Chamber of Commerce getting buyer’s remorse over Tea Party alliance?

posted at 3:25 pm on July 29, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

No, this isn’t a “second look at Democrats” for the Chamber of Commerce, as National Journal’s Chris Frates reports, but it’s not exactly a love letter, either.  The CC loved the pro-markets, small-government demands of the Tea Party, but the flirtation with the debt ceiling has the business community growing more nervous by the day.  That has them hoping that Democrats can help bring the issue to a close before the crisis damages the markets and the economy:

U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbyist Bruce Josten wrote an alarming blog post recently arguing that Congress’s failure to raise the debt ceiling would have “calamitous,” “devastating,” and “potentially catastrophic” effects. It was the latest in a series of apocalyptic warnings that the National Association of Manufacturers, the Financial Services Forum, and other business players have been sounding for months about the risks of the United States defaulting on its debt.

So as negotiations on raising the debt ceiling went down to the wire this week, how much pressure did these K Street powerhouses exert on the Republican House majority that they helped create?

“I haven’t heard from them,” said Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., referring to the chamber. Huelskamp, who was weighing a vote against House Speaker John Boehner’s debt-ceiling bill, had lots of company in not feeling lobbying pressure from the corporate sector.

Washington’s top business lobbyists aren’t knocking the heads or twisting the arms of debt-limit deniers. Instead, they’re counting on the Democrats whom they fought to put in the minority to help save the country from default. The lack of behind-the-scenes pressure from K Street is in stark contrast to the dire public warnings. Despite the high stakes, little, if any, smashmouth lobbying is going on.

Why don’t they talk to the Democrats?  For one thing, the CC has gone all-out against Democrats since ObamaCare, especially in the midterm elections.  It’s doubtful that Democrats would give them the time of day.  Besides, the CC still sees the Democratic Party as the main threat to the economy, not Tea Party-backed politicians who want to keep playing chicken on the debt ceiling:

The business community wants to stay on the good side of House Republicans. At most, business leaders are a little peeved at GOP members who are willing to risk default. But, they say, dealing with the occasionally difficult Republican is better than another two years of apoplexy under a Washington run by Democrats. “Business invested in an emergency brake on the Obama administration, and they got it,” said Collins, who ran the American Action Network, which spent $26 million largely helping to elect House Republicans. “They don’t want to see that go away.”

So the Chamber of Commerce and the business community at large has to remain on good terms with the Tea Party after all, and hope that the crisis ends well.  The very Democrats that might have acted as a brake on Obama got booted out of office in the midterms, mainly because they didn’t act as a brake.  In a two-party system, there aren’t a lot of options.

But the remorse — if it exists or develops at all — might come more from a fundamental misunderstanding of the Tea Party dynamic.  The business community leadership is comprised mainly of big corporations that have significant investment in government interventions such as those built into the tax code.  Business organizations hoping to use the Tea Party to ride back to Republican majorities would want a return to status quo ante and the genial, more subtle corporatism that the previous Republican majority perpetuated if not expanded.  The fundamental changes demanded by the new crop of Republicans may very well have come as an unpleasant surprise to these business leaders, who expected the libertarian-tinged populism of the Tea Party politicians to fade.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Expected a pussycat and got a wolverine.

IlikedAUH2O on July 29, 2011 at 3:28 PM

CC delusional, truly unexpectedly.

Schadenfreude on July 29, 2011 at 3:29 PM

Corporatist are not on anyone’s side but their own.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 3:29 PM

Unexpected!

j_galt on July 29, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Of for crap’s sake can somebody grow a spine?

Cindy Munford on July 29, 2011 at 3:30 PM

that will pass.

rob verdi on July 29, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Obama Approval Drops to New Low of 40%

OT from gallup

hello

cmsinaz on July 29, 2011 at 3:31 PM

CC is a lobby for Corporatism, plain and simple. They are interested in government handouts. Remember, they supported the bailouts and the stimulus.

Anyone who thinks big business is interested in free markets or conservatism is delusional.

Clark1 on July 29, 2011 at 3:31 PM

U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The TEA party is Country first. The So Called U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Me First.

The TEA party doesn’t believe in sh1tting where it eats. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce with it’s open borders policy is busy turning the U.S. into a third world toilet, and a banana republic.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 3:32 PM

I hear most everyone claiming that the Tea Party is willing to risk default. We’re not. We want a reduction in spending AND in spending. What’s wrong with that? The GOP to its discredit had not done a good job of messaging. Of course, what else is new?

On a side note, I’ve not heard any GOP member defend those of us who got them reelected.

madmonkphotog on July 29, 2011 at 3:33 PM

The very Democrats that might have acted as a brake on Obama got booted out of office in the midterms, mainly because they didn’t act as a brake

No, they lost because they were Democrats in a GOP wave election. Short of changing party affiliation, they couldn’t have done much to avoid their fate. Just like in ’06 when a lot of “moderate” Republicans lost to Dems just ‘cuz.

