« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Hitting Obama’s nerve: A gaping chink in the armor opened up by a Cantor offer reveals what the debt ceiling fight is really about

Promoted from diaries by Bill

Amazing how the Democratic majority Senate hasn’t passed a budget in over two years.  Wait a minute, they haven’t even presented one.  They just vote down whatever budget comes out of the House and don’t present any alternative to avoid taking tough votes because there are 23 Democratic senators up for re-election in 2012.  And now suddenly President Obama is very, very anxious to get something big put together and stop kicking the can down the road.  Anyone find that ironic?  I didn’t think so.  We’ve become so used to this since he was inaugurated that it is no surprise to us.

For all the pressure, coaxing, and persuading the GOP to give in to Obama’s demands and let him get re-elected compromise and forget their pledges prior to the 2010 elections, the GOP has hit Obama’s nerve.  I don’t know if anyone has picked up on this, the GOP has known it all along but didn’t know how to exploit it until now, or suddenly the chink in Obama’s armor has been in plain sight all along.

Let’s think about this.  Remember Obamacare?  It really doesn’t start kicking in until 2013…the year after the 2012 elections.  Why didn’t the President and the Democratic Congress write the bill to get Obamacare rolling right off the bat in 2010 and not 2013?  After all, if the legislation was so good that Americans would see the benefits and Democrats would reap the laurels of political gain, where was the confidence of the Democratic party to get Obamacare started right away?  Because it was a bad, bad bill that was going to cause a tremendous amount of damage to the American economy as a whole and would imperil their hold on the presidency and their congressional majorities.  So they wrote the legislation to shield themselves as best they could from the political ramifications of their bad legislation.  Whether President Obama and Democrats in Congress want to face this fact or not, when Obamacare was passed, business hiring became stagnant at best, cutting their work forces because the uncertainty the legislation has created, and have been hoarding capital to shield themselves from the hurricane that will devastate this country’s wealth in a few years.  This could be interpreted as a vote of no confidence in President Obama.  So long as Obamacare is law, it will be this way.  Job hiring is going to remain anemic, unemployment will remain high, and a sizeable portion of people will be miserable and mired in despair.  The GOP presidential nominee will rightly point out to the American people “It doesn’t have to be this way.”

Fast forward to now.  The same thing is happening again.  Obama is all about keeping his presidency.  He and the Democrats know what a crushing disadvantage having the debt ceiling and the economy, with a side salad of Obamacare and other government regulation hindering job creation being the main course for the American people to eat and ponder before voting in 2012.  A short term fix and making this an issue in the 2012 elections is their nightmare scenario.  The only way he can keep the presidency is by the GOP caving, raising the debt ceiling and raising taxes while cutting spending.  He is becoming unnerved at the GOP’s steadfast insistence (let’s hope this lasts) about cutting spending, not raising the debt ceiling and getting our financial house in order.  It all became apparent with Eric Cantor’s offer of a short term solution that would put the debt ceiling issue back on the table next year prior to the 2012 elections and his temper tantrum that followed.

No Grand Bargain

Ladies and gentlemen, this is the whole ball game of the debt ceiling debate.  The Democrats know that they are going to lose the Senate and will not win back the House.  Their only hope of having any power in the legislative and executive branches after 2012 is for the GOP to give it to them by caving.  They can’t stomach a plan that cuts government because that would imperil their left wing base from showing up in November 2012.  The MSM is trying their best to aid the Democrats any way they can by framing the GOP as the ones who are willing to take down the country by defaulting.  As Erick Erickson rightly pointed out earlier, people don’t blame Congress for the calamities that fall upon our nation, the lion’s share of the blame always falls on the president. Barack Obama knows this and is engaged in a liar’s poker game for his presidency’s survival.

The GOP would be wise to remember that if there is no deal done and a catastrophe ensues, Barack Obama would put himself in a class by himself.  He would have a presidential legacy of being Herbert Hoover plus Jimmy Carter combined together.  He would have a legacy so infamous that the mere mention of his name would be odious to a vast majority of Americans.

Just as George W. Bush went along with TARP in fear of having a legacy of becoming Herbert Hoover, Barack Obama finds him in the same predicament as President Bush was in 2008.  The GOP has all the cards here minus the media as the Democrats did in 2008.  Either Barack Obama goes along with cutting government spending so that there is a zero net increase in the debt ceiling (69% of Americans agree with the GOP on the debt ceiling issue and spending in a CBS(!) poll) or he validates a portion of Americans who believe that his motive for attaining the presidency was to destroy our country and becomes the American version of Nero. Mark Levin is right.  It is a no win situation for him if the GOP doesn’t cave.

