Backing into a Government Shutdown

If one does happen, Boehner won’t leap into it as Gingrich did; he will be pushed by an idealistic new crop of Republican representatives.

·
You’re missing an operative word: look. “Boehner won’t look like he leap[ed] into it as Gringrich did;…”
·
But, Jay, do you honestly believe the open amendment policy he’s stood behind would actually lead to anything else than this stand off?
·
Could this be a calculated move to make it look like the real Republican brand (not that Tea Party sort) is level headed and can be trusted?
·
Are you really so sure that Boehner Fake Tears isn’t playing you?
·
If I were you I’d have to ask that question. And if I were me, which I am, I’d have to ask you if you already asked yourself that question. And if I’m to assume you’re an intelligent observer of all things political, where exactly does that leave you?

gum,
.
You have a point, but I’m not totally sold that Boner has control of that tiger.
.
I will agree that it’s what he’d LIKE for all to think. And he would LOVE to appear to be the voice of moderation here.
.
So, he MAY be trying to make as much political “hay” out of events as he can.

Boehner probably does not have control over the freshman situation at all. He’s stuck with what he was handed, but that doesn’t mean he can’t be an opportunist when it comes to spinning the story and the media along with it.
·
It seems silly to me to believe that he wants to avoid a government shutdown. If he wanted to avoid that, there are enough Republicans and Democrats who are not “Tea Party” ok’d to make that happen.
·
That would take some backbone, so we won’t see it happen. It would also require real bipartisanship, which is something Republicans can’t afford and don’t see as part of their winning strategy.
·
Boehner sees the cliff up ahead, he’s just trying to make sure he has a parachute, but he’s also got his hand next to the steering wheel. What’s absent is an amount of force on that wheel that would take us in any other direction. And don’t tell me politicians can’t ignore the the polar parts of their Camp. Obama has been doing exactly that from day 1.

With Democrats from Wisconsin hiding out in hotels in Illinois and a Democratic controlled US Senate on vacation until a couple of days before the government runs out of money, the idea that it is the Republicans that are shutting down governments is ludicrous.
.

I still think he’s lost control of the caucus, and will let the shutdown happen in a vain attempt to reassert control.
.
it’s easy to tweet nonsense about job losses and being broke. It’s also easy to find 60 billion dollars that would neither tick off Democrats–but those involve farm subsidies and tax loopholes, and other forms of largesse the freshmen are fine with.
.
This is not about the budget.

Seems Democrats everywhere are practicing “cut & run” so they won’t face tough votes. And you have Democratic Governors aiding and abetting political cowards

House Democrats are leaving the state rather than vote on anti-union legislation, The Indianapolis Star has learned.

A source said Democrats are headed to Illinois, though it was possible some also might go to Kentucky. They need to go to a state with a Democratic governor to avoid being taken into police custody and returned to Indiana.

Why in the world would the freshman compromise?
.
That’s not facetious, I am curious.
.
As best as I can tell they don’t want anything for their districts, so the usual quid pro quo is out.
.
Sticking to their guns not only doesn’t bother their supporters-both voting and financial-but delights them.
.
Why compromise?

Why compromise with the Freshmen? How many of them are Tea Party affiliated again? How many does that leave?

“As best as I can tell they don’t want anything for their districts, so the usual quid pro quo is out”
.
Isn’t this what the left supposedly has been yammering about, no corporate interests in Washington? So now you have Representatives practicing their principles and the left is still objecting? Seems you want villains not results.

“If they can’t do it now, what are they going to tell the people back home if they let this opportunity pass by?”
.
That reality set in. That we can’t ‘cut gratia cut.’ That we can SLIGHTLY raise taxes on the richest of us and balance the budget like we did in the 1990s.

“avoid being taken into police custody and returned to Indiana.”
.
.
Finally, it is out. Freeinpa would like to institute a police state where people are taken into custody at any time. What the Dems are doing to avoid votes isn’t illegal and so there would be need for them to be “taken into police custody and returned to Indiana.
.
Police State anyone?

freeinpa, I know you normally ignore what we say or misunderstand, so it’d be easy enough to make this mistake. They’ve got half of the equation. The other half is representing your home district. That’s where you are from. That’s what ‘Representative means.’ If they’ve properly interpreted what their district wants, the more to them. But we generally don’t define special interests as the representee, but as big business interests.