YYZ on July 29, 2011 at 3:33 PM

“… failure to raise the debt ceiling would have “calamitous,” “devastating,” and “potentially catastrophic” effects!”

Funny how the Democrat lies and talking points found there way into a lobbyist’s blog…

… isn’t it?

Seven Percent Solution on July 29, 2011 at 3:34 PM

Corporatists.

OhioCoastie on July 29, 2011 at 3:35 PM

U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The TEA party is Country first. The So Called U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Me First.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 3:32 PM

Tell a group of Tea Party members that we need to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, then see how altruistic they’re willing to be in the name of putting the country first.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

It has been public knowledge for some time now that the Chamber of Commerce is an organization that has been co-opted by the D.C. go along to get along culture. They are nominally pro business and pro entrepreneurship but mostly a group that enjoys being part of the fat cat, good ole boy, Georgetwon cocktail party set. They don’t want to rock the boat. That they are/may be disillusioned about the Tea Party is a positive sign. It means the TP is doing something right. So up theirs. Who gives a hang if they don’t like the Tea Partiers in Congress and outside the beltway.

JimP on July 29, 2011 at 3:40 PM

Excuse me for crapping on a good meme the JournoListers are pushing, but it’s only the President and Treasury that will determine if we default, not some entity named the Tea Party.

MNHawk on July 29, 2011 at 3:40 PM

Yeah, look at the market crashing today……

Oops, never mind.

Vashta.Nerada on July 29, 2011 at 3:42 PM

Tell a group of Tea Party members that we need to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, then see how altruistic they’re willing to be in the name of putting the country first.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

You’ve got a point there. Everybody seems to tiptoe around 70% of the problem.

Vashta.Nerada on July 29, 2011 at 3:43 PM

The Chamber of Commerce is not unlike AARP. It seems to me that they cover all the bases, just in case. So they might be down on the Tea Party? That doesn’t mean they have nowhere else to go….

joejm65 on July 29, 2011 at 3:44 PM

The TEA party doesn’t believe in sh1tting where it eats.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce with it’s open borders policy is busy turning the U.S. into a third world toilet, and a banana republic.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 3:32 PM

THIS…!!!

Seven Percent Solution on July 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM

Tell a group of Tea Party members that we need to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, then see how altruistic they’re willing to be in the name of putting the country first.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

You’ve got a point there. Everybody seems to tiptoe around 70% of the problem.

Vashta.Nerada on July 29, 2011 at 3:43 PM

You can throw in defence spending as well.

Pablo Honey on July 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM

The Chamber of Commerce is no different than AARP. Self-serving and fickle. They refused to endorse me as a Republican candidate since the Democrat I ran against managed a general store. You can’t look at each party and see where the candidate is going, you have to hedge. The guy I ran against and his general store closed down after getting busted for selling smokes to minors about a month after the election.

Hening on July 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM

What’s with all the anti-Tea Party stuff on HA today?

Pattosensei on July 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Tell a group of Tea Party members that we need to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, then see how altruistic they’re willing to be in the name of putting the country first.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

Are you serious? Do you honestly think that Tea Party members don’t know that entitlement programs need to be cut?

And are you admitting that these are not lock-box programs?

blink on July 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM

What % cut are they proposing in their personal accounts?

Pablo Honey on July 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM

The Chamber and the Tea Parties coming at odds is just beginning. The Tea Parties believe in the concept of capitalism that the Chamber has forgotten. That businesses- of any size- should FAIL if they screw up badly; that risk needs to come at a cost. And that the immigration laws need to be applied, no matter how much the business community has developed a plantation mentality and grown addicted to cheap, government-subsidized semi-slave labor.

michaelo on July 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Congress’s failure to raise the debt ceiling would have “calamitous,” “devastating,” and “potentially catastrophic” effects.

Any perceived effects of not raising the debt ceiling, would be short term and nothing compared to the long term effects of raising it. I for one don’t want a compromise, let what happens, happen. It would be interesting to see what Obama would do if has to decide who gets paid. Of course he will go golfing and let his economic team handle it. And if we have to default, I vote for sticking it to the Chinese.

Tommy_G on July 29, 2011 at 3:50 PM

O/T

This needs to go viral – right now! It’s at the Powerline blog and it’s great!

(I’m willing to bet even Bishop will gush about this…)

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/07/pl-prize-countdown-2-dont-you-see.php

Bruno Strozek on July 29, 2011 at 3:50 PM

Tell a group of Tea Party members that we need to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, then see how altruistic they’re willing to be in the name of putting the country first.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

You obviously don’t know anything about the TPers. I’m in three different groups and by overwhelming margins the TPers favor both SS and Medicare reform.

NoNails on July 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

As a Tea Party supporter who is 58, I have informed my representatives that I am more than willing to have the age of receipt increased and a small percentage subtracted from my gross to save these stupid Ponzi schemes. If people can sign up to possibly die for our country I can certainly make a sacrifice, as piddling as it is. Everyone is not the same.

