GOP IS GETTING SCHOOLED … AGAIN
Kenny Rogers would have a field day with the ongoing debate over the “fiscal cliff.” Of course the man who once sang “you got to know when to hold ’em, know when to fold ’em” clearly hasn’t been advising Congressional “Republicans” as they play a high stakes game of competing tax hikes with U.S. President Barack Obama.
As always seems to be the case, the GOP is getting thoroughly out-negotiated and out-debated by Obama and his Democratic allies … further proof of the fundamental inefficacy of trading on principle in an effort to secure a short-term political compromise.
In keeping with his campaign slogan, Obama is charging headlong toward the fiscal cliff – leaving the GOP (which polls show will be blamed for the fiasco no matter what happens) with no real leverage.
Bottom line? Either Obama is going to get his $1.6 trillion in tax hikes (and limitless debt ceiling expansion) or the GOP is going to get blamed for everybody’s taxes going up. This is obviously an untenable position – and “Republicans” have exacerbated their dilemma by proposing an $800 billion tax hike in a failed effort to sate Obama and his fellow neo-fascists. Basically, they’ve sold out their principles for nothing.
Given that the cliff negotiations are now stalemated, the GOP is faced with the mother of all lose-lose scenarios – unless it acts very quickly to change the debate.
First of all, every member of the GOP-controlled U.S. House of Representatives should vote in favor of a bill extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for all income earners – especially the “upper income earners” whose small business investment accounts for roughly half of the jobs in our country. We know they did this already back in July – but it should be reintroduced as a standalone proposal in the context of this session.
Obviously, such a bill will be rejected by the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate before it even reaches the desk of U.S. President Barack Obama.
At that point, we think every member of the GOP-controlled U.S. House should vote in favor of a bill extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the income brackets Obama is seeking.
Wait … isn’t that heresy? Or worse … surrender?
No … because unlike the “compromises” being pushed by Lindsey Graham and other liberal “Republicans,” this legislation wouldn’t include a single dime of “revenue enhancements.” It would merely protect 98 percent of America from having a gun held to its head by the Obama administration during the debate over extended tax relief for upper income earners (i.e. investors in our economy).
Overnight, Obama would lose all of his leverage.
Obama has drawn a line in the sand – saying that he will not agree to any “fiscal cliff” deal that does not include tax hikes on those making $250,000 or more. And his reelection guaranteed his ability to make good on that threat. But he’s also brandished a pen saying that he would immediately sign the extension of tax relief for “lower” income brackets.
Republicans should call that bluff and make him sign the 98 percent tax cut extension right now – independent of any other revenue considerations. Then they should aggressively fight against every red cent of Obama’s proposed $1.6 trillion tax hike … you know, rather than trying to meet him halfway on the “tax and spend-o-meter.” In fact they should be following the lead of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul and fiscal conservatives who have proposed trillions of dollars in long-overdue cuts in recent years (see here and here).
Obama’s recalcitrance on the issue of upper income tax hikes has guaranteed that America’s job creators will see their tax rates increase in 2013. There is simply nothing “Republicans” can do to stop that from happening – which is why it is pointless to continue letting Obama hold 98 percent of the country hostage.
***
27 comments
FITS: Sanford is disgraced, and Haley is Kicking your @$$…
And you have the media 1000 percent on your side…Idiots like you will always sing and dance what you are told.
Therefore: You ALWAYS see the Right as losing..The media tels you to believe that.
The truth is: the Right loses when it put YOU and Sanford in office on the ‘Meet Chicks-Beat Chicks’ Ticket…
With you calling yourselves Rs…any wonder the party is suffering???
Really, in the context of the ridiculous debt the nation has, all this teeth gnashing over more taxes and spending is simply arguing while the Titanic sinks-and there’s no stopping it-that time is long gone.
Everyone all upset about it is wasting their time, better to simply prepare and take care of those close to you.
As always seems to be the case, the GOP is getting thoroughly out-negotiated and out-debated by Obama and his Democratic allies
Oh please. Republicans have flat out stonewalled Obama for the last two years, even after Democrats have punched themselves in the face to sweeten deals for them. Obama’s finally grown a pair and Republicans have no clue how to get what they want because of it.
and “Republicans” have exacerbated their dilemma by proposing an $800 billion tax hike in a failed effort to sate Obama and his fellow neo-fascists.
lol… Neo-fascists? Really? Obama wants to merely let tax cuts for those making over $250k/year expire and that makes him and other Democrats “neo-fascists?”
