Boehner’s Briar Patch?

Googling “Obama” and “Boehner Plan” and “briar patch.”  Nothing there–at least nothing recent.  This seems odd. … Maybe I am missing something, but isn’t the Boehner Plan the President’s most promising route to the “grand bargain” (including revenue increases) he says he wants? It would set up a commission to propose $1.6-1.8 trillion in deficit closing measures–which could include tax increases and entitlement reforms. Then it would force an up or down vote under threat of default if Congress votes “no.” It almost seems like Obama’s dream bill, if you take what he says seriously. If you were cynical you would say that this is why he has semi-threatened to veto it. … By contrast, the Reid plan seems unlikely to produce a “grand bargain” of any sort because it doesn’t make avoidance of default contingent on passing a big new cuts-and-revenues package. … But I am not Standard & Poor’s, which seems to have waded into the debate fairly obtrusively. … P.S.:  Now Googling “S & P” and “Nobel Peace Prize Committee.” Would S&P have threatened a downgrade if Congress had just given Obama the clean debt-ceiling increase he wanted? If not, why are they making a fuss about plans that promise to increase the ceiling and reduce the deficit a bit?  … It’s lucky I’m not paranoid, because if I were I might think that, like the Oslo judges, they are doing their part to help our President out. ….

  • Anonymous

    Is Kaus doing his usual sputtering-out routine? I think Newsweek publishes more often than he does.

  • nvaresident

    All one has to do is listen to the language used by people on this board. SEE presents an argument, no name calling and includes links to Congressional Research Service and DredMalice and StephenKaus come back with, wait for it, teabaggers> Absolutely brilliant

    an open minded liberal, I guess? Dredmalice wrote

    lease just give ten or fifteen examples of the “many, many precedents for the President unilaterally not spending funds on things the Congress appropriated money for in US history.” This is so ridiculous that you have no credibility on anything else in your post (which is why I didn’t read past it-ed) You and me both, ed.

    Just dismiss anything that conflicts with your ideology. Way to think for yourself

    • stephenkaus

      nvaresident and DaveT3000,

      Why so personal? Facts not working out for you?

      I am not against reducing costs to deal with the deficit in due course. It is too large. I am against holding the country hostage over the phony debt limit issue, which is not about new spending and is about our credit rating. The confidence that the US would meet its obligations is one of the sources of our strength. Laughable that Peggy Noonan was on Morning Joe this morning saying that the TPers should “listen to the markets.” She started it with the “read my lips” demagoguery.

      What this really is about is the right wing trying to starve government, which is particularly wrong during the economic crisis. You can see it in the current attempt to curtail Pell grants and it extends to all programs designed to help people. Meanwhile the Bush tax cuts to millionaires are untouchable. In that context, I think it is important to point out how the deficit got so large.

      And yes, I think the Tea Party Activists (did I get their title right?) are idiots. but the reason is the facts, not their stupid costumes and offensive signs.

    • SEE

      You know what the amazing thing is? I think the responsible choice right now is, in fact, to pass a clean debt ceiling increase that would get us through to February 2013. Suddenly shutting down 40% of government expenditures is not actually a responsible choice.

      But, a massive cut in spending is not the same thing as defaulting. When the President says that we would default if the debt ceiling isn’t increased, there are three explanations.

      1) That the President is dangerously ignorant on a vital issue of the day despite unparalleled access to knowledgeable advisors.

      2) That the President is deliberately lying in order to try to terrify the American people.

      3) That the President is telling us he intends to violate the Constitution if he doesn’t get his way.

      Now, I will grant that as a matter of rhetoric I used only #3 as the explanation I presented. My expectation was that someone would try to defend the President by coming up with #1 or #2 on their own . . . which, while less damaging than the accusation the President is deliberately planning to act illegally, would force the person doing so to admit the President is part of the problem.

      Ah, well. The best laid plans of mice and men . . .

      • Dredmalice

        You keep repeating your flawed interpretation of reality hoping it will somehow become true. Can you honestly say these are the words of someone who is lying, breaking the law, or acting unconstitutionally? -“Congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility. This brinksmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets, and the Federal deficit would soar.”

    • Dredmalice

      I dimissed it because it was dismal. His source actually disproved his own argument. He is changing his argument from constitutionality to recent case law to..who knows? Still waiting on those examples, which he won’t give because (little secret here – I already knew there were examples, and hoped he would list them) if he were to, they would be so drastically different from the present situation that he would have to backtrack his entire argument. ANd of course it is a bit annoying that he is spreding disinformation about the constitution – alarmingly, the kind you see in militia literature (not so alarming – this is the Daily Caller, after all. -ed) I thought Daily Caller readers were only the militia wannabes (still, -ed)

      But don’t worry nva, I’m sure Daily Caller readers will just read your post and not bother to notice all the truly personal attacks on this website.