There’s a narrative gaining traction in Washington as a debt crisis looms: House Republican hard-liners might soften their stance once they’ve gotten a vote on their Cut, Cap and Balance proposal.
But if that’s the case, the conservatives aren’t in on the plan.
While such a vote would usually be viewed as a chance to win some political cover for those who later agree to a more moderate deal, the idea of seeking cover out of a symbolic vote is foreign — if not outright offensive — to the new breed of House Republicans.
I know this is coming as a surprise to many in the beltway, but as we have noted before, the current GOP is filled with fanatics and imbeciles. They don’t have another plan after Cut, Cap, and Balance because they simply don’t think default will be a problem. They honestly are dumb enough to think that defaulting means cutting future spending. They simply do not understand that lifting the debt limit merely allows us to pay for what we have already spent. Those that aren’t that dumb are merely cheering it on because they think a Democrat will get the blame and because they think destroying our credit will cut down on “oppressive big government.” They simply do not understand how this will rock the entire nation. They are ignorant of how much of our financial system is tied to the treasury. They are indifferent about how this will impact every single person in the United States.
Again, we are dealing with fanatics. This is not news. These are people who think all sorts of crazy things- there is no climate change, a stem cell is a baby, the earth is only 6,000 years old, etc.- yet folks like David Brooks and Ross Douthat and the rest of the fluffers have been running rhetorical cover for them for years. Speaking of David Brooks, here is what he is up to today:
This week, Republicans will probably pass a balanced budget Constitutional amendment that has zero chance of becoming law. Then they may end up clinging to a no más Senate compromise. This proposal would pocket cuts that have already been agreed on, and it would eliminate leverage for future cuts and make them less likely.
It could be that this has been a glorious moment in Republican history. It could be that having persuaded independents that they are a prudent party, Republicans will sweep the next election. Controlling the White House and Congress, perhaps they will have the guts to cut Medicare unilaterally, reform the welfare state and herald in an era of conservative greatness.
But it’s much more likely that Republicans will come to regret this missed opportunity. So let us pause to identify the people who decided not to seize the chance to usher in the largest cut in the size of government in American history. They fall into a few categories:
Brooks understands how well and truly screwed we are and is making sure he doles out the blame ahead of time. He should stop pointing fingers and look in the mirror, because he’s one of the ones who helped strapped the explosive vests onto these fiscal suicide bombers.
MIss Ayn Thrope
The zealots are in the pulpit. Are we screwed? Yes, yes, we are.
joes527
Once again. The paywall saves me from staring into the abyss.
Thank you paywall.
Felanius Kootea
Brooks is a Republican and as such he must live up to the Republican MO of never taking responsibility for anything. So there will be no looking in the mirror, thank yew verry much.
Bulworth
A great column by Brooks, except he doesn’t unemployment. I know our media village doesn’t care about unemployment, but there it is.
arguingwithsignposts
None dare call it treason. But that seems to fit the description.
The Moar You Know
God, I can see him masturbating as he writes this.
Stooleo
Which are as elusive/extinct as the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker.
Mouse Tolliver
I don’t know WTF just happened, but it looks like somebody tried to take a shot at Murdoch during the hearings.
ETA: Most of this happened off camera. All I could see was the stunned reaction and security jumping between Murdoch and someone out of frame.
Mike Goetz
One thing that is heartening me through this absolutely sick-making episode is the fact that the Republicans are getting lambasted almost exclusively in the press and public opinion. They are hurting themselves badly. Statements like “I’m embarrassed to be a Republican.” are showing up in Politico. Politico!
When the debt ceiling is raised, the Republican Party may fly apart at the seams.
Stefan
I’ll repost from an earlier thread:
Look, most people simply don’t understand the economy. They don’t get it, never have, never will. In real life economic concepts are complicated and, quite often, counter-intuitive, so polling people on their opinion of economics, given the state of education in this country, is like polling them on their opinion of quantum physics.
For one thing, I bet only a small minority even understand that raising the debt ceiling enables us to pay back money we’ve already spent and/or committed to spending —instead, they think it relates to capping future spending.
Villago Delenda Est
I’ve said it before, and I will no doubt say it again:
The sooner the broken, mangled body of David Brooks is found in some back alley, the better for all of us.
beergoggles
Oh you bunch of drama queens. We all know the plutocrats will not let the republicans do nothing to result in a default.
Stefan
Fortunately, there are still practical conservatives in the G.O.P., who believe in results, who believe in intelligent compromise.
Name one.
Athenae
I’d cut off my arm to have written this line.
A.
4tehlulz
Which makes it more likely that it won’t be, IMO.
Though I wonder if the GOP hopes a ratings agency will kill the economy before they do. The agencies have painted themselves into one hell of a corner too.
Davis X. Machina
Mah nishtanah, ha-laylah ha-zeh…
The Dangerman
@Villago Delenda Est:
I’ll toss in a few bucks to buy a guillotine, place it on a flatbed, and park it in front of his office.
