Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-12-2011, 04:54 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
3,088 posts, read 5,352,508 times
Reputation: 1626

Advertisements

Does anyone remember the old curse "may you live in interesting times"?

We do, indeed, live in interesting times!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2011, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,929,215 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
It's a trap and quite a clever one because if he takes the offer then it will be used against him in the election. "Obama raised the debt ceiling 20 gazillion dollars...blah, blah".

If he declines which I suspect is what will happen he's going to be seen as not wanting to take responsibility for it.

Either choice he loses... LOL.
Exactly. I can't believe the Left thinks this might be a good thing for obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 04:58 PM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,943,270 times
Reputation: 3159
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Exactly. I can't believe the Left thinks this might be a good thing for obama.
It is not a good thing, but the alternative is catastrophic. The sides will not come to an agreement. Remember though, this rule would be in place when and if you have a Republican President.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 05:03 PM
 
45,542 posts, read 27,152,040 times
Reputation: 23858
I don't go for the idea. I understand the political strategy behind it - but debt is debt, and it ain't political.

I say play within the system. Stick to your viewpoints. Maybe the right should have offered tougher terms in the beginning and then negotiate back to their standard.

It is also unconstitutional. This is Congress' job. Do not set the precedent of passing unconstitutional laws just because it MAY be politically expedient.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 05:03 PM
 
Location: USA
2,362 posts, read 2,995,056 times
Reputation: 1854
Wow, this sure p*ssed off a lot of Republicans:


Freedom Works

"Sen. McConnell thinks cutting spending is too hard. Help him find his spine! Call him at 202-224-2541"

https://twitter.com/#%21/FreedomWork...73797263114241


Gingrich

"McConnell's plan is an irresponsible surrender to big government, big deficits and continued overspending. I oppose it."

"The answer to Obama's irresponsibility is a principled "no", not a blank check."

Twitter

Heritage Foundation

"The plan that we are reading reports about today is a serious walk back from that position and would seemingly trade the leverage needed to achieve reforms in return for political gains.
If Republicans in Congress believe they cannot strike a real deal with President Obama, they should begin making serious plans to live under the confines of a de facto balanced budget come August 2.â€


Heritage Group: McConnell Plan Trades ‘Systemic Reforms’ for ‘Political Gains’ - By Daniel Foster - The Corner - National Review Online

Red State

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 05:06 PM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,943,270 times
Reputation: 3159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacific Swell View Post
Wow, this sure p*ssed off a lot of Republicans:


Freedom Works

"Sen. McConnell thinks cutting spending is too hard. Help him find his spine! Call him at 202-224-2541"

https://twitter.com/#%21/FreedomWork...73797263114241


Gingrich

"McConnell's plan is an irresponsible surrender to big government, big deficits and continued overspending. I oppose it."

"The answer to Obama's irresponsibility is a principled "no", not a blank check."

Twitter

Heritage Foundation

"The plan that we are reading reports about today is a serious walk back from that position and would seemingly trade the leverage needed to achieve reforms in return for political gains.
If Republicans in Congress believe they cannot strike a real deal with President Obama, they should begin making serious plans to live under the confines of a de facto balanced budget come August 2.â€


Heritage Group: McConnell Plan Trades ‘Systemic Reforms’ for ‘Political Gains’ - By Daniel Foster - The Corner - National Review Online

Red State
Ideologues. If they had their way, we would have no government, only a department of defense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 05:06 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,023,289 times
Reputation: 17864
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
Remember though, this rule would be in place when and if you have a Republican President.
As I'm reading it the rule would expire in 2012.

Quote:
First Read - McConnell floats a back-up plan, a 'last-choice' option

Congress would write a law that requires the president to submit to Congress a request to raise the debt ceiling three separate times before the 2012 election, totaling $2.4 trillion dollars to cover the government's obligations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 05:07 PM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,943,270 times
Reputation: 3159
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
As I'm reading it the rule would expire in 2012.
That would make it better for Republicans. Pretty smart little clause.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 05:11 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,032,019 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
It is also unconstitutional.
I so love the Lawrence Tribes of City Data....


If McConnell's idea is unconstitutional so then is the debt limit itself, since it was enacted in 1917 for the very exact reason, so that the Treasury Department didn't have to seek Congressional approval for the issuance of each series of war bonds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 05:17 PM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,847,737 times
Reputation: 4585
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Exactly. I can't believe the Left thinks this might be a good thing for obama.
It's not particularly good for Obama, but it may be good for America, to have the GOP stand up to the TParty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top