« Inevitable Catastrophe: The Fruits of Moral Hazard on a Global Scale
Fukushima Reconstruction Committee Issues Urgent Global Appeal (Niigata-Nippo Shimbun, Japan) »
Cantor To Obama: Do As You’re Told
Dear President Obama:
We’ve been very patient with you and your Democratic pals. We’ve given you plenty of time to do exactly what we want done — stiff the poor and middle class big time without bothering the rich in any way. But even our patience has limits, and these limits have now been reached.
So here are your instructions. We’ve taken taxing the rich off the table. It’s off the table. Stop talking about it. Stop thinking about it. We won’t negotiate until you agree in advance on this point while allocating all economic sacrifice to lesser folks. In return, we will negotiate with you again. You should get down on your knees and thank us for making even this concession.
Some smarty pants types have said that if we hold to our present position, if the debt limit isn’t raised, if this country starts defaulting on its debt, this will have horrific consequences for the economy. Maybe so. But whose fault is that? Not ours. We ask only what’s right. Our view of what’s right. And if you won’t go along, any nasty consequences will be on your head.
Truth be told, we can’t lose any way this breaks. You collapse and do as we say, we win. You finally show some spine, don’t do as we say, the economy collapses, we win, too, because believe me, Mr. president, you’ll get the blame and we’ll win the White House in 2012. We are very skilled at apportioning political blame.
I expect your capitulation promptly!
Yours respectfully,
Representative Eric Cantor
3 Responses to “Cantor To Obama: Do As You’re Told”
Well that comes close to summing it up. It seems to hardly matter that Obama is close to being a DINO anyway since the GOP is so deep into the right field they can’t see over the tops of the weeds.
There’s plenty of blame to go around, especially among liberals who are ignorant or insistent on being stupid themselves (and more so).
GOP insistence on no tax increases is stupid. Not that tax increases are needed — the budget problems arise almost totally from, it’s no surprise, spending. But some tax increases are needed in any compromise with Dems. Additionally, if this walkout (“due to the Dems’ insistence on tax increases”) was actually planned a long time ago, and is staged, that’s stupid.
It’s probably a (stupid) GOP tactic to gain bargaining power.
(presuming public opinion is on the GOP’ side — not guaranteed)
Dems have stupidly, mindlessly defended their spending. They are also offensively stupid if they insist on income tax increases while neglecting the need to restore former FICA (payroll) tax rates and probably raise them, to address the principal problem, entitlements.
However, being stupid and mindless as the Dems are, but their votes nevertheless being essential to securing an agreement (that Obama will not veto), obviously a tax increase of some kind is the blood the Dems can expect to extract in exchange for the Democratic votes that are needed(!). (True for other budget and other issues so long as Dem votes are needed for anything.)
The GOP (the Dems aren’t trustworthy enough to expect from them, too) should have, instead, insisted that any tax increases be properly(!) limited, and proper in nature — putting FICA tax increases first before any idiotic income tax increases.
Instead, there’s stunting. Dems can hold out for some kind of tax increase; the GOP shouldn’t play the walkout game, but bargain.
J. Spencer wrote:
Actually, no (and your assessment of Obama and the GOP shows why this may have been arrived at by you — not the truth about them, from mis-observing or from misinterpretation of what they are now doing). However, don’t worry, as the GOP isn’t angelic or smart in this instance, and worse if they planned and staged this walkout.
They’re no doubt hoping (and may wrongly be assuming) that the walkout is good because the public’s on their side, which may not be so, and in fact probably isn’t so. They’re trying to boost their negotiating (bargaining) position by being more popular with the public than they think the Dems would be by insisting on tax increases. The public more likely believes the GOP is being either childish or dishonest in this case, or just using clumsy tactics (to put pressure on the Demmies to concede, seek no tax increases).
The Dems no doubt are silly, too, and probably think they have the public on their side if they really are insisting on tax increases of some kind. They won’t have the public on their side, not the smarter public (for the problem is spending, not “insufficient present revenues” [sic; taxes, nor "revenues" [gag]]). But some kind of tax increase can be expected to be needed to arrive at a bargain, and the GOP should insist on properly limiting any tax increases, doing it of the proper kind (mainly ending the FICA tax cut, because the worst problem is with entitlements, and raising other taxes only secondarily, if at all). Probably an end to the Bush-era current income tax rates (raising them back to pre-Bush levels) or even going up to Clinton-era rates (in exchange in either case for SUBSTANTIAL spending cuts, especially if raising income taxes back to Clinton rates), and ending the temporary FICA tax reduction (or better, raising these as the choice for an increase in taxes), is what ought to be sought.
The GOP thinks it can boost its clout by walking out. I say that is not necessarily so, and probably not so.
Both sides likely are positioning themselves and choosing tactics (bad or good) to put themselves in the strongest position and get the best deal for themselves, not for both parties necessarily.
(It’s all pretty obvious, or should be so.)
As to stupid trivia such as some reported resistance against taxing things like corporate jets (at all, rather than insisting on proper tax design if this is to be done, not to be simply envy-based “luxury tax” style idiocy), that’s minor stuff currently.
We’ll have to wait and see which side blinks first: Will the Dems yield on their demands for higher taxes, or will the GOP come back to the negotiations first if(?) the public reviles their stunt?