Reid postpones vote to “give everyone as much room as possible” for deal; Update: $2.8T in cuts and debt-ceiling boost, no tax hike?

posted at 11:45 pm on July 30, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

The late breaking news from the nation’s capital tonight is that the late-breaking news from the capital early tomorrow morning has been postponed:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced shortly after 10 p.m. Sunday that he would postpone a vote on his bill to raise the debt limit to give negotiators at the White House more time to work.

He said the Senate would vote on his plan at 1:00 p.m. Sunday, instead of 1:00 a.m., as was originally scheduled. …

“I believe we should give everyone as much room as possible to do their work,” he said. “I spoke to the White House, quite a few times this evening, and they’ve asked me to give everyone as much time as possible to reach an agreement if one can be reached.”

The Senate adjourned at 10:13 p.m. Saturday and will reconvene at noon Sunday.

Translastion: The remarks by John Boehner and Mitch McConnell earlier today appear to have been accurate.  CBS’ Mark Knoller had been tweeting earlier that Dan Pfeiffer was poo-pooing the notion that a deal was brewing, but that he has “covered WH long enough to know when pool kept late on Sat night something’s going on.”  And as I predicted earlier tonight, the first stage may be a very short-term debt-limit increase to get time to finalize a deal:

If they get a tentative deal, Pres Obama will agree to short term extension of debt limit to allow time to enact deal.

If Obama told Reid to extend the vote for another 12 hours, then the White House must figure that they’re close to a deal.

Update: Jimmie Bise links to ABC, which reports the tentative parameters of the deal:

  • Debt ceiling increase of up to $2.8 trillion
  • Spending cuts of roughly $1 trillion
  • Vote on the Balanced Budget Amendment
  • Special committee to recommend cuts of $1.8 trillion (or whatever it takes to add up to the total of the debt ceiling increase)
  • Committee must make recommendations before Thanksgiving recess
  • If Congress does not approve those cuts by late December, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare.

So Obama gets all of the increase in one fell swoop, but no tax hikes, apparently, plus a total of $2.8 trillion in reductions for projected spending (none of the plans actually made cuts in spending) in areas guaranteed to hurt both parties.  The vote on the BBA is a win for Boehner, but only in the sense that Republicans get Democrats on the record for opposing it.  It’s a deal we could have reached two weeks ago, but were never going to reach until time ran out.

Update II: Via Jeff Dunetz, National Journal’s Major Garrett also gets a similar story from his sources, but the news is a little better:

  • 2.8 trillion in deficit reduction with $1 trillion locked in through discretionary spending caps over 10 years and the remainder determined by a so-called super committee.
  • The Super Committee must report precise deficit-reduction proposals by Thanksgiving.
  • The Super Committee would have to propose $1.8 trillion spending cuts to achieve that amount of deficit reduction over 10 years.
  • If the Super Committee fails, Congress must send a balanced-budget amendment to the states for ratification. If that doesn’t happen, across-the-board spending cuts would go into effect and could touch Medicare and defense spending.
  • No net new tax revenue would be part of the special committee’s deliberations.

I expect plenty of hyperventilating at the term “Super Committee,” but it’s basically the kind of ad hoc committee that Congress can authorize at any time.  It sounds a lot like the BRAC process used by Congress to identify military bases for closure.  The prohibition on net tax revenue gains is a big, big win for Republicans if it holds.  I should note that Jimmie Bise in his post believes that the second round of cuts might be actual cuts; if so, then this is an even bigger win.

Note too that the second round of cuts appears to be guaranteed; if the Super Commission can’t agree on specific and precise reductions, then an across-the-board cut goes into place.

Update III: Jen Rubin hears the same deal from the offices of two “senior” Republicans on the Hill.

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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

“Compromise” = working with Democrats to pass something that everyone in DC can live with. And if Obama and Reid can live with it, I can’t. Sorry compromisers.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Well, that’s sort of the point of my question. If a compromise something that will make Obama jump for joy or something that actually makes him give up say 50% of his agenda?

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:29 AM

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:23 AM

We never had 60 votes for cloture in the senate.

Really Right on July 31, 2011 at 1:29 AM

This is not 1991-2.
What if things get so bad that a third party changed history and snagged everyone in this country who is or will suffer some kind of painful hit from this administrations policies over the next year and a half? Snagging Dems, poor, rich, independents, blacks, hispanics, gays (that were kicked out of CPAC ;o) and everyone else who is screaming F-ck this! What if? if the pols are correct and huge majorities are calling DC broken…what if?

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:26 AM

History is not on your side in those assumptions, Katy. I still believe as I always have. The only way Obama is guaranteed a win is with a putsch a la Perot. If Clinton could do it with 43% of the popular vote after all the turmoil of the 1992 democratic nomination process, I don’t see how Obama could fail given the same general set of circumstances.

