Obama called a press conference today to tell the GOP he will not negotiate if they try to hold the debt ceiling hostage in exchange for a ransom of spending cuts.
He is bluffing.
He will never cut spending unless conservatives use the threat of a so-called government shutdown to get his attention — witness the results of the fiscal cliff talks, more spending and no cuts to speak of.
He blatantly threatened to delay Social Security checks, as well as payments of veterans’ benefits and pay for active soldiers on duty in war zones.
He is bluffing.
According to The New York Times account, Obama said of Republicans, “They will not collect a ransom in exchange for not crashing the American economy. … The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip.”
No, the 14th Amendment says the debts must be paid. It is all the other stuff that is subject to debate and ransom — entitlements, federal salaries, huge bureaucracies doing things no one needs or wants.
“It would be a self-inflicted wound on the economy,” the Times quoted Obama as saying. “It would slow down our growth and tip us into recession. To even entertain the idea of this happening is irresponsible. It’s absurd. … America cannot afford another debate with this Congress about whether or not they should pay the bills they’ve already racked up.”
When will the deficits to infinity and beyond bleed the economy dry? During someone else’s presidential term perhaps?
Back in 2006, Obama was singing in the Democratic choir:
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”
In 2007 and 2008, he did not even bother to vote on the debt ceiling, though he later pushed trillions in budget busting TARP and bailouts and stimulus spending.
Obama is holding no cards. He is trying to stretch out the game until he can escape and leave this nation’s next generations without so much as the ante.
He is bluffing.
The Times quoted House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio:
“The consequences of failing to increase the debt ceiling are real, but so too are the consequences of allowing our spending problem to go unresolved. … Without meaningful action, the debt will continue to act as an anchor on our economy, costing American jobs and endangering our children’s future.”
Boehner and the GOP must demand serious spending cuts as a quid pro quo for raising the debt ceiling. Put it on the table say: Take it or leave it.
Let it be on Obama’s head if the government shuts down and the checks don’t go out. Republicans will be blamed, but that is better than letting the federal government bleed red ink until it is too late to fix.
He is bluffing.
4TH ST8 
The very people, i.e., the President and the members of the Congress, that burdened the nation with debt now squabble among themselves, not for larger pieces of the pie already baked, but one that is to be baked. That’s a half-baked homily, especially because the Congress up to Obama’s arrival were responsible for most of the spending but now it has little to say on spending; the best they can do is parcel out what little is left after Obama has directed the lion’s share to his progressive programs and projects. While many of us were concerned when Obama announced his “fundamental transformation”, it now appears obvious the members of the Congress should have taken serious note the transformation included them. The Congress is going through the motions while fading into irrelevancy. It will find a way to continue but not in pre-Obama form, no longer statesmen but functionaries, they brought it on themselves.
Well said Vernon!
So you believe that hreatening to destroy the US economy (and that of most of the free world as well) is a legitimate means of achieving one’s policy objectives.
Who knows what Obama’s policy objectives are, that’s beyond his personal hubris and gaining riches? Today the great man mentioned the military and social security recipients could be the first to suffer non-payment, not the near half of the population that receive food stamps or the millions employed in non-military governement work. The members of the military earn their pay, social security recipients have paid into the system, how many food stamp recipients earned that benefit. How about if the members of the Congress and their staffs don’t get paid, how about his czars and their staffs?
Obama is the one who made the threat, Petey. Republicans should hand him an ultimatum, then Obama can do the destroying in one move, instead of by slow exsanguination.
There is no threat. He isn’t negotiating with people who threaten to destroy the US economic system if their policy demands are not met.
This is really serious stuff. You don’t shatter the full faith & credit of the United States of America in order to get your way on policy matters.
Even hard-core wingnuts should tread very carefully here.
That is the key phrase: he refuses to negotiate. Period.
One cannot negotiate with people who, in bad faith, threaten to destroy the US economy because they cannot get their way on separate policy matters. To do so is an invitation to endless further hostage-taking.
Are you guys really willing to ruin the full faith and credit of the United States in order to further your policy agenda?
Obama says he is.
You are 100% wrong
Obama believes he alone knows what is best for the nation, he is bolstered in this delusion by support from most of the members of the Congress but in a few days he will be master of all he surveys; there will be little use for either the Senate or the House to convene or any members of the now defunct legislative branch to go to their offices. Chief Justice Roberts will administer Obama’s oath of office and then will to told, in essence, to get lost.