General Stuck
I agree with Bill Clinton’s take on the debt ceiling and the legalities surrounding it. Especially, the common sense noting that congress has already appropriated these monies to be spent, and it shouldn’t legally need to be done twice by voting on the debt ceiling.
I think Obama should have already asserted this constitutional option, that seems legally sound to me, and clear the board of all this nonsense. Maybe he will do it soon. If the wingnuts want to retract what congress has already voted to spend, then they should repeal those laws, or modify them through the normal legislative process, that the debt ceiling is not part of.
I would note, that polls are really start to swing against the wingnuts for causing this mess, and giving Obama the upper hand at acting like an adult. So maybe it isn’t a bad issue for dems to politick on, but it is too dangerous to play it out to August 1st, hoping the idiot tea partiers will suddenly come around to doing the sane thing.
Spot on, imo.
Villago Delenda Est
I strongly suspect you are correct here. They really do not understand any of this.
They also do not seem to understand that in 2001, we had a balanced budget, and that a bunch of Republicans unbalanced it and made it even worse, with an “off budget” totally optional and utterly illegal and immoral war of aggression. Then Obama came in, said “we’re going to stop lying about operations in Iraq”, and put it back on budget, and these morons started screaming that it was Obama’s fault that the deficit was so bad, because he ceased the fiction of wars being “off budget”.
Brachiator
@John Cole:
Bingo! I just read this same idea in The Economist this morning:
A lot of these people believe that the financial crisis at the end of the Bush Administration was a sham, and have re-imagined it as a government giveaway of money. So now, they are doubling down on their stupidity, spurred by the anti-intellectualism of the Tea Party People.
bemused
I feel like we’ve gotten accidentally on purpose locked in a maximum security insane asylum.
Stefan
I don’t know WTF just happened, but it looks like somebody tried to take a shot at Murdoch during the hearings.
I think they tried to foam pie him. It would have been a fitting end….
Davis X. Machina
@Mike Goetz: True. Encouraging too. But about 8 people read Politico — and all of them know how they’re voting already.
Mr. and Mrs. All-the-news-I-need’s-in-the-weather-report don’t read Politico.
slag
@Villago Delenda Est: So, do us all a favor and stop saying it. Seriously.
I want a Moore Award just as much as the next person, but those things need to be earned. And earning them should require a little more imagination and artistry than simply wishing David Brooks dead.
Stefan
This assumption is almost certainly false. Many are under the misapprehension that it is a vote to authorise new spending, not permission to pay the bills that this and earlier Congresses have already run up. According to Gallup, 60% of Republicans, 46% of independents and 21% of Democrats oppose increasing the debt ceiling at all.
I don’t how to get through to such people. To put it in terms they’d understand, it’s not like taking out a new mortage, it’s raising money to pay off the mortgage you already have — but given the abysmal state of both public education and the news media in this country, where are they going to be given this information if they don’t actively go looking for it themselves?
BO_Bill
In light of the fact that nearly half of American adults do not work, and Balloon Juice has bemoaned produce rotting on the vine due to labor shortages, I have developed a plan to solve all our problems. If these American adults have saved up and are financially independent, this is their business. If these American adults are living off the government tit, this becomes our business. So here is my plan, which is a derivation of the classic Cloward-Piven strategy.
Mine is called: Default-Collapse-Get Off The Fucking Sofa-Pick Produce.
Consider the consequences of my policy, if enacted:
1. Diabetes: Down
2. Associated Public Health Expenses: Down
3. Food Inflation: Down
4. Obesity: Down
5. HHS Spending: Down
6. Dignity of Work: Up
7. Illegal Aliens: Out
joes527
It is hard enough to get your concealed firearms into these things. I find myself sitting here wondering: how do you get a pie past security?
Yes, I know.
Joes527 –>
<– point
Woodrowfan
this story appears by an ad that I keep seeing on BJuice for a self-published book by some idiot about how “Liberalism destroys peoples and nations.” These people really are so amazingly stupid it’s a wonder they haven’t died out from simple household accidents…
dpcap
All ya’ll can let the global finance markets fall. I gots me mah gun and a basement full of canned food. I’m all set for the zombies!!
Davis X. Machina
@Stefan:
They shouldn’t need to go look for it.
We’re seeing a gross abdication of responsibility by the very representatives that lend their name to ‘representative democracy’. They have agency. They’re not puppets. Polls aren’t the Delphic f@cking Oracle.
We’re seeing a gross abdication of responsibility by the press — the extraordinary license granted to them by the First Amendment is part of a contract. And they’re in prima facie violation of their half of it.
Deep, systemic failure….
Han's Big Snark Solo
How long until the GOP either rights it’s ship or implodes?
After 2008 the most extreme, and most gullible, portion of the GOP was repackaged as the Tea Party. They were given microphones and loud speakers and told to go reek havoc at town hall meetings. They were given real power to effect political change. This was in the Republican Party’s short term favor. It helped them win an election.