On the other hand, if it’s Obama against “Generic Republican” and no one else, he can’t feel real good about his chances right now. 43% of the popular vote against one other opponent would constitute an electoral landslide the likes of which we haven’t seen in my lifetime.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:29 AM

you’ll have the likes of DWS waging all out war on the GOP and unless the GOP has the spine to have any sort of convincing come back, your polls are going to show terrifying things.

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:26 AM

You have GOT to be kidding. Everyone outside of the fringe left see DWS as a brainless, scatterbrained, hyperbole-slinging, partisan hack in a bad poodle-cut.

Honestly – who takes her seriously?

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 1:29 AM

We never had 60 votes for cloture in the senate.

Really Right on July 31, 2011 at 1:29 AM

Do the Dems have 60 votes for cloture now?

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:30 AM

I see what you are saying..But a lot of innocent folks would get hurt..I don’t want ot see that happen..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:26 AM

First of all, I’m not convinced that Obama would choose to hurt the innocent folks. He probably believes his base would forgive him quicker.

Secondly, we’re all going to get hurt if we end up like Greece … soooooo

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:30 AM

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:21 AM

I don’t feel good about taking that risk with Obie cutting things..:)
PS..Obie is in big trouble as is..I do not see him getting reelected if the economy does not change..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:30 AM

Gotta give the libtards credit. They learned the lesson of divided we fall long ago. We’ll only learn it upon our demise.

DLEW on July 31, 2011 at 1:30 AM

Update II: Via Jeff Dunetz, National Journal’s Major Garrett also gets a similar story from his sources, but the news is a little better:
The prohibition on net tax revenue gains is a big, big win for Republicans if it holds. I should note that Jimmie Bise in his post believes that the second round of cuts might be actual cuts; if so, then this is an even bigger win.
Note too that the second round of cuts appears to be guaranteed; if the Super Commission can’t agree on specific and precise reductions, then an across-the-board cut goes into place.

I only got through the comments to 1:00 AM time stamp but I wonder if any of you hyperventilists have been reading the updates?

Vince on July 31, 2011 at 1:31 AM

I know a lot of folks here are snake-bitten with the GOP. It’s understandable. To that I would say two things:

1- There is always going to be a need for someone of import within the party to be able to converse with the other side. We’ll never have a super-majority so we’ll never rule in totali.

2- This chart.

I know we won’t get all we want. I know the “cuts” either will only be cuts in future spending levels or in areas that we won’t really feel. The EPA isn’t going away under Obama. But I hope those disjointed by the events over the last couple weeks won’t sit home come election day. It’s too important.

Here’s a reminder. Have a great night all.

BKeyser on July 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Rush’s statement cuts both ways, BTW.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:24 AM

We can’t win elections we don’t seriously contest. Sometimes that means biting our lip and running someone whom we don’t agree with in order to win a state that’s more liberal than the movement at large.

You know, the Gingrich revolution, for whom Rush still has a place in his heart, had more moderate Republicans among its components. People like Susan Molinari and John Chafee. And that Congress was able to pass conservative legislation that was both successful and effective.

I see no vice or betrayal in improving upon a formula that worked.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM

You have GOT to be kidding. Everyone outside of the fringe left see DWS as a brainless, scatterbrained, hyperbole-slinging, partisan hack in a bad poodle-cut.

Honestly – who takes her seriously?

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 1:29 AM

It’s not “her” that will be doing the talking. I’m just pointing out that Dems will continue to wage war on the Repubs whether or not there is a compromise. This notion that somehow a compromise guarantees public satisfaction with the GOP is dangerous. DWS is going to push for ads that will be flat out lies – and don’t count on the media to correct them. Is the GOP hoping Paul Ryan will be on air to bat back every single lie?

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:30 AM

I see youtr point..BUT we are not Greece yet..If we can win the WH and the Senate I think we will see spending changes..Big time..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Gotta give the libtards credit. They learned the lesson of divided we fall long ago. We’ll only learn it upon our demise.

DLEW on July 31, 2011 at 1:30 AM

So how long do you think it’s going to take Crybaby Boehner to figure out that he’s getting played like a violin?

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:33 AM

We can’t win elections we don’t seriously contest. Sometimes that means biting our lip and running someone whom we don’t agree with in order to win a state that’s more liberal than the movement at large.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Like California?

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:33 AM

Vince: ‘Might’ be actual cuts, is what I read. We could cut 20% off of the last published budget, and be nowhere near fiscal sanity. I doubt it cuts anything like that.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:33 AM

I see youtr point..BUT we are not Greece yet..If we can win the WH and the Senate I think we will see spending changes..Big time..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Well, by my reasoning, we have a better chance of winning back the WH if we force Obama to prioritize spending – see how that works? ;)

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:34 AM

History is not on your side in those assumptions, Katy.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:29 AM

I’m not looking to history. We’ve been remaking history ever since bastard boy swore an oath.

