Just When It Appeared the GOP had Democrats on the ropes....

[djAdvocate]

here comes another debt ceiling fight:

www.politico.com/story/2013/12/mitch-mcconnell-debt-ceiling-101249.html

because, don't you know, it worked so well last time!

gotta love the GOP.  rather than letting ObamaCare ruin the president, they are going to hand him the one thing that can bring his numbers back up.

unbelievable.

[EVT1]

Box eating turtle strikes again

Is he fearing an attack from the right?  Is his job on the line?  Why piss off the whole country right before an election?  (except for a small minority of course that just got through giving Paul Ryan shit for not being conservative enough)  I really think this contingent of geniuses has no bar to hit, and only stands for fucking up the president in any way possible damn the consequences.  People are tired of this.

[marvholly]

I thought I read/saw somewhere that the Speaker said the debt ceiling would NOT be an issue. Has he lost his newly transplanted backbone already?

[cme1201]

Dec 18, 2013 6:23:58 GMT -5 marvholly said:

I thought I read/saw somewhere that the Speaker said the debt ceiling would NOT be an issue. Has he lost his newly transplanted backbone already?

The Speaker of the House has no control over the Senate Minority Leader. Separate structures for who listens to whom.

If we are going to get pissy over backbone at least make sure you know who controls what.

[rockon]

"gotta love the GOP. rather than letting ObamaCare ruin the president, they are going to hand him the one thing that can bring his numbers back up.

unbelievable."


   Yeah the GOP seems bent on cutting their fingers off one knuckle at a time, their political strategy and messaging would have to be described as incompotent at best but regardless of how terrible they have been at public messaging and opinion the questions will always remain.

1- Should a congress person vote for what they believe is right or should they vote based on national public opinion?
2- Should a congress person vote to please a paticular voting group in hopes of gaining political position?
3- Should a congress person let Obamacare ruin the president?
4- Should a congress person not hand the president something to bring his numbers up even if it is the right thing to do?
5- Should a congress person vote in a manner that represents the majority in their district?

   The OP would seem to suggest that it is "unbelievable" or poor policy to do the right thing if it helps the president or am I reading this all wrong?

[billisonboard]

Dec 18, 2013 10:02:26 GMT -5 rockon said:

...

1- Should a congress person vote for what they believe is right or should they vote based on national public opinion?
2- Should a congress person vote to please a paticular voting group in hopes of gaining political position?
3- Should a congress person let Obamacare ruin the president?
4- Should a congress person not hand the president something to bring his numbers up even if it is the right thing to do?
5- Should a congress person vote in a manner that represents the majority in their district?
...

That there is a mouthful to chew. What is the nature of "representation"? I believe a good representative votes generally in a manner consistent with a majority of their constituents, but also help to educate provincial minds.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 6:23:58 GMT -5 marvholly said:

I thought I read/saw somewhere that the Speaker said the debt ceiling would NOT be an issue. Has he lost his newly transplanted backbone already?

he and Mitch need to have a little pow-wow.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 10:02:26 GMT -5 rockon said:

"gotta love the GOP. rather than letting ObamaCare ruin the president, they are going to hand him the one thing that can bring his numbers back up.

unbelievable."


   Yeah the GOP seems bent on cutting their fingers off one knuckle at a time, their political strategy and messaging would have to be described as incompotent at best but regardless of how terrible they have been at public messaging and opinion the questions will always remain.

1- Should a congress person vote for what they believe is right or should they vote based on national public opinion?
2- Should a congress person vote to please a paticular voting group in hopes of gaining political position?
3- Should a congress person let Obamacare ruin the president?
4- Should a congress person not hand the president something to bring his numbers up even if it is the right thing to do?
5- Should a congress person vote in a manner that represents the majority in their district?

   The OP would seem to suggest that it is "unbelievable" or poor policy to do the right thing if it helps the president or am I reading this all wrong?

i am not particularly political, so my answer to all of the above is that they should do the right thing.

but i will add this to that: playing chicken with the debt ceiling is prima face NOT the "right thing".

[rockon]

   Let me continue the questions...
Is the right thing what the majority of your constituents want or what someone like dj thinks is right?
Have you every heard of one person playing chicken by themselves?
Is allowing the national debt to grow basicly unchecked "the right thing"?

