Will President Obama push us over the cliff?
There are at least two sticking points. Obama has insisted that the first new revenues come from raising tax rates on couples who earn above $250,000; Boehner has insisted that, no, they should come from limiting personal deductions and closing loopholes. Democrats like Sen. Harry Reid say the deduction/loophole route won’t yield enough revenue. The Washington Post editorial page argues that in fact, limiting deductions to $50,000 per taxpayer would raise about $750 billion over 10 years, nearly matching the $800 billion that would be raised through the proposed tax hikes on the top 2%.
In Washington of yore, when leaders sat down and negotiated face to face, those differences would seem highly bridgeable. Get part of the revenue by raising rates slightly (not all the way), and get the rest through deductions/loopholes. Both sides get some of what they want. …
In short, we have known the framework of a grand bargain for a long time, and in theory, we should be closer to it than ever. But this week, there is a palpable sense in Washington that the parties are drifting apart and chances of an agreement before Christmas are diminishing. Erskine Bowles, a former White House chief of staff and former co-chairman of Obama’s debt commission, now puts the chances of a deal that prevents us from going over the fiscal cliff at only one in three.
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
Let us hope so, and let there be a massively huge explosion when he does it. Rock the morons to their cores.
astonerii on December 1, 2012 at 9:01 PM
Why weren’t you asking this before the election, eh, David?
thebrokenrattle on December 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM
Yes, and I say let him have at it.
bgibbs1000 on December 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM
Heh. Future tense… Weird.
Gingotts on December 1, 2012 at 9:08 PM
And he’ll take a puff on his cigarette and laugh at us.
rbj on December 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM
Since the right can’t mount any kind of effective resistance, the only relevant question remaining is “When?”
I’d just rather the end hit now than later. It’s actually more painful watching a slow wretched death, be it of a family member or a nation. Or the difference between suddenly hitting a wall in your car and looking ahead of a train and seeing the bridge out 10 miles ahead.
MelonCollie on December 1, 2012 at 9:17 PM
Uhm … that already happened, David, pretty much in a single moment on January 23, 2009, when — during a gathering of leaders from both parties in the White House — Obama responded to a challenge by Sen. John Kyl (R) with the well-thought-out and rationally argued defense/response: “I won.”
ShainS on December 1, 2012 at 9:19 PM
Short answer, yes.
He is apparently a megalomaniac and a fascist. It’s what such people do.
farsighted on December 1, 2012 at 9:24 PM
Well, since that’s been his objective all along why not?
clippermiami on December 1, 2012 at 9:24 PM
It’s what he wants so he can then pretend to be a great tax cutter when he demands middle class tax cuts. The GOP should tell him to GFY. Sick if this a$$holes games.
jawkneemusic on December 1, 2012 at 9:26 PM
His social life would have been negatively impacted.
He wouldn’t have been invited to as many of the cocktail parties and social gatherings his liberal and leftists buddies in the MSM were putting on, and they would have made fun of him at the ones he was invited to.
farsighted on December 1, 2012 at 9:28 PM
LET. IT. BURN.
Tim Zank on December 1, 2012 at 9:59 PM
Of course. That was the plan all along. He is the community organizer. He is the Alinsky-ite. We are the suckers.
petefrt on December 1, 2012 at 10:02 PM
Why push when you can drive?
Left Coast Right Mind on December 1, 2012 at 10:04 PM
I see the others here mirror my own reaction to the question. Something has to make it clear to Americans that elections have consequences. No better time to start than now. Who is John Galt?
I’m ready for the cliff. I have my barrel, with the lid nailed down and the corners caulked. The GOP should offer the same concessions Obama has done, i.e. nothing.
flataffect on December 1, 2012 at 10:20 PM
With you 100%. So tired of threats, punting, and can kicking. Lets roll.
arnold ziffel on December 1, 2012 at 10:20 PM
I see the others here mirror my own reaction to the question. Something has to make it clear to Americans that elections have consequences. No better time to start than now. Who is John Galt?
