« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The President Rejects the Bipartisan Plan

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  July 25th, 2011 at 10:06 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The President has rejected the short-term bipartisan deal that Reid and Boehner concocted.

Now Boehner is losing the headlines with the media claiming Reid will offer no tax increases and more spending cuts than Boehner, not that they are real.

It’s just another reason the House needs to draw a line in the sand and demand Cut, Cap, and Balance. Stop negotiating. Fight.

You can listen to me talk about this one at the bottom of this hour right here.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • BigRedConservative

    Take the opportunity and drive the wedge between the executive and legislative branches. Impossible to fail.

  • silentcal2012

    Reid is moving towards the GOP position. The headlines are positive. To suggest otherwise is crazy.

  • steve010

    nt

  • bigredone

    IF Boehner will hold the line, we will get a solution to the debt problem. It all depends now on making those phone calls and reinforcing the will of the GOP and conservatives.

  • carmen

    has stated for the better part of the week that Obozo has got his lawyers’ opinion RE: circumventing the Congress using the 14th Amendment tucked away in his desk in the Oval Office and is going to use it, citing that Congress (well, the Republican House) is preventing him from executing his duty.

    I trust the Great One’s instincts. This WHOLE thing has been a political game, never, not once was this Marxist serious about ANY of it.

  • steve010

    1st option was take the CCB- rejected

    2nd option- will be to take what ever the House now dishes up- looking now like he make reject this

    3rd option- ignore Congress and go it alone. Hugo Chavez in a 1000 dollar suit.

  • Matt In The Hook

    All Reid has to do at this point is be pushed to not count the savings from the wars in the reduction and we’d basically be at around $3T in cuts, a bit more than the Biden talks, with zero revenues.

    How is that not a win for the party that controls 1/3 of the levers of power in Washington? It’s a somewhat decent incremental step forward and zero steps back.

  • edintexas

    For starters, the MSM casts Reid as having a “compromise” plan (spending cuts and no tax increase – which they state the Republicans want). Then the MSM points to the House Republicans as being intransigent in refusing to compromise.

    I don’t know how you can say Reid is “…moving towards the GOP position.” In order to move his position toward that of the House Republicans, he would have had to have a position to start with. At the last minute (they claim), this Democrat move is a propaganda move.

  • johnt

    The automatic “Democrat is right” reflex ain’t what it used to be, and the now obviously fanatical Obama isn’t doing his party and anybody in it any good. That includes the slimy Reid, who plays well with the casino bosses but not with Normal People.
    Hang tough Republicans, please!

  • edintexas

    Boehner has already folded.

  • lineholder

    Whether he will actually do it or not is a different matter. But if he’s already made up his mind to do this, Constitutional crisis or not, then he is making himself and all the Dems look even worse by dithering around about it.

  • jaykali

    All these he said/she said private negotiating isn’t getting us anywhere bc so-called deals are made then broken and then we get a bunch of posturing around it. I wouldn’t be surprised if all of this so-called deal making is completely denied in press conferences later.

  • bk

    “Speaker Boehner’s plan, no matter how he tries to dress it up, is simply a short-term plan,” Reid messaged last night on Twitter, adding, “it is a non-starter in the Senate.”

  • lineholder

    Undermining the Constitution by these actions would be just another step in “fundamentally transforming America” from Obama’s viewpoint.

  • Ausonius

    MAObama seemingly has left the building: Boehner needs to take his marbles and go home! :)

    “Losing the headlines” ? Only if he and the Republicans do not hit the points that THE DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED SENATE rejected MAObama’s own budget plan, and that the Dems want more debt, taxes, and stagnation with its attendant high unemployment.

    Dictatorial powers under the 14th Amendment? Not impossible says “Republican Senator Grassley” as seen on HuffPo:

    ” “So people are looking at the fact that maybe the debt ceiling bill that Congress presumably has to pass for the government to borrow more maybe is contrary to that constitutional provision, and that the administration may take out [loans] on their own — just to borrow money — and say that they can ignore the law,” he said. ”

    “…at the FACT that…” Exactly how do you have FACTS with all those “maybe’s” and “may’s” ??? :)

    See:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Slickone/frank-dismisses-14th-amendment-option_n_892492_96062940.html

  • red_oakster

    That strikes me as more than a tad unrealistic.

    The outline of a deal was reached when Reid went to the White House yesterday. It was delayed by Obama, but it was not killed. A deal will get done that will be messy and unsatisfactory and the reason is the separation of powers and the accompanying checks and balances. Those same separations and checks are the reason that the modern Leviathan took a long time to build. It won’t be dismantled quickly for precisely the same constitutional reasons. If you want more, you have to wait for a conservative president and Congress. Fortunately, those are real possibilities soon.