None of the geniuses who empowered this Scrotum of Teabaggers thought about how to get those loud speakers back. Nor did they realize how easy it would be to lose control of them. There is a lot more hate radio than there used to be and each of the hate mongers is in business to reap a profit. They make money by getting their listeners outraged at the (purely fictional) injustice being done to them. The hate mongers can’t tone it down because if they do their listeners will find some other hate monger to feed their fears and prejudices. The “Conservative Marketplace of Ideas” is suffering free market pressure. How about that for some awesome irony?
Can you imagine if after 2004 the Democrats had decided to put Cindy Sheehan, Code Pink and Dennis Kuchinich in total control of everything? It wouldn’t have been as bad as the Teabaggers, but it wouldn’t have been pretty either.
Mike in NC
As Ronald “Red” Reagan would have said, “There he goes again”.
jl
@19 Stuck: thanks for link to Bill Clinton, who is correct, both in terms of politics and policy. If the debt ceiling is not raised, and social security checks, and other social insurance payments cannot go out, then no one will be in the mood for a President dithering about whether ‘the constitutional question’ needs to be reached.
Obama should do what is best for the country, preferably using an option that will take maximum time to work through the courts, and hardest to stop if the courts don’t go his way.
After reading about the fifth or sixth technical way to evade the debt ceiling earlier this week, I think the thing is not only unconstitutional, but operationally meaningless. It is a bad law.
@26: public is so unbelievably ignorant of the simplest things, that probably a good idea to check every poll result by looking at the questionnaire to see if the issue was explained to the subjects first, in neutral terms.
btomdarga
Sometimes I think anything that scares Wall Street as much as Default just might be a good thing.
jwb
Mike Goetz: You’d like to think so, but so far the polls aren’t showing it. The congressional election polls still show the GOP with a healthy 3% lead in the generic ballot and Obama’s approval ratings are near the lows of his presidency.
Commenting at Balloon Juice since 1937
What kind of weird sh*t do these people smoke? Does he write during an opium dream or is it the absinthe? Alice in Wonderland was a great idea but its been done.
Poopyman
@arguingwithsignposts:
Sadly, no:
It might qualify as Sedition, though. There’s gotta be something out there ….
Mr Furious
I keep reading stuff like this and “the Galtian Overlords control the leash,” etc. Why should I believe Wall Street doesn’t already have their plan to reap yet another obscene windfall out of a default somehow.
Seriously.
All the fuckers who should have gotten screwed in the meltdown instead walked away richer than ever. As far as I’m concerned, this is all win-win for the wealthy no matter what happens until someone shows me otherwise.
The Moar You Know
Yay. Someone tried to pie Murdoch. Way to turn the proceedings into a circus, and way to make him a victim. Good going, dumbshits.
rikryah
we knew they were fucking crazy. the rest of these folks are late to the game
Lolis
@General Stuck:
I just wish a few weeks ago Clinton did not say it wouldn’t be a huge problem if we defaulted for a few days. He really can stick his foot in his mouth.
murbella
and so have you Cole.
Balko, Kain and de Bore are just the latest libertarians you fluffed.
jl
Don’t have the link or cite handy, but Thomas Jefferson once wrote that when President has choice of obeying the law and saving the country, the President should save the country, explain his actions to the people and throw himself to their mercy.
DonkeyKong
To the Republican Party, the debt ceiling is another rope cord to engage in their favorite perversion, auto erotic economic asphyxiation.
murbella
And so have you, Cole.
Balko, Kain, de Bore are examples.
Lurking Canadian
I don’t think the media, by and large, understands the difference between “the deficit” and “the debt”. The words seem to be used interchangeably, in a way that totally hides the fact that one is essentially the integral of the other.
That’s why Republicans can get away with saying “Obama ran up $13T of deficit!” or whatever, and not get challenged on it. The reporters really don’t understand what they’re talking about.
joes527
Thomas Jefferson wrote all sorts of crazy shit. (I’m not saying that everything he wrote was crazy shit, just that he went there too)
Using his writing as a guide, we should be watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants and patriots every 20 years.
If a President thinks that he has choice of obeying the law and saving the country, then 5 will get you 10 that that President is a tyrant who would destroy the country just fine on his own (thank you very much) — joes527
Dennis SGMM
I think that Obama would be badly chumped if he settles for the “The president can unilaterally raise the debt ceiling three times,” deal. Congress will appropriate money, thus raising our debt, while Obama will inevitably have to raise the debt ceiling to pay for those appropriations. Congress will have the responsibility, Obama will have the blame. Moreover, I don’t see how such a deal could withstand a test in court. If the line item veto was turned down as an unconstitutional abdication of congressional responsibilities then this deal would likely be regarded as the same. That depends, of course, on whether or not anyone would demonstrate the standing or the interest to mount a court challenge. My guess is no on the second even if the first could be achieved.
