Boehner rejects Obama cuts-revenue proposal

[OhioChick]

Source: Politico

4/5/13 11:55 AM EDT

House Speaker John Boehner immediately dismissed President Barack Obama’s package of significant new entitlement cuts tied to new tax revenues, calling them “no way to lead and move the country forward.”

The White House had portrayed the proposal, part of the budget it will release next week, as a compromise with Congressional Republicans that could have put them on track for another run at a grand bargain.

But Boehner said he will not consider new revenues as part of the deal, arguing that “modest” entitlement savings should not “be held hostage for more tax hikes.”

The budget proposal sets Obama up for major fights on his right and left. Republicans will not accept any new tax revenues and liberal Democrats have already signaled they will resist any cuts to Social Security and other entitlement programs that Obama is proposing.





Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/obama-budget-medicare-social-security-89658.html

[n2doc]

1. Of course he does. The Kabuki Theater goes on n/t

[grahamhgreen]

29. So 3d chess Obama now has the R's defending SS cuts. What a freaking genius. Wow. Impressive. For

the think tank crowd that trolls these boards, anyway.

[n2doc]

31. Should really help get out the vote in 2014, you think?

I'm always amazed at those who think that, by getting the Republicans to say No to something that they want, it really helps the Democrats. The Republican base expects and demands that they reject ANYTHING Obama proposes. So saying No costs them nothing and strengthens their support. One would think, knowing this, having numerous examples over the past 4 years, that Obama might actually propose something that the Nation wants and that his base craves. But I guess he doesn't think that way. It is always more important, it seems, to be seen as 'reasonable' and 'compromising' .

[Autumn]

2. “modest” entitlement savings ? Is that code for, it's not enough you need to sweeten the pot

a little more? I don't trust any of this shit.

[cliffordu]

3. Boom goes the dynamite.

Obama knew this was going to be the response.

[L0oniX]

7. Oh please ....pfffft. n/t

[BumRushDaShow]

24. Exactly. +infinity

He says "Up" they say "Down". He says "Okay, 'down'" and they say "NO! 'up'!!"

His black face makes them go crazy and apparently the same makes some on DU go foaming-at-the-mouth crazy as well.

[greatauntoftriplets]

27. The Republicans are so predictable!

[grahamhgreen]

30. Right. The genius has the R's defending SS (again). Pure genius. So smart.

[cliffordu]

33. Except that isn't what happened.

[JoePhilly]

37. If Boehner was smart ... he'd have waited to throw his latest hissy fit.

Instead he wants bigger cuts, and no revenues.

Let him run on that.

[onehandle]

4. Worst (and Weakest) Speaker Ever. nt

[Iliyah]

5. Well well well

"modest" entitlement savings (cuts), uh huh and holding rich people hostage. I understand that maybe 40% of Americans can't see beyond Pres O wants to cut cut cut my SSI and Medicare, including his base, but shit, read what Boner said, GOPers want deeper cuts and refuse to discuss any tax increases on their beloved masters.

[frazzled]

6. This is why we need to put the whole thing in perspective

I haven't jumped on the OMG thing about chained CPI because I knew the Republicans would never agree to new tax revenues in this context. I sincerely believe Obama did too, when he proposed it. I DO think he believes that a Grand Bargain is what we need to get long-term stability and just put all this behind us so we can focus on other things the government needs to do. But he is not naive about negotiating with Republicans.

This is what we call theatrics. He tried again to show them (and the country) that he'd be willing to make some extremely painful concessions if they would do the same on their side. They were never going to do it. They become the obstructionists.

Sadly, we're right back where we started, with the sequestration austerity cuts locked in place ... which, frankly, is just as bad as the CPI mess (if not worse), especially for poorer Americans.

[L0oniX]

8. pffffft "This is what we call theatrics" n/t

[frazzled]

12. Maybe you need to try out

a different response than "pffffft" (used twice thus far in this thread). It really is no substitute for actual analysis. Mine might be wrong, but "pfffffft" is plain nothing.

[L0oniX]

14. Don't worry. It's just my "theatrics". n/t

[elleng]

11. Right, good analysis. Thanks.

May reread your 'frazzled' (NOT) post, to improve my otherwise very discouraged mood.

[frazzled]

15. Heh, "frazzled" became my name for two reasons ...

(1) when I first became a member here, my then user name was already taken, and I had to choose something else on the spot.

(2) it was how I felt after the 2000 elections and the first Bush year ... like wanting to pull my hair out. I really should change it some day.

[elleng]

17. Yes, do change your name

(if you want,) but you could do so as a statement: NOT frazzled anymore!!!

[geek tragedy]

20. Except that Obama's negotiating against himself again.

Back to the good old days of the debt ceiling crisis, when he offered to give away the farm without getting anything in return.

Obama put Social Security and Medicare on the table. The Republicans already have him more than halfway to their position.