The way I see this playing out is the GOP will pass a reasonable package in the House when something will need to be passed shortly before August 2nd that cuts spending and has a zero net increase in the debt ceiling and send it up to the Senate for a vote, putting the onus on Harry Reid and Barack Obama to squawk and stomp their feet about how bad this is but in the end, will have to take a vote on this or worse, do something that Harry Reid doesn’t want to do:  Actually offer up a bill of their own which would require vulnerable Democratic Senators who are up for election to take a vote on.  If they vote the GOP bill down without offering any plan of their own, the anger of the American people against Harry Reid and the Democratic Senate will be so great that it could yield a 60 plus majority in the Senate for the GOP in 2012.  If they pass the bill and send it to Obama’s desk…oh boy…now that will be something I will want to see Obama trying to explain his way out of by means of a veto, thus incurring the wrath that the Senate would have had if the bill had been voted down.  If they vote the GOP bill down and take a vote on their bill which will be tax increases, bigger government, and incurring more debt and send to the House, just imagine the squirming of those vulnerable Democratic Senators and Harry Reid.

Finally, whomever the GOP winds up nominating for President, they can start right now by taking their case and the 2012 campaign to the public.

LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE THE FATE OF THIS COUNTRY

If you are for exploding deficits, more debt, more spending, less jobs, more taxes, then vote for our current president.

If you are for less debt, less spending, less taxes, more jobs, fiscal responsibility and a balanced budget, then join us.

It’s that simple.  We can only hope that the GOP doesn’t go the way of a Mitch McConnell a couple of days ago (he redeemed himself today)  and be persuaded by the MSM and Obama’s game of liar’s poker.

COMMENTS

  • zooboy

    I’m emailing a copy of this to my friends.
    Liar’s Poker, so true.

  • carolina

    No wonder ALL of the BO/dems offers are for ‘out years’ AFTER 2012.

  • carolina

    No wonder ALL of the BO/dems offers are for ‘out years’ AFTER 2012.

  • reaganbuckley

    Because that is a truly conservative thing to do. If we default, we will be blamed, not Obama. Nobody is going to believe a liberal democrat wants to shut down government. Small government, a strong defense and self determination needs to be our mantra. Compromising the full faith and credit of the United States will weaken us.

    • RealQuiet

      The Democrats have the Senate and the presidency. There is no guarantee that raising the debt ceiling will prevent a downgrade of the country’s credit rating. Read Moody’s comments. The message is clear: GET YOUR FINANCES TOGETHER AND PUT TOGETHER A PLAN TO DECREASE DEBT. Read this:

      http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2011/07/15/will-coming-debt-ceiling-deal-save-americas-aaa-credit-rating/

      As I said, the House will pass something reasonable eventually and force Reid and Obama to vote on it.

      • reaganbuckley

        Thank you for the link, though. We should at least pass something 2 trillion or greater in deficit reduction and not default. Yeah, defaulting may not lead to economic calamity. But there is a decent chance it will significantly worsen the economy. Is that worth it? I say no, especially if a liberal democrat is willing to endorse over 2 trillion in spending cuts.

        • RealQuiet

          Looks pretty reasonable to me.

          http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/15/gop-announces-vote-on-18-month-debt-ceiling-plan/

          • reaganbuckley

            nt

      • snowshooze

        The house has to start the ball rolling, right?
        They cannot proceed without them.
        I would think it is time for ultimatum, very unreasonable ultimatum.
        And when that crashes and burns, send them worse…untill they figure out the little game.
        How much? 10 bucks.
        Really? Too much. How much?
        50 bucks, you wanna try that again?

    • http://www.rightreality.wordpress.com andysmith

      Hate to break it to you reaganbuckley, but no matter what happens, the Republicans will get blamed. It’s the nature of this man-child buffoon in the White House and his state run media cronies.
      If there’s a default, which is highly unlikely, the Republicans are blamed.
      If there’s NOT a default, yet the economy is still tanking, the Republicans are blamed.
      If there’s not a default yet Moody’s still downgrades our debt even though interest payments are being made, Republicans will get blamed for that.
      And on, and on, and on. Basically, the Republicans can solve the debt crisis, cure cancer, and help the Cubs win a World Series and they would STILL get bamed for something.
      Call his bluff. Go all in with him. He’s been caught with his pants down trying to create a crisis so he can ride in and deliver on his BS bipartisan, pragmatic image he campaigned on. All the GOP needs to do is get in front of the cameras every chance they get and go tit-for-tat with him on his lack of compromise.
      His game’s almost up. America gave socialism, I mean “hope and change” a try and the people are catching on that he makes Jimmy Carter look like a rocket scientist.

