Bipartisanship Breaks Out In The Senate

Republicans voted against pay-go because it also included increasing the statutory debt limit (which is, you know, kinda the OPPOSITE of fiscal responsibility, even if you do call it pay-go).

Do a little research, Rev.

Next.

Pay-Go is an ongoing process. Meaning going forward legislation would have to be paid for before it could become law. I agree that the statutory debt limit is bad, but if you use Pay-go you might not need to use that increase.

Pure and simple the party of no did what it does best.

King is right. Also, congress adopted pay-go rules in 2007 and have ignored it ever since and I'd guess there's plenty of exceptions written into the current amendment. It's b.s. window dressing that only provides an excuse for raising taxes.

I'm not surprised the Reverend fell for it, though.

Bingo, larry. The Dems ignored the previous pay-go from the second it went into effect. This is a phony response to the Mass. election to make Dems appear fiscally responsible. Only the rubes will fall for this, as the Dems continue to spend, spend, spend.

It is time for REAL worldwide bipartinship to solve the no. 1 problem in the world.
I propose a board consisting of 5 people, each one being not only an influential politican but an expert in global warming.
Representing the Reps–Lindsey Graham
Representing the Dems.– Al Gore
Representing the quilty nations– Gordon Brown
Representing the damaged countries–Osam bin Laden

It's relatively easy to just say "next" when you can't answer the question posed.

King says that the reason Serious and Sober Ultra-Responsible Fiscal Conservative Republicans voted "no" on PayGo was in order to stop the lifting of the national debt limit, something Serious Republicans were in favor of twice under…..guess who?…..W. & Dick. What this means is that Republicans not only voted against PayGo, odd in itself for, you know, bedrock fiscal conservatives,…but it also means that those same Republicans did so in order for the U.S. Treasury to go bankrupt, causing it to no longer be able to fulfill it's debt obligations.

So, now….I can only conclude that Republicans no longer consider paying as you go as a virtue, preferring borrowing to paying…..AND….what the U.S. has already borrowed, Republicans no longer believe in paying back.

Interesting financial doctrines Republicans hold to…..they don't want the government to pay for anything they put in place….and they want to renege on existing debts incurred by government. Interesting. I wondered what fiscal responsibility looked like….now I know.

And as brilliant as larry has proven himself to be……Obama and the Democrats don't need an "excuse" to raise taxes. It's the one truly responsible and fair thing to do right now.

They need an excuse because their poll numbers are going down the toilet, Reverend. Americans are tiring of the kind of fundamentally dishonest arguments they see from Dem leadership and that we see in a blog post such as above.

In Congress every person takes an oath to do what is best for the United States – and since the Republicans clearly have a different agenda – they ARE unpatriotic. And should be VOTED all out.
For the 6 years THEY controlled Congress, anyone who didn't vote their way (or doubted Iraq had WMDs) were 'unpatriotic', or even worse. Now, they sit on their hands no matter WHAT the agenda is, with their only goal seemingly to deny the President or Democratic Congress of a victory. They wont even clap at Obama State of the Union when he mentioned tax cuts – Shame on them Unpatriotic self serving UN Americans

Couldn't have said it better, Andrea.

larry suggests that I'm being dishonest when I point out how the Republicans in the Senate voted. I said the Republicans voted against pay as you go. King disagreed saying that what Republicans really did was stop the debt ceiling from being raised. I then said that Republicans voted to stop honoring American debt obligations.

Somehow….that's making a "fundamentally dishonest argument."

What's a blogger to do?

Poor King, or should I say Queen.

Credit where credit is due Rev. I watched quite a bit of Obama's visit with the GOP on C-Span. I give him credit for doing it and I thought he handled the situation well and(although I dont believe a thing he says) made numerous good points.

Hey Rev:

"Paygo," as King points out, was part of a bill to authorize another $2 trillion borrowing by the federal government. Barack Obama's Senate voted to increase the federal debt load by another $2 trillion, while saying essentially "after this $2 trillion, we're going to stop borrowing."