I tend to think people are at their wits end and scared to death like never before. History is ours to make.

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:34 AM

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:34 AM

I see..:)..Just too big a risk for my blood..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:35 AM

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:30 AM

No, they don’t. But all we can do is shut down the government, in which case Obama will keep Grandma from getting her SS check. When the LSM tells Grandma that it is our fault she is going to believe them.

Our only weapon is destructive. If we pull that trigger, Grandma will vote for Obama, and make Boehner minority leader.

Really Right on July 31, 2011 at 1:36 AM

“Compromise” = working with Democrats to pass something that everyone in DC can live with. And if Obama and Reid can live with it, I can’t. Sorry compromisers.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Here is a wonderful speech by Sen. Rubio. At 9:00 he admits that everyone agrees that the debt limit must be raised. Do you consider that a wrong position? If you agree the debt limit should be raised then by how much?

Bill C on July 31, 2011 at 1:36 AM

Note too that the second round of cuts appears to be guaranteed; if the Super Commission can’t agree on specific and precise reductions, then an across-the-board cut goes into place.

Just curious Ed – but are you willing to stake your reputation on the fact that these cuts will (a) actually happen and (b) not be gimmicks?

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:37 AM

I’m not looking to history. We’ve been remaking history ever since bastard boy swore an oath.

I tend to think people are at their wits end and scared to death like never before. History is ours to make.

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:34 AM

I seek to minimize risk while recognizing that I am unable to completely eliminate it. A third-party candidacy is an unnecessary risk to freedom. But by God, if it comes down to it, I hope you are right.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:37 AM

How pathetic that Congress needs to create Super Commissions to do their job. Buck passing, can kicking morons, these idiots aren’t serious.

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 1:37 AM

Just curious Ed – but are you willing to stake your reputation on the fact that these cuts will (a) actually happen and (b) not be gimmicks?

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:37 AM

Ed is still hearing about how wrong he was in declaring Sarah Palin politically dead. I don’t think he has any problem at all in being wrong in his assumptions.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM

I see..:)..Just too big a risk for my blood..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:35 AM

Yeah, but think of it this way. Do you believe that by “playing it safe,” you have higher odds of winning?

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM

KingGold: You’re looking at each individual election. I’m looking at the entire election cycle.

I believe that the Tea Party was a net positive for the GOP in the 2010 cycle. Sure, there were a couple of cracked teapots among the candidates, but we got a lot more conservative candidates in office than if the Tea Party hadn’t stepped up.

And, considering the grassroots nature of the Tea Party, it’s not something that is easily controlled.

Basically, I think we’d be worse off right now without the Tea Party, and therefore I think that to harp on the small minority of losses is completely unproductive.

I also believe that it’s unethical to attempt to win an election if you do not think you represent your constituents. Therefore, if a state is overwhelmingly liberal, let it be represented by liberals.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM

How pathetic that Congress needs to create Super Commissions to do their job. Buck passing, can kicking morons, these idiots aren’t serious.

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 1:37 AM

And neither are the Republican sack-lickers who actually think this could mean anything in the long run.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM

Like California?

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:33 AM

Yes, like California. I know there were no small number among us who thought Carly Fiorina was too squishy and too close to John Cornyn. They wanted Chuck DeVore instead. Fiorina did end up losing, but she kept the race close and the Democrats were forced to firewall the state.

Come 2012, a lot of Senate seats are up for grabs. Some are in blue states. We appear to have lucked out in Michigan. But there’s Wisconsin to consider. New Jersey. Hawaii. Connecticut. We may end up having to make some very hard choices.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM

It’s not “her” that will be doing the talking.

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Gotcha…see what you mean now (it’ll be hard for ‘em to force her out of the way of the camera’s (as we’ve all seen lately) and she leaves such a spectacular amount of ludicrous soundbytes behind, that I actually have come to think of her as an asset….but even if she sends out her minions to lie…..lil bammies got a record now….a bad one.

Look at polling trends over the last couple of weeks….this issue is going to hurt him…..and with this economy….any “deal bounce” will be short-lived.

I don’t fear DWS (not even a little).

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 1:39 AM

$3 trillion is a small price for my kids to pay their part of in order to maybe win an election next year for the GOP.

See here, younglings, you now owe about 100 grand even though you’re not even old enough to deliver papers. Have a great day!

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 1:41 AM

Yeah, but think of it this way. Do you believe that by “playing it safe,” you have higher odds of winning?

