GOP Failure Watch Part III

This is pronounced "Goat-See." right? RIGHT?

 

I thought this would be a bigger topic in this thread. That treaty yesterday should have been a no-brainer. It had 61 votes and needed 66 to be ratified. (Shows you how ridiculous the current senate is that you only need five more votes than you would for the most routine bill these days). So, you have a treaty that imposes virtually NO obligations on the US, but requires other countries to come on board with the provisions of the ADA. You have a former republican senator roll her 89 year old former republican senator, presidential candidate and disabled war hero onto the floor to implore the senate to ratify this treaty that creates no real obligations on this country, and the republicans can't muster the votes to do it. They can't because the crazies will primary them. Senators who served with Dole and who, once upon a time, cast honorable votes on a number of far more controversial and politically risky issues couldn't summon the courage to vote for THIS?

For all the talk about the discord between republicans and democrats, the true disfunction in this country is between republicans and republicans. If Boehner insists on having a majority of the majority to compromise on the fiscal bill, then forget it. They would have never gotten the votes to pass Mitt Romney's closure of "deductions and loopholes." As a long ago registered republican, I'm sickened by the state of the party. It will drag the whole country down the drain. You can't do big things if you can't even do the little things.

 

We are living in bizarre times. Republicans are the "champions" of spending cuts and have NEVER advanced specific cuts. Obama is the bad guy for not advancing a plan with THEIR cuts spelled out in terms that they have refused to specify. When the republicans won control of the house and brazenly said that they would immediately cut huge amounts, I said, "go ahead. You keep saying that 'Obama is spending us into oblivion' so it should be easy. Just cut the Obama spending, right?"

So how is it that they STILL can't make cuts? They put forward a higher age for medicare, which frankly is a reasonable position to start from. But nothing else. No military spending cuts. No specifics on discretionary cuts. They have to put something on the table if THEY are the ones advocating cuts.

I'm starting to agree with the "go over the cliff" crowd. It would be the short term pain that many libertarians and others argue that we need, and it would produce long-term reductions in deficits that would put us into a stronger position, and it would be with the spending cuts that the democrats favor. So, Clinton tax rates and lower military spending? Probably a better deal than we will get from the tea partiers. I would prefer to see the clinton rates go into affect for everyone, but to raise the lower 98% in a more graduated manner to spread the pain a bit.

Quick question. Do the capital gains rates increase on January 1 as well? I think a raise in the CG rate is more important than the top marginal rate.

 

Actually worse than that, I think.

DeMint's statement the other day literally said that he couldn't support the 800 billion in tax increases because it would take that money out of the economy at a time when it is needed to maintain employment; and besides if the government gets 800 billion more it will spend 800 billion more because that's what governments do.

He didn't, however, explain where the government would spend 800 billion that would keep it out of the economy...

 

Exactly. Of course, my liberal friends need to remember that simply slashing billions out of the military budget does not come without similar consequences. I'm not saying that we shouldn't. I think we should. But it will result in a short term loss of tens of thousands of jobs. Government spending is not bad, but we should make sure it is necessary.

 

Which is coming to a head this week. My guess is that the House effectively becomes two mini-parties. The Boehner reps will agree on a deal that includes revenue increases with the President, because in their district it's worse to be an obstructionist than a compromiser. The Tea Party reps will vote no and speechify, because they will get primaried if they vote yes.

 

If by worse than that, you mean that DeMint doesn't understand economics, well yes. But that is implied by bumper sticker thinking, no?

 

I've been there for a while. Ironic that Democrats are the fiscal conservatives in this country. In other countries, the right tends to play that role.

 

This would be construed as turning our sovereighnty over to the UN. Basic rules of Tea Party, no UN.

 

No, worse because it is contradictory. Most bumper stickers are internally consistent at least.

This was on a par with "Keep the government away from my Medicare!"

 

Good point.

 

Arch-conservatives treat their golden idol, Ronald Reagan, much like they treat the Old Testament. Some mandates are unassailable and others inconvenient. Here is Reagan on one of his upper class tax increases. (inconvenient)

[ur]

 

Yeah. Usually people just spell it phonetically. Do an image search for goatse and it'll all make sense.

 

That is some awesomeness. While my views have changed over the years and I might not vote for him again based on other things, that is the Ronnie I remember. An ideology tempered by pragmatism. THAT is what we need from republicans right now. Instead of wasting a billion or two on the election, I wish the superpacs would spend some money simply airing these clips right now.

 

No no no no no no no no no no

 

The CBO published a report a couple of months back that if Bush tax cuts aren't restored for everyone - Defense cuts restored to budget.

Unemployment goes to 9.1 percent and GDP will be 1.7 instead of 2.2 percent.

 

Republicans achieved their dream in Ronald Reagan. So then they wanted to double down on Reagan, get that much more. Then triple down.

If Ronald Reagan were reincarnated today and ran as a Democrat, the Tea Partiers would call him a socialist.

 

To Schapes: Link?

 

Print was too small for me to notice the language. Edited.

 

I'm guessing it's England.

 

I'm going to have to hate Reagan a little bit less.

 

He gets better from a distance, in part because emotions soften and in part because he was better that most of today's Republicans.