      • post4u

        Here is a scenario that could develop. The House passes the Cap, Balance, Budget bill. The Senate passes the McConnell plan, but it will be the McConnell plan developed on paper by Reid (which is going on now). The Reid plan could be a 2,000-pager which is indecipherable, but Reid will bring the bill to the floor at the last minute, and the Senate will pass it. The onus would be on the House to pass the Senate bill.

        If this scenario develops, the House Republicans will get the blame if they do not pass the Senate bill.

        The only way the House Republicans would not get blamed is if the Senate Republicans do NOT vote for Reid’s bill, a morphed McConnell plan.

      • cordpt

        If there?s NOT a default (or a government shut-down), yet the economy is still tanking, he can try to blame the republicans all he wants: voters wont’ care.

        Obama owns the economy, the unemployment rate and the gigantic deficits. Barring an overwhelming event, that wont’ change till the elections day.

        Too bad some conservatives are so willing to offer him the type of overwhelming event that can be a game-changer.

    • http://www.rightreality.wordpress.com andysmith

      Hate to break it to you reaganbuckley, but no matter what happens, the Republicans will get blamed. It’s the nature of this man-child buffoon in the White House and his state run media cronies.
      If there’s a default, which is highly unlikely, the Republicans are blamed.
      If there’s NOT a default, yet the economy is still tanking, the Republicans are blamed.
      If there’s not a default yet Moody’s still downgrades our debt even though interest payments are being made, Republicans will get blamed for that.
      And on, and on, and on. Basically, the Republicans can solve the debt crisis, cure cancer, and help the Cubs win a World Series and they would STILL get bamed for something.
      Call his bluff. Go all in with him. He’s been caught with his pants down trying to create a crisis so he can ride in and deliver on his BS bipartisan, pragmatic image he campaigned on. All the GOP needs to do is get in front of the cameras every chance they get and go tit-for-tat with him on his lack of compromise.
      His game’s almost up. America gave socialism, I mean “hope and change” a try and the people are catching on that he makes Jimmy Carter look like a rocket scientist.

      • techartlead

        Be a man. I don’t know about where you work, but I get criticism ALL the time. Its part of being an Adult. There will always be people out there who will try to take your credit, and assign you their blame. But! If you consistently do the right thing most people will follow you.

        Reagan was hammered for four years and he took it without whining, and is now considered by ev en the Libs to have been a great man.

        • cordpt

          The debt ceiling rose from $935 billion to $2.8 trillion and was raised 18 different times.

          No meaningful spending cuts will ever happen without a republican trifecta. It’s already hard to get republican legislators to vote for serious cuts; it’s virtually impossible to do so if the Dems control the presidency or one of the chambers.

      • post4u

        I have emailed all three of my legislators TWICE to tell them they need to get in front of the cameras, they need to get into the newspapers, and they need to get online. There used to be a joke about Republicans and what GOTV meant. The old way meant Get on TV. The new way meant Get Out The Vote. Maybe we need to pull up the old GOTV right now.

  • Spartan4Life

    I’m kind of sick of this kabuki dance they are doing and Obama is winning the visuals. The one thing the House can do is pass legislation. Just keep passing bills and sending them over to Reid. Let him become the face of obstruction. Nobody likes that jerk.

    • YnotNOW

      The House has passed a 2012 Budget (the Ryan plan), and the Senate has been silent.
      We need to do the same on a debt ceiling package (cut-cap-&-balance), and then DEMAND the Senate to do their $*%#*& Job!

      (and make sure we highlight that in the press – the Senate isn’t doing their job – to shame them into action)

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

      “Just keep passing bills and sending them over to Reid. ”

      This is great advice. I posted on Rep Carter’s ‘use regular order’ approach over a week ago, same basic idea. Newt Gingrich gave the same advice on this matter to HughHewitt – “talk less, pass bills.”

      Pass the cut, cap and balance. Then pass a short-term cut and smaller debt ceiling increase as the real “plan B”.

      Actions speak louder than words, and the House needs to have bills that SOLVE the problem, and then they need a consistent 24/7 message that all the leadership in unison convey:

      “We said we needed to cut spending as we increase the debt ceiling. We passed that solution in the House. The Senate needs to act and do the same and put the bill on the President’s desk to sign. WE HAVE DONE OUR PART NOW ITS TIME FOR THEM TO DO THEIR PART.”

      Repeat ad naeseum until the message hits home.

