'll lose the house if they keep it up, so they need a way out quickly while saving face.

BroncoBeavis
10-14-2013, 04:47 PM
Actually, the CBO says that repealing Obamacare would increase the deficit.

The CBO refused to provide a new cost estimate for repeal, saying there is too little time before the vote. But Director Doug Elmendorf pointed to an estimate from July 2012 that abolishing healthcare reform would raise the deficit by $109 billion over 10 years.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/healthcare/299895-cbo-obamacare-repeal-will-increase-the-deficit

Thanks for the bull****, but no thanks. :wave:

So, what is the good reason the Republicans have for bringing down the country?

One, I said "going forward" meaning "from now on" so you reference something from over a year ago.

And then there's that pesky gap CBO always has to deal with between what Politicians say they'll do and what they'll actually do.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2009/10/21/democrats-dishonest-doc-fix-dodges-deficit

In other words, in the real world, Obamacare is a huge cost, which will only grow from this point onward.

Rohirrim
10-14-2013, 04:48 PM
One, I said "going forward" meaning "from now on" so you reference something from over a year ago.

And then there's that pesky gap CBO always has to deal with between what Politicians say they'll do and what they'll actually do.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2009/10/21/democrats-dishonest-doc-fix-dodges-deficit

In other words, in the real world, Obamacare is a huge cost, which will only grow from this point onward.

OMB says bull****. CBO says bull****. BB says, who you gonna believe, me or your lyin' eyes? Hilarious!

Rohirrim
10-14-2013, 04:52 PM
I believe the plan was to get a Republican in the white house in '16, which is easier if the economy collapses and the blame falls on the kenyan socialist.

Instead they're realizing they'll lose the house if they keep it up, so they need a way out quickly while saving face.

If Boehner cuts off the radicals and goes with the Senate deal, the crazies will respond by trying to take down his speakership and replacing him with Cantor. Things could get a lot crazier before this is over.

BroncoBeavis
10-14-2013, 04:55 PM
OMB says bull****. CBO says bull****. BB says, who you gonna believe, me or your lyin' eyes? Hilarious!

CBO also said Medicare was going to slash reimbursements 20% 3 years ago

And it never happened. Yet they still count Obamacare's deficit impact as if it's going to. And it's not. Because, like Enron, DC Politicians lied to make costs look lower, and CBO is powerless to do anything about that.

GIGO.

elsid13
10-15-2013, 01:04 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/debt-ceiling-deal-in-congress-161907863.html

House Republicans met privately for more than an hour in the basement of the Capitol on Tuesday, but finished with no clear proposal for how to avoid a possible federal default.
“There have been no decisions about what exactly we will do,” Republican House Speaker John Boehner said after the meeting. “But we’re going to continue to work with members on both sides of the aisle to try and make sure that there’s no issue of default and that we get our government reopened.”
Translation: Republican leaders still can’t find the votes they need to pass a debt ceiling increase.
The federal government has been shut down since Oct. 1, and the Treasury Department says that Congress must agree to a plan to raise the federal debt ceiling by the end of the day Thursday so the government can continue to pay its bills on time. Failing to raise the borrowing limit could rattle financial markets and put the federal government at risk of defaulting on its debts.
While nothing conclusive came out of the closed-door House GOP meeting, which began with a group rendition of “Amazing Grace,” lawmakers who attended described a possible framework for a House proposal that could see a vote as early as Tuesday afternoon: In exchange for an agreement to raise the federal debt ceiling until February and reopen the government until January, House Republicans want a law that would force all members of Congress and top administration officials — including President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden — to enroll in the federal exchanges established by the Democrats’ federal health care law. They also are considering asking for a two-year delay of the tax on medical devices that also is in the health care overhaul.

bronco militia
10-15-2013, 01:24 PM
But I thought it was irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling.

it's probably part of he plan to get rid of the tea party. It's been the narrative since the shutdown began.

Rohirrim
10-15-2013, 01:48 PM
The Tea Party has wanted to destroy our form of government for years. Why would they bother to negotiate now, when victory is within their grasp?

Bronco Yoda
10-15-2013, 01:51 PM
Meanwhile we're now at the brink of another downgrade in the credit rating people.

The inability to compromise will cost US ALL again. And for what? The ACA is done. Everything now is just adding to the financial pain.

You simply cannot mess around with our rating. This time it's really interesting because it's not a case of 'cant pay' but rather 'WON'T PAY. There will most likely be a spike in Bond Yields, Mortgage Rates, and really anything that's interest rate related will be affected.

And this if all goes well which doesn't look good right now.