Cindy Munford on July 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM

The CC have always loved the pro-markets, small BIG-government demands of the Tea Party GOP Establishment

Ed, you are usually on target but this article contains so many errors that I couldn’t help pointing it out.

The business community, as represented by the CC, might prefer the GOP to be in charge because of their usual pro-business or pro-markets stand but it is quite inaccurate to say the business community is pro-small government. They are pro-small government in the matter of onerous regulations but as BIG GOVT. as you can get where it benefits them and reeks in the dollars.

Hence you have the McConnells, Murkowskis, the late Ted Stevens, etc… (BIG Govt. Republicans and best friends with the business community and of course… earmarks overlords!)

TheRightMan on July 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM

first of all, the Chamber of Commerce should know that herding cats is a learning experience. Secondly, Obama and company just wanted to raise the debt ceiling and go about the business of spending it as fast as they can, “We don’t need no restraints on spending.” .

We’ll see how this ends, but so far they’ve done a credible job of trying to get the job done, with little help from leadership.

IMHO, they should have told the Senate their plan is sitting on Harry’s Desk, either they vote on it or they keep it tabled, they can do what they want. When they’re ready to negotiate it, give them a call.

bflat879 on July 29, 2011 at 3:53 PM

You can throw in defence spending as well.

Pablo Honey on July 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM

Yes, that is another 10% of the problem, but do the math.

Vashta.Nerada on July 29, 2011 at 3:54 PM

To Cindy- It’s not about the money. If 200 million people sent them $1.00 a day, that would be an extra $200 million a day and, at the end of the year, the debt would still be higher, Social Security and Medicare will still be in trouble, and spending will still be out of control. After a while, you wonder why you’re sending them money in the first place.

Get spending under control first, then think about revenue, but for debt reduction only and with no increases in debt.

bflat879 on July 29, 2011 at 3:56 PM

The Chamber of Commerce? Who still listens to these people or cares what they think?

rrpjr on July 29, 2011 at 3:57 PM

God, I love the comments here. The tea party is full of smart, engaging people who understand concepts like strategy, teamwork, and incremental success, but you wouldn’t know it from the vocal minority of nutjobs who claim to lead it. Those vocal few are too busy alienating all potential allies to score any real victory against Obama and the tax-and-spend Democrats.

Caiwyn on July 29, 2011 at 3:58 PM

You obviously don’t know anything about the TPers. I’m in three different groups and by overwhelming margins the TPers favor both SS and Medicare reform.

NoNails on July 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Perhaps you don’t know them as well as you think you do.

This poll has 70% of self-identified Tea Party members opposing cuts to Medicare and Social Security, with only 28% approving.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:59 PM

As a Tea Party supporter who is 58, I have informed my representatives that I am more than willing to have the age of receipt increased and a small percentage subtracted from my gross to save these stupid Ponzi schemes. If people can sign up to possibly die for our country I can certainly make a sacrifice, as piddling as it is. Everyone is not the same.

Cindy Munford on July 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM

I have already planned to not get anything out of them, and still pay into them until I retire. That is the level of sacrifice needed, IMO.

People assume that they pay a 30% marginal income tax, and 15% SS tax, when in actuality, we are all paying 45% income tax, since the money is just lumped together, then the Treasury spends twice that amount.

Vashta.Nerada on July 29, 2011 at 3:59 PM

herding cats is a learning experience
bflat879 on July 29, 2011 at 3:53 PM

That’s pretty good. But it looks to me like the Tea Party members have some sort of group-think going on. Its a shame. Once the Tea Party marches became actual groups with leaders and spokesmen, the freedom to your own opinion went out the window.

Keyser-Soze on July 29, 2011 at 4:01 PM

Are you serious? Do you honestly think that Tea Party members don’t know that entitlement programs need to be cut?

And are you admitting that these are not lock-box programs?

blink on July 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM

Knowing that entitlement programs need to be cut =/= wanting those programs to be cut.

Polls have consistently shown that large numbers of Republicans, Democrats and self-identified Tea Party members understand that entitlement reform is necessary.

Polls have also consistently shown that majorities of each group – EVEN Tea Partiers – balk when it comes to ACTUALLY taking action to do that.

Opposition to entitlement reform has been talked about on this very site.

And there’s also this Big Government piece, which references a WSJ poll. The money quote:

According to the Wall Street Journal who co-sponsored the poll, “Americans across all age groups and ideologies said by large margins that it was ‘unacceptable’ to make significant cuts in entitlement programs in order to reduce the federal deficit.”

No wonder President Obama in his State of the Union speech only paid lip service to Social Security and Medicare reform, mentioning each by name only once in over 7,000 words of text. He knows what Americans are really about as summed up in the old adage: “It all depends on whose ox is being gored.”

And the poll exposes a potentially discrediting hypocrisy within the Tea Party movement who claim to be for smaller government and a return to a libertarian Nirvana. Consider: by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, self-described Tea Partiers declared significant cuts to Social Security “unacceptable.”

Vyce on July 29, 2011 at 4:03 PM

Default? Why are they buying into that?