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM

I will take my winnings and hope for the Senate and the WH in 2012..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:41 AM

…if the Super Commission can’t agree on specific and precise reductions, then an across-the-board cut goes into place.

Sounds to me like the power brokers are just trying to convince us that business-as-usual will somehow give us different results this time. I wouldn’t buy that for one thin red cent.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:42 AM

We appear to have lucked out in Michigan. But there’s Wisconsin to consider. New Jersey. Hawaii. Connecticut. We may end up having to make some very hard choices.

You know, it’s tiresome to hear you use “we” so often. You don’t speak for anybody but yourself. And you sound like Bob Dole.

Emperor Norton on July 31, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Dire Straits: At which point, you hope that the GOP will change their ways. ;)

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:42 AM

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:37 AM

The only way out of a third party attempt would be someone who is so outside the mainstream, so defiantly anti- establishment, someone who fears no one and nothing can be done or said about them that can damage them, and leads the charge with such in your face courage…that the party will have to submit to them or die an irrelevant death.

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:42 AM

43% of the popular vote against one other opponent would constitute an electoral landslide the likes of which we haven’t seen in my lifetime.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:29 AM

Gryphon, are you not old enough to remember Reagan/Mondale?

JohnGalt23 on July 31, 2011 at 1:43 AM

I won’t believe there are no hidden tax hikes or gimmicks unless someone like Jeff Sessions states there are none.

INC on July 31, 2011 at 1:43 AM

Yes, like California. I know there were no small number among us who thought Carly Fiorina was too squishy and too close to John Cornyn. They wanted Chuck DeVore instead. Fiorina did end up losing, but she kept the race close and the Democrats were forced to firewall the state.

Fiorina lost after a ton of money was dump into that race. Not only that, but her wingwoman Meg also lost to a complete nut. I think the only thing to conclude is that California must suffer some sort of economic meltdown in order to wake up. Your point is far from convincing.

Come 2012, a lot of Senate seats are up for grabs. Some are in blue states. We appear to have lucked out in Michigan. But there’s Wisconsin to consider. New Jersey. Hawaii. Connecticut. We may end up having to make some very hard choices.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM

What about New York? They had some nice moderates run? Oh, and they lost. I’m not going to say that you must nominate uber-conservatives in blue states to win, but I sure don’t see how nominating moderates brings in the wins.

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:43 AM

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:37 AM

Have you listened to the Friday TEMS show?..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:43 AM

Compare this to what things were like a year ago.

We now control the conversation, at least.

Nothing happens quickly.

Alana on July 31, 2011 at 1:44 AM

Basically, I think we’d be worse off right now without the Tea Party, and therefore I think that to harp on the small minority of losses is completely unproductive.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM

Should we not strive for perfection? Should we not seek a majority that’s not only filibuster-proof but veto-proof? Should we not, then, employ our power and learn from the mistakes we make?

I personally like the idea of a future Tea Party Congress, in which the Democrats are a screaming minority and we start amending the constitution unilaterally, without having to give away the store to intransigent welfare-mongers.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:45 AM

The only way out of a third party attempt would be someone who is so outside the mainstream, so defiantly anti- establishment, someone who fears no one and nothing can be done or said about them that can damage them, and leads the charge with such in your face courage…that the party will have to submit to them or die an irrelevant death.

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:42 AM

I don’t feel good about the odds of that happening. All of that would have to be true, AND that individual would have to be able to garner enough of the popular vote. Can’t leave that particular ingredient out of the recipe.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:45 AM

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:42 AM

I’m thinking 2012 will be a good year for the GOP!..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:45 AM

I will take my winnings and hope for the Senate and the WH in 2012..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:41 AM

You may have no winnings ;) Oh, and if I were you, I’d push for a more conservative (not read Republican) Senate. Senators like McCain and Graham (both in redish states), can do a lot of harm for their fellow Republicans. I’d also say given Rand Paul’s success, Mitch McConnell should also be ousted – when possible.

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:45 AM

Here is a wonderful speech by Sen. Rubio. At 9:00 he admits that everyone agrees that the debt limit must be raised. Do you consider that a wrong position? If you agree the debt limit should be raised then by how much?

Bill C on July 31, 2011 at 1:36 AM

Raising the debt limit was only necessary to prevent the panic that was about to ensue on August 2nd – which was not an actual default date – but an arbitrary date picked by Turbo Tax Timothy Geithner.

Now – second … it’s fine to say … “Hey we can’t do this all at once … so we need to raise the debt but we’re going to also cut spending drastically”. However – spending isn’t being cut drastically at all. And – just as when the $39B in cuts that Boehner announced on the budget deal – which turned into an actual $380 million of cuts (which is what? About one hour of spending?) … and this deal will likely come up the same. Nothing … a rounding error.