You are stupid or you are a liar. Or you are a stupid liar. Either way, you are a liar, you lying liar.

Also, while we're on the subject of bipartisanship, here's a prediction: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be tried at Guantanamo Bay, which will (still) be open one year from today.

What do you think about that, you liar who tells lies?

Are you talking to me?

Not stupid, not lying….just reporting and commenting on the obstructionistic vote by GOP senators.

Attention conservative Einsteins! If GOP senators who voted twice under Bush to raise the debt ceiling….vote against Obama's call to raise the debt ceiling…..what does that tell you?

If conservatives praise the hypocritical action of 40 GOP senators by asserting that they agree with not raising the debt ceiling…..why didn't conservatives feel that way under Bush, when the same GOP senators, twice, approved raising the debt ceiling.

Or is it that conservatives, as I suggested, don't want America to pay back it's debt?

Which is it?

Tbomb, if you're not going to even try why bother?

Raising the debt ceiling to pay back debts sounds like a pretty disastrous policy, Reverend. I hope the Mrs. handles the checkbook at your house.

We have a United States President who has been called a liar to his face by a member of congress and a supreme court justice during speeches and who now has been forced to deny he's a communist ideologue in front of a national television audience.

Is that weird, or is it just me?

What do you think I'm going to do with that beachball question?

It's just you.

Rev:

Yes, Bush and Republicans spent too much money. Everyone already knows that.

But Democrats have controlled Congress since 2007 and Barack Obama hasn't done anything to improve the budget outlook. In fact, he has made things worse.

Dispute anything that is written above. I dare you. You liar.

Also, dispute that "Pay-go" was part of a package in which Democrats authorized another $2 trillion in borrowing – essentially saying, "Hey, after we borrow another $2 trillion, no more borrowing."

Do it. I dare you. Liar.

If "everyone already knows" that Bush and the GOP "spent too much money",….then what's the complaint about Obama all about? Because I've been paying close attention for the last 15 years or so…..and from 2001-2009 I never heard any whining from conservatives about spending or debt. None.

From 2007-2009, Democrats had a majority in Congress…..but as you should already know, unless you are a, you know, "liar", Republicans had more than 34 Senators….and that's all that was needed to protect a Bush veto of anything that appeared in the least to be progressive.

That's two down….and now the third, and it's the easiest….thanks.

Bush and the Republicans had no qualms, none, about raising the national debt ceiling not once, but twice, on their way to doubling the debt in two short presidential terms….something never done by any other American administration.

Yes, Pay-Go was part of a legislative piece which raised the debt ceiling. Republicans, having already raised the debt ceiling twice under Bush, were just oh-so-deeply offended and disturbed, like you are, about Obama telling Congress the debt ceiling needed to be raised in order for the U.S. to pay it's, you know, financial obligations.

Furthermore, the very reason why the debt ceiling needs to be raised again is because of the financial trainwreck leftover from the rogue Bush administration.

Like I said, the Republican vote in the Senate, heartfelt, I'm so sure…..was a commitment by Republicans to stop paying U.S. debt obligations and never pay for the cost of legislation when it's passed.

Seems strange for a bunch of fiscal conservatives……maybe they really aren't.

So, it's "Bush did it too," today. Refreshing.

There's been plenty of criticism of Bush's spending on the right, all along. And Obama's worse. In fact he spends worse than Bush, is more cynical than Nixon, and is less able to lead a government than Carter.

I'm not simply dismissing huge deficits, etc. What I'm pointing out is that the same folks…..the very same folks…..who passed a huge, unpaid for, Medicare Plan D program….are now screeching the loudest about Obama's new and paid for program on health care reform.

I wasn't asleep from 2001-2009…..like many conservatives and Villagers were. Fiscal conservatives DID NOT convene TeaParties or TownHall-Bustups after Bush and the GOP passed an unpaid for entitlement program…..ditto for doubling the national debt in 8 years.