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 12:51:50 GMT -5 rockon said:

   Let me continue the questions...
Is the right thing what the majority of your constituents want or what someone like dj thinks is right?

neither.  the right thing is the right thing for governance, and what is right in the absolute sense.  if your constituents think you should kill liberals, it doesn't make it right.

Have you every heard of one person playing chicken by themselves?

red herring.  there are about 70 people playing chicken with 312 million.

Is allowing the national debt to grow basicly unchecked "the right thing"?

no.  but there is a sensible solution for that.  it is called long term budgetary planning.

edit: the deficits now are about what they were under Reagan.  i remember a FEW people worried about it back then, but not many.  i was one of them.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Dems might want to strap in (and reserve their U-Haul now).  It's going to be a VERY rough 2014... notmsnmoney.proboards.com/thread/36733/ad-strike-terror-hearts-dems

[rockon]

   Actually I would probablly be much more inclined to argue that the "right thing" to do is not necessarily what meets the least resistance from peers in government, is popular in public opinion but what rather what is lawful, ethical and what after careful, objective deliberation gives you peace with your individual conscience that the best long term results will be acheived for the majority. I simply really question whether many of todays decisions are made in this manner.
   Your comment on 'chicken" is absolutely incorrect. Our country is quite evenly divided on their opinion on most of these devisive issues and I believe reports I've read conclude that the large majority are very concerned about our governments reckless borrowing and spending. Again no one can play chicken only

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 13:31:03 GMT -5 rockon said:

   Actually I would probablly be much more inclined to argue that the "right thing" to do is not necessarily what meets the least resistance from peers in government,

that standard would not even register for me.

is popular in public opinion but what rather what is lawful, ethical and what after careful, objective deliberation gives you peace with your individual conscience that the best long term results will be acheived for the majority. I simply really question whether many of todays decisions are made in this manner.

i think many of them are.  congress loves to make a big spectacle of their differences.  it helps with branding.

   Your comment on 'chicken" is absolutely incorrect. Our country is quite evenly divided on their opinion on most of these devisive issues

i have no idea what you are talking about here.  but i was talking about the government shutdown.  we are not divided on that.

 and I believe reports I've read conclude that the large majority are very concerned about our governments reckless borrowing and spending. Again no one can play chicken only

again, i haven't the foggiest idea what you mean by that.  i never claimed that anyone could.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 13:26:51 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Dems might want to strap in (and reserve their U-Haul now).  It's going to be a VERY rough 2014... notmsnmoney.proboards.com/thread/36733/ad-strike-terror-hearts-dems

the GOP went from hero to goat to hero in the space of 60 days this fall, and you are talking about what will happen in 10 months?

it is to laugh.

[rockon]

"but there is a sensible solution for that. it is called long term budgetary planning."

Sensible yes, realistic no.
Long term planning in it's true sense normally just results in leaving the problem for someone else to deal with. In our case it means we rack up trillions of dolloars in debt for our children to pay or default on and it is in my opinion the most devastating thing any group of selfish humans could do to another group of humans and their own country. Our generations should be tried for treason and human rights violations for allowing this to happen.
Every president has had a laundry list of plausible reasons why the problem can't be resolved during their time in office. There is a war to fight, an economic crisis, natural disastours, infastructure to build, human rights violations, another party to blame. All noble causes and reasons that justify spending way more money than what is available. I don't expect this trend to change with our pressure from some external force. We need leaders who will make the tough choices, take responsability for these choices and above all tell the whole and objective truth regardless of the fallout. Without the TP pressure or the threat of interupting their "easy street" as they know it I really don't think anyone (not even the fiscally conservative GOP   would even be talking about this mounting problem.

[rockon]

Actually I would probablly be much more inclined to argue that the "right thing" to do is not necessarily what meets the least resistance from peers in government,

that standard would not even register for me.

I must not fully understand your comment in post # 10 "the right thing is the right thing for governance" It would seem to indicate that everything that makes government move is always right which in my opinion could not be further from the truth.

is popular in public opinion but what rather what is lawful, ethical and what after careful, objective deliberation gives you peace with your individual conscience that the best long term results will be acheived for the majority. I simply really question whether many of todays decisions are made in this manner.

i think many of them are. congress loves to make a big spectacle of their differences. it helps with branding.