  • carolina

    And Fox has still not reported on BO’s rejection. Why don’t the House & Senate pass this – and force BO to veto?
    Uhmm, Reid won’t let that happen. Nevermind.

  • johnt

    It degenerates down to, what pack of dogs sells out the other first, Senate Democrat mongrels or White House mongrels led by the Mongrel in Chief.

  • Ausonius

    Supposedly certain House members are rumbling about impeachment, if the 14th Amendment ploy is used.

    Convince me that Republicans in the House will actually try to impeach the First Afro-American President!

    And that they will do so with Democrats controlling the Senate for an impeachment trial?!

    :) :) :)

  • acat

    Ducks float along on the surface, looking all placid, but with their feet paddling madly below the scenes.

    Those who are rumbling about impeachment are anti-ducks. Nothing going on below the surface – or between their ears, evidently – and yet .. they want to be seen as men or women of action.

    Mew

  • Kyle-MI

    He can’t raise taxes on his own and he can’t cut spending on his own. The only thing he could do (and even this is debatable) is increase the debt ceiling. The problem with this approach is that the nation’s underlying problem is spending too much. The debt ceiling only acts much as a car’s warning light. The problem isn’t with the warning light; it is with what is triggering the warning light.

  • Tbone

    and take over the government. Strong words but let the Democrats try to defend it.

  • inovrmihd

    Eric, if Boehner has a greed to sa deal and submitted it to the President, you need to be on the radio telling all congressional republicans that they need a new speaker of the house. What if Obama accepted the deal. In that event, the tea party republicans in the house would take all the blame if it didn’t pass. Boehner essentiall threw his caucus under a bus, and that is what they need to do to him.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    As soon as we have at least 70 – more like 75 – US Senators. Until then it’s a fool’s ploy and anybody mumbling about it in the House is too stupid to remain in office.

  • Matt In The Hook

    Who cares that the Dems have been totally irresponsible in this process? Who cares that the Senate Ds never had a real plan and neither did the president. It’s the result that matters.

    There’s no way to spin a $2.7-3T deal with no revenues as a win for the Democrats, even though the MSM will undoubtedly try. It’s not big enough to be a “grand bargain” and there’s a fairly good chance that credit agencies will blast it since they’ve called for at least $4T as just a starting point.

    This will avert meltdown in the markets, but not a credit downgrade. Then the GOP can push even harder for CCB or something along that lines that can actually pass the Senate without the specter (and bad press) of total armageddon looming and instead just higher interest rates and a floundering president with no plan being the backdrop.

  • ghostship

    Even if the Democrats were to cave and adopt the Republican plan there would still be no cause for Conservatives to cheer because the plan is a joke. There aren’t any actual spending cuts in the the Republican plan. There’s absolutely no effort put forth by any plan to shrink any government program.

    In short, there is nothing really significant worth fighting for in the Republican plan. Franky, it’s all smoke and mirrors so even if we win we still lose.

  • alreadyexists

    Obama is practicing his tyrant rant and showing his base that can rule as a hard-as-nails dictator (move over Hugo Chavez). Reid is scheming and dissembling as usual. The media is getting daily high anxiety headlines and increased viewership. Finally, Boehner is preparing his caucus for the inevitable cave and collecting RINO votes at the margin for the last ditch push to 218.

    There is, however, a small glimmer of hope. Obama may surprise everyone and actually go through with the veto. If so, then the deadline will pass, and the world will not come to an end, and it will be shown that the king has no clothes. We should be so lucky.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Yes, there are ‘real cuts’ in the CCB plan, about $110 billion in lower FY2012 spending, lowering the 10-year trend by $1500 billion.

    Much more is needed, yes, but its wrong to say there arent real cuts. Fiscal policy will change significantly with Cut, Cap and Balance and if it werent, you wouldnt have the Democrats shreiking over it. It ends Big Government.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Reid can pass his plan in the Senate and then we’ll talk.

    Until then, all his negative vibes are just upsetting the markets.

  • charlesmartel

    Newsflash – the GOP is going to “lose the headlines” no matter what happens. If that’s our basis for making choices, we’re screwed. How about, instead of worrying about how the MSM is going to frame things, we worry about doing what’s best for the country?

  • crimsonandclover

    Democrats are the majority in the Senate, so it is their right not to bring bills to the floor they don’t like. When Republicans are the majority – as in the House now – they do the same with Dem bills.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    “Those same separations and checks are the reason that the modern Leviathan took a long time to build. It won?t be dismantled quickly for precisely the same constitutional reasons.”