jl
Also Cole makes a big big mistake in his last sentence, and gives Brooks far too much credit. I fixed it:
” Brooks understands how well and truly screwed we are and is making sure he doles out the blame ahead of time. He should stop pointing fingers and look in the mirror, because he’s one of the ones who
helped strappedIS HELPING, IN THIS VERY COLUMN TODAY, strapping the explosive vests onto these fiscal suicide bombers. ”This is another of the very very sloppy or dishonest columns Brooks has been churning out lately. See Dean Bakers comments on it at his blog Beat the Press
Brooks Left Himself Off the List of Budget Deal Villians
Tuesday, 19 July 2011 05:19
Dean Baker, CEPR
Beat the Press
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/brooks-left-himself-off-the-list-of-budget-deal-villians
Sometimes this CEPR website loads very slowly, so I will summarize:
Brooks still peddling lines that
Current deficit is due to out of control spending (but it is also due to lack of aggregate demand due to recession)
Social insurance is reason for deficits (Social Security is in good shape and needs only minor tinkering, Medicare and Medicaid spending are result of broken US health care system)
Brooks also does sloppy or dishonest reporting on public sentiment about spending cuts, implying that even if the GOP is extreme, the public really agrees with them about spending cuts being most important.
The column is far worse than Cole indicates, IMHO.
bcw
So if David Brooks help strap on the suicide bombers vests, Obama is the one who invited them into the nation’s house with his grand deficit plan.
I notice this blog has stopped talking about how Obama wold never cut social security and medicare, and that we’re all Obamba haters eager to smear his character. Instead it’s how social security really is sortof insolvent and we need to reduce the deficit and CPI chaining and retirement age changes aren’t really cuts.
Nice pivot, almost as good as the kick-some-ass-WMD to nation building pivot by the Bushbots over Iraq.
arguingwithsignposts
Id go with sedition
Martin
No. There’s no advantage to declaring it until it’s necessary, and the public doesn’t think it’s necessary. He’ll do some more pressers – maybe an address to the nation – leading up to the date, and starting to outline the specific consequences of this. That’ll bring urgency to the public. Congress still has time, so he’ll give them that time. My guess is that there will be a partial govt shutdown, to show that he’s serious about us being out of money before he does it. It’ll be a truly last-resort move. That’ll get him public backing.
stuckinred
bcw
Who the fuck is “WE”?
Linda Featheringill
@jl:
Thomas Jefferson:
http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl207.htm
A law beyond the Constitution.
jl
@48: joe527
What an ignorant comment you made.
You are wrong about Jefferson’s quote. He did not recommend bloody revolution every 20 years. Your homework is to go find the letter with the quote and read it.
And everyone makes crazy comments. I don’t think Jefferson’s advice is crazy at all. If the debt ceiling is not raised there will be conflict of laws (a bunch of laws say to pay out the money, and another law denies the means to do it), and a constitutional issue (legal debts cannot be questioned, and denying the means to pay a debt is surely questioning it).
If the debt ceiling is not raised, and there is a financial panic, and no means to PAY OUT DEPOSIT INSURANCE, then come back here and explain to us why you think the debt ceiling law is better than all the other laws or the constitution, and how Jefferson was a crazy loon.
@55: thanks. I will read it and see if I misrepresented anything.
Dennis SGMM
@Martin:
Recent experience suggests that Obama will be labeled a dictator-in-the-making who will do anything to maintain his free spending ways.
Martin
You want us to talk about how your’re all Obama haters eager to smear his character? It’s not all about your fee-fees, okay?
Fuck, who invited all of the 9 year-old girls?
Linda Featheringill
@Dennis SGMM: #57
And this will be different? How so?
Martin
No point being afraid of the stuff they’re going to do no matter what decision you make.
Elie
It is not always possible to predict tipping points in advance — usually they are clear only in retrospect when the proper context can be appreciated.
That said, I truly believe that this crisis is a tipping point for our political system as currently designed, and whether it can be effective in keeping the wheels on the cart in this country.
While it might not be treason, it is really obvious to me that Obama’s administration has experienced the most unparalleled opposition since Lincoln had to deal with the succession of the south.
I LMAO listening to some of the asshats on teevee this morning talking about how much better Reagan would have been to deal with this and that its all Obama’s fault that he didnt have those vital relationships with the insurrectionists (aka Tea Party/Republicans). HA! (I also have to give an honorable mention shout out to our own homie FDL “progressives”, who have been tireless in their efforts to break this administration)
Can our political system hold this within its formal boundaries?
It does no good to bemoan how “stupid” the American people are. I don’t believe that they are as stupid as people think, on the whole, (though some may be). Mostly, I think they lag in awareness but eventually “get it”, as they did in 2008.
What do I wish for? I wish for increased awareness and engagement of the people. I hope that we can get a bit of Europe in our political social culture where folks “hit the streets” spontaneously. Of course, be careful what you wish for, as chaos has its own consequences and having overturned cars burning in the street aint exactly progress and increased awareness.