I’m not familiar with WI law, but if there’s no law on the books requiring dems to make a quorum, then yes this would be over stepping bounds, fascist, and reminiscent of police states.

erie,
.
I believe that’s called “totalitarianism for thee and thine but not for me and mine”.

Why does the debate have to be about how much to cut government? Why isn’t there a part of it about how much tax revenue the government takes in? Especially about historically low rates on corporations, capital gains and the highest earners?
-
I mean, this whole thing is just absurd, cutting every single dollar of nondiscretionary nondefense spending still leaves a huge budget shortfall. But you’d never know that reading stories like the one JNS just posted.
-
In the words of Jon Stewart “Stop. Just stop. Please, stop hurting America.”

PNNTO,

If that were true, they would have picked cuts Dems would have supported. Oil company subsidies. Closing loopholes for the wealthy, etc. Even better, they would have targeted their districts, and dared other Members to do so. (That’s something I’ve always wanted to see, actually. “Take the Pork Pledge.” Find, in this case, 150 million in wasted money in your own district–challenge the other members to do the same. 60 billion!).

“But we generally don’t define special interests as the representee, but as big business interest”
.
Since the left here generally talk out of both sises of their mouth it is difficult to know what you mean. Since they ran on a campaign of cutting spending and getting debt in balance it appears that they have both sides of the equation right.

I am curious to as to how you define “big business interest”?

If what was true jay?
.
I didn’t say (and didn’t mean to suggest) that they were true budget cutters/balancers just that they have no reason to change their demands.
.
Boehner and the rest of the establishment republicans are scared to death of them.
.
And the support they have, again both their constituents and financial backers, are happy with them digging their heels in.

Hi Hosni,
.
How’s the hotseat?

The relative size of the demonstrations in Wisconsin might be an indicator of the actual size of the dogs n this fight, JNS.
.
I think some note should be made of that.

freeinpa, this is another topic entirely, so I’m just moving it down here so that others can talk about what they’re talking about uninterrupted.

“But we generally don’t define special interests as the representee, but as big business interest”
.
Since the left here generally talk out of both sises of their mouth it is difficult to know what you mean. Since they ran on a campaign of cutting spending and getting debt in balance it appears that they have both sides of the equation right.
I am curious to as to how you define “big business interest”?

·
Which is why I said, they might be close enough given their organization; but that I disagreed with something else you said. It seemed you were implying that the people of a state were a “special interest.” Special meaning abnormal and all, that felt particularly off.
·
A big business interest might be the Cable Companies wanting to be able to throttle their internet to drive companies like Netflix out of business while solidifying their cable packages. As network distributors they are capable of doing this, but net neutrality stands in the way. When we hear that Republicans OR Democrats are helping the cable/internet industry to tear down the net neutrality laws we have to question whether they are helping the people they were elected to represent or a special interest.

I totally agree, but even beyond that, why does even that debate eclipse the one on Jobs and the structure of our Economy?

I would like to point out one detail that seems to get lost in the shuffle.

Let us assume that the GOP is sincere in wanting to significantly cut spending (that is a huge assumption since the GOP never actually identifies on-budget items to cut other than sub-rounding-error items like funding for NPR or PBS). Even if they want to cut funding going forward, there is nothing principled about refusing to raise the debt ceiling.

Remember, the debt ceiling needs to be raised because Congress and the President have already agreed to the additional spending.

Again, even if the GOP doesn’t like the spending that has already been approved, the fact is that the spending was approved by our democratically-elected leaders and the prior decisions of Congress and the President should be respected.

Imagine you sign a contract to buy an exotic sports car for $1M. Imagine you write a check for $1M to cover the purchase price. Now, imagine that your wife decides after you have signed the contract that she doesn’t want you to buy the car. So, she withdraws all the money from your checking account so that the check bounces.