You’re becoming a caricature not unlike Big(o)T, FITSNews.
You are full of shit.
Wow, Tom! Thanks for sharing…
Yeah, they could start by being actual fiscal conservatives. I.e., by putting the nation a path of economic sustainability by increasing revenue and lowering expenses.
By the way, wasn’t the “cliff” supposed to ensure a MINIMAL amount of progress to that goal? WTF became of that notion?
It isn’t a cliff.
It is a step in the right direction.
Amen brother.
First of all, every member of the GOP-controlled U.S. House of Representatives should vote in favor of a bill extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for all income earners…
Obviously, such a bill will be rejected by the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate…
At that point, we think every member of the GOP-controlled U.S. House should vote in favor of a bill extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the income brackets Obama is seeking.
Or, in other words, break your Norquist oaths and surrender, but make sure you play pretend first!
That’s hilarious!
What the GOP should do, rather than play some pointless bullshit like they did with trying to end ObamaCare 30+ times, is actually negotiate. If Obama wants his tax hikes, make him agree to spending cuts. That is the leverage Republicans could exert, and even use to change the debate on the fiscal cliff. Changing the momentum of the fiscal cliff would benefit fiscal conservatives better in the long run, and possibly give Republicans more leverage even if we went over the cliff.
Securing an end to the Bush tax cuts for the rich pretty much signs most of the deal away and will be called an Obama victory. Sure, Obama won’t have leverage at that point, but why the fuck would he even need it? Republicans are the ones that would lose the potential leverage they have now and gain nothing later.
What does Jim DeMint think:
“You can’t get a deal with Obama without raising taxes on [top income earners],” said South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, a leader of the limited-spending Tea Party movement. “We might as well cut a deal,” he said. “If Republicans want to maintain the defense, we’re going to have to give tax increases to Obama.”
I wonder if Grover had a seizure when he heard that quote. But from today’s headlines I guess the Koch brothers sent ole Jim a little more money sand put him back on the reservation.
There seems to be a basic misunderstanding here.
One of the prime reasons the Republican Party exists is to make sure
Rich people get richer..Asking them to take any action conflicting with that goal?
Totally unacceptable.
After reading that piece, I can understand why you got out of politics and into blogging! That is some of the stupidest political advice I’ve ever seen. I really loved your line “It is pointless to continue letting Obama hold 98% of the country hostage” You’ve been hanging around with Big T(urd) too long!
You seem to think Boner still controls his caucus. He doesn’t. Norquist has more control over house GOP than Boner.
This is really kind of stupid. The Senate has already passed a bill extending the Bush Tax Rates for those making less than 250k. Obama has encourage the House to take up the bill and pass it, so he can sign it. Of course he will sign it. Republicans are the one’s holding the middle class hostage and the vast majority of Americans know that.
You can not fix John Boehnor. This guy goes way back to when Livingston was disgraced and forced to abandon the Speakership. If anyone should know how to negotiate, it is him. Alas.
If you raised taxes on the above 250k crowd, threw in estate taxes, etc from the Bush tax cuts, you would get around one trillion in ten years of revenue. However, federal spending is projected out to be 42 trillion in the next ten years.
Now, to play politics, just for shits and grins, Boehnor should throw in pension reform for federal employees. Force current and future federal hires, including the post office into government retirement accounts of US Treasury bills only, then cave in on raising taxes on the above 250k crowd but not the middle class save estate taxes and capital gains, but not marriage penalty etc. Then go after entitlement programs in the next Congress. Apples is what Boehnor needs, and he simply does not have them.
Boehnor’s probably having a good cry.
The middle class does not pay estate taxes and never have. So I say go over the cliff on those. The Capital Gains increase will have no material impact on the middle class. The Bushies were very careful to exclude capital gains earned inside retirement accounts (401ks and IRAs) from the benefit of lower capital gain taxes. 95+% of Capital Gains earned by those making less than 250k a year are either inside IRAs and 401ks or are earned on the sale of a principal residence of which first 250k of those are exempt from taxes. This break benefits the rich as well as the poor.