NonyNony
@Martin
Sadly I think that is the case. Congress won’t get serious about doing their fucking job until their constituents are on the phone with them demanding to know why their Social Security payment hasn’t hit the bank or why the federal park they were going to visit during their vacation is closed.
It’s truly stupid that people in this debate don’t understand that ultimately this whole thing is a failure of Congress – the President has jack all to do with this except that it’s his job to make sure that the spending that Congress allocates via the budget happens. It’s up to Congress to make sure that outlays and revenue match and it’s up to the Treasury to make up the difference via bond sales when they don’t.
The longer this goes on the more it looks like the whole “debt ceiling” law is just kabuki from the get go. Congress has already passed a law requiring a certain level of spending and designating a certain level of revenue. If you want to fix a “debt ceiling” then it’s up to Congress to set it on themselves via the budget as the Constitution directs. This is a complete failure of Congress to do its own damn job.
(And McConnell’s “deal” smells worse and worse every day. The right “deal” is a complete repeal of the debt ceiling and a requirement that in the future if Congress wants a “debt ceiling” they should do their damn jobs and make sure they’re not spending more money than they have coming in for revenue. )
jwb
Martin: Nice sexist pivot. That’s a great way to win debates.
res ipsa loquitur
Brooks is an asshat of the highest order, but I’ve got to give him props for this line:
I wonder when Brooks and Norquist last dined on quail together (at Karl Rove’s or elsewhere).
Martin
I have a 9 year old girl. It’s not sexist when I compare them to someone I have day-to-day experience dealing with. How about this instead:
“Fuck, who invited a thousand clones of my 9 year-old daughter?”
Better?
ppcli
Lurking Canadian @ 47
Good point, and it’s a common problem, not just in the States. I remember the in the last Canadian election before I came to the States (Mulroney versus Turner 1), watching the French language debates when Mulroney tried to hammer Turner on the fact that as Finance Minister, Turner had produced a big deficit. Turner answered that no, in fact it was a surplus overall – he had big surpluses in the first years and then ran deficits (smaller in absolute value) in subsequent years. Mulroney acted as if Turner was claiming to have begun with a large absolute surplus of money in the bank and turned that into a debt over several years. Most of the people I spoke to, and most of the newspaper blathering I read, didn’t realize that Turner was basically correct – they thought Turner had clearly been made to look foolish. The fact that Turner’s French was mechanical and sounded book-taught, while Mulroney spoke like a native contributed to the effect, but mostly it was the fact that people thought “deficit” meant “debt”.
That’s one reason why people completely underestimate Bush’s effect on the debt: it wasn’t just that he ran up huge deficits, but that he did so for *eight consecutive years*.
lacp
I’ll be first in line to grouse and bitch about Obama’s cuts to Medicare and Social Security. But he actually has to make them, first.
Elie
Donkeykong @ 45 —
I gotta remember your line — LMAO. Auto erotic economic asphyxiation…
Redshift
General Stuck:
They should, but the entire wingnut MO back at least as far as Reagan is to declare that they know with absolute certainty that most of the federal budget is unnecessary and wasteful, and then look around for some twisted indirect mechanism to make someone else decide which parts.
Redshift
ppcli:
And put in place policies that would produce growing deficits forever if they weren’t repealed or allowed to expire.
fasteddie9318
Recent experience suggests he gets called worse for waking up in the morning.
Elie
I may be crazy or stupid, but I see much of the Republican effort as around giving themselves political cover and face to get out of this trap… at least for their senior leadership. Some of them know they have the matches too close to the gasoline and that they made a mistake in playing with the pyromaniacs in the tea party.
I believe that this will be resolved without a government shut down and that the Republican party is going to undergo severe internal warfare… Bottom line, the message is already out there that they are crazy and irresponsible and the polls are moving to increase the percentage of people who know and acknowledge this. The complexity of all this “negotiation” with McConnel and perhaps others is how to let them look the best they can while backing out of the room. There is no win for them on this. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Only how bad they will look and minimizing how much more damage they can do.
SiubhanDuinne
@Miss Ayn Thrope #1: awesome nym!
@thread: what happened to format and comments after #28 joes527 at 12:08?
Redshift
@Martin:
I’m not sure there will, and I hope not. Though the immediate direct effects will be much like the “government shutdown” crap of a few months ago, what I’ve been reading indicates that if it happens at all, even for a few days, it could well do tremendous damage to the economy. Basically, the only reason disastrous effects haven’t happened already is because the financial markets still assume that Republicans aren’t that crazy, and we’ll have yet another last-minute agreement.
From Felix Salmon:
I think Obama and his people (though I disagree with them on quite a few matters of economic policy) do, unlike even the so-called “adult” Republicans, actually understand this.
Corner Stone
President Obama will never use the Constitutional remedy. I can’t believe anyone here could straight faced accept that he would.