Now, has your wife stopped the sale? No. You are already committed to buying the car. There is a signed contract and the seller can sue you for the $1M. All your wife has done is wreck your credit and incur a bunch of service charges.

The Republicans in this debt showdown are no different than the angry wife in my hypothetical. The Republicans can ruin America’s credit worldwide and throw the debt markets into turmoil. At the end of the day, this will cost Americans more in interest payments. But it wont cut America’s spending obligations by one penny.

If Republicans were principled about cutting spending, they wouldn’t play games with the debt ceiling. The would respect that past budgets are in the past and would simply draw a hard line in the sand on future budgets.

What Republicans are being are nihilistic a–holes. Our entire system of government will simply collapse if every Congress refuses to accept the consequences of bills that have been passed by past Congresses and signed into law.

No surprise the left supporting lawmakers or unions who collect an outrageous amount of taxpayer money for do nothing, then run and hide when asked to work

It’s a very weird dynamic, Paul. I do think part of it is driven by a lack of concern about re-election. As with the other elements that I have been calling “The Big Lie,” I think these guys actually mean it when they say they don’t care about being re elected–that they are largely sincere in what they’re saying.
.
So, no, i do not think they are really doing what their constituents want. But it’s CONFUSING because what their constituents is reduced Medicare spending AND scooters.
.
I suppose they’ll settle for more teenage births, and kids who drop out earlier because of cognitive failure and no nursery school. But that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense either.

“Why does the debate have to be about how much to cut government? Why isn’t there a part of it about how much tax revenue the government takes in?”
.
Because the wimpy Democrats aren’t making that case?

“that the people of a state were a “special interest.”
.
Not to split hairs but if special interest is only defined by being a corporation, then I disagree. “People” can be special interests too.

“Why isn’t there a part of it about how much tax revenue the government takes in?”
.
Because it has been shown time and time again the issue is not revenue but spending. On a federal level tax revenues were the highest ever and yet we had deficits

“It’s a very weird dynamic”
.
You ain’t lying jay.
.
I should have used “voters” rather than”constituents” and probably used “what they think they want” instead of “what they want”.
.
And if they think they want spending cut, with no more nuance than that, the freshman will be happy to deliver.
.
What’s the old Paul Weller line? “The people get what the people want”

Sure, people could be a special interest, if it was a subset of the set that elected you. Say, you were elected by republicans to be fiscally conservative, but you went beyond that and advocated laws having to do with abortion that appeased a small set of your followers and ignored the other conservatives.
·
Vice versa, if Obama had, and he didn’t, only gone after the Public Option for liberals and nothing else, you could say he was serving a special interest, the far left people.
·
But, if you are actually trying to serve all of the people who elected you that would be serving the interest that elected you and that wouldn’t be abnormally special. It might be that fluffy special that you call your child after giving them a cup of hot coacoa; but I don’t want to confuse the terms.
·
Generally when a member of the left says special interests, they mean a minority group or interest that does not represent the will of the majority of those who elected the the representative. Or at least, that’s what it means to me.

Freeinpa,
Where has it been shown time and time again? That is just nonsensical and untrue.
..
Revenue – Spending = Deficit
if spending is more than revenue or surplus if revenue is more than spending. Both revenue and spending however are variables in this very simple and basic equation which means that the solution can be found in both. Your aforementioned problem can also be found on both variables. You are simply wrong!

This will begin to backfire on these “good citizens” once the people understand the games they are playing. I hope they continue to stay away. State after State even. Perhaps when nothing gets done, people will lay blame where it belongs once and for all.

“Again, even if the GOP doesn’t like the spending that has already been approved, the fact is that the spending was approved by our democratically-elected leaders and the prior decisions of Congress and the President should be respected.”

.
What part of elections have consequences don’t you understand or grasp.
.
The dopes who passed this were negligent. If this was a law and it was determined it was negligent by the majority, do we keep the same stupid law intact? No, we change it.
.
Why are you people so stupid?