What they ought to be concerned about is a possible domino effect concerning municipal bonds.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 29, 2011 at 4:10 PM

this effort by the establishment to sideline the TEa party before the 2012 elections will fail. If anything it simply exposes more and more of their socialist like connections and telegraphs to the TEa party new areas to that will need to be fixed.

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:10 PM

Perhaps you don’t know them as well as you think you do.

This poll has 70% of self-identified Tea Party members opposing cuts to Medicare and Social Security, with only 28% approving.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:59 PM

And I think that poll is crap. TPers, as a whole, understand that entitlements are the biggest hurdle in achieving a balanced budget and reducing the national debt. Anyone who claims to be a TPer and is against SS and Medicare reform is very much in the minority. While it’s true that most of those already on SS and Medicare don’t want their benefits cut, those who haven’t turned 55, mostly agree that reform is necessary.

The D’s try to paint the TPers as a bunch of doddering old fools who draw SS and Medicare benefits while being unaware that they’re government programs. That’s simply not the case. The average age of the members in my TP groups is around 45. I’m 62 and I’m one of the oldest in all three groups. Most of them don’t believe that SS or Medicare will be there for them unless there are reforms which include increased deductions, older eligibility thresholds, and means testing.

NoNails on July 29, 2011 at 4:12 PM

$14 Trillion in debt and $9 Trillion on it’s way in the base line budget…

… and you don’t think the K-Street lobbyists had anything to do with it?

Seven Percent Solution on July 29, 2011 at 4:13 PM

“What’s with all the anti-Tea Party stuff on HA today?
Pattosensei on July 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM”

They are caught up in the mass hysteria that has gripped many Repubs including Laura I. and Ann C. They’be been stampeded by the various apocalyptic narratives that no one has provided any credible evidence for or attempted to get out counter-memes placing the blame where it belongs, on the Dems.

You know how it goes. When people panic they don’t think. Then too many of these folks, I am sure, are very nervous that their investment potfolios are going to take a big hit because the Wall Streeters, who gave us the mortgage derivatives disaster, have been whispering in their ears about 1929 all over again if we don’t raise the debt ceiling. Of course the Wall Streeters are up to no good of soome kind again probably and are just covering their own rear ends.

Cui bono, on Wall Street if the debt ceiling is raised?

JimP on July 29, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Damnit Ed! When did you go soft on us?!?! We all knew cutting spending would be tough and that Republicans would be blamed for everything.

The difference between now and 1995 is that the deficit is just so God awful that even if the Democrats retake control of everything they will be facing some tough choices which they will not resolve meaning the GOP gets back in power to cut again.

taney71 on July 29, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Tell a group of Tea Party members that we need to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, then see how altruistic they’re willing to be in the name of putting the country first.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

Are you serious? Do you honestly think that Tea Party members don’t know that entitlement programs need to be cut?

And are you admitting that these are not lock-box programs?

blink on July 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM

This depends how it’s done. If we try to first cut Medicare and SS, I oppose that as well. A balanced, across the board all-inclusive cut however would be seen much differently by the Tea Party. Slash government departments, end DoEd and DoEn, cut government salaries, end giveaways to PBS and ACORN et al, end farm subsidies to Bruce Springsteen, and then let’s talk cuts, or even better, means-testing and privatization of SS and Medicare.

We also need award-based reporting programs to end fraud in Social Security Disability, Welfare, Food Stamps, WIC, Medicaid, etc. We also need to make it clear to states that Medicaid money will not be spent on illegal aliens.

slickwillie2001 on July 29, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Where’s Peter Jackson when you need him?……..The Hobbits isn’t the same without him.

Falz on July 29, 2011 at 4:17 PM

What’s with all the anti-Tea Party stuff on HA today?

Pattosensei on July 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM

What do you think this debtlimit debate is all about? the establishment has decided to try to sideline the tea party before the election of 2012. The debt limit debate is simply the next phase of the plan. They want to pain the Tea party as fringe just like the dems wanted to do. progressives only really have one game plan doesnt matter if the progressives are on the left or right.

the TEA party is a direct threat to the progressive mindset of both major parties. It represents a direct threat to the status quo that includes big business at the government teat.

look for the left and right progressive establishment to make common cause to try to destory the TEA party just liike they made common cause to try to destroy Gov Palin. Come to think of it. They are using the same game plan they used with GOV Palin to now attack the TEA party.

Rush said it very well today.

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Considering the alternative, the Tea Party is struggling to get this country back into fiscal ground and not sinking.

To those that think Tea Party are not thinking about Medicare and Social Security, we are. Consider that Obama too $500 Billion out of Medicare and much of Obama’s policies are the drain on this economy. Which is why we have a 1.3 GDP rate today.

No Compromise.

Kini on July 29, 2011 at 4:20 PM

What’s with all the anti-Tea Party stuff on HA today?

Pattosensei on July 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Others are finally catching on to the fact that some of you TP folks are a bit, shall we say, schizophrenic.