Consequently, I say let captal gains go up as well. The Bush tax cuts were targeted toward the very wealthy. Their benefits for the middle class were very small.
The Obama tax increase of 2013 won’t be hailed by a complicit press as such. We need to take a tough love stand and take it on over the cliff as we ought to have let GM and Chrysler follow on the same Darwininan path and survive or become extinct. Once over the cliff, no pork barrel or spending that isn’t mandated by the Constitution, PERIOD!
The Senate has passed a bill keeping taxes were they are on those making less than 250k a year. Obama has agreed that he will sign that bill if passed. Only the House Republicans stand in the way of that bill.
Obama has taken full ownership of increasing taxes on those making over 250k a year and the Republicans have to take ownership of increasing taxes on those making less than 250k a year.
Any and all tax increases are the result of Obama’s intransigence. PERIOD.
North Korea Launches Fragrance
PYONGYANG (The Borowitz Report) — North Korean leader Kim Jong-un surprised Korea-watchers today by abruptly cancelling his nation’s controversial rocket test and launching a fragrance instead.
The dictator’s signature fragrance, called “Number Un,” could be on store shelves in time for Christmas, according to the Korean Central News Agency.
The decision to launch a fragrance rather than a rocket “shows a kind of realism that has been rare in the Kim family,” said North Korea expert Dr. Hiroshi Kyosuke, of the University of Tokyo.
“I think Kim Jong-un most likely said to himself, ‘Given how badly my last rocket did, maybe I’ll just launch a fragrance,’” he said.
The official North Korean announcement offered this description of the new fragrance: “Number Un deliriously combines the sweet smells of North Korea’s native unicorns with the irresistible aroma of our Dear Leader himself. This holiday season, every kiss begins with Kim Jong-un.”
GOP shouldnt worry after all Pres Obama swore during one of the debates that he had no intent of letting the country go through sequestration. ;) I’m so sure he meant that!!
Yea, that was a dumb thing to say. He should have realized who he would be negotiating with. House Republicans have already shown they are willing to hurt the country to protect their billionaire donors. No reason to believe an election would change that.
His statement was couched as more of a prediction than a promise, but in any event its seem likely the statement was inaccurate.
The actual statement was “That won’t happen.” Not I have no intention of letting that happen.
Jan – on the other hand you can say that the Dems are willing to destroy the country to protect special interest groups and unwillingness to STOP spending money we dont have…. All in all there are 2 stubborn groups. However the irony is that the Pres and the Senate are controlled by the Dems. So let them send a plan to the floor for a vote.
@ Jan – here is what the Pres said
“Obama: Bob, I just need to comment on this. First of all, the sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.”
As such the Pres is saying he will not let the Sequester happen – its all on him!
If reducing taxes on the wealthiest Americans lead to job creation, where are the jobs? The wealthiest Americans have received tax breaks (like 98% of Americans), but where are the jobs to show for this theory in application? We should be swimming in jobs for as long as we’ve had tax cuts for ALL Americans. Easy answer, from the right is the wealth and even those small to mid-size biz owners; are hesitant to invest due to the possibility of higher taxes. Ok! Lets take that off the table and raise the tax rate, because lower tax rates did not create a record boom in job creation from the Bush Admin to the Obama Admin. The proof is very clear that cutting taxes for ALL Americans DO NOT lead to job creation. Former Pres. Clinton raised taxes and job creation skyrocketed. Now granted, during the early days of the recession 2008-09; raising taxes would have been foolish. Yet the broader economy (housing, manufacturing, and retail sales) all signal it is time to cut back on enhanced spending (lower SNAP-food stamp benefits and other social services) and raise revenues. This needs to happen at the federal and state levels; in addition use the saving to FINALLY pay towards the debt. New (lower and limited) spending proposals would still exist. Why? Becuase the economy is soft and needs stability in which only the federal government can support. Businesses and the markets cannot provide the level of assurance because it is to fluid in nature.
Superb, what a website it is! This blog gives useful data to us, keep it up.
Howdy! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog before but after browsing through some of the post I realized it’s new to me.
Nonetheless, I’m definitely happy I found it and I’ll
be bookmarking and checking back often!