Free-

Because it has been shown time and time again the issue is not revenue but spending. On a federal level tax revenues were the highest ever and yet we had deficits

This is utter and complete crap. There is no way in hell to to get back to fiscal sanity on cuts alone. It cannot be done.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/02/18/Reading-between-the-Lines-of-Obamas-Budget.aspx

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/taxes-at-an-all-time-low-deficits-at-an-all-time-high/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+OTB+(Outside+The+Beltway+|+OTB)&utm_content=Google+Reader

At lets also be serious there was not a spending problem before two wars were put on the credit card on top of two unnecessary tax cuts. There was no serious spending problem before A Medicare Drug program was passed with zero thought on how to pay for it.

“iSnce the GOP never actually identifies on-budget items to cut other than sub-rounding-error items like funding for NPR or PBS)”
.
Here we have the Demos speaking out of both sides of their mouth. First the $70 billion of a $3.5 trillion budget was draconian Now it is rounding errors. Seems like plain and simple the left wants no budget cuts.
.
“there is nothing principled about refusing to raise the debt ceiling.
.
Exactly how do you figure that?. I understand principles are a foreign concept to the left. The results of November were pretty clear – get the fiscal house in order. Raising the debt ceiling only enbles the spending.
.
“the fact is that the spending was approved by our democratically-elected leaders and the prior decisions of Congress and the President should be respected.”
.
This is probably the weakest and lamest excuse yet! Are the current members of Congress not democratically elected? Has there never been any spending or law passed by one Congress and changed by another? Times and circumstances change so should the budget.
.
“Now, has your wife stopped the sale? No. You are already committed to buying the car. There is a signed contract and the seller can sue you for the $1M. All your wife has done is wreck your credit and incur a bunch of service charges”
.
Actually she probably can. Most states have 3 day periods when the sale can be canceled. And when a grown-up notices that you spent an exorbitant amount on a silly item and empties the bank account; yes someone needs to e a grown-up and say no.

We know that person is not a Democrat!

Paul–
.
I appreciate your hanging in on this. As you know by now, I am not trying to win an argument. I am trying to figure stuff out.
.
The media coverage is a disaster. (I whinge about one aspect of that here: Blogwhore )
.
But then there’s Ezra this morning
.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/02/wonkbook_are_republicans_overr.html
.

Republicans and Democrats, it seems, govern rather differently. Republicans are proving themselves willing to do what liberals long wanted the Obama administration to do: Play hardball. Refuse compromise. Risk severe consequences that they’ll attempt to blame on their opponent. The Obama administration’s answer to this was always that it was important to be seen as the reasonable actor in the drama, to occupy some space known as the middle, and to avoid, so much as possible, the appearance of dramatic overreach. This is as close as we’re likely to come to a test of that theory. In two cases, Republicans have chosen a hardline and are refusing significant compromise, even at the risk of terrible consequences. Will the public turn on them for overreach? Applaud their strength and conviction? Or not really care one way or the other, at least by the time the next election rolls around?

.
When legislation and poll interpretation have to be passed through Versailles’ Hall of Mirrors, it gets MORE CONFUSING.
.
And, you know, none of this has to do with effective public policy…..

Sean–
.
Just say Vodaphone.
.
http://www.thenation.com/article/158282/how-build-progressive-tea-party
.

“Say, you were elected by republicans to be fiscally conservative, but you went beyond that and advocated laws having to do with abortion that appeased a small set of your followers and ignored the other conservatives”
.
First exactly why do you limit this republican to voting on things that with fiscal matters? But maybe more importantly what if the the abortion law had to do with say no federal funding of abortions. Isn’t he then being fiscally conservative?

I don’t think we’re arguing (in a non pejorative way) jay.
.
I think having the freshman stick to their guns, just as Walker is doing so far, may have a positive effect.
.
Certainly not in a public policy sense but in a civics lesson way. They have laid bare what they stand for, none of the backdoor let’s get rid of the president because of an affair stuff from the 90s, and that’s smallest (no?) government. The pretense has been dropped.
.
As this goes on in Wisconsin the populace will see that Walker’s proposal has much more in it to be alarmed by than union issues.
.
By the same token if the House shuts down the government the average citizen will see that this isn’t a game.
.