[pmorlan1]

22. Obama - always moving to the right

He knew they would say no to whatever he proposed so now he will move further to the right to "negotiate". He's the only person I know who negotiates by moving towards the other sides position before the negotiations even start. He's not stupid so one must accept the fact that he is moving in the direction he wants to go in.

[blkmusclmachine]

34. +1.

Old. Tired. And transparent.

[JDPriestly]

9. Obama needs to get out of the negotiations and sign or veto

a bill that Congress sends him.

There is a congressional election in 2014. Let the Republicans fall on their swords. Then, let's take back the House for Democrats. Because we will if we forget about cutting Social Security and Medicare. We will if people are losing their jobs due to the unwillingness of the House to raise taxes on the rich.s

And let's get a people's candidate ready for 2016. Not someone who plays footsie with the 1% and the corporations.

If the Republicans continue to refuse to raise taxes on those earning over $500,000 per year, the recession will get worse and worse, and people will want a candidate who is more liberal on economics in 2016.

[LongTomH]

23. +1000 I agree with everything you said!

Moving to the left is the only way we're going to get out of this "lesser depression" (As Paul Krugman calls it!). If we continue to temporize with the Republican right, we're going to lose not only elections; but, any chance at a new Progressive Era.

[JoePhilly]

38. Congress won't be sending him anything.

[elleng]

10. No kidding!

The 'system's not working. What should we do???

[Myrina]

13. Of course, now he knows SS et al are on the table ...

... he's going to hold out for 100% reduction of those aspects, and absolutely zero, zilch in 'additional revenues'.

Why POTUS always throws all the chips on the table in the opening round continually befuddles me.

[watoos]

16. Well. I say do nothing.

Putting Chained CPI on the table was stupid. Dems seem to have to keep catering to Republican austerity demands. It is much harder for the Dems to get their message out since the MSM is corporate-controlled and controls the narrative.
With that in mind I say do nothing. Let the Cons shut down the government. I can do several months without my SS check, many cannot. Unless Dems control Congress the middle class and the poor are doomed. Maybe if we allow Cons to over-reach and shut down the gvt. Dems can control Congress again.
The sad part of this situation is that our economy only grew 0.4% last quarter, with the sequester it's not going to get any better. Obama can't get his jobs Bill passed or infrastructure Bills passed so our economy isn't going to grow without any stimulus, let alone subjugating it to more austerity.

I think that Boehner rejected Obama's offer because he knew it would not pass in the House and then it would be clear to all that Republicans were the problem. This way, he still has the MSM to enable them to ramble on about the deficit, with nary a mention about job creation. The media is enemy #1 IMO, and yes that includes MSNBC, they too are corporate controlled.
Look what happened to Phil Donahue (NBC) Keith Olbermann, Cenk Uyngar, Dylan Ratigan when they strayed from the corporate narrative.

[liberal N proud]

18. Maybe the only reason Obama recommended cuts to Social Security is because he wanted to prove this

He might have thrown down the gauntlet just to prove that they will reject anything Obama send them.

[Orsino]

26. That would e a gutsy variety of chess.

I don't think he has that much in the way of guts.

But we'll know for sure when he renews the offer--or doesn't--a few months fom now.

[winter is coming]

32. I'm sure the people who depend on Social Security will be awed by his willingness

to gamble with the meager payments they rely on, just to play politics with the Republicans.

[JoePhilly]

39. How is it a gamble exactly?

Obama's budget proposal is not a bill. An actual bill would have to be crafted by the Congress. So let's play that out.

Let's say Boehner says OK, we agree in principle (which is all he can say), and then he gets the House to write the actual bill.

Any bill that gets written is different from the President's proposal. Which means the President can look at it and select ANY detail in it and say "I won't give you that".

Of course the GOP House would never be able to draft a bill that comes anywhere close to what Obama proposed.

And anything they might actually pass would fail in the Senate anyway.

There is no gamble.

[winter is coming]

40. So you're imagining Obama will offer bait to bring them to the negotiation table,

yet eventually whisk away any cuts to SS & Medicare, much like a magician pulling away a tablecloth while leaving the silverware undisturbed? Not likely. Far more likely that the minute he pulls back on anything, "the deal" will collapse.

[blkmusclmachine]

35. Horse pucky.

Obama's 11 Dimensional chess always gets us screwed in the end.

[geek tragedy]

19. Heckuvajob, Barack. nt

[OKNancy]

21. I should have posted in the " Obama is terrible" thread

I knew this would happen. Whatever the President proposes will not go through. I'm sure he knew that.

[jpak]

25. Obama knew this would happen - his "bipartisan entitlement cuts" gambit wasn't much of gamble

Now he can cut the shit.

Yup

[librechik]

28. what? You mean when Obama caves it still isn't enough?

what a surprise!

[blkmusclmachine]

36. So, when does Obama FIGHT for policy Leftist/Progressive-ish ??

Or is it always just pretty speeches from the WH?

Hope for change