Vyce on July 29, 2011 at 4:21 PM

U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The TEA party is Country first. The So Called U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Me First.

Amen. All the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is looking for is a fast buck. These guys would turn their daughters into prostitutes if there was enough profit in it.

bw222 on July 29, 2011 at 4:21 PM

look for the left and right progressive establishment to make common cause to try to destory the TEA party just liike they made common cause to try to destroy Gov Palin. Come to think of it. They are using the same game plan they used with GOV Palin to now attack the TEA party.

But you’ll rise up and destroy them both, right?

Just like Sarah Palin ha– OH WAIT.

Vyce on July 29, 2011 at 4:22 PM

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Under what scenario do Republicans and/or Tea Partiers come out ahead in the debt limit situation? I can’t think of any.

Obama is iching to have a reason to deny Grandma her SS check, and the LSM is dying to blame it on you know who.

Really Right on July 29, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Tea Party Puts Country Before Party.

Remember that.

Kini on July 29, 2011 at 4:30 PM

I felt like I was the only (R) at the last CofC networking event I went to.

Just saying.

southsideironworks on July 29, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Corporatist are not on anyone’s side but their own.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 3:29 PM

Just so.

The business community leadership is comprised mainly of big corporations that have significant investment in government interventions such as those built into the tax code.

Wait until they find out our goal is to eliminate those “government interventions” currently riddling the tax code. Am I to understand they wouldn’t be willing to trade those “interventions” for a corporate tax rate of, say, 10 percent??

SukieTawdry on July 29, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Regarding the poll often cited on this thread, if one is a “self-described” TEA Partier, does that mean they are all telling the truth? Heck, if I received a polling call for a democrat perspective, I might be willing to tell them I’m a democrat. ;o)

kakypat on July 29, 2011 at 4:31 PM

The problem I have with “staunch conservatives” is their hell-bent mission to get Democrats elected. They tend to back candidates that don’t have a snowball’s chance in Gerlach of getting elected and often refuse to support Republican nominees if they aren’t 100% of their desired position on issues.

Do I like McCain? Hell no. But he wouldn’t have been as bad for this country as Obama has been. The damage Obama has done is going to haunt us for generations. He has raided the wallets of people who aren’t even born yet. Yet you had these nincompoop “conservatives” refusing to vote for the Presidential slot in the general election and quite possibly got Obama elected.

So far Boehner has presented two budgets to the Senate (the Ryan budget and Cut, Cap, and Balance) which have both been refused by the Democrats in the Senate. He has made several debt ceiling proposals to both the Senate and the White House, all of which have been declared DOA. Boehner can not force the Senate to approve something. He can not force the President to sign it. All he can hope to do is moderate it somewhat.

The Democrats want a “pure” debt ceiling extension that has no strings attached. They want it big enough so that the issue does not come up again between now and the November elections next year.

The Republicans want restrictions on spending or at least an interim increase in the debt ceiling now so that a more lasting fix can be made between now and next November. The Democrats do not want public attention focused on their deficit spending between now and the election.

The Democrats hold the Senate and the White House. The only power the House Republicans have is “passive-aggressive”. They can not actually DO anything, they can only refuse to do something. They have the power to block a budget’s approval but they have no power to actually get the budget that they want passed in the Senate and signed in the White House.

Every time some Tea Party “leader” lashes out at Boenher, it is another victory for the Democrats. Every day this goes on is another day that Fast and Furious or Obama’s bungling in Libya isn’t on the front page. The Democrats win by dragging this out and fracturing the Republican Party.

What would a “Tea Party” “victory” look like? A bill out of the Senate that neither the Senate nor the President will sign. Spin from the news media that about 80% of the people will take as the Republicans not taking the issue seriously. The majority of the people want this issue settled. The majority of people know pretty much only what they hear on the news broadcast on the way to work. The majority of the people aren’t reading Hot Air or Daily Kos. They don’t give a rat’s pair of hips about the political posturing and the Tea Party often comes across just like the hard line Progressives do; spoiled children throwing a tantrum and threatening to hold their breath until they get what they want.

Where are the grownups in this game? I don’t see ANY on the Democrat side. I see a few on the Republican side.

crosspatch on July 29, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Alinsky lives !!
Ed Morissey putting his app. in for Obamanation Kapo.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on July 29, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Excuse me for crapping on a good meme the JournoListers are pushing, but it’s only the President and Treasury that will determine if we default, not some entity named the Tea Party.

MNHawk on July 29, 2011 at 3:40 PM

THIS!

The debt ceiling day of reckoning may come, and go, without a bill passed and signed into law. But, that doesn’t mean we will be in default.