And when we get to that point maybe the country can start discussing sound public policy.

“Where has it been shown time and time again?”
.

Here. As percent of GDP from 1960-2009 spending has been 20.3% while revenues has been 18.0%
.
http://www.fundmasteryblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/heritage-spending-revenue-gap-6-2010.jpg
.
“This is utter and complete crap. There is no way in hell to to get back to fiscal sanity on cuts alone.”
.
Especially if you don;t try. Especially if you consider a $70 billion spending cut in a $3.45 trillion budget draconian. But it seems like the state of Wisconsin is finding a different answer.
.
At lets also be serious there was not a spending problem before two wars were put on the credit card on top of two unnecessary tax cuts
.
So let me guess the secret to fiscal “sanity” is gut defense and tax the wealthy, right

And I am unclear of your math which may explain your fiscal understanding–2 tax cuts? But even if it were two the reality is that revenues went up after the 2003 cuts.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/revenue20growth.jpg
.
Liberals can keep repeating lies but it doesn’t make them true

Yeah, Paul. I wouldn’t agree with all the details of what you say, but, yeah, the idea that policy isn’t beanbag either needs to come to the fore.
.
There is enormous pressure in the media against that idea. Policy is way harder than what passes for politics. It’s much easier to write an “Obama overreached, now Ryan overreaches” than an actual examination of the relevant policy issues, and the sincerity of those claiming commitment to a policy regime.
.
Because, of course, such an examination would be really useful.
.
But not Savvy.
.
I do urge you to read the AdNags overreach article from this last weekend in the Times. It’s class. The link is in the blogwhore.
.
Nags is just wrong about the Dem overreach. Flat out completely, demonstrably wrong.

Damn freeinpa you are like a little nat. Flying around from comment to coment shouting the same sky is falling BS trying vainly to get someone to bite.

No, we change it.
.
@Rusty: You don’t understand how this works. If you have already ordered a $14 billion aircraft carrier, you are going to have to buy the carrier. Period. Throwing the government equivalent of the checkbook into the trash does not change the fact that the money has already been spent. You aren’t “changing” spending one iota. You are merely declaring to the world that you are a credit risk and driving up how much interest people charge you going forward.
.
What part of elections have consequences don’t you understand or grasp.
.
Yes, Rusty. Elections have consequences. That is my point. If, over the past 10 years, our elected representatives — both Republicans and Democrats — decided to spend $X and only take in $X -10 Trillion in tax revenue…well, I’m sorry to tell you but elections have consequences. The money has been spent. It is gone. Now it is time to pay the bill.
.
Crying like a baby and refusing to pay your bill is not a mature response.

“First exactly why do you limit this republican to voting on things that with fiscal matters?
·
Because I wanted a simple example. My example involving Obama wasn’t anymore reflective of the actual Democratic party than my example of a *possible* Republican.
·
But maybe more importantly what if the the abortion law had to do with say no federal funding of abortions. Isn’t he then being fiscally conservative?”
·
No, not necessarily. Especially if that has nothing to do with the fiscal position of the United States.
·
I’ve listened to plenty of people who identify as Republicans off of this particular blog whine about how they aren’t represented by Republicans because the Rs who get elected tend to fall back to what they consider meaningless side social issues.
·
They’d rather see an honest attempt at balancing the budget than a token effort of cutting $100,000,000,000. And many Fiscal Conservatives that I know are for raising taxes as part of that package. Fiscal Conservatism and Social Conservatism are two entirely different ideas. But Republicans have put them under the same tent. By doing so, but ignoring part of the tent they are serving “special interests,” a subset of their electors instead of all of them.

Republicans don;t want to “look like” they’re angling for a government shutdown. They’re smart enough to realize that the public does not want that and that such a move would destroy the already-fragile economy. They will do whatever it takes to shift blame to the president and to Democrats for failing to “compromise” enough, even though it’s unclear that the GOP would accept anything less than 100% of their agenda.
http://www.sunstateactivist.org

…to say nothing of the malaria he’s carrying….

