Reid: If you were expecting a fiscal-cliff deal before Christmas… don’t
posted at 5:21 pm on December 11, 2012 by Erika Johnsen
Whether this is an attempt at shrewd negotiating or just plain ol’ flying by the seat of their pants, I don’t know that anyone was really convinced that a fiscal-cliff deal was going to get done before Christmas — but that doesn’t make this any more welcome. Roll Call reports:
Senate leaders warned Tuesday that time is running out to strike a deal on the fiscal cliff, with Majority Leader Harry Reid saying it would be “extremely difficult” for Congress to finish its work before Dec. 25.
“Until we hear something from Republicans, there’s nothing to draft,” the Nevada Democrat said. “It’s going to be extremely difficult to get it done before Christmas.”
Meanwhile, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney rebuffed Speaker John A. Boehner’s call Wednesday for President Barack Obama to offer up specific new cuts to entitlement programs, suggesting that the GOP make specific suggestions first and again demanding that Republicans cave on raising tax rates for the wealthy.
Given the snail’s pace at which these ‘negotiations’ have been proceeding so far, not to mention the now-mirrored accusations of, “No, you name specifics!”, I’m not holding out hope for fiscal cliff-free Christmas festivities, and other Congressional leaders have already affirmed that the legislative branch is going to stick around until this gets done.
Although, perhaps, there is a tiny glimmer of hope? Maybe? Politico reports that the White House did indeed present Boehner with their second version of a fiscal-cliff proposal on Sunday (although, as evidenced by Boehner’s comments today, it apparently wasn’t that impressive and the White House is still “slow-walking” this thing), and the GOP has counter-offered again — but the details are still undisclosed:
House Republicans say they have sent President Barack Obama a fresh proposal that would “achieve tax and entitlement reform to solve our looming debt crisis and create more American jobs.” …
Obama sent House Republicans a counter offer to their original proposal Sunday that called for $1.4 trillion in new revenue but little movement on entitlement cuts, sources said.
But, I’m generally inclined to think that taking this thing down to the wire has been part of the plan all along — I’m betting we’ll be hearing a lot of rabble-rabble-rabble straight through ’til New Years.
Update: Or, then again…?
senior official: new obama-boehner call today on fiscal cliff … clearly inching along here
— Ed Henry (@edhenryTV) December 11, 2012
Related Posts:
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: « Previous 1 2
Sweet. How sweet it is.
Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM
This.
When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM
ear relevant…
driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.
kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM
This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.
savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM
Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.
However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)
What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.
In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.
It’s not socialism. It’s worse.
EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”
jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM
A fitting capstone to Ed’s story about loss-prevention (aka employee theft) and management’s “permission structure” in this post.
(Not to mention the jaw-dropping statements of Eleanor Clift in this one.)
AesopFan on May 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2