Cuts over 10 years – cuts that will NEVER happen because one congress can’t bind another.

Gimmicks – bread … circuses …

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:46 AM

This “deal” isn’t great by a long shot. But until we get control of the Senate and the White House, I think this is as good as it gets.

We can cry and moan about it and talk about 3rd Parties and such but until the next election I’m not sure what else we’re going to get. Pity, the nation deserves better but the President and Congress we have is what the people, foolishly I would add, voted for. Until we get more Tea Party supporters in Congress and hopefully the White House then this tragically might be as good as it gets.

Yakko77 on July 31, 2011 at 1:47 AM

Have you listened to the Friday TEMS show?..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:43 AM

No why? What is TEMS?

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:48 AM

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:45 AM

When otherwise stable middle America is living in the streets and can’t feed their families unless it’s with a SNAP card…things will change very quickly.

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:48 AM

What about New York? They had some nice moderates run? Oh, and they lost. I’m not going to say that you must nominate uber-conservatives in blue states to win, but I sure don’t see how nominating moderates brings in the wins.

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:43 AM

Candidate quality is just as important as ideology, if not moreso. It’s the bright line that separates a Marco Rubio from a Sharron Angle. No matter the state, crappy moderate candidates will lose just as badly as crappy conservative candidates.

That’s why New York doesn’t concern me. We had a crappy conservative run for governor; he lost in a landslide. We had one crappy conservative and one crappy moderate run for Senate; they also lost.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:49 AM

Compare this to what things were like a year ago.

We now control the conversation, at least.

Nothing happens quickly.

Alana on July 31, 2011 at 1:44 AM

AND (miracle of miracles)…the MSM is actually starting to get fed-up w/ Carney.

People are hurting….and they’re tired of bammies lies…..he wasn’t the shining Messiah that they had “hoped” for.

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 1:49 AM

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:45 AM

I definitely want the GOP to gain control the Senate..I would not have a problem with ousting McConnell but that is not going to happen..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:49 AM

When otherwise stable middle America is living in the streets and can’t feed their families unless it’s with a SNAP card…things will change very quickly.

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:48 AM

Those same people will flock to the Dems when their SNAP benefits are threatened. It never fails.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:50 AM

Earmarks for votes are not allowed in the House anymore but the Senate will pay off anybody.

Big dollars are flushing through the Senate right now.

House… Stay strong.

freedomplow on July 31, 2011 at 1:50 AM

KingGold: Ah, let me be clearer.

I don’t think you can ‘shape’ or ‘direct’ the Tea Party easily. It’s part of its nature. Therefore, I don’t think you could have stopped the few crackpots from contaminating the mix. Any attempt to ‘shape’ the Tea Party backfires, because it’s the largest grassroots movement of this generation.

Even knowing this, I think it’s better than the alternative.

I think we should strive for changing the hearts and minds of the electorate to become more conservative. That way, winning the elections is easy. I don’t see a whole lot of that these days. I do see a lot of promises of kicking an addiction if you give them the power to feed the addiction.

Reagan’s adage of ‘Trust, but verify’ applies just as well to the GOP as to any other entity, and for myself at least, the verification is failing more often than not.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:50 AM

This “deal” isn’t great by a long shot. But until we get control of the Senate and the White House, I think this is as good as it gets.

Yakko77 on July 31, 2011 at 1:47 AM

You should think about $14T dollars of debt. You should think about the absolute HEROIC and RADICAL cuts that the Republicans would have to make to fix that – and you need to think about whether or not the GOP has the balls to do those cuts.

Based on their history – NO TIME will ever be THE TIME to fight for cuts. They are always fearful the masses will turn on them and kick them out of power.

You also need to consider the fact that NO GOP CONGRESS OR PRESIDENT has ever cut spending.

What you’re running on is …. IS PURE FAITH.

And I think it’s misplaced – and 100 years of history with the GOP proves it.

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:51 AM

Well, by my reasoning, we have a better chance of winning back the WH if we force Obama to prioritize spending – see how that works? ;)

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:34 AM

And I say that 0bama will prioritize spending like those jerkwads on the City Council who threaten to cut cops and firefighters when the city’s budget is cut. And he’ll blame the GOP.

If the GOP’s explanation why 0bama would be a liar in this instance is in any way tl;dr, which it would be, 0bama wins the round.

Sekhmet on July 31, 2011 at 1:52 AM

Candidate quality is just as important as ideology,

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:49 AM

No ideology is MORE important. Squishes won’t have the spine to make the radical and deep cuts necessary to save this nation.

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:53 AM

Candidate quality is just as important as ideology, if not moreso. It’s the bright line that separates a Marco Rubio from a Sharron Angle. No matter the state, crappy moderate candidates will lose just as badly as crappy conservative candidates.