It is called his right and I believe his obligation. To shout from every mountain top if necessary. This is what liberals are having a hard time dealing with today. For years and years and years, people have sat back idly and allowed this country to be taken over by ruthless special interest groups. It is high time people speak out and loudly.
.
Now we shall see whose voices will finally be heard.
.
Don’t like it, you have a scroll wheel to go right on by. Otherwise, SHUT UP

“You don’t understand how this works”

.
Bullcrap. Everyone knows this government has spent, and spent more. More than we now have or can pay.
.
If a project is not finished, cancel the project. Like the New Jersey plan to build another tunnel which Christie stopped, yes it can be done, and yes it can be stopped.
.
If you have a bleeding patient do you let them bleed all the way out or do you attempt to stop the bleeding?
.
I am sure there are some contracts where the work has already been done, yes those obligations have to be paid. For the rest, citing Planned Parenthood as an example of the continuous sucking off of the tax payers, yes that can be canceled today without consequence. Same goes for all the rest of the entitlement and special interest programs across this nation. Those that can be cut back or stopped need to be stopped NOW. If you think Planned Parenthood is such a great thing, then send them a check today, I am sure they will not turn down your money.
.
So there is your lesson on what government budgets are all about. Period.

@Freeper:
.
I’m sorry, but if you choose to live in a fantasy universe where the government spends $70B on NPR, don’t expect the rest of us to humor you.
.
Here is reality. In 2000 the U.S. budget was essentially neutral. So, what has changed to create such large deficits?
.
1. Massive defense spending, including in Afghanistan and Iraq, that has been overwhelmingly supported by Republicans.
.
2. Massive tax cuts that severely cut federal tax revenue. The less money the government has to spend the more it has to borrow. This is Econ 101. Republicans obviously overwhelmingly supported the tax cuts.
.
3. Massive economic decline. Although the massive Bush tax cuts were supposed to fuel economic growth, in reality all they did was fuel the housing bubble and Wall Street speculation. When the bubble burst, the economy cratered and tax revenues cratered at the same time. During this time, Republicans overwhelmingly supported the financial deregulation and the monetary policy decisions (i.e. low interest rates) that lead directly to the housing bubble and crash.
.
4. Massive health care costs. Aside from defense spending, the only real spending problem that the U.S. faces is Medicare spending. However, the Republicans have opposed virtually every effort to curb Medicare spending. Republicans opposed restricting or abolishing the more costly Medicare Advantage program. And Republicans opposed using the economic scale of the U.S. government to negotiate lower medical care and drug prices. Based upon their policy positions, Republicans want Medicare to cost more, not less.
.
So, while Republican may put on a good show about cutting deficits, they have no intention of doing so. That is because they refuse to raise taxes and they refuse to propose significant spending cuts in areas that actually matter (i.e. military and Medicare).

Governors of Indiana and Florida have directed their legislatures to drop the “Collective Bargaining” legislation under consideration. Apparently, they read the prevailing “weather report”…
.
Now, if Governor Mubarak Walker in Wisconsin will take the hint…

So what is your alternative, Einstein? Spend more? This Administration and all the rest before have spent more than ever should have been spent. If the government needs shut down, I for one believe the vast majority of Americans would go right along with it.
.
Shut It Down!!

All the dogs shipped into Wisconsin by the big labor unions?
.
I thought so.

Can I get some numbers to go with these claims?
.
Specifically, what is the amount of income for the budget, what are the total expenditures and what is the percentage of those expenditures in a) Medicare, b) social security, c) defense, d) interest on the debt, e) all other expenditures?
.
These seem to be the relevant baseline numbers to keep in mind for any budget discussion yet they seem to be lost in the shuffle.
.

@Rusty: You still don’t get it. I don’t care if you think that Planned Parenthood is the worst program in the world to fund. It just doesn’t cost that much money.
.
Look at where the money is going. The Afghanistan war costs $300M a day. That is where the money is going. Not to NPR and Planned Parenthood.
.
If you want to immediately cut costs then you have to not only immediately defund both Iraq and Afghansitan, but you have to refuse to pay to bring the troops home again.
.
If that isn’t what you are proposing, STFU already.