  • renny

    raise the debt ceiling deal with some proposed cuts in discretionary spending to the Sen. and let Reid choke on it.

    The House can pass bills and forget whether the sen. is in agreement. The Reps. should not let o’s temper tantrums set the tone of the “negotiations”–o can’t negotiate, he never has done anything–or let the MSM bolster his narcissism.

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

      5 – agree 100%

      • RealQuiet

        They announced a bill they will send to the House next week that will cover an 18 month stretch that doesn’t increase the debt ceiling at all and cuts spending. If Reid and Obama decide to ignore it or vote it down, public anger against Reid and Obama goes up. Then the GOP House will send a bill forward that will be a short term solution, probably 9-12 months and make it a 2012 election issue. The GOP will be able to claim that they tried a longer term plan but the Democrats voted it down so they will be able to justify the 9-12 month plan they put forth next. Also, the Democrats will not be able to cry that the GOP was playing politics with the debt ceiling. Great strategy by the GOP leadership in the House.

        • Spiral

          The bottom line is that you can’t cut spending when there is a Democrat US Senate and a Democrat President.

          If you want to cut spending, you have to make sure that the Democrats are totally removed from power in Washington DC.

          Completely.

          Even the filibuster rule will probably have to be eliminated because otherwise 41 Democrats will be able to prevent reform of Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid.

    • concap

      .

  • sarg01

    … was an attempt to learn from the master panderer himself. That McConnell proposed it with no intention of supporting it, just to be doing something for the media.

    Just like Obama with “entitlement reform”.

  • oldfarmboy

    so as to give Obama more time to paint himself into a corner with his constant blabber about how important it is to raise the debt ceiling?

    • audax

      nt

  • gkendall

    If memory serves right, McConnell joined Bill Ayers et al in supporting the trampling, burning, etc. of our flag. Which tells me all I need to know about McConnell.

    • gekster

      Inquireing minds want to know.

  • http://www.ArchitecturalShots.com mdyou

    …call his bluff.

  • izoneguy

    Dem Congresswoman Brings Obama’s Race Into Debt Ceiling Fight

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/07/15/dem_congresswoman_blames_debt_ceiling_fight_on_obamas_race.html

    Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) used the race card this afternoon to assess blame in the debt ceiling fight. Jackson Lee, a black Congresswoman, believes the disagreement over raising the debt ceiling is because of President Obama’s race.

    “I am particularly sensitive to the fact that only this president, only this president, only this one has received the kind attacks and disagreements and inability to work. Only this one,” Jackson Lee said on the House floor this afternoon.

    “Read between the lines.”

    “What is different about this president that should put him in a position that he should not receive the same kind of respectful treatment of when it is necessary to raise the debt limit in order to pay our bills, something required by both statute and the 14th amendment?”

    Hmmmm,

    ?From Sen. Obama?s Floor Speech, March 20, 2006:

    The fact that we are here today to debate raising America?s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can?t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government ?s reckless fiscal policies. ? Increasing America?s debt weakens us domestical ly and internatio nally. Leadership means that ?the buck stops here.? Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchild ren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership . Americans deserve better.?

    I guess President Obama is a racist???

  • lineholder

    Robert Reich, economic advisor to Clinton, has been pushing a WPA pretty strongly for the last few weeks, and sometimes, reading what is being presented by those on the left can be a “head’s up” to what they have in mind.

    Jobs and the economy are being considered the greatest factors going into the next election. Suppose Dems figured out a way to “quick fix” a short-term WPA?

    Shoot high on the debt ceiling, demanding a one time vote before the election. Then once Dems know they have the financial leeway, put forth this jobs plan,spelling it out for the American people if they have to, but not telling them that the program is a “limited time only” transaction. If Repubs refuse, the electoral tide could completely shift. Repubs would vote for it, because not doing so would be political suicide.

    WPA goes in effect. Unemployment goes down, Dems get the credit, and go strutting into the electoral season riding high. Obama’s chances of getting re-elected increase dramatically. Plus, the left gets the chance to advance their own agenda of having more people become dependent on our government. And we’ll be listening to them rant on and on to the American people how government intervention and managed capitalism is a “good thing”.

    Of course, the artificially-stimulated demand is just another “bubble” which could easily burst the minute funds are pulled back if not before (because the economic impact of Obamacare is going to be huge), but I’m not sure how many people in the general public would recognize that part of it.

    So when Cantor suggested a short-term limited solution, or other even other suggestions that have been presented that won’t allow the Dems to have enough “wiggle room” to get their WPA, Obama had to play “hard-ball”. Republicans have responded by presenting their bill in the House. Now the ball is back in the Dems court.