Rohirrim
10-15-2013, 01:58 PM
I can think of no greater encouragement to the rest of the world to look for a more stable currency elsewhere. The geopolitics of this whole thing is catastrophic. Of course, I doubt the majority of Tea Partiers could spell the word "geopolitic." All they care about is that danged Kenyan Muslim in the White House.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-16-2013, 08:13 AM
So now Republicans approve of Bush's drunken spending spree?

Do you recall any of the Bush blowers on this forum sounding the alarm re: spending at any time during Oil Boy's eight-year watch?

I certainly don't.

BroncoBeavis
10-16-2013, 08:25 AM
Meanwhile we're now at the brink of another downgrade in the credit rating people.

The inability to compromise will cost US ALL again. And for what? The ACA is done. Everything now is just adding to the financial pain.

You simply cannot mess around with our rating. This time it's really interesting because it's not a case of 'cant pay' but rather 'WON'T PAY. There will most likely be a spike in Bond Yields, Mortgage Rates, and really anything that's interest rate related will be affected.

And this if all goes well which doesn't look good right now.

"Hey, I can make my credit card payment this month. We should get more credit cards!"

Think long term man. Spending has to be cut if you care about this country's long-term credit rating. These fights are insignificant compared to our financial prospects ahead when our entitlement debts really come due.

peacepipe
10-16-2013, 08:29 AM
"Hey, I can make my credit card payment this month. We should get more credit cards!"

Think long term man. Spending has to be cut if you care about this country's long-term credit rating. These fights are insignificant compared to our financial prospects ahead when our entitlement debts really come due.

Hate to break the news to but tax hikes are going to have to be a part of the deal. Cuts alone aren't going to do it.

peacepipe
10-16-2013, 08:33 AM
Anyway, another few hours and this .shutdown will be over and the debt ceiling will be raised. And what will rethugs have to show for it? Nothing. Rethugs got their asses handed to them on this mess they created.

peacepipe
10-16-2013, 08:38 AM
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/mccain-republicans-have-to-understand-we-have-lost-this-battle


The rethugs have lost this battle pretty convincingly.

BroncoBeavis
10-16-2013, 08:39 AM
Hate to break the news to but tax hikes are going to have to be a part of the deal. Cuts alone aren't going to do it.

If you adjust what we spent in 2000 for normal inflation, it comes out to about $2.4 trillion today. We're spending $3.8 trillion.

Over the last 13 years, government spending is up 63%. That can't be sustained.

peacepipe
10-16-2013, 08:43 AM
Maybe not but cuts alone won't fix it. No one will accept cuts to SS or medicare.

BroncoBeavis
10-16-2013, 09:16 AM
Maybe not but cuts alone won't fix it. No one will accept cuts to SS or medicare.

They won't have much choice. The day is coming whether it's good politics or not.

Then we'll see what worrying about debt ratings really looks like.

mhgaffney
10-16-2013, 01:53 PM
I believe the plan was to get a Republican in the white house in '16, which is easier if the economy collapses and the blame falls on the kenyan socialist.

Instead they're realizing they'll lose the house if they keep it up, so they need a way out quickly while saving face.

You are taking a lot for granted.

Check this out.
http://www.eutimes.net/2013/10/pentagon-warns-to-expect-radical-change-in-us-government-soon/

Pentagon Warns To Expect “Radical” Change In US Government Soon
Posted by EU Times on Oct 5th, 2013 // 554 Comments


A highly troubling “urgent bulletin” issued earlier today by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) states that it has received information from the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) warning to expect a “radical change” in the government of the United States, possibly within the next fortnight, based on information they have received from “highly placed” sources within the Pentagon.

According to this MoFA bulletin, GRU intelligence assests were notified by their Pentagon counterparts this past week that President Barack Obama is preparing to invoke the powers given to him under 50 USC Chapter 13 to hold that various American States are now in a “state of insurrection” thus allowing him to invoke the National Emergencies Act under 50 USC § 1621 and invoke the highly controversial “continuity of government” plan for the United States allowing him, in essence, to rule with supreme powers.

