The Deal: Door Number 3

Jed Lewison writes:

Boehner is doing his best to pretend that he has a strong hand, but let's not forget, if he were to actually carry out his threat and block an increase in the debt limit, the United States would go into default on its debt. [. . .] So unless Boehner's absolutely insane, he's running a complete bluff. [. . .] If Boehner ultimately goes along with a hike in the debt limit without securing the spending cuts that he promised to the tea party, teahadists will be furious. On the other hand, if Boehner decides to block the debt limit increase, sending the United States into default and shutting down the federal government, the rest of the country will be even angrier.

Behind Door Number 3 lies the 3rd Hand that apparently Lewison does not think possible - President Obama capitulates to GOP demands to cut spending.

Me, I'll take Door Number 3 as the most likely outcome.

Speaking for me only

< Expounding The Constitution | A Dick Morris For The Obama Era >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Door Number 3 (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 02:42:28 PM EST
    Prior to negotiations beginning, Obama offers more spending cuts than even the Republicans would demand.

    Obama supporters will cheer and say that isn't it  wonderful that Obama and the Democrats will be able to take credit for this great achievement. These will be the most progressive cuts to all needed domestic programs evah.  

    Can I just hibernate now? (5.00 / 0) (#5)
    by sj on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 02:58:29 PM EST
    And (none / 0) (#7)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 03:13:46 PM EST
    He'll just put the word "affordability" into whatever lame policy they devise and they're golden!

    I'm getting too much mileage from that word today.


    No, no, no (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 03:16:07 PM EST
    This time Obama will STAND up to the Republicans and call their bluff!

    Oh, shoot, cracked a laugh....I was so trying to keep a straight face too.


    Ha Ha! (none / 0) (#11)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 04:33:03 PM EST
    Obama was already against the debt ceiling - well, before he was for it.

    Four year ago, however, then-Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., voted the exact way President Obama is now cautioning senators not to do.

    "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure," he said on March 16, 2006. "Leadership means that `the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership . Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit."

    But he was only against it (none / 0) (#12)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 04:34:14 PM EST
    Because, according to Gibbs:

    Asked about that quote - and vote -- today, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said that it was important that "based on the outcome of that vote...the full faith and credit was not in doubt."

    Then-Sen. Obama used the vote "to make a point about needing to get serious about fiscal discipline....His vote was not necessarily needed on that."

    in fairness (none / 0) (#13)
    by CST on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 04:45:54 PM EST
    the fiscal situation of the nation in 2006 was vastly different from what it is today.

    I'm all for a balanced budget when times are good.  But times have changed.


    True, but (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 05:41:26 PM EST
    His quote does not leave room for that - he says if you have to raise the debt celing, it's due to a failure in leadership.

    And then, of course, instead of just saying what you said, the WH's position is that he only voted against it because he knew it would pass anyway.

    That's called a "cop out".


    fair enough (none / 0) (#21)
    by CST on Fri Jan 07, 2011 at 08:58:17 AM EST
    I actually don't mind when politicians change their minds about something as long as it's reasonable.  None of this - thinking the same thing on Wednesday as they did on Monday no matter what happens Tuesday.

    But they should at least be honest, upfront, and know why they changed.


    Do you know (none / 0) (#18)
    by Warren Terrer on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 07:38:43 PM EST
    why you are all for balanced budgets? We aren't on the gold standard any more.

    I guess I'll say (none / 0) (#22)
    by CST on Fri Jan 07, 2011 at 09:07:18 AM EST
    if you can afford it - why not?

    There is the inflation issue.  Which is not an issue now, but when the economy is good it is.  Devalue's the dollar.  Gives too much power to china.

    All of these are secondary issues to a failing economy.  But that doesn't mean they don't exist.


    Failure of leadership (none / 0) (#16)
    by BTAL on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 05:47:22 PM EST
    Guess that is one area where we all might find some common ground....

    For my friends on the left, at least Gibbsy didn't use a "he was against it before he was for it" cop out.


    Obama is Boehner's (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 03:23:23 PM EST
    strong hand. and it's a full House.

    Shall we start taking bets (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 02:45:01 PM EST
    on what saved item will justify the capitulation? How about the AMT fix? :D

    EIC (none / 0) (#6)
    by sj on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 02:59:14 PM EST
    Probably cheaper in the long run.

    Yup. Obama is probably just as intimidated by the (none / 0) (#3)
    by ruffian on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 02:48:05 PM EST
    teahadists as Boehner is.  Bold leadership!

    Plus (none / 0) (#4)
    by sj on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 02:58:26 PM EST
    It's what he WANTS to do

    surely not PERMANENT (none / 0) (#9)
    by observed on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 03:17:30 PM EST
    spending cuts?

    Who gets the credit for coming up w/ (none / 0) (#14)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 05:40:16 PM EST

    What Boehner Should Really Demand (none / 0) (#17)
    by kaleidescope on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 07:13:29 PM EST
    That Biden resign and that Obama appoint Mitch McConnell as the new Vice President, and that Obama should then resign. And only then will Republicans allow the debt limit to be raised.

    I think there's probably a better than even chance that Obama would go for it.

    Teahadists....I love it! (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 07:56:26 PM EST
    I will probably go to my grave using that label :)  As far as the United States being "sent into default" though, does anybody at all wonder what happens when the Fed is spewing all this money at zero interest and then it is leveraged times 10 in the shadow banking world?  Cuz that is what is going on right now and why the markets look so great.  What happens to the shadows leveraged to the hilt on nothing but margins when the Fed needs to create some inflation though?

    They lasted for one day (none / 0) (#20)
    by Edger on Fri Jan 07, 2011 at 08:11:53 AM EST
    when they tried this with Clinton