    • Bill S

      *I* didn’t write this. RealQuiet did. I just put it on the front page.

      • lineholder

        one your diaries, correct? I can see the logic behind it. I just think that there may be other possibilities.

        Come to think of it, if Dems have figured out a way to use one of the many “the Secretary shall determine” options provided in O-care to set up a WPA, then this wouldn’t even have to go through Congress.

  • SoFiMil

    That way he can make his tee-time and still have time to lounge around before attending that extravagant 50th b-day bash he’s throwing for himself on August 3rd.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    Last year I read an interesting article on the 10th Amendment Center website titled The Federal Tax Funds Act.

    A major power shift from the states to the federal government after the New Deal has made states dependent on recycled taxpayer dollars for major parts of state budgets. This dependency has made states virtual units of the federal government. My own Senator, Mark Pryor (D-AR) regularly touts how much money he brings to AR for education, health care, or roads without any second thoughts as to the responsibilities of states vs the federal government.

    Due to the excessively high rates of federal taxation it is nearly impossible for states to raise their own tax rates to take care of themselves and their citizens. If the balance of power were restored to its proper place we would pay more state taxes and less federal taxes.

    Does it make sense, for example, to send tens of billions of dollars to the federal government to fund the Dept. of Education who then turns around and gives it back with strings attached rather than leaving those funds in the states?

    The Dept. of Education 2010 budget was $98.2 BILLION dollars or almost $2 BILLION per state.

    An old but great example of how this practice forces states to be subservient to the federal government is the 55 MPH speed limit. States that didn’t comply were denied federal highway funds.

    State governments should not be coerced by threats of fund witholding to do the fedes bidding.

    The best way out is for the states to take back control of their finances and I think that the The Federal Tax Funds Act worth considering.

    • renny

      and then the states started “revenue” sharing with towns and cites. Bad deals all around and mostly boosted public employee employment and membership in public unions.

      Neither a good deal for cons. and/or Reps. The unintended consequences brigades keep marching on.

    • techartlead

      I’m all for taking back goverment,and States Rights. But I think you are saying that States should raise taxes to replace revenue given them by the Federal Government, I don’t see how that can fly.

      • concap

        The States raise taxes to make up for lost Federal income.

        Then the fight starts all over again. Only this time it?s on a State level.

        Now instead of having to go all the to Washington, you only have to go as far as your State Capital.

        Now start throwing out all the bums that spend to much money and fight to bring down the taxes in your state.

        Try to push as many social issues down to a local level as you can.

        It?s cheaper and easier to feed and house the few people living on the streets in your home town with donations and volunteer groups, than it is to feed and house all the homeless in your state through social tax programs.

  • wennejunk

    “The way I see this playing out is the GOP will pass a reasonable package in the House when something will need to be passed shortly before August 2nd that cuts spending and has a zero net increase in the debt ceiling and send it up to the Senate for a vote, putting the onus on Harry Reid and Barack Obama to squawk and stomp their feet about how bad this is but in the end, will have to take a vote on this or worse, do something that Harry Reid doesn?t want to do: Actually offer up a bill of their own which would require vulnerable Democratic Senators who are up for election to take a vote on. If they vote the GOP bill down without offering any plan of their own, the anger of the American people against Harry Reid and the Democratic Senate will be so great that it could yield a 60 plus majority in the Senate for the GOP in 2012. “

    There’s little spine in the GOP to do what is right vs. what might preserve their cush jobs.

    • techartlead

      Are you saying the House GOP won’t do this because they believe the majority of Americans are against it?

      The only way they can preserve their cush jobs is by getting re-elected. If they think voting against this will get them re-elected isn’t that how democracy works. On the other hand if they don’t do it and we don’t vote for them then they lose heir jobs.

      They are not spineless so much as calculating on who will vote for them,, in theory at least we are still a democracy.

      • wennejunk

        What makes sense to the boots on the ground sounds like tigers in the bamboo to the Congress critters.

        See Erick’s post today on the need for better Generals: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/24/the-stupid-party/

  • YnotNOW

    becase #1 we have already spent past the debt ceiling (reached in May), and #2, even with “drastic” budget cuts, we will continue to run a deficit for FY2012.

    The good thing about the debt ceiling, is that it highlights and gives us leverage to make the painful spending cuts required. But raising it is required (eventually).

  • macperr

    Lets make sure we remove those 23 senators in 2012
    and take back the White House ……………

  • Pingback: Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system? « A Nation ADrift-Why?