And FWIW, I think it’s BS as well.
stuckinred
Elie
You are giving the electorate an awful lot of credit.
Corner Stone
@dpcap:
That’s what you say now. That’s what they all say…until.
Chris
@ 61 Elie,
And then vote in a bunch of teabaggers two years later who make Bush look like a paragon of sanity.
On the whole “American people are stupid” question:
I reread “To Kill A Mocking Bird” in college a few years back, and one of the things that struck me was the moment after the trial when Atticus explains that the reason Ewell is still so furious is that he knows no one in the town actually believed his fairy tale about Mayella’s rape. They supported him anyway because he was white and the other guy was black, but when it was over, they had even more contempt for him than they did before.
Two interesting morals the story may have been trying to teach: one, don’t assume that the people who make up the Gooper base are as stupid as they seem. And two, don’t assume that just because they’re not retarded, you can change them. Twisted tribal loyalty can make people agree to the most psychotic things imaginable even if they know better.
Corner Stone
@Elie:
Yes.
Davis X. Machina
The long story arc is that since I don’t know when — 1930? 1945? — Congress has basically been like a snake eating its own tail, hell-bent on diminishing itself right out of existence. And it’s shrunk up pretty good by now, only bestirring itself occasionally to perform various acts of political theater, like impeachment, showboat hearings, purple fingers at the SOTU, etc…
But Congress was clearly designed to be the senior branch. It can impeach and remove presidents, but presidents can’t dissolve Congress and call for new elections. It can impeach and remove judges, but Marshall had to basically invent judicial review.
And it’s something between a shadow and a parody of what it was supposed to be. Volunteering to be in the cast of a shadow or a parody isn’t going to draw forth the best minds of a nation, either.
So we get Bachmann & Co.
Obama may step high, wide and handsome on those areas where Congress has traditionally deferred to the executive — law enforcement, foreign affairs, defense/war — with often-regrettable results.
But his deference to the legislative branch on domestic matters, especially fiscal ones, which strikes many of us as extreme, is probably the way things were designed to be. I suspect the professor in him is responsible for some of that deference.
MattR
@Elie:
I firmly buy into the George Carlin quote that I will paraphrase: “Think about how stupid the average American is. Now realize half the country is dumber than that.”
Elie
Tombstone;
Go fuck yourself
Bender
You do realize that black Democrats are twice and thrice more likely to believe these things compared to white Republicans, right? (Not to mention that Guam will tip over and everything that comes out of Sheila Jackwagon Lee’s embarrassment-hole…)
Why does John Cole call black people crazy fanatics? Will the overt racism of Ball-Juicers never cease?
Elie
81 —
Okay Okay!! THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE STUPID!!!
You win.
Now what? What does that give you that you can work with to solve our situation?
You don’t make political change with that belief, and if you are not after positive political change to better or lot, what are you doing, what are we doing?
MattR
@Elie: Sure you can make political change with that belief. You just have to understand the people you are dealing with and tailor your message towards them. IMO, pretending that they will one day understand something that is actually beyond their comprehension is a losing strategy.
Martin
Put it this way: I don’t think Obama can/would withhold SS payments or declare a constitutional option without demonstrating that it’s a last resort. That means that national parks better be closed, because if grandma can’t make rent but she can still go up in the Washington Monument, then it’s all going to blow up on Obama. Same goes for the constitutional option – it must be accepted by the public as a last resort against an intransigent House of Representatives.
If the public perceives that he’s doing this sooner than he has to, they’ll interpret it (rightly) as a power grab.
Martin
Because you say so? Evidence please.
Elie
Chris @ 61:
Thanks for the thoughtful comment.
I can appreciate that my statement that the American people aren’t all stupid is controversial.
I just don’t see how you can take on any hope for political change or progress if that is truly what you believe.
Granted, change is not easy and “arc of history” is long — sometimes longer than our individual perspective exists. That said, things that would not have even been thought to be possible a hundred years ago, or even 50 years ago, are now accepted commonly. How did that happen if “stupid” is a permanent affliction to which we have no reasonable means to inform?
Hell, I am frustrated and pissed off too at some of the creeps. But I believe we have to keep a corner of optimism and positive belief about our fellow citizens or we definitely cannot hope for any progress or success for the social justice, etc that many of us believe in. I gotta believe and think even the most cynical have that little corner of hope.
catclub
jl @ 50 “The column is far worse than Cole indicates, IMHO.”
Well, that’s what you get for getting out of the boat and _reading_ it. Some of us have learned to trust the shorter.
Bill Arnold
@Martin
This has been a likely endgame for a while. I am glad that Obama has been working these negotiations with his A-game, because this is pretty much close to a Cuban Missile level of threat to the continued long term existence of the Republic. (Excepting the 100s of millions that could have been killed in a thermonuclear exchange if the Cuban Missile crisis had gone bad.)
(Since I am not a lawyer, I get to make this up.)