Jellystone National Park might be shut down, though…

kakypat on July 29, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Tell a group of Tea Party members that we need to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, then see how altruistic they’re willing to be in the name of putting the country first.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

You think it isn’t coming? You really think that the only people who are going to see their taxes increased and their services decreased is the wealthy? I have a bridge I’d like to sell you. It’s called divide and conquer the Federal Government has been playing it since there has been a Federal Government. They start with the strong – the wealthy -it’ll be easy to manage the vulnerable (Sheep) when the wealthy are gone. But you go on believing in unicorns and rainbows, and your protected class status. Barack Obama: taxes are necessarily going to go up in the out lying years starting in 2013. There are 10,000 baby boomers beginning to draw from both those programs a day. You don’t think there isn’t going to be rationing- they call it means testing – in bullsh1t speak. Guess who get’s to decide the measurement for the means test? Hint – not you. What color is the sky in your world?

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Vyce on July 29, 2011 at 4:22 PM

It is so refreashing for you to finally show your true colors.

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:35 PM

How does no compromise on the debt ceiling solve any problems? If we don’t raise the debt ceiling and the stock market tanks and interest rates go up, how is the economy helped?
I want the spending to stop as much of the next guy and am willing to see retirement ages raised and benefits cut. But that is not going to happen in the next couple of weeks. So how do you save the economy by refusing to compromise?

bopbottle on July 29, 2011 at 4:35 PM

And I think that poll is crap. TPers, as a whole, understand that entitlements are the biggest hurdle in achieving a balanced budget and reducing the national debt. Anyone who claims to be a TPer and is against SS and Medicare reform is very much in the minority.

NoNails on July 29, 2011 at 4:12 PM

I’d find that more believable if not for signs like this

Signs like “Keep the govt. out of my Medicare” too well represent what the “Tea Party” as devolved into.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Perhaps you don’t know them as well as you think you do.

This poll has 70% of self-identified Tea Party members opposing cuts to Medicare and Social Security, with only 28% approving.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Other “expenses” are conveniently being ignored. They knew damn well that the TEA Party demographic itself would be hurt most by cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Toss in millions of illegal immigrants and those who get paid under the table for good measure.

The fact that millions receive SSI payments that never have worked, or who are far below retirement age is ignored. The fact that corporations have been expanding the privatization of health care, insurance companies and malpractice firms have been driving up health costs in order to maximize profit is ignored. Could also mention insurance and Medicade fraud.

Part of the problem is indeed from the right. Privatization isn’t a panacea. Some things are better left to government, and some things aren’t. Government should control and levy taxes for those things that are in the interest of the majority of citizens. But, government should not be allowed to dump billions into social problems in lieu of solutions far out of proportion to the number of citizens being “helped”, and especially if nothing improves 70 years on.

I believe the vast majority of TEA Party adherents have paid in much more into than they’re getting out of the “system”.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 29, 2011 at 4:36 PM

The debt ceiling day of reckoning may come, and go, without a bill passed and signed into law. But, that doesn’t mean we will be in default.

Jellystone National Park might be shut down, though…

kakypat on July 29, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Jellystone may close and doctors may stop getting paid for services by Medicare. How long will doctors continue seeing their medicare consumers if no checks are going out? Defense contractors may not get paid, how long can they go and still be able to pay the salaries of their employees. Medicaid dollars may not get paid to the states. How long befor the states are bankrupt? This goes way beyond social security checks and Jellystone.

bopbottle on July 29, 2011 at 4:39 PM

Under what scenario do Republicans and/or Tea Partiers come out ahead in the debt limit situation? I can’t think of any.

Obama is iching to have a reason to deny Grandma her SS check, and the LSM is dying to blame it on you know who.

Really Right on July 29, 2011 at 4:23 PM

that all depends how what you view as coming out ahead of. Let’s say for argument’s sake the debt limit isn’t raised. The government would be forced to cut itself by about 40% if you are a believer in capitalism and the drag of regulation and government on the private sector. That forced automatic cut would by definition power the private sector to the largest peacetime economic expansion in our histroy. but let’s say the debt limit was going to be raised. If the GOp leadership wouldn’t have taken it off the table and instead made Obama believe they were fine with a 40% cut Obama and the dems would have had to compromise on some cuts maybe a 10% or 20% cut across the board which would also have given the economy new life.

If however you believe in big government as the answer then the GOP would get nothing out of the debt limit fight.

I think a roaring economy is reason enough to cut government massively.

As far as grandma getting her check. there were plenty of ways to ensure she got her check that the GOP never bothered to enact. Much liek they failed to enact the conditions required to ensure Obama paid the troops during the budget battle.

If Obama doesn’t want to pay grandma there are many ways to make sure everyone knows where the blame lies and while you might not make all of them think so enough will to stop it from being the weapon the dems think it will be.

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Does anyone here think that if government is cut by 40% today the economy would not take off on record expansion?

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:46 PM

bopbottle on July 29, 2011 at 4:39 PM

all bow down to government our savior….

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:47 PM

The CC loved the pro-markets, small-government demands of the Tea Party, but the flirtation with the debt ceiling has the business community growing more nervous by the day.