Nothing from Kasich in Ohio on this yet.
.
But it looks a lot like Daniels and Rick Scott just sawed the limb off that Walker crawled out on.
.
It will be quite interesting to see if he soldiers on and sees this through or spins some sort of “face-saving” message about “wanting to spare the citizens of Wisconsin further disruption in their lives”.

jay-thanks (?) for pointing to AdNags.
.
I typically do not read his nonsense. For years now, actually.
.
I was struck by the quote from Sen Johnson, though-
.
“What we are facing is an American public that is really on the Republican side in their desire, on a macro basis, to cut spending, balance the budget and show real fiscal restraint.”
.
“Macro basis” Sounds like what I was suggesting about voters wanting cuts, with no more detail than that.
.
As to reporting policy versus politics we all were given the best example I can think of during the health care period.
.
Even by the sainted KT.

So now you make the statement that trickle down economy works?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/Revenue_and_Expense_to_GDP_Chart_1993_-_2008.png

Maybe you should broaden the horizon a bit.

In any case you are still dead wrong on the assumption that spending is the problem of the deficit. There are still 2 variables in that equation, spending and revenue!

That’s a turn of events.
.
Daniels was pretty clear he wasn’t interested in that fight but Scott?

He has rights. I can STFU. Right, you are nothing but consistent.

BaldCrook will do whatever it takes to please the Tea Partiers. That’s why he plays it so close to the vest.

Love me some Ike. Since the rise of the plutocracy, however, there numbers aren’t so negligible.
.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/02/quote-9.html
.

This is what I mean by my constant insistence on ‘moderation’ in government. Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid,” -

President Eisenhower

freeper knows what he opines is cr*p. He just chooses to repeat his bogus “facts” rather than acknowledging the truth. It is what he does.

What happens when hundreds of thousands of government workers are furloughed.
Let’s imagine local stores loosing customers, house payments not being made, public transit loosing riders, bills not being paid, medicare claims not being processed affecting doctors, hospitals, clinics etc., contracts not meeting payroll, rents not being paid, and all the other ricocheting outcomes.

“There are still 2 variables in that equation, spending and revenue!”
.
See you keep repeating it over and over with no facts. And that old hag apr2563 is not any support. I attached work for the Heritage Foundation. I will accept that liberals don’t like their work but it doens’t make them wrong.

.
apr3564 on the other hand offers up TalkPointsMemo as a reliable source. I think the probability of it being crap rests on her.

“I think some note should be made of that”
.
Yeah a whole bunch of people either skipping work or out of work or soon to be out of work

“Especially if that has nothing to do with the fiscal position of the United States.”
.
Oh but I disagree. If it doens’t why are we sending millions to planned parenthood. I have stated here before, I am against abortion but it is a choice that should be left up to the mother and father. I also believe no taxpayer dollars should be spent on it.e

“There are two variables in that equation.” – robbert5
-
“So you keep saying over and over again with no facts.” – freeinpa
-
An illustration of facts. First, the equation: Revenue – Spending = Deficit. Second, the variables: Revenue, Spending. Variable #1 = Revenue. Variable #2 = Spending. There is no third variable. The number of variables is equal to the quantity expressed in whole numbers that is between one and three, also known as two. There are two variables in that equation. It is a fact that there are two variables in that equation.
-
Thank you freeinpa for the best bit of reality confused talking point comedy since the “keep government out of my medicare!” signs carried by the early Tea Partiers.

