• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT2| Worth 77% of OT1

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

ridethepiggy

Banned
Speaking of debt limit

House Republican leaders are gearing up for what is likely to be a surrender on the debt ceiling, while trying to mask it as a long-sought victory.

A Friday memo to GOP members by Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) says “the House will act to prevent a default on our obligations before” the mid-October deadline the Obama administration has established. “House Republicans,” he says, “will demand fiscal reforms and pro-growth policies which put us on a path to balance in ten years in exchange for another increase in the debt limit.”

The language is vague — intentionally so, in order to maintain wiggle room for Republicans to avert a disastrous debt default. President Barack Obama has vowed not to pay a ransom to ensure the U.S. can meet its obligations.

If and when they do cave, Republicans will be hard-pressed to show their base they got something in return for raising the debt ceiling. In January, they got Senate Democrats to agree to pass a non-binding budget resolution. This time around, the possibilities for symbolic concessions range from a doomed Senate vote to delay or defund Obamacare or instructions to initiate the process of tax reform.

...

The Cantor memo makes it all but official that Republicans won’t seek to defund Obamacare in the fiscal battles. The strategy, pushed by conservative activists, to withhold support for keeping the government running after Sept. 30 unless Democrats agree to defund Obamacare. Instead it vows to “hold a series of strategic votes throughout the fall to dismantle, defund, and delay Obamacare.” The memo says Republicans “will continue to pursue the strategy of systematically derailing this train wreck and replacing it with a patient-centered system.”
Click to expand...



More at link
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
yglesias has a good post about 401(k) costs. The logic here is pretty solid (I suspect EV will approve). The core points:

This all gets at the underlying paradoxical and crappy nature of the 401(k) approach to retirement stability. Yes, it's important for households to save. Yes, most Americans save too little money. But the 401(k) concept is built on the ideology of consumer sovereignty, individual choice, and democratic capitalism in a context where all of those ideas are totally inappropriate. The best 401(k) plan to be a part of is a really gigantic one that limits your choices to the technocratically approved low-fee diversified index fund. But in a realm where large scale and limited choice are the outcomes you want, what you want is a big stodgy boring government program, not a vast array of options orchestrated by HR departments all across the land.


What you want, in other words, is Social Security.
Click to expand...

His follow on point about how to manage those funds (in the link) I'm not on board with, but I do wish more commentators got this.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
ClassyPenguin said:
The posters with consistently terrible opinions and lack of critical thinking skills have terrible opinions. What a surprise.
Click to expand...

Well, when a good chunk of the people in that thread have no clue who a majority of the congress people are and only really know Obama because he's the president, it's no wonder a lot of people are grossly misinformed and putting far too much blame on him.

I mean, he is the President. Obviously everything is his fault. Completely. No blame on anyone else. Whatsoever. Nope.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
zero shift said:
Obama is a terrible president. We might as well have had Romney or even McCaine.
Click to expand...

If you are saying they would have been equally poor presidents, I'm curious about your reasoning.

If you are saying we'd have gotten the same polices, particularly on social and domestic fronts, nope.

If sarcastic, well then. Ho ho.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
PhoenixPause said:
Can't stand Samantha Powers
http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/post...g_about_samantha_s_speech_bothers_me_big_time
Click to expand...

Its the Trustee Model of Representation. Saying that elected leaders don't need to make sure everything is popular. They were elected to make decisions, not pass those decisions on.

And this is an over simplification that's pretty much wrong in anything but the broadest sense. Appeals to the founding fathers are the worst.
The American system is founded on the belief that the people do indeed know what is best for them.
Click to expand...
 
F

Fuchsdh

Member
APKmetsfan said:
Its the Trustee Model of Representation. Saying that elected leaders don't need to make sure everything is popular. They were elected to make decisions, not pass those decisions on.
Click to expand...
Well, there's a fine line. I think based on how it's set up the Senate functions as more trustees while the House is more pure representational, and there's pros and cons to both issues. There were the Aussie politicians who committed political suicide to pass controversial gun control legislation that's worked. Would you say to them "no you weren't representative enough"?
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Fuchsdh said:
Well, there's a fine line. I think based on how it's set up the Senate functions as more trustees while the House is more pure representational, and there's pros and cons to both issues. There were the Aussie politicians who committed political suicide to pass controversial gun control legislation that's worked. Would you say to them "no you weren't representative enough"?
Click to expand...
Yeah the delegate model runs into the tyranny of the majority problem.
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
Also look at the whole concept of civil rights, most of that legislation wouldn't have even passed if not for the trustee model.
 