Only NOW….with Democrats in power….have I heard any complaining about spending, deficits and debt. Why not embrace the Great GOP Protector…The Dick…who famously bragged that "deficits don't matter, Reagan proved that?"

Dare I ask….Could Cheney have been mistaken?

Hypocrites…..really….can never be taken seriously.

Rev,
Here's an idea, and here's what fiscal conservatism should really mean…..

STOP ALL THE INSANE FEDERAL SPENDING. That's what we can't pay for, and that's what is driving the debt through the roof. If it makes you and Andrea feel all warm, cuddly, and righteous to blame Bush and Republicans, fine, feel free. I blame them too (along with Democrats), but THAT DOESN'T FIX THE FREAKING PROBLEM now, does it ???? You can rattle off all the partisan bs in the world if you wish, but we are still on a drastically wrong course, economically speaking, and Obama is MAKING IT WORSE, much worse. You two sound like nothing but human talking point machines. Did the DNC give y'all brain implants or something ?

And if the Republicans HAVE changed course from their previous ways (of which I'm skeptical), more power to them. That makes them right. Why are you still arguing for the wrong ?

The current wrong is the government refusing to spend money. You can disagree all you want to…..highly respected economists on both sides are on my side on this one.

Yes, the debt can, and must, be dealt with……but cutting taxes ain't gonna…umm…cut it. I think you agree with that but won't say it.

Do you have any faith in the Great Capitalistic Engine of America? I thought you believed in free market, very free market capitalism? If you still do, then you should have faith that as soon as the bankster-caper ashes have been cleaned up….and no new plans to re-regulate anything emerge….that economic paradise will simply be around the next quarterly-report corner.

If the debt is ever reduced, it will be because the economy grew and more taxes flowed in…combined with higher taxation on the wealthiest. But none of this matters, really, because the Supremes declared that our biggest American corporations are entitled to buy ALL of our elected officials. I mean, really now, who can argue with a decision like that? That ruling will take care of all our problems, lickedy-split.

Forgot….

Your faith-basedness is showing when you say stuff like…."if the Republicans HAVE changed from their previous ways…". At least you added a note of skepticism.

Republicans can't change….because then they might risk being seen as mistaken about something…..which they never are.

The Republicans have admitted to being mistaken about a great deal during the Bush years. I'm not sure how you could have possibly missed that. It was all over the airwaves. GOP mea culpas everywhere.

But the funny thing is, Obama is making all the exact same mistakes. Spending growing, deficits through the roof, tax cuts at the same time, government subsidies everywhere………..it's Bush all over again, but this time on steroids.

And yes, I have more confidence in free-market capitalism than I have in ANYTHING else. We built our country around it, and ended up with the most powerful economy on earth. Maybe you see that as a problem, but…….try to think it through some more. History is on my side, big time. What threatens to destroy it all is the encroachment of big government, which CONSUMES the economy, and consumes the private sector. Government spending is becoming a significant liability, which I wish our current President would learn and learn quickly. Instead, he thinks more government is the answer to everything.

But there's nothing wrong with sensible regulation. Every game needs rules, and it's the government's job to set them up.

Repent – economic armaggedon approaches.

" I'm not sure how you could have possibly missed that. It was all over the airwaves. GOP mea culpas everywhere."

The ONLY mistake owned up to by Republicans was, predictably, that Bush ran up huge deficits and doubled the national debt in 8 years. He spent too much…just like Ronnie and Poppy did before him. Now, GOP'ers, again predictably, are swarming over Obama…..blaming him for the economic chaos.

The tax cutting, the Iraq crime, the near destruction of the Justice Dept., the purposeful alienation of the rest of the world's nations, torture, Gitmo, etc…..have never, ever, been rejected by Republicans,…..or even acknowledged as mistakes.

And…..America hasn't had a "free market…capitalistic"…economy for a very long time. Over decades the "free market" has been perverted into a system of huge multi-national corporations monopolizing pretty much all the basics of the "market." Eisenhower's warning writ very large. Thanks to elected officials from both sides…I might add.