Thread: Republicans Resort to Blackmail and Coersion

Originally Posted by Hoplite

Which is exactly why demanding we pass one in less than a week before you'll do anything is unrealistic at best and obstructionist at worst.

They are only pretending, they don't want a BBA they don't want cut any spending, they just want to pretend that they do.
They had the Senate, the House and the White House for six years, did they ever cut anything? Wasn't that period actually the largest peacetime expansion of government in history?

One of the main reasons for waiting til the last minute is that the deal doesn't have any details. So that later they won't have to cut anything.
And we aren't talking about the distant past here. The GOP demanded 100 billion in cuts right after the election, they passed a bill that they claimed cut 100 billion, it actually cut 30 million, that's 0.3% of their claim.

I expect nothing different from this deal, a whole lot of self promoting back patting, and then no real cuts.

hoplote
you really needd to learn what was proposed.
no one has said the bba had to be passed and ratified before the debt limit was met. what was proposed is that a bba be put out to be discussed and voted on. the liberals in congress did not what even the discusion aof bba to happen. i hope you now understand wht was going on.

The only requirement under the cut, cap and balance plan was congressional approval. It did not delay the raising of the debt ceiling until ratification.

Based on the speed in which it was passed by the House, and tabled by the Senate, that could be done in a couple hours.

Nice try though.

Originally Posted by Forplay

In the old day's, yeah but that all changed when the Dem's controlled both houses of congress and the white house when they passed Obamacare, without one Republican vote.

Oh, I see. So all the GOP's obstructionism is a response to the fact that the Democrats ran in 2008 on fixing health care in America, won all three houses including a 60-seat majority in the Senate, and passed a bill to fix health care in America.

That was somehow illegitimate because the GOP didn't vote for it.

The GOP sees anything they don't like as illegitimate, while feeling free to employ any tactic they wish to pursue their radical agenda. It's because they're doing God's work, you see.

You say "Much of their agenda is too extreme even for conservative Democrats".

I do not agree.

Why couldn't the Republicans and Democrats decide at the beginning of this debate many months ago to follow a simple strategy with these goals:
(1) The debt limit shall not be raised.
(2) The federal budget shall be decreased in two steps:
- Step # 1 is immediate: Identify cuts that would be equal to an amount sufficient to allow the US to meet all of its financial obligations on Aug 2 without raising the debt limit. These cuts would take affect immediately. If the savings from these cuts would not be realized in time to allow the US to meet all financial obligations on Aug 2, implement a temporary increase in the debt limit until these cuts sufficiently decrease the budget.
- Step # 2 is long term: Identify additional cuts to decrease the federal budget so that the debt limit can be decreased over time.

Maybe I am of simple mind, but these goals seem quite workable and would greatly benefit the US in the long term. So what went wrong? Were the Democrats too obstinate? Did the Republicans not do a good enough job in expressing there goals?

Originally Posted by LandOfGoshen

You say "Much of their agenda is too extreme even for conservative Democrats".

I do not agree.

Why couldn't the Republicans and Democrats decide at the beginning of this debate many months ago to follow a simple strategy with these goals:
(1) The debt limit shall not be raised.
(2) The federal budget shall be decreased in two steps:
- Step # 1 is immediate: Identify cuts that would be equal to an amount sufficient to allow the US to meet all of its financial obligations on Aug 2 without raising the debt limit. These cuts would take affect immediately. If the savings from these cuts would not be realized in time to allow the US to meet all financial obligations on Aug 2, implement a temporary increase in the debt limit until these cuts sufficiently decrease the budget.
- Step # 2 is long term: Identify additional cuts to decrease the federal budget so that the debt limit can be decreased over time.

Maybe I am of simple mind, but these goals seem quite workable and would greatly benefit the US in the long term. So what went wrong? Were the Democrats too obstinate? Did the Republicans not do a good enough job in expressing there goals?

the problem is that dems dont think anything in gov can be cut but the miltary. in fact dems belive that the gov must keep spending more and making gov bigger and that the gov is the only thing that can solve any problems and that the gov should get more money from tax payers because they know how to spend your money better than you do. that is what teh entire problem was and why the dems wouldnot let any budget come to vote. they did not want any cuts and did not want a balanced budget to even be looked at

Originally Posted by sailorman126

hoplote
you really needd to learn what was proposed.
no one has said the bba had to be passed and ratified before the debt limit was met. what was proposed is that a bba be put out to be discussed and voted on. the liberals in congress did not what even the discusion aof bba to happen. i hope you now understand wht was going on.

The Democrats don't want it even discussed because they know the American people want it and it will expose their fraud to the American people.

Typical Con response. They got brains but don't know how to use em.

Unfortunately, we all tend to make responses like this from time to time, and it really does not lead us toward any productive solutions. JPN started a post with what he feels is a legitimate concern, and I believe in addressing it as such. I'm not typical anything, and I do know how to use mine, Mr. Blue Doggy. But, too often are "concerns" are just what we repeat from watching, the entertaining, but less that accurate portrayals by Mr. Hannity, Mr. Matthews, Ms. Coulter and Ms. Maddow, rather than anything based in fact or reason.

The Debt Ceiling Debacle that JPN so eloquently spoke of was just that a debacle. It is another example of a procedure being used for the wrong intent. I am big on trying to find root causes to things rather than to dwell on terms like "hi-jacking" or "blackmailing." It gets us no where.

The proper use of raising the debt ceiling: During the current year, we have to put together a budget for next year. An estimate of the anticipated revenue is produced, and a list of expenditures is approved. They should be close to neutral as possible. If next year, the anticipated revenue is lower than anticipated, or there are a few Billion $$ are required for unforeseen events, like, a new war, a down-turned economy, a drought or tornadoes, and there is not enough revenue to pay for these extras, the Legislature is allow to vote to raise the Cap on allowed spending, and borrow money to pay for these items.

We, as a nation, I take the blame along with every other citizen, have allowed Congress and President to abuse this tool. If you PLAN to spend 40%more than you expect to bring in, it is not an emergency condition that requires you to Raise the Debt Ceiling and borrow more money. It is criminal.

Was it an opportune time for the Republican Party to stand up for what was right and say no more? No, probably not. Was it the right time for the Democrat Party to want to further exceed the authority given to Congress to Raise the Debt Ceiling for more intentional Debt increase? Nope, probably not either.

But when both sides call the other Terrorist and Communists, and NO ONE steps up and gives the truth that both Parties have been abusing the Debt Ceiling since the Reagan Years, well, once again, I feel we all share the blame.

Lastly, yes, at the end of Mr. Clinton's administration, there was a year or 2 (sorry not sure on that) that there was a little money left over at the end of the year for that specific annual budget (we still had an accumulated Public Debt, though, we weren't "Balanced by no means) well, we had that little bit of money left, I'm a Conservative by my nature, not because of any Political Party, we should have taken that left over money and Paid it toward the principle on the Debt, not passed it out in $300 checks to the masses for a party. And we shouldn't have cut taxes, assuming that we would ALWAYS have that much money left over every year, and we Definitely should have raised the taxes back up, when the Spending Spree began and the annual deficits began getting bigger and bigger.

Sorry, I'm new and probably should not be taking up so much white space.

I really hope that we can have posts like this. I really do like to hear views from all sides that are well spoken and have a point. I've been known to move my point of view on issues when valid points get me to thinking that maybe I don't have all the information.

Wow, so if the Republicans don't vote for the Democrat agenda, it's blackmail. You read it here first, guys. Now you know, so don't act like you don't.