I agree that it’s important for the candidate to be well liked and articulate. Why again, did Harry Reid win?

That’s why New York doesn’t concern me. We had a crappy conservative run for governor; he lost in a landslide. We had one crappy conservative and one crappy moderate run for Senate; they also lost.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:49 AM

If there was ever an example of a Tea Partier (?) gone wild it was Paladino. You’re right. It still doesn’t explain away the California debacle. And, if you’re main point is about charisma or something, then why didn’t you just say that instead of implying/saying that the Tea Party shouldn’t be RINO hunting because sometimes you have to elect moderates – don’t you mean sometimes you have to elect people with good people skills?

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:53 AM

Sekhmet: So, basically, we have to bow down to the power of the media.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:53 AM

Wait….so the plan is the GOP can’t do anything substantial now because they would get crucified by the public, unfairly or not, for the cuts they would propose.

But after winning all the seats of power in 2012, that same GOP will start slashing everything in sight to try and find enough to cover a $17 trillion deficit, and the public will climb to their collective feet in rapturous applause.

Ok.

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 1:53 AM

And I say that 0bama will prioritize spending like those jerkwads on the City Council who threaten to cut cops and firefighters when the city’s budget is cut. And he’ll blame the GOP.

If the GOP’s explanation why 0bama would be a liar in this instance is in any way tl;dr, which it would be, 0bama wins the round.

Sekhmet on July 31, 2011 at 1:52 AM

Why do you want to shovel this debt on future generations? Why don’t want you to use a bit of courage to fix what YOU have broken?

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:54 AM

No why? What is TEMS?

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:48 AM

The Ed Morrissey Show..Check it out..There is a link at the top of page..Ed and Duane do a good job of discussing these issues we are talking about..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:54 AM

I definitely want the GOP to gain control the Senate..I would not have a problem with ousting McConnell but that is not going to happen..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:49 AM

If you clone Snowe, Graham, McCain, McConnell, and Collins; and have them help the GOP take over the Senate – no thanks.

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:54 AM

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 1:53 AM

Baffling isn’t it?

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 1:55 AM

And I say that 0bama will prioritize spending like those jerkwads on the City Council who threaten to cut cops and firefighters when the city’s budget is cut. And he’ll blame the GOP.

If the GOP’s explanation why 0bama would be a liar in this instance is in any way tl;dr, which it would be, 0bama wins the round.

Sekhmet on July 31, 2011 at 1:52 AM

Obama’s already blaming the GOP. Haven’t you noticed? Put the car in R or something.

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:55 AM

But after winning all the seats of power in 2012, that same GOP will start slashing everything in sight to try and find enough to cover a $17 trillion deficit, and the public will climb to their collective feet in rapturous applause.

Ok.

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 1:53 AM

Essentially – you are spot on!

We may be the hobbits – but it’s the RINO’s on this board who actually believe in fairy tales.

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 1:55 AM

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 1:50 AM

It’s true, the Tea Party is a great political force. But it is a nascent one, and should always learn more about the way of things.

The average voter is one who runs on low to medium information. They may not know or care about the ideological contests. What they do is they scratch their heads and wonder why they should vote for an unemployed marketing consultant who doesn’t share many of their views, over a county executive who does.

What can we do better? Where can we do better? What races should we be watching closely, and which are better left ignored and tended to by the party committees? We must ask these questions, using history as a guide, if the Tea Party is to achieve everything it seeks.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:56 AM

Candidate quality popularity is just as important as ideology,

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:49 AM

Or do you have a different way of defining “candidate quality?” You obviously define it differently than I do.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:56 AM

Sekhmet on July 31, 2011 at 1:52 AM

Excellent post..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:57 AM

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 1:50 AM

People who have known nothing but handouts will indeed stay dumb.
I’m talking about people who have never ever received a handout in their lives and those same people would experience the kind of shame that social welfare scum have no concept of.

It will be devastating, intolerable and unacceptable. Things are going to change and people will be challenged like never before. We will find out if the American experiment was a success or a failure. I tent to think it’s in our genes. A free people will always rebel once they have reached their boiling point. We are heading their now.

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:58 AM

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 1:55 AM

Well that’s one way to put it.

Give PBHO 3 trillion bucks to play with, and then after the 2012 elections the GOP will find a creative way to make all that money back…and it won’t cost you a dime or cause so much as a jot of anxiety.

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 1:59 AM

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:54 AM

If we win enough Senate seats we can make the Maine twins and Grahman and McCain irrelevant..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:59 AM

This will be the moment that historians in the future look back upon as the pivotal point in America’s collapse. The failure to address the debt at this moment in time.