Your comment on 'chicken" is absolutely incorrect. Our country is quite evenly divided on their opinion on most of these devisive issues

i have no idea what you are talking about here. but i was talking about the government shutdown. we are not divided on that.

The thread title is about the debt ceiling limit. The government shut down was a result of two parties (not one) deciding that they would sit in their corners and point fingers at each other rather than have objective conversation. Our country is not divided on that fact either. They blamed both parties and the president for this failure to communicate. The Republicans hoped they could win the pubilc support for demanding a change to the obvious pending debt crisis while the Democrats wagered that the public would blame them less in the short term. The Democrats won that public opinion battle by a small margin not because their position is "right" but because the public prefers that our government work in a more orderly and professional manner. In short the Republicans actually have a much better position but tried to leverage their majority in the house and suffered the back lash just as the Democrats did in 2009.



 and I believe reports I've read conclude that the large majority are very concerned about our governments reckless borrowing and spending. Again no one can play chicken only
again, i haven't the foggiest idea what you mean by that. i never claimed that anyone could.

Sorry this should have read. "no one can play chicken alone." A game of chicken always involves two parties as was the case in the latest partial government shut down. (Regardless of how it was presented by Jay)

[billisonboard]

Dec 18, 2013 14:23:45 GMT -5 rockon said:

... "no one can play chicken alone." ...

Yes but you can be in a position in which you are simply driving down the road and some one decides they are going to attempt to hit you head on.

[rockon]

"Yes but you can be in a position in which you are simply driving down the road and some one decides they are going to attempt to hit you head on."

I will assume you meant "simply driving over a cliff " ?

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 13:59:32 GMT -5 rockon said:

"but there is a sensible solution for that. it is called long term budgetary planning."

Sensible yes, realistic no.
Long term planning in it's true sense normally just results in leaving the problem for someone else to deal with. In our case it means we rack up trillions of dolloars in debt for our children to pay or default on and it is in my opinion the most devastating thing any group of selfish humans could do to another group of humans and their own country. Our generations should be tried for treason and human rights violations for allowing this to happen.
Every president has had a laundry list of plausible reasons why the problem can't be resolved during their time in office. There is a war to fight, an economic crisis, natural disastours, infastructure to build, human rights violations, another party to blame. All noble causes and reasons that justify spending way more money than what is available. I don't expect this trend to change with our pressure from some external force. We need leaders who will make the tough choices, take responsability for these choices and above all tell the whole and objective truth regardless of the fallout. Without the TP pressure or the threat of interupting their "easy street" as they know it I really don't think anyone (not even the fiscally conservative GOP   would even be talking about this mounting problem.

i disagree that long term budget planning is unrealistic.  i agree about what the HISTORY of the budget has been.

[rockon]

thenationaldebtcrisis.com/the-debt-solution-a-proposal-to-reduce-the-national-debt/

Just for the record... I think long term strategic planning is necessary but it will as a minimum also require an ammendment or legislation that requires a balanced budget before any poltician of either stripe will put partianship aside and actually follow the plan instead of doing what plays best for the voter today. Would we agree on that and how would we the people make that happen?

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 14:23:45 GMT -5 rockon said:

Actually I would probablly be much more inclined to argue that the "right thing" to do is not necessarily what meets the least resistance from peers in government,

that standard would not even register for me.

I must not fully understand your comment in post # 10 "the right thing is the right thing for governance" It would seem to indicate that everything that makes government move is always right which in my opinion could not be further from the truth.

no, of course not.  but shutting the government down when you are there to govern is....well....stupid?

is popular in public opinion but what rather what is lawful, ethical and what after careful, objective deliberation gives you peace with your individual conscience that the best long term results will be acheived for the majority. I simply really question whether many of todays decisions are made in this manner.

i think many of them are. congress loves to make a big spectacle of their differences. it helps with branding.

Your comment on 'chicken" is absolutely incorrect. Our country is quite evenly divided on their opinion on most of these devisive issues

i have no idea what you are talking about here. but i was talking about the government shutdown. we are not divided on that.