“Congressional Democrats have recently urged the president to lift the debt limit unilaterally. He said — as he has before — that he won’t do it, that Congress has voted for the spending that resulted in federal borrowing, and should now agree to pay the bill.”
You guys say he should do it himself and he refuses.
Obama says he is willing to ruin the full faith and credit of the United States in order to further his policy agenda. So willing he is even refusing his own party’s demands.
You are in favor of the President attempting to “lift the debt ceiling unilaterally”???
Guess I was not “100% wrong”
Yes, you are
From my point of view, it appears Congress has effectively abdicated all authority and will hardly be calling anyone’s bluff. There have been numerous issues that serious adults interested in the truth ( and far from being conspiracy lunatics) could have demanded answers to but did not.
Joe Arpaio gave them a fraud case on a platter but no one bit. His birth certificate case was one in which any person who used Photoshop or Illustrator could see that the President had presented and vouched for a forgery.
He has used the Executive Order and recess appointment to abuse.
Now he comes to claim executive ability to negate the Bill of Rights vis a vis guns.
As a contributor to numerous races through the Club for Growth I am seriously asking myself if all this was in vain.
I am not sure Congress still wants power. They just want the treats to keep coming.
“Yes, you are” not 100% wrong.
“Mike” – you are insane.
I guess we can add “psychiatrist” to the list of Nyp’s specialties, along with “legal scholar” and “economics expert.”
Yes. I have a correspondence degree from the “Close Cover Before Striking School of Mental Health.”
nyp
elaborate
I’m new here so I don’t know if you are a thoughtful person or just a troll. I have never been found to be insane in the past (60 plus) years but who knows, maybe I am getting some early dementia.
Did I err in my statement of fact? I don’t think so. Did I piss you off with fact (more likely). Is my logic faulty?….or are you just a troll? The opinions of others re: nyp would be appreciated.
It is helpful to see what and how the other side thinks … or believes, Mike, so Petey serves a purposes and occasionally makes a good point or cracks a good joke.
Happy to help out. Saying that the President of the United States is a Keynian whose birth certificate was photoshopped is insane. Saying that the President “claims executive ability to negate the Bill of Rights,” is, as a clinical matter, not strictly insane, but falls well within the definition of “nuts”. Saying that a Congress that has now twice threatened to wreck havoc on the international economic order by not permitting the Executive Branch to pay the bills that Congress has incurred is, shall we say, somewhat loopy.
Whoops. Pushed “send” too early. I meant to write:
“Saying that a Congress that has now twice threatened to wreck havoc on the international economic order by not permitting the Executive Branch to pay the bills that Congress has incurred has, nevertheless, “effectively abdicated all authority,” is, shall we say, somewhat loopy.
Hope that clarifies things.
No, he’s a Keynesian.
About that we can all agree.
Nice to see Nyp is including the whole Congress in his current statement.
“he’s a Keynesian.”
On the whole, I’d rather be a Kenyan.
But Keynesian’s get to print their own money, thereby negating the need for selling pencils on street corners.
Gotta print our own money to pay for the weaponry to defend ourselves against Paul Krugman’s space alien invasion.
By the way, Steve, thanks for the heads up about the Obama tax cuts. I get paid bi-monthly, so today was my first payday of 2013. Net was 2.5% below my last paycheck in 2012. Like you, I’m not one of those $400K guys, so I wonder why the Obama tax cuts turned out to be a tax hike for me.
B/c the GOP insisted that Obama’s payroll tax holiday be eliminated. That’s why.
Get used to it, Milty. We’ve had a 40 year party and now it’s time to pay the bill.
So is Rincon acknowledging that we’re not going to revenue enhance our way out of this situation by relying exclusively on tax increases for the wealthy?
President Obama, 07/13.2012: “We must ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more.”
I congratulate Steve and all the others on this blog who just became “wealthy.”
You should have written to your Republican senators and representatives to demand that they support President Obama in retaining the payroll tax holiday instituted in 2009 as part of his economic stimulus package.
Our hole is too deep for only the rich to pull us out of it, Milty. My big problem with the rich is they often pay a smaller percentage of their income for income tax than the middle class, as Romney and Buffet do. 70%, as it was in the 1960’s is way too much, but 15% is equally ridiculous.
Bottom line is that we need to grow the economy, but the middle class and rich will have to pay some extra and spending must decline. The spending decline includes spending on the lower class.