The president will be given a choice of which laws to break. The 14 amendment says (can be interpreted to say) that not honoring debts is a violation of the constitution, so that’s out. So he can chose to ignore the debt ceiling law, or ignore the instructions from Congress on how much money to spend, and on what to spend it. So a possible implied threat, actualized if the debt limit is not increased, is that the President can chose to break the law by choosing how to spend what’s left. These choices could have a partisan nature, and it need not be very well disguised.
catclub
“All ya’ll can let the global finance markets fall. I gots me mah gun and a basement full of canned food. I’m all set for the zombies!!’
Them’s good eatin.
Elie
matt @ 85
Seems like your statement contradicts itself. If you tailor a message towards a population segment, presumably you are trying to craft an effective message that will “work” and get through to them, right? Then you go on to say that its a failed strategy to try to craft such a message since they have no ability to ever understand it. Not to be a bitch, but which one do you actually believe?: no messaging is capable or reaching them or that you actually can influence their change with the right messages/experience over time?
mike in dc
I don’t quite understand why so many conservatives seem so eager to lose their jobs and crash their 401ks. I mean, they do know that a deafault would have a catastrophic effect on both the market and the economy, right? Right? They don’t? Wow, whose fault is that?
I just graduated law school. It’s already nigh-impossible for me to get a lawyer job, but if default occurs, I might as well douse my diploma with lighter fluid and cook it on the grill out back.
Poopyman
@Bill Arnold:
“Not intended to be a factual statement” has proven to be a valid disclaimer as well.
stuckinred
mike in dc
I don’t think many people on the left realize that these clowns think that they are saving the country and that Obama will fold when push comes to shove.
MattR
@Elie:
It is a failed strategy if the message you craft depends on them being able to make inferences and draw conclusions that they are not able to make. But you can be successful if you can simplify the message into something that they can understand (based on your understanding of your target audience’s limitations – ie. their stupidity)
IMO, you have to dumb down your message to match the electorate, rather than expecting the electorate to raise themselves to your level.
(EDIT: To put it another way, stupid people can still learn new things. But they learn them slowly and they require more help to take each step along the way. It can be successful if you realize their limitations and work around those instead of just assuming that they will figure it out)
dpcap
@mike in dc
It’s like my snarky comment earlier. Most teatards don’t have jobs or investments and are happy to live off of roast squirrel for the rest of their lives–they already are.
Jeffro
It’s quite a giveaway that Brooks calls out Palin and Bachman by name, but then can’t seem to think of a single specific radio show host who’s “stimulates listeners’ pleasure centers” (ech) and therefore is keeping the Republican Party from utterly trouncing the Dems in 2012.
It’s almost as if Brooks (and more importantly, those who cut his checks) want Palin and Bachman out of the way, but would sorta like that radio-driven anger/intensity to keep on goin’…you know?
Elie
93 – I don’t think that so many do want to crash their 401 Ks.
I think that whoever crafted this approach made some mistakes and got trapped in a stance with higher risk than they thought about clearly. They may have gotten a little confused in what they were trying to do with which tool (blackmail, coercion are not really negotiation tools unless you are a Republican tea party person). It is a very risky situation because they have set up a very dangerous situation and are having trouble figuring out how to get off the ledge with minimal damage to themselves and the country. I further believe that there is some risk that they may try to cover their tracks on this mistake by overlaying more chaos — forcing O to shut down the government. Its all major lose for them (and the country) if that happens but they are running out of time and runway. I am very concerned that they may not be able to manage this due to the personalities involved and cognitive limitations that put them in this spot to begin with.
Corner Stone
@mike in dc:
Actually, I’d suggest catching the family dog first, then BBQ’ng him over the toasty JD degree. All your dreams will be much more tasty if you put them to good use feeding yourself.
Because that $150K debt piece of paper isn’t going to do it by itself.
Stefan
Why should I believe Wall Street doesn’t already have their plan to reap yet another obscene windfall out of a default somehow. Seriously. All the fuckers who should have gotten screwed in the meltdown instead walked away richer than ever. As far as I’m concerned, this is all win-win for the wealthy no matter what happens until someone shows me otherwise.
Ah, no. During the financial crisis Wall Street really did go bust and everyone lost their money, but the government immediately stepped in and back-stopped the banks, thereby concealing the loss. If the debt limit is reached, that’s no longer possible and Wall Street really will melt down. Sure, some few people might profit but the vast majority of the financial industry in this country will go down in flames.
Here’s how to show you otherwise: the benchmark standard for credit in this country is triple-A rated Treasuries — it’s basically what the worth of every other financial asset is rated against. No more AAA Treasuries, and suddenly every bank, hedge fund, pension fund, etc. has to mark down its positions. Not pretty. Not pretty at all.
catclub
I am guessing that Mike in dc did not specialize in bankruptcy law.
There might be good business in (broken) contracts, too, also.
catclub
stefan @ 101
But they market is happy today. Maybe in a toasting weenies when Rome burns kind of way.
