Tick, tick. August 2nd is the Debt Limit Armageddon. Or Not.

So, why bother with the ten-years-out stuff in the context of this acute crisis?

Can one of the wonks explain the relevance of this long-term stuff to me? "Four trillion in ten years" etc? Politically, no deal struck in 2011 can bind the president of 2013 or the Congress of 2013. So, why bother with the ten-years-out stuff in the context of this acute crisis?

Actually, more than 80% of the American people agree with Obama that tax increases should be included in solving the deficit.

This thread has been tagged "1 Term".
I guess that would be true for new tea party congressmen
if the public blames them for inability to compromise.

parados wrote:

Actually, more than 80% of the American people agree with Obama that tax increases should be included in solving the deficit.

That is a liberal lie.

parados wrote:

Actually, more than 80% of the American people agree with Obama that tax increases should be included in solving the deficit.

That is a liberal lie.

Rep. Broun told ABC's Jonathon Karl that he would vote against any legislation that would raise the ceiling, "no matter what."

It's because of stances like these in the Republican Party that another plan presented this week by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has been gaining attention.

The plan would give the president the authority to raise the debt ceiling, while bypassing the necessity for Congress to vote for the measure.

The Daily Beast's John Avlon says he sees McConnell's plan as a sign that Republican leadership is having difficulty reconciling internal divisions.

"He [McConnell] wasn't sure he could get the votes he needs to raise the debt ceiling out of the republican caucus and that this was in fact an attempt to delegate this to the president—very unusual for congress to ever delegate power to a president," Avlon said in an interview with ABC News.

The president is dealing with internal party divisions of his own. While the president says he's willing to make some difficult concessions in reaching a deal, he may have difficulty convincing his own party to go along.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said Friday that Democrats will not sign onto a deal that cuts into Medicare or Social Security.

"Whatever happens, we will not be reducing benefits to Medicare and Social Security recipients," Pelosi said.

If political leaders fail to reach an agreement by the Aug. 2 deadline, the government would be unable to pay 40 percent of its bills, which would cause interest rates to rise throughout the country, affecting mortgages, credit cards, and other personal loans.

There will also be implications in the international financial markets, as credit rating agencies would downgrade the U.S. debt rating.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts, and the facts are that if you do not raise the debt ceiling, and America defaults on its debt, we will be in a deeper fiscal hole almost overnight," John Avlon said.

It's just more gamesmanship. It doesn't really give him that authority. It just gives him the authority to request the increases and then assumes that it wouldn't be rejected by a 2/3 majority. It's creative, I'll grant him that. And it's an attempt to get the debt ceiling raised in a manner that the nutcases in the house can't defeat but it's still a bullshit ploy. At least it's coming from a Republican.

The republicans don't want any tax increases.

. It just gives him the authority to request the increases and then assumes that it wouldn't be rejected by a 2/3 majority.