Still True Today: Forgotten Facts of the Debt Debate

[sinkingfeeling]

http://swampland.time.com/2011/07/27/still-true-today-frequently-forgotten-facts-of-the-debt-debate/#ixzz1TP0bA8XN


If the debt-limit debate had anything to do with reality, every story about it would include a few basic facts. Starting with: President Obama inherited a $1.2 trillion budget deficit. And: Republican leaders supported the tax cuts and wars that (along with the recession, another pre-Obama phenomenon) created that deficit. Also: Republicans engineered this crisis by attaching unprecedented ideological demands to a routine measure allowing the U.S. to pay its bills. Finally, Obama and the Democrats keep meeting those demands—for spending cuts, then for more spending cuts, and even for nothing but spending cuts—but Republicans keep holding out for more.

These are verifiable facts, not opinions. But since they aren’t new facts, and re-reporting them would make “GOP claims” about the crisis look, um, non-factual, they’re rarely mentioned, except as “Democratic claims.” This is a real problem for journalism in an era where—now this is an opinion—one of the major parties has abandoned its grip on reality. I understand why objective reporters aren’t encouraged to contradict political lies with historical truths, but this hostage drama is one of the prices of our era of amnesia.

In other words, it’s at least possible that this crisis the Republicans created could have a beneficial effect. It’s also possible that this crisis the Republicans created could cripple the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, plunge the economy back into recession, and increase borrowing costs for just about everyone. But whatever happens, Republicans created this crisis. They blew up the debt. They refused to raise the debt ceiling without conditions. And because of their internal divisions, they can’t even decide what those conditions should be. They initially demanded a breakdown of 85% spending cuts and 15% revenue increases, before deciding the deal had to be 100% spending cuts. Some initially praised the bipartisan Gang of Six plan—until Obama endorsed it. Now Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has a proposal for 100% spending cuts, all of which Republicans had already endorsed –until, of course, Reid proposed them.

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2011/07/27/still-true-today-frequently-forgotten-facts-of-the-debt-debate/#ixzz1TPXfuoav

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Memes of the Republican Party

1. It doesn't matter how the "crisis" was created.
2. What matters is that Obama made it worse.

[hakko936]

3. You said it!

The only thing is a lot of people don't understand that Obama didn't make it worse, he just didn't do anything to make it better. Pelosi and Reid fall into the same boat.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Obama came into office during the worst recession in memory. He should have asked for 2 or 3 times

the amount for the stimulus program. And raised taxes.

[hakko936]

9. I don't know about tripling the stimulus...

....but taxes should have gone up to pay for the mess. Obama didn't have the political moxy to do it and the Reid/Pelosi led Congress didn't either.

[Igel]

10. At the time he was saying you don't raise taxes in a recession.

It was common wisdom, at the time.

I don't actually know of any research since then that says otherwise, come to think of it.

And, no, Clinton didn't raise taxes in a recession.

[sinkingfeeling]

5. How did he 'make it worse'?

[no_hypocrisy]

6. Doesn't have to be true. It just has to sound inflammatory.

[sinkingfeeling]

7. Sorry, I thought you were saying Obama had made things worse.

[no_hypocrisy]

8. You actually confirmed my contention.

It "sounded" convincing, didn't it? That's how the republicans get lies to be accepted as truth.

[hakko936]

2. The Pubs definitely started this mess....

...but the dems had complete control of Congress for the final two years of W and the first two years of Obama and did little or nothing to change the path. That is the only blame I can lay on the Dems. They should have and could have done more to move us to a better way and didn't. It is almost like they were afraid. I just don't get it.

Now the pubs have highjacked the House and can basically stomp their feet and hold their breath until Obama gives in. It shouldn't have been this way. If the dems had used the power given to them by the voters, they would still have complete control. It's a damn shame.

[Igel]

11. Surely, you jest.

Referring to the fact that deficit spending was de rigueur *and* that the House originates all spending bills before they are voted on in the Senate?

No, no. * was so charismatic, so imposing and impressive as a leader, so worthy of universal support, so able to convince with the soundness and brilliance of his intellect and persuade with his golden-tongued rhetoric that they, like a young virgin girl seduced by a handsome, powerful man, must be held entirely blameless. :silly:

[bhikkhu]

12. "complete control of congress" is easy to say...

but it hasn't ever worked out that way in reality for either party, in my 40 years of paying attention.

From what I've read of history, how it has worked out is just how it works out, as far as ever having one side free to ignore the other.