It really puzzles me.
The US stock market is essentially at all time highs.
Bond interest rates are at nearly all time lows. Inflation is far lower than it was during the entire Reagan adminsitration. And Obama is an anti-business sockulest (fixed for wp filters).
Glen Tomkins
Crazy like a fox
Refusing to raise the debt ceiling is not going to cause a default. Of course Obama claims it will, because he wants to frighten the Rs into not going ahead and refusing to raise the ceiling.
None of this has anything to do with default. The Rs want to refuse the rise in the ceiling that Obama desperately wants, because if the national debt hits the ceiling, the adminstration will be forced into one or another politically damaging response.
The most straighforward and proper adminstration response to the deby hitting its ceiling would be to simply ignore the ceiling. The debt hitting the ceiling creates a legal contradiction in which the amdinstration has to do something formally illegal: either violate the ceiling or violate the legal obligation to spend money exactly as Congress has appropriated by law. Violating the ceiling is the only possible choice here, for two reasons:
1) The practical consequences of violating the spending laws would be disastrous.
2) Congressional intent to raise the ceiling to cover obligations created by appropriations bills can be reasonably inferred from Congressional passage of those bills. At the same time, Congressional intent for the adminstration to become some sort of spending broker, deciding which obligated spending will be honored, and which will be ignored, is nowhere to be found.
The other option available to avoid fiscal and economic disaster in the event the debt exceeds the ceiling, would be to pull the ultimate fast accounting trick. The SocSec Trust Fund has over $4T, a sum that counts against the ceiling. Were it to not count as part of the national debt, we have 3-4 years left until we hit the ceiling. Now, declaring such internal borrowing as the Trust Fund not a part of the national debt would be an open and legally indefensible defiance of the law, as contrasted with simply ignoring the ceiling, but it might be thought less politically indefensible.
Presidential defiance of the ceiling law, however much reasonable people will be able to see that the president only took this course because he was left by the House’s refusal to raise the ceiling with no legal options, will be seized upon as Kenyan Usurpation by the right-wing noise machine. And off course the Rs would jump all over the accounting trick of formally repudiating govt debt to the Trust Fund as proof that the Trust Fund isn’t real, is some sort of sharp accounting gimmick, and SocSec is a Ponzi Scheme, etc., etc.
Of course Of course Obama doesn’t want to let them get away with that, so of course he maintains publically that the ceiling law will be scrupulously followed, over the cliff of national bankruptcy. He might even mean it, or will have to mean it, if he keeps making the public claim that the ceiling law is sacred.
Stefan
But they market is happy today.
The market expects a deal to get done. That doesn’t mean it will actually happen, though. The market may just be overly optimistic and discounting the possibility that the Teabaggers will actually crash the economy.
Martin
BTW, we hit the ceiling around May 16. It’s been bandaids and bailing wire since then. In August, we run out of bandaids and defaulting on someone is all that’s left.
catclub
My only point is that the market is schizophrenic and not a reliable indicator of anything on a day to day basis.
El Cid
A free online anonymizer website such as Anonymouse allows for reading any NYT content at any time. No comment reading or posting, though.
Caz
Boy, you really are dumb, aren’t you??
If the debt celing doesn’t get raised, they will have to prioritize their spending, which means some things will have to be cut. They can’t cut out the debt payments even if they wanted to because the Constitution requires them to pay their debts. So other things will get cut as debt payments go to the top of the priority list.
We have gone past the deadline three times in the past 15 years or so and never defaulted. There will be no default.
You really have to be supremely ignorant to not understand this simple issue. Add to that ignorance a good dose of denial and you’ve got absolutely no grasp of the debt ceiling issue.
Useful idiots.
Caz
Mike in dc, how the hell did you make it through law school being such an idiot?? There is NO chance of a default if the debt ceiling doesn’t get raised. They will pay their debt payments and with whatever is left, they will prioritize the spending and some other stuff will get cut. Simple, right? Why is this so hard for you people?
I know some of you are just outright lying, but the rest of you seem to be more ignorant than I thought possible.
If you maxed out your credit cards, would you need another credit card to pay off the other ones?? No, you would need to cut back on other stuff and start paying off your credit cards. At some point, though, the debt will be too high to work with – that happens after we keep raising the ceiling and raising spending over and over and over. At some point soon, we need to stop this insanity.
Why would you give an irresponsible spender more credit??
Stefan
If you maxed out your credit cards, would you need another credit card to pay off the other ones?? No, you would need to cut back on other stuff and start paying off your credit cards.
If I maxed out my credit cards at, say, 20%, and then someone came along and offered me a loan at 1%, why wouldn’t I take out the new loan and pay the old high-interest loan off, rather than cutting back? I’d be an idiot not to. That’s essentially the situation we’re in right now with yields on Treasuries scraping the bottom.
To pay bills you need revenue, and you can’t cut your way to raise revenue.