Green Room

The Sore Loser Party Threatens to Hold its Breath

posted at 10:32 am on August 1, 2011 by

As my colleague Jazz writes this morning, it is premature for any faction in the debt ceiling debate to declare victory, particularly since “nothing is agreed upon until everything is agreed upon.” The rank and file on each side still have to sign off on the deal, and some members of Congress, especially on the left, are now threatening to vote no.

Among the dissenters is Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), who co-chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Almost simultaneously with the president’s announcement last night that a deal had been struck, Rep. Grijalva told his constituents he would not support it. Don’t look for the mainstream and other liberal media to call the congressman a “traitor” or “terrorist” or claim he is “holding the economy hostage” by threatening to vote no. That criticism is reserved only for the Tea and/or Republican Parties.

Back in the not-so-distant past, when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and the White House, they had no use for the phrase full faith and credit, which in recent weeks has become their mantra. The head of the executive branch, Barack Obama, had run on the promise to nationalize health care, and by golly, Congress was going to deliver on that pledge even if it meant ignoring the will of a large segment of the populace and resorting to parliamentary chicanery.

As though irony is needed to punctuate the hypocrisy of the left, it has since been determined that ObamaCare—originally advertised as a strategy for magically reducing the deficit, then as deficit-neutral—will add $2 trillion to the nation’s already staggering debt.

Democratic members of Congress are not alone in their bellyaching this morning. The New York Times editorial board and the paper’s op-ed residential whiner, Paul Krugman, have already proclaimed that the nation is doomed. Admonishes Krugman, an economist by trade:

The worst thing you can do in these circumstances is slash government spending, since that will depress the economy even further. Pay no attention to those who invoke the confidence fairy, claiming that tough action on the budget will reassure businesses and consumers, leading them to spend more. It doesn’t work that way, a fact confirmed by many studies of the historical record.

Krugman seems to forget, as do his Democratic brethren in government, that we tried it his way. In fact, it was that grand experiment in government spending known as the American Recovery and Investment Act, or stimulus (aka “confidence fairy”) that put the nation in this bind in the first place. It is time for the Democrats to swallow hard, remember that they had their moment in the sun, and then grow a pair.

Related Articles

Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook. You can reach me at howard.portnoy@gmail.com or by posting a comment below.

Recently in the Green Room:

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

I am amused by the now obvious talking point attempts to turn up the hatred on the Tea Party.

Tea party won, etc. As someone said it is the new Bush.

I guess the Koch brothers didn’t stick very well, so here we go. It’s all they’ve got.

Now for Sarah to run and watch these fools go into fits not seen since Caligula…

golfmann on August 1, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Krugman seems to forget, as do his Democratic brethren in government, that we tried it his way. In fact, it was that grand experiment in government spending known as the American Recovery and Investment Act, or stimulus (aka “confidence fairy”) that put the nation in this bind in the first place. It is time for the Democrats to swallow hard, remember that they had their moment in the sun, and then grow a pair.

They know it wasn’t going to work – it was a huge slush fund to pay back Obama supporters from the 2008 election (Public Sector and Private Sector Union Workers). They really need a second one ala raising the debt ceiling so they can line people’s pocket’s like Unions so they can barter for votes again. There really are two Americas, Takers vs Makers. There are still more Makers than Takers. The best thing that could happen after a Conservative Republican win next year is to put legislation into place that doesn’t put the Takers in the driver’s seat again. Tying the budget to 19% of GDP would go a long way toward that goal. You can’t buy people off if there is a Constitutional amendment that won’t allow for the ballooning the National Debt to accommodate political chicanery.

Dr Evil on August 1, 2011 at 11:11 AM

The worst thing you can do in these circumstances is slash government spending, since that will depress the economy even further. Pay no attention to those who invoke the confidence fairy, claiming that tough action on the budget will reassure businesses and consumers, leading them to spend more. It doesn’t work that way, a fact confirmed by many studies of the historical record.

This paragraph comes off, at least me as obtuse. Is the highlighted part inferring that the tough action is increasing it, or decreasing it?

Either way, investors will not be reassured as long as regulation is out of control and Obamacare is lurking around the corner, getting ready to mug everybody.

cozmo on August 1, 2011 at 11:59 AM

The dang preview button does not work. The highlighted part was supposed to be this:

Pay no attention to those who invoke the confidence fairy, claiming that tough action on the budget will reassure businesses and consumers, leading them to spend more.

cozmo on August 1, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Dr Evil on August 1, 2011 at 11:11 AM

My brother says,

People who WORK for a living vs. people who VOTE for a living

rockmom on August 1, 2011 at 12:04 PM

cozmo…Judging by the last line of the preceding paragraph, followed by a colon, I think the paragraph you referred to was intended to be a (typically obtuse) Krug quote, and should have been indented or surrounded by marks.

RushBaby on August 1, 2011 at 3:01 PM