I’m ready for the cliff. I have my barrel, with the lid nailed down and the corners caulked. The GOP should offer the same concessions Obama has done, i.e. nothing.
Oh, and since Gergen and the rest of the MSM are largely to blame for this fiasco, they should be the first to hit the rocks.
flataffect on December 1, 2012 at 10:28 PM
May he go first, heads down.
Many will follow him, fools.
Schadenfreude on December 1, 2012 at 10:49 PM
Welcome to
Schadenfreude on December 1, 2012 at 10:51 PM
Push? He’ll throw us off the cliff.
Bigfoot on December 1, 2012 at 11:51 PM
Gergen is such a fool. The rich will just push the tax hikes onto the prices of what they sell…to…the middles class and the poor.
Obama hates the middles and poor classes.
Schadenfreude on December 2, 2012 at 12:26 AM
I am all for leaving the loopholes open and raising the rates. I have a great accountant who runs rings around the IRS. I just may end up paying even less taxes.
It does screw the younger generation but since they voted for this fool in the White House then let them have it, good and hard.
iconoclast on December 2, 2012 at 12:28 AM
I think you are giving 0dumba too much credit – don’t forget his background as a chooming slacker! I don’t believe he has the intellectual sophistication needed in order to be a genuine idealogue; I don’t believe he is capable of having thought-out plans; I don’t believe he has a specific vision of what America should look like.
Rather, I think he is closer to a totally self-serving, quasi-pragmatic, makes-it-up-as-he-goes-along socialist like Hugo Chavez than he is to a hardcore socialist like Mao, Castro, Stalin, or Hitler – he is better categorized simply as a dictatorial, petulant child with a messiah complex, who sincerely believes he knows what is best for everyone, and who believes that he can get others to go along with his grandiose, “wonderful” ideas through the force of his “winning” personality – I offer his pitiful, botched attempt to bring the Olympics to Chicago as an example of this.
I don’t believe his goal is to take us over the fiscal cliff – I think he believes the cliff will be avoided because he will get the GOP to bend to his will.
Anti-Control on December 2, 2012 at 1:14 AM
The problem with Obama is that he’s always too damn high.
The Rogue Tomato on December 2, 2012 at 2:31 AM
exactamundo….the love fest before…blech
cmsinaz on December 2, 2012 at 7:54 AM
And limiting them to zero would “bring in” more than ten times that much. Credits and Deductions are hidden spending that total more than a trillion dollars each year.
Count to 10 on December 2, 2012 at 8:40 AM
There will only be change when EVERYONE feels the pain.
ProfShadow on December 2, 2012 at 8:51 AM
Agreed.
You don’t think Obama is running the show, do you? Valerie Jarrett (plus many unelected nasties) are the puppet masters here. Obama was hand-picked as the willing face of their plans to bring down America, while Choomy alternately golfs and campaigns.
disa on December 2, 2012 at 9:26 AM
No, I don’t believe Valerie Jarrett, nor Bill Ayers, nor dreams about his father, nor his wife, nor Rev. Wright, nor any one person in particular, is singularly pulling his strings – he has numerous leftist forces trying to pull him in different directions and cannot please them all, which is one reason he has been attacked by some of his fellow travelers for not being enough of a leftist!
He is not just an idealistic socialistic dictator, he is a sometimes-astute politician, too, which means that his psychology and behavior is more complex than many on the Right give him credit for. As I said, he is more closely related to Hugo Chavez (and the modern ChiComs) than he is to those other hardcore totalitarians I mentioned.
While I’d agree that he is stupid, I don’t believe there is any good evidence he is as radically stupid as someone like Patty Murray, who is openly advocating for us to go over the fiscal cliff – in fact, I say the evidence we have about him points away from that.
Anti-Control on December 2, 2012 at 9:57 AM