T

The Librarian

Banned
B-Dubs said:
I blame you personally for their loss. Stop messing with our running backs Dax!
Click to expand...
Wait. So you blame me for their loss, and you'll blame me if the NYC mayoral race doesn't go your way?

What did I do?!
GhaleonEB said:
yglesias has a good post about 401(k) costs. The logic here is pretty solid (I suspect EV will approve). The core points:



His follow on point about how to manage those funds (in the link) I'm not on board with, but I do wish more commentators got this.
Click to expand...

Ooh. Will read later.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Tamanon said:
Also look at the whole concept of civil rights, most of that legislation wouldn't have even passed if not for the trustee model.
Click to expand...

And the trustee model is built into the judicial branch so to say the founders were ignorant to is clearly not true.

A mixture of both is I think the best, I think deference should be towards the voters but there is always another election if you as a representative feel you need to do something that's not popular. We lionize 'courage' in politics (LBJ, Lincoln) when we agree with it and when we don't we call it a 'power grab' or undemocratic. Why can't we just be honest that we disagree with stated policy rather than constantly making contradictory claims about what the 'founders wanted' or 'the american system'? Argue why your ideas are right then and there not that they're correct because of some divine rule

Sometimes those question are important but to often its used as a faulty appeal to authority
 
mckmas8808

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
CHEEZMO™;80899317 said:
Accidental diplomacy. OBAMA DOCTRINE
Click to expand...

Why the heck is the White House "acting" like Kerry made a verbal mistake and didn't mean it the way it sounded?
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
mckmas8808 said:
Why the heck is the White House "acting" like Kerry made a verbal mistake and didn't mean it the way it sounded?
Click to expand...

I have no idea anymore. I used to try and make sense of stuff but screw it. No more.

Dax01 said:
67 Questions about Syria from the CPC



You hate me :(
Click to expand...

I don't hate you :(

You got me this time. You win this round Dax, you win this round.

EDIT: You guys really need to read the Zimmerman thread, there is some funny stuff going on in there.
 
R

ridethepiggy

Banned
Update on Obamacare and the House.

LOL

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans plan to condition a short-term spending bill for averting a government shutdown next month on making Senate Democrats vote on — but not necessarily pass — a tea party-backed plan to dismantle President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.

The move would be a partial victory for conservatives demanding a House vote to “defund ‘Obamacare’” as part of any must-pass stopgap funding bill. But GOP leaders are employing an unusual procedural trick to make sure that the tea party measure doesn’t get in the way of smooth passage of a straightforward stopgap funding bill before the Oct. 1 start of the new budget year.
The unusual strategy would start with a House vote this week on a stopgap funding bill that includes the provision demanded by conservatives to block the controversial health care law. The two issues, however, would automatically be decoupled when they’re sent to the Senate. The maneuver would force Democrats controlling the Senate to vote first on defunding Obamacare before the House sends over a “clean” stopgap funding bill as a separate measure...

The idea may not sit well with some conservatives who may see it as a tactical retreat that in the end won’t touch Obama’s health care law as its implementation marches ahead. It also would mean that House Republicans would need to pass the measure without any help from Democrats unlikely to vote for it over its attack on Obamacare.
Click to expand...

Man it would suck to be Boehner.

RedState confirms

[Update: Based on what I'm hearing from House sources, the worst suspicions are confirmed. Eric Cantor is floating an idea to pass a short-term CR with a defund rider. But just as we predicted, they plan to write a rule that will sever the defund rider from the body of the bill after it passes the House. This will allow the Senate to vote down the defund part separately, and send a clean CR straight to the President's desk without ever returning to the House. This will ensure that we capitulate while allowing House and Senate Republicans to be shielded from charges of voting to defund Obamacare. Here is the link from Politico.

This is exactly why we need new leadership in the party. Call your members and make sure they are opposed to any trick that will allow the Senate to separate Obamacare funding from the rest of the bill. If they support funding Obamacare in the budget, they should have the courage to do so through the front door.]
Click to expand...
 
R

ridethepiggy

Banned
Wilsongt said:
The Republicans are going to keep fucking around and they'll be no stopping this train wreck of a nation down the shitter. Every empire has to fall at some point.
Click to expand...

If you mean no stopping the train wreck that is the GOP from doing down the shitter, I agree.