    Liberalism was accumulated over many many decades. It was done by and incremental process of always demanding more. We need to demand the maximum but take the salami slices of incremental progress when we can. Liberals did it that way, we need to do the same.

    To dismantle Big Government, you need to reduce taxes, spending, regulation, corruption and the instrumentalities of all of the above. You need leaders who ACCEPT the goal. Hence the GOAL in the “CAP” part of cut, cap and balance is an 18%/GDP Federal Government. Every Republican needs to be on board that goal, pushing in that direction … if not, they are useless.

    It will be the vanguard’s job to ALWAYS demand more. Always. If the conservatives are happy with whatever deal that happens, something is wrong.

    Here is the size of the fiscal change needed $10+ TRILLION over 10 years. We are talking $2 T or $5 T (Ryan). Coburn ($9 T) is a pipe dream, supposedly.

    “If you want more, you have to wait for a conservative president and Congress. Fortunately, those are real possibilities soon.”

    Yes, in the meantime, what is the MOST we can do now to incrementally go in the direction we want? That is the point of these budget and debt fights. We have to work to get the most we can, based on the political leverage we have. It’s a tough call in some cases, and we need leaders willing to fight, more in William Wallace vein than in Scottish nobles cut-a-deal method, to stand for principles and force the choices needed. But it is better to make incremental progress than to fight and lose on principle.

  • http://www.skiloveland.com skicougar

    It’s still not coming through to many here and Boehner, Obama could care less about a default, the 14th admendment or anyone in Congress.

    The media will give him the cover needed to look like the savior and that helps him for 2012.

    To hell with anything else.

  • Goldwater_Conservative

    mr. “what can you say yes to” is now in his own hole he dug. Send him this bill, let him veto it and own the whole thing.

  • bk

    The Dems could have added amendments to the Ryan budget and sent it back to the House. Instead they buried it.

    The Dems could have added amendments to CCB and sent it back to the House. Instead they swept it under the rug.

    Meanwhile they have offered no plan in public, demagogued the GOP left and right, and demanded that the GOP quit wasting time and act.

  • msctex

    . . .and was probably appropriate a long time ago for a variety of reasons. But:

    1) Two consecutive Democrat Presidents impeached?

    2) The first Black (sic) President impeached?

    He more than deserves it, but it would only give the Media all the more to work with, and I’m afraid Obama himself is so far removed from Reality that if he sees himself portrayed as the oppressed hero, he will only be all the more emboldened.

    The wisest course might well be just to hang tough for 16 more months, and let the enormity of his failings come home to roost next November. There are some things beyond spin, and this guy is already resting comfortably in that territory.

  • msctex

    One of the markers of a true Progressive is an endless and necessary capacity for believing one’s own BS. Obama may well believe he has leverage, where in fact he has none whatsoever.

    The sky will not fall, no matter how long and hard he yells at it.

  • Matt In The Hook

    Because apparently logic is becoming high treason in some circles.

  • JSobieski

    Take incremental/directional improvements. Wake up the next morning and fight for the next victory.

    The U.S. Constitution was specifically designed to require incrementalism.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    Impeachment is not an option. Certainly not over either policy or performance. The worst thing the Republicans have done since Reagan left office – and there’s a lot to choose from – is to impeach Clinton. That single act of stupidity healed a fractured and beaten party behind Clinton and gave the Left a permanent talking point to be hauled out when all else fails.

    Obama needs to be beaten on the issues and only the issues because, it’s the issues that are important not the little man.

  • msctex

    Somewhere on here was someone sincerely calling for impeachment, but damned if I can find it now. Either I hit the wrong button or it was mis-posted, somehow.

  • Matt In The Hook

    It came posthumously, but he ended up with near socialized medicine, didn’t he?

    The Constitution was indeed crafted with a bent towards conservatism. I don’t mean in the modern sense but in the sense that it was created to prevent radical change unless there was overwhelming consensus. In the absence of such consensus, the best ruling parties could expect is incremental advances back and forth.

    Why should we expect this fight to be any different?

  • Matt In The Hook

    It came posthumously, but he ended up with near socialized medicine, didn’t he?

    The Constitution was indeed crafted with a bent towards conservatism. I don’t mean in the modern sense but in the sense that it was created to prevent radical change unless there was overwhelming consensus. In the absence of such consensus, the best ruling parties could expect is incremental advances back and forth.

    Why should we expect this fight to be any different?