My prediction? Maybe … Maybe the GOP will win next year (if it doesn’t – then you RINO’s put money in a piggy bank with a hole in it) … but if they win – they will NOT make the kind of cuts they need to make – the radical cuts necessary to save this nation.

They won’t make these cuts because they’ll be politically “hard” to make. And making those cuts will cost them votes in the next election – and they’ll make excuses not to make those cuts.

And … as a result – the nation will collapse – and the GOP and Conservatism will get the blame.

Good Job.

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 2:00 AM

A free people will always rebel once they have reached their boiling point. We are heading their now.

katy on July 31, 2011 at 1:58 AM

And the outcome may be the end of America as founded. You are an optimist. There is nothing wrong with that. I just don’t share your optimism.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 2:00 AM

KingGold: You are still talking in terms of directing the Tea Party. It cannot be directed. The Tea Party refuses to take its marching orders from ‘leaders’ who tell it exactly the type of information and ‘strategy’ that you’re thinking of providing it.

Would it be better if they did listen? Maybe. If they did listen, the electoral outcome would be better.. but the movement would almost certainly be coopted or killed because the fundamental renewing force of the Tea Party would be stifled by this direction.

Essentially, the Tea Party is the goose that lays golden eggs for the GOP, and the GOP seems hellbent on killing it for the electoral benefits. It would be far better to listen to it, than to instruct it.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 2:00 AM

OK, guys. Goodnight. Dream of Dollars or something!

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 2:01 AM

If we win enough Senate seats we can make the Maine twins and Grahman and McCain irrelevant..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:59 AM

If I could s*** into a dixie cup and turn it into gold – I’d be a millionaire.

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 2:01 AM

If we win enough Senate seats we can make the Maine twins and Grahman and McCain irrelevant..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 1:59 AM

Not if we win with people like the Maine twins, Graham, and McCain. :D Goodnight.

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 2:01 AM

The single biggest problem with this plan is the “cuts over ten years”. As many of you know, no legislative cuts are binding for any future fiscal year which has not already had a budget passed.

Since no budget has passed since FY2009, there’s no guarantee that one will be passed anytime in the future. Remember all of those tiny cuts that were made earlier this year to obtain the Continuing Resolution which carries the U.S. through the end of this FY? Congress based those cuts upon the budget submitted by the President even though that budget was never approved.

When the next round of C.R.’s come about, those promised cuts will not be worth the paper they are written on. Congress can even choose not even follow the law they passed thanks to their ability to change the rules governing that body.

Those who believe that either Democrats or Republicans have any interest in reducing the spending by the Federal Government need to seek medical care – you are delusional.

jackal40 on July 31, 2011 at 2:02 AM

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 2:01 AM

Enjoyed it friend..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 2:02 AM

And, if you’re main point is about charisma or something, then why didn’t you just say that instead of implying/saying that the Tea Party shouldn’t be RINO hunting because sometimes you have to elect moderates – don’t you mean sometimes you have to elect people with good people skills?

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 1:53 AM

Quality’s about more than charisma and people skills, though you’re right that good quality candidates often have that. It’s about experience, it’s about threading the needle between the grassroots and the party structure, it’s about sending the proper message to the proper people.

As for California – I don’t know what to tell you, pal. Everybody got demolished in that state. Just like in New York, we just didn’t have a prayer of winning with the people we had.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 2:03 AM

KingGold: You are still talking in terms of directing the Tea Party. It cannot be directed. The Tea Party refuses to take its marching orders from ‘leaders’ who tell it exactly the type of information and ‘strategy’ that you’re thinking of providing it.

Would it be better if they did listen? Maybe. If they did listen, the electoral outcome would be better.. but the movement would almost certainly be coopted or killed because the fundamental renewing force of the Tea Party would be stifled by this direction.

Essentially, the Tea Party is the goose that lays golden eggs for the GOP, and the GOP seems hellbent on killing it for the electoral benefits. It would be far better to listen to it, than to instruct it.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 2:00 AM

No one in the Tea Party listens to King Gold – he’s a Rino and we don’t respond to Rino’s … so there you have it.

King Gold is a guy who sits on his couch and is envious of what the TP has accomplished – because his RINO’s can’t effect the same kind of enthusiasm the TP does.

TP did exactly the right thing during these negotiations with the exception of supporting the Boehner bill – which they never should have supported.

Aside from that – they were the ONLY PATRIOTS in this whole mess.

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 2:04 AM

As for California – I don’t know what to tell you, pal. Everybody got demolished in that state. Just like in New York, we just didn’t have a prayer of winning with the people we had.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 2:03 AM

So tell me, oh wise one, under what conditions do you think California or New York would elect a conservative to national office?