Anti-immigration (errrr illegal immigration)
Anti- gay (errrr love the sinner, hate the sin)
Cut Cut Cut (errrr freedom)
Anti- womens rights (errrr true respect for women)

I don't see how they can continue on the path they're on. The party is close to splitting with a fiscal conservative party and a social tea party one.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
ridethepiggy said:
If you mean no stopping the train wreck that is the GOP from doing down the shitter, I agree.

Anti-immigration (errrr illegal immigration)
Anti- gay (errrr love the sinner, hate the sin)
Cut Cut Cut (errrr freedom)
Anti- womens rights (errrr true respect for women)

I don't see how they can continue on the path they're on. The party is close to splitting with a fiscal conservative party and a social tea party one.
Click to expand...

If this winds up happening I have to wonder which one will come out on top. Right now I'd have to say the social tea party one would probably win in the short term.
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
I'm so glad he took the case to the people and to Congress.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-puts-syria-strike-on-pause-as-possible

In a potentially dramatic change of course, President Barack Obama told ABC News on Monday that he does not expect any votes in Congress in the near term on the use of force in Syria while the administration takes time to explore a diplomatic solution.

"I don't anticipate that you would see a succession of votes this week or anytime in the immediate future," Obama said. "So I think there will be time during the course of the debates here in the United States for the international community, the Russians and the Syrians to work with us and say is there a way to resolve this."

The diplomatic solution is not final but it involves the possible support of Russia, according to news reports. Obama said a military strike against Syria would "absolutely" be on pause if the regime agrees to do away with its chemical weapons as part of a diplomatic solution.

"I consider this a modestly positive development," he told ABC.
Click to expand...
 
C

Cloudy

Banned
Obama doesn't want the strike. Dunno why he let the media and GOP back him into this in the first place. Hopefully a diplomatic solution can be reached
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Cloudy said:
Obama doesn't want the strike. Dunno why he let the media and GOP back him into this in the first place. Hopefully a diplomatic solution can be reached
Click to expand...

Pride and defending alleged US principles.

One could argue that the WH's firm stance is what convinced Putin to make this surprise move.
 
C

Cloudy

Banned
PhoenixPause said:
Pride and defending alleged US principles.

One could argue that the WH's firm stance is what convinced Putin to make this surprise move.
Click to expand...

It most definitely is but I hate that he was ready to fire missiles because the media took his words out of context and he didn't want to clarify because it'd appear "weak" on the world stage
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
Cloudy said:
It most definitely is but I hate that he was ready to fire missiles because the media took his words out of context and he didn't want to clarify because it'd appear "weak" on the world stage
Click to expand...

Don't buy into that narrative. If it was really a personal thing, he wouldn't have bothered with the deliberations and the Congress.
 
S

Snake

Member
APKmetsfan said:
I can't help but thinking the push to congress was to buy time for something like this.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, whether it meant a possible diplomatic solution or growing international support for intervention, Obama's move was clearly an attempt to stall a military strike until conditions became more favorable for the US or until a strike became moot. That doesn't mean we have to call it 11-dimensional chess. Rather, it's a President realizing the potential hazards of quick and overzealous action in this situation (to the point of overriding his more hawkish or interventionist advisers), while keeping the US' threats credible. And while internet people were pretty quick to jump on this as "accidental diplomacy" at first, I'll bet my account that we'll see genuine sources leak/surface regarding secret diplomatic activity between the US and Russia on this front. To both countries' credit.

Of course this all might fall through, but after watching Obama's interviews touching on the subject it's pretty clear to me that he's going to make this happen. It's in his (and our country's) best interests after all.
 
C

Cloudy

Banned
Tamanon said:
Don't buy into that narrative. If it was really a personal thing, he wouldn't have bothered with the deliberations and the Congress.
Click to expand...

I get that but they should have pushed back on the red-line bullshit from the start. He ONLY said his "calculus would change" if chemical weapons were used.

The media (egged on by the GOP) of course wanted a gotcha and something to criticize never thinking he'd actually use military action.

Not wanting to take the negative press for a few days is why we're here today...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

X (twitter) is now worth 9.4 billion
Business 2
96
4K
Trogdor1123 replied
Jensen Huang's net worth passes Intel's market cap
Business
34
1K
Hawking Radiation replied
Any deals on LG OLED 77" C1 vs C2?
6
675
The Infectious Paradox replied
LTTP: Dead Space 3 (2013) via PS3 Ultra Slim
17
535
WoJ replied
"Gonna be worth tuning into the Xbox Tokyo game show stream next week" says Tom Warren
Rumor 2 3 4
163
7K
Tiago Rodrigues replied
Top Bottom