If they didn’t understand what it was going to take to solve these problems, then they’re extremely ignorant. I thought the business community was, above all, realists!

disa on July 29, 2011 at 4:47 PM

The “Crisis” hasn’t damaged the market. The Federal Government has damaged the market. Operating without a budget for over a year has damaged the market. The Fed loaning out $16 Trillion over 3 years has damaged the market. Lying, scheming, criminal politicians have damaged the market.

joshlbetts on July 29, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 4:34 PM

You should try responding to what I actually wrote instead of the alternate version that exists only in your head.

There absolutely should be means testing- SS is a welfare program little different than food stamps or any other such program. Yet when it’s suggested, even those (falsely) claiming to be fiscal conservatives whine that they deserve free money because they paid SS taxes, whether the need the money or not.

We’re fiscally boned, and the problem is that voters have become addicted to entitlements. The vast majority no more willing to break this addiction than was Amy Winehouse of hers, and the end result will be as similar as it is predictable.

The problem is massive, and the cause is easy identified in our collective mirrors. The Dems demagog any attempts to deal with runaway entitlement reform for a reason- it works.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Does anyone here think that if government is cut by 40% today the economy would not take off on record expansion?

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:46 PM

Yes. These people are known as “sane”.

It’s obvious why you fail to identify with them.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 4:52 PM

The CC loved the pro-markets, small-government demands of the Tea Party

Oh, horses**t! the US Chamber of Commerce is a corporatist lobying group that utterly despises free markets. It’s composed of parasites that get rich off the government teat.

single stack on July 29, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Vyce on July 29, 2011 at 4:21 PM

True.

At one time, there was a mild attempt by AP to somewhat marginalize the Paulbots. But because AP is not particularly conservative, he actually emboldened them. Some libertarians are as rigid as Obama is. They hold a great hand of cards, but are clueless on how to play them.

Connie on July 29, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Does anyone here think that if government is cut by 40% today the economy would not take off on record expansion?

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 4:46 PM

The last thing the Chamber of Commerce wants is level playing field. The Middle Class is fed up, and there are more of us, lots more of us, than there are of them. If they were smart they would align themselves with us. It’s the Untied States Economy that makes the world go round. We buy stuff, lot’s of stuff. Why piss off the consumers- customers? We have high unemployment because they are backing big government, that is causing high unemployment – that effects the ability to consume goods and pay taxes. How stupid is that – destroying your customer base? It may not be the Chamber of Commerce as much as it is the people working in the system. Bright people don’t cut off their noses to spite their faces. (We are at 1.3 GDP these Einsteins are choking the goose, that lays the golden eggs.) They are spoiled, they have rigged the system for so long, and have had things their way – for way too long. That’s why we hear all the whining while we are weening them off the government tit.

They think people in the TEA party don’t know it’s the Middle Class being attacked out in the open in the Media? We know who we are.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 5:01 PM

“Jellystone National Park might be shut down, though…
kakypat on July 29, 2011 at 4:34 PM”

Egads! No more pickinick baskets.

JimP on July 29, 2011 at 5:02 PM

Vyce on July 29, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Just a heads up.
I’ve heard there are very effective new medications for the treatment of OCD.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on July 29, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Do you live in the U.S. and work in the U.S? Look at your pay stub they- the government withholds for SS and Medicare. No one is giving anyone anything. Why on earth would you be deserving of another person’s sweat equity, just because they have been responsible and successful?

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 4:52 PM

you don’t understand capitalism do you? hint. it is not powered by government socialism. in fact government spending is a drag on economic activity

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 5:17 PM

They think people in the TEA party don’t know it’s the Middle Class being attacked out in the open in the Media? We know who we are.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 5:01 PM

some people would rather have a quater of a loaf in the hand than be able to take a risk to get 10 loaves from their hard work. Big business like the steady profits of governmetn socialism not competition.

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 5:19 PM

you don’t understand capitalism do you? hint. it is not powered by government socialism. in fact government spending is a drag on economic activity

unseen on July 29, 2011 at 5:17 PM

Depends upon the spending.

How many here that live near military bases would be happy if they were closed down?

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 29, 2011 at 5:57 PM

Tell a group of Tea Party members that we need to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, then see how altruistic they’re willing to be in the name of putting the country first.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

You’ve got a point there. Everybody seems to tiptoe around 70% of the problem.

Vashta.Nerada on July 29, 2011 at 3:43 PM

This admittedly is a big problem. Yes, senior Tea Partiers understand the need for entitlement reform. And yes, a majority of those seniors don’t want their entitlements touched. That’s why any entitlement reform currently under discussion doesn’t affect anyone over age 55.

I happen to disagree with my fellow senior Tea Partiers. I feel since we’re mostly an affluent group, the majority of us can withstand a trim to our Social Security benefits and can afford to bear a greater cost of our health care. Furthermore, I feel we should be leading the fight for reform in the names of children and grandchildren and their progency. Failing that, what we’re essentially saying is that we expect everybody to make sacrifices but us. This, in my opinion is a terrible message to be sending. But I fear mine is a losing argument. I doubt a majority of seniors will ever see things my way and I know we’ll never find enough politicians with guts enough to force such reform.