The thread title is about the debt ceiling limit. The government shut down was a result of two parties (not one) deciding that they would sit in their corners and point fingers at each other rather than have objective conversation. Our country is not divided on that fact either. They blamed both parties and the president for this failure to communicate. The Republicans hoped they could win the pubilc support for demanding a change to the obvious pending debt crisis while the Democrats wagered that the public would blame them less in the short term. The Democrats won that public opinion battle by a small margin not because their position is "right" but because the public prefers that our government work in a more orderly and professional manner. In short the Republicans actually have a much better position but tried to leverage their majority in the house and suffered the back lash just as the Democrats did in 2009.

yeah, we really are not communicating, here.  i agree with everything you said here, but let's look at this objectively: what did the shutdown accomplish?

 and I believe reports I've read conclude that the large majority are very concerned about our governments reckless borrowing and spending. Again no one can play chicken only
again, i haven't the foggiest idea what you mean by that. i never claimed that anyone could.

Sorry this should have read. "no one can play chicken alone." A game of chicken always involves two parties as was the case in the latest partial government shut down. (Regardless of how it was presented by Jay)

jay who?  i really don't know.  and i understood what you were saying about chicken.  i just don't know what that means.  i never claimed that anyone was playing chicken alone.  i claimed that one small faction of one party is playing chicken with everyone else OVER THIS DEBT ISSUE.

[rockon]

dj, I don't think planning is unrealistic. I think following the plan is unrealistic unless there is some measure of enforcement.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 14:57:41 GMT -5 rockon said:

thenationaldebtcrisis.com/the-debt-solution-a-proposal-to-reduce-the-national-debt/

Just for the record... I think long term strategic planning is necessary but it will as a minimum also require an ammendment or legislation that requires a balanced budget before any poltician of either stripe will put partianship aside and actually follow the plan instead of doing what plays best for the voter today. Would we agree on that and how would we the people make that happen?

i think an amendment is a horrible idea unless it excludes periods of recession.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 14:59:42 GMT -5 rockon said:

dj, I don't think planning is unrealistic. I think following the plan is unrealistic unless there is some measure of enforcement.

i kinda agree with this.  i think we should have budget targets that are roughly the INVERSE of economic growth.  in other words, i think our budgets should have a NEGATIVE CORRELATION to economic growth.

[billisonboard]

Dec 18, 2013 14:57:41 GMT -5 rockon said:

thenationaldebtcrisis.com/the-debt-solution-a-proposal-to-reduce-the-national-debt/

Just for the record... I think long term strategic planning is necessary but it will as a minimum also require an ammendment or legislation that requires a balanced budget before any poltician of either stripe will put partianship aside and actually follow the plan instead of doing what plays best for the voter today. Would we agree on that and how would we the people make that happen?

Too much opportunity to "cook the books" for an amendment or legislation to be effective. We need to have a balanced budget be "what plays best for the voters today". Remember, "we the people" are the voters.

[billisonboard]

Dec 18, 2013 14:59:42 GMT -5 rockon said:

dj, I don't think planning is unrealistic. I think following the plan is unrealistic unless there is some measure of enforcement.

Elections must be the means of enforcement.

[rockon]

dj, I think you are seriously under estimating the percentage of people who are really concerned about this debt issue and the long term affects on our country. I don't believe for one second that only a small faction of one party wants this fixed. As a matter of fact a huge majority are really pissed off at our current position and want it fixed. The small faction you speak of was elected due to the over reach of the Democrats in 2009 and if the public views their position as an over reach they will suffer the same fate. Time will tell but their position that the debt load is unsustainable and something needs done before we raise the ceiling yet again (which is the thread topic) is very popular with a large majority.

[rockon]

i think an amendment is a horrible idea unless it excludes periods of recession.

Ammendments can have exclusions, they almost always do but one would have to be very careful to craft it in a manner that would only allow for exclusions when very specific criteria was met.

[rockon]

"Elections must be the means of enforcement."

Then you should be very happen with our current position and the fact the TP position is a result of that.

[billisonboard]

Dec 18, 2013 15:06:50 GMT -5 rockon said:

... Time will tell but their position that the debt load is unsustainable and something needs done before we raise the ceiling yet again (which is the thread topic) is very popular with a large majority.

Then how did President Obama gain reelection in 2012?