Specifically, this bulletin says, Obama will invoke 50 USC § 212 that states: “ the President shall have declared by proclamation that the laws of the United States are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings”
The specific laws being opposed by these “combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings,” that Obama will outline in his reasoning’s for declaring a state of emergency, this bulletin continues, are the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), otherwise known as Obamacare.
The NDAA is opposed by many US States, this bulletin says, with California joining Alaska and Virginia this past week in passing a law making it illegal to be enforced in their territory, and with many other States, also, preparing to do the same.
The specific portions of the NDAA law being opposed by these US States allows for the indefinite detention without charges or trial of all American citizens and allows for their assassination should Obama order it.
The PPACA (Obamacare) law is, likewise, opposed by over half of the US States and has led to an American “shutdown” this past week that has closed 15% of their government, but has left fully 85% of it still open.
To the specific “combinations too powerful” Obama will cite in his declaration of National Emergency as being needed to be defeated by extraordinary measures, the MoFA says, is a faction of the US House of Representatives popularly known as the Republican Tea Party whom the President and his allies have likened to “hostage takers” and “political terrorists.”

Obama’s greatest fear, and reason(s) for declaring a National State of Emergency, this bulletin continues, was outlined yesterday by his US Treasury Department who released a report yesterday warning of potentially “catastrophic” damage should Congress fail to raise the debt ceiling and prevent the government from defaulting on its debt.

As the current US government shutdown crisis and debt ceiling fight have now merged, the MoFA warns in this bulletin, Obama further warned yesterday that an impasse on the debt ceiling beyond 17 October, when the US government will be essentially out of cash to pay its bills, could start a downward economic plunge worse than the recession of five years ago – with credit markets seizing up, the dollar’s value plummeting and US interest rates soaring and even coming close to the brink of such an unprecedented default that could roil both domestic and foreign financial markets.

Preparing to oppose Obama, should he, in fact, declare a National State of Emergency, the GRU grimly warns, is the US military who themselves are preparing to invoke 50 USC § 842 which allows them to protect America from “The Communist Party of the United States, or any successors of such party regardless of the assumed name, whose object or purpose is to overthrow the Government of the United States, or the government of any State, Territory, District, or possession thereof…”

Not known to many Americans is that the Progressive movement Obama belongs to, and whose media acolyte “presstitutes” swept into office, have long been associated with the Communist Party.

And, as the World Net Daily News Service reported this past August, John C. Drew, Ph.D., the award-winning political scientist, met Obama in 1980 and wrote in 2011: “[Obama] believed that the economic stresses of the Carter years meant revolution was still imminent. The election of Reagan was simply a minor set-back in terms of the coming revolution. … Obama was blindly sticking to the simple Marxist theory … ‘there’s going to be a revolution.’ Obama said, ‘we need to be organized and grow the movement.’ In Obama’s view, our role must be to educate others so that we might usher in more quickly this inevitable revolution.”
With Obama’s “revolution” now at hand, the GRU warns in this bulletin, it is critical to note that that United States, unlike other nations, have all of their elected officials and military personal swear allegiance to the US Constitution, and not to their government or its leaders.
The most recent example of this conflict between Obama and the US military, the GRU further states, was in Egypt when the Obama regime supported Muslim Brotherhood was overthrown by the Pentagon backed Egyptian military, and who, like the United States, makes its political and military leaders swear allegiance to their constitution, not to any of its leaders.
As many in America now know that these present times are not the normal activities of a government seeking peace and prosperity, and as dozens of undisclosed Obama Presidential directives that define US national security policy and task government agencies are still unknown either to the public or, as a rule, to the US Congress, this bulletin warns in its summation that with each passing day American can be more likened to a communist dictatorship than a functioning democracy.

So bad, in fact, has the United States become that one of its legendary reporters, Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh wrote this past week that the Obama administration lies systematically yet none of the leviathans of American media, the TV networks or big print titles, challenge him.

W*GS
10-16-2013, 02:01 PM
Figures gaffe sucks ГРУ cock.

And WTF is the "EU Times" (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/European_Union_Times)?

Mindless propagation of idiocy

Rohirrim
10-16-2013, 05:54 PM
Progressive movement Obama belongs to?

When did that happen? :rofl:

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-16-2013, 07:35 PM
Progressive movement Obama belongs to?

When did that happen? :rofl:

Indeed...


U.S. Eases Rules on Exporting Military Technology to Secure Role as World’s Leading Arms Dealer

The United States is relaxing controls on military exports, allowing some U.S. military supplies to flow to nearly any country with little oversight.

“The whole globe, basically, is going to get an easier deal in terms of getting access to U.S. military technology without very many questions asked,” says arms and security expert William Hartung of the U.S. easing controls on military exports.

“The Obama administration, more than even the Bush administration, bought into the industry’s arguments,” Hartung adds. “Countries are getting license-free spare parts, surveillance equipment, and so forth that can then go onto a human rights abuser or terrorist group,” Hartung explains.

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/10/16/us_eases_rules_on_exporting_military