I think the “hands off my Medicare” crowd are mostly the older members who get scared to death when they see that ObamaCare is being financed largely on their backs and hear words like “rationing” and “death panels” (my mother is one of these people). It should scare them because, let’s face it, Medicare currently allows them to be indiscriminate consumers of health care (and anyone who’s had experience with seniors and their medical care knows what I’m talking about). Frankly, I think a little “rationing” is in order.

I believe we’re at an impasse on this issue. I agree it’s a black eye for the movement, but it’s one we’ll have to bear.

SukieTawdry on July 29, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Do you live in the U.S. and work in the U.S? Look at your pay stub they- the government withholds for SS and Medicare. No one is giving anyone anything. Why on earth would you be deserving of another person’s sweat equity, just because they have been responsible and successful?

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Cutting spending by 40% doesn’t imply a 40% tax cut. The taxes would stay the same, with millions of government employees and contractors no longer receiving a paycheck.

We do need major cuts in discretionary and especially entitlement spending with fewer federal employees, but anyone who believes that an overnight 40% cut in spending wouldn’t have a negative effect on the economy is, in a word, stupid.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM

Oops- quoted wrong post

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 6:22 PM

Do you live in the U.S. and work in the U.S? Look at your pay stub they- the government withholds for SS and Medicare. No one is giving anyone anything. Why on earth would you be deserving of another person’s sweat equity, just because they have been responsible and successful?

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Every paycheck I’m “giving” money to those drawing benefits now. The SS taxes paid by those currently drawing benefits were spent on then-current recipients almost as fast as the taxes were paid.

Social Security isn’t a trust fund or retirement program- it’s a welfare program. That used to run a surplus doesn’t change that.

I pay taxes that were spent on welfare payments, ag subsidies, food stamps, etc, etc, etc. Do I deserve to get paid from those programs for no reason other than having paid into them?

Someone who retires with enough assets and investment income to live off of comfortably shouldn’t get a welfare check in the form of SS. We just can’t afford it any longer.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 6:31 PM

Every paycheck I’m “giving” money to those drawing benefits now. The SS taxes paid by those currently drawing benefits were spent on then-current recipients almost as fast as the taxes were paid.
Social Security isn’t a trust fund or retirement program- it’s a welfare program. That used to run a surplus doesn’t change that.
I pay taxes that were spent on welfare payments, ag subsidies, food stamps, etc, etc, etc. Do I deserve to get paid from those programs for no reason other than having paid into them?
Someone who retires with enough assets and investment income to live off of comfortably shouldn’t get a welfare check in the form of SS. We just can’t afford it any longer.
Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 6:31 PM

neither should illegal aliens

Sonosam on July 29, 2011 at 6:48 PM

Someone who retires with enough assets and investment income to live off of comfortably shouldn’t get a welfare check in the form of SS. We just can’t afford it any longer.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 6:31 PM

Social Security and Welfare Stipends are not the same thing. That’s called a rationalization.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 6:55 PM

bopbottle on July 29, 2011 at 4:39 PM

You totally missed the point which was that we would not be in default simply because the debt ceiling isn’t raised. I didn’t say that there wouldn’t be consequences for not raising the debt ceiling.

kakypat on July 29, 2011 at 7:00 PM

JimP on July 29, 2011 at 5:02 PM

Dat you, Boo Boo? ;o)

kakypat on July 29, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Social Security and Welfare Stipends are not the same thing. That’s called a rationalization.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 6:55 PM

The only difference between them is that the taxes which fund SS are itemize and fixed and the way benefits are calculated.

They’re both direct payments to individuals, those payments being funded by current taxpayers. SS recipients no more earned the right to receive benefits than I earned the right to fly on Air Force One simply because I helped pay for it.

Congress could completely eliminate SS tomorrow if they had the votes.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Even by your standards that’s a stupid statement.

bw222 on July 29, 2011 at 8:35 PM

The CC loved the pro-markets, small-government demands of the Tea Party,

That’s just not accurate. The Chamber had often paid lip service to markets and small government, but it has never wanted or supported either.

Bugler on July 29, 2011 at 8:41 PM

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Yes, they are exactly a like, except where they are completely different.

Congress could completely eliminate SS tomorrow if they had the votes.

Hollowpoint on July 29, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Did you forget there are 3 branches of government? Congress could pass all different kinds of legislation if they had the votes. That does’t mean all their legislation would become law.

Dr Evil on July 29, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Michelle Malkin has warned us about the Chamber of Commerce before:

From:
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/10/15/why-im-not-donating-to-the-chamber-of-commerce/

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is one of the staunchest promoters of amnesty and joined with the AFL-CIO/ACLU to oppose immigration enforcement measures. They oppose E-verify and sued Arizona over its employer sanctions law.

The Chamber supported TARP, the auto bailout, and the stimulus.

The Chamber is supporting a pro-Obamacare, pro-TARP, pro-card check, pro-stimulus, pro-amnesty Democrat in Arizona over his free-market GOP challenger.

RJL on July 29, 2011 at 9:27 PM