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 2:04 AM

Honda: Thank you for your input. I am sure it will advance this discussion immensely.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 2:05 AM

They won’t make these cuts because they’ll be politically “hard” to make. And making those cuts will cost them votes in the next election – and they’ll make excuses not to make those cuts

That’s why I like our professional class of politicians, because they always put election results before country.

Yeah sure, the nation will be in hock for a ghastly amount of money after November 2012, but the GOP is going to swoop in like a flock of vultures and pick the deficit clean.

Well ok, there might be an exception here and there…and here…and there…and over there…for political expediency and to cover some rep’s ass in his own district, but other than that it’s flat-out deficit surgery.

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 2:05 AM

MeatHeadinCA on July 31, 2011 at 2:01 AM

There is a real chance for the GOP in 2012..Dems have to defend something like 23 seats..We can definitely win control of the Senate..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 2:05 AM

the Tea Party is a great political force. But it is a nascent one.

The “nascent” tEA-Party has done more in 2-Years than the entire NRC, Dumb-@ss “Establishment-repubs, and lazy useless jagg-offs like you have done in 10.

The “newbies” gave us the midterms you incredibly arrogant @ss.

What can we do better? Where can we do better? What races should we be watching closely, and which are better left ignored and tended to by the party committees? We must ask these questions, using history as a guide, if the Tea Party is to achieve everything it seeks.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 1:56 AM

Why the hell do you care? You’re not going to do anything anyway. Your type NEVER does.

You’ll find a myriad of reasons to “kick the can down the road”.

It’s NEVER the right time is king?

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 2:05 AM

Bizarre article over at dailykos, they are saying the only hope for the country is that Obama stops the Republicans, then proceeds to trash him.

pedestrian on July 31, 2011 at 2:06 AM

There is a real chance for the GOP in 2012..Dems have to defend something like 23 seats..We can definitely win control of the Senate..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 2:05 AM

So the Republicans can go back to the situation they were in before 2006, the last time they had control of both houses and the executive branch. Forgive me for not jumping for joy.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 2:07 AM

No one in the Tea Party listens to King Gold – he’s a Rino and we don’t respond to Rino’s … so there you have it.

King Gold is a guy who sits on his couch and is envious of what the TP has accomplished – because his RINO’s can’t effect the same kind of enthusiasm the TP does.

TP did exactly the right thing during these negotiations with the exception of supporting the Boehner bill – which they never should have supported.

Aside from that – they were the ONLY PATRIOTS in this whole mess.

HondaV65 on July 31, 2011 at 2:04 AM

What he said.

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 2:07 AM

Tim_CA: Thank you for your support of Honda’s insightful comments into this discussion.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 2:08 AM

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 2:07 AM

No problem..That is your opinion not mine..:)

Dire Straits on July 31, 2011 at 2:08 AM

The purse (money) is controlled by the United States House of Representatives…

Nothing will happen unless the House of Representatives agree to it.

That means the Senate and the President better come up with something pretty damn close to what the House wants.

If they don’t… Nothing will pass.

freedomplow on July 31, 2011 at 2:09 AM

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 2:08 AM

lmao!

;-)

Tim_CA on July 31, 2011 at 2:09 AM

freedomplow: In a capital where the people have the courage of their convictions, that would be true.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 2:10 AM

pedestrian on July 31, 2011 at 2:06 AM

First, I commend you for risking an infection of terminal gonorrhea by visiting DailyKos.

Second, why would you ever try to make sense of the dysfunctional tree-screamers at that place? You would have better luck getting a band of Capuchin monkeys to build you a functioning space shuttle.

Bishop on July 31, 2011 at 2:10 AM

KingGold: You are still talking in terms of directing the Tea Party. It cannot be directed. The Tea Party refuses to take its marching orders from ‘leaders’ who tell it exactly the type of information and ‘strategy’ that you’re thinking of providing it.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 2:00 AM

Sorry. That statement’s wrong. There are those who exert control over the movement, just as there are those who claim they do, but don’t.

Tell me. Why is it that when Rush or Mark Levin start praising a Tea Party candidate, their coffers start filling? When a post on RedState proclaims that we must “burn Mike Castle in effigy,” why does suddenly a low-profile perennial candidate transmute into a conservative hero?

The lifeblood of the Tea Party is information.

KingGold on July 31, 2011 at 2:10 AM

And the outcome may be the end of America as founded. You are an optimist. There is nothing wrong with that. I just don’t share your optimism.

gryphon202 on July 31, 2011 at 2:00 AM

I’m not an optimist. I’m a realist. America is headed for a complete meltdown.
I just know how it ends up.
Thanks for chatting..gotta go….

katy on July 31, 2011 at 2:10 AM

Tim_CA: I am glad I have been able to make you laugh in the midst of this sobering discussion.

Scott H on July 31, 2011 at 2:10 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5