“I’m sorry, but if you choose to live in a fantasy universe where the government spends $70B on NPR”
.
I never said we spent $70 billion on NPR. Your reading comprehension is only exceeded by your ability to comprehend the budgets you mis-speak about.
.
“. Massive tax cuts that severely cut federal tax revenue”
.
And you failed Econ 101 and you repeating falsehoods doesn’t make it true. Since reading comprehension is an issue for you here is a picture.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/revenue20growth.jpg
.
“Republicans overwhelmingly supported the financial deregulation and the monetary policy decisions (i.e. low interest rates) that lead directly to the housing bubble and crash.”
.
So many errors so little time. The financial deregulation of Bank occurred under Clinton and the easy money policy and lousy housing policy began before that. The economic decline in 2003 was the result of the Clinton recession which came after the Tech crash under Clinton.
.
“they refuse to propose significant spending cuts in areas that actually matter (i.e. military and Medicare).”
.
I don’t see any “brave Democrats calling for cuts to Medicare either. As always the left whines but whine the tough decisions have to be voted on it’s “RUN FOREST RUN”

Just saw something else…
.
Walker just signed into law a requirement that any tax increases will require a 2/3 majority. That pretty well leaves cuts only as the way to balance their budget.
.
Shades of Prop. 13 in CA. Only difference is that it’s not part of the WI Constitution yet and could be undone in a subsequent session.

Walker is doing what he can to bust Wisconsin.
.
I wonder how serious a recall he faces.

Damn freeinpa you are like a little nat. Flying around from comment to coment shouting the same sky is falling BS trying vainly to get someone to bite

Let’s see Mr (?) freeinpa always thinks in broad generalizations, is always right, never listens to to the other’s argument and thinks anyone who doesn’t agree with him is automatically hogwash stupid.

OMG! It’s the Rabid Right!! This is the group that is driving the budget narrative in the US right now?

Wow!

Now that the “culture war” has escalated into “class warfare” one does have to wonder how this is going to play in the heartland.

Just say Vodaphone

This is an interesting concept, but the problem is that you need the main stream press involved to get the facts out. I mean, wouldn’t it be great if Time did a piece on how much taxes people like Murdoch and Buffett, huge corporations and the institutionalized banks did really pay so the public could judge if they are paying their fair share to bail out the country. But, of course, Time Warner would have to be on that list too, so it will never be done.

So, Time reporters, do you understand why someone might think you are in your corporate master’s pockets?

Investigative reporting, where have you gone! All MSM reporters do is, as Tony Kornheiser likes to call his own reporting work now as, “yodel “.

Can’t be recalled until 2012.
.
So, he’s got another year in which to inflict as much damage as possible.

Can you post any links afguy?
.
I haven’t been able to find anything.

Interesting chat, Jay and Paul. Interestingly, I agree with both of you.
.
Republicans, will be pushed by their terror of the Teatard monster into bad over-reach. This delights Walker because his corporate sponsors (the Koch brothers, etc.) are psychopaths and he’s too stupid and hostile to the unions to see what’s going to happen to his lying @ss when the public wakes up to who he is and what he’s about. Boehner’s corporate paymasters, on the other hand, are smarter and much more calculating and incremental in waging the class war so they are probably terrified of being exposed to the public by what the Teatards will make the Republicans do.
.
Meanwhile, the political press which can’t tell the story of the class war, which is the story here, even as it is being revealed to the public through unmistakable actions by Republicans, falls further into failure and irrelevance. So, oddly, the more damage Republicans do, the better it will be for the Republic. Perhaps I need to apologize the liberals who decided to stay home and sit on their hands the last election…if they can convince me this was their diabolical strategy all along.

53,
.
Here’s an article on the recall requirements that should be relatively accurate.
http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/02/19/recall-in-wisconsin/
.
Walker signs law requiring 2/3 majority for future tax increases
http://metro.onmilwaukee.com/articles/932744-gov–walker–signs-bill-requiring-2-3s-majority-vote-for-income–sales-tax-increases
.
This has the links about Florida and indiana Governors backing off of Right to Work legislation.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

Well the recall will take 500,000 signatures so I bet they get started early.

Just for freeper additions to the crazy reactionary file:
.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/02/islamist-baiting.html
.
LImbaugh comparing teachers to the Muslim Brotherhood. He also spent part of his day mocking Michelle O’bama’s body. What a sophisticate, what a laugh riot.
.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/02/a-discredit-to-the-cause.html
.
Turning to the White House, Breitbart calls President Obama’s involvement in union activism “deeply un-American.” “What you have is the president of the United States organizing anarchists, public-sector unions in order to intimidate Americans,” he says.