Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Showing posts with label Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
"There's no doubt that the Supercommitee will fail..." (VIDEO)
More on the Debt Ceiling deal, which Lawrence is very unhappy about, but the key thing here are Bob Greenstein and Jared Bernstein.
"The stupidest Deficit Reduction Package in history"... (VIDEO)
Like I said, Lawrence lays out the details, and doesn't seem happy about them. But since I put him up when he was praising the President, I'd best put him up when he's ripping him.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Lawrence O'Donnell with Ari Melber and (more importantly) Jonathan Alter (VIDEO)
Lawrence, like Chris Matthews, isn't happy with the President., now that it's all said and done, but Jonathan Alter had some words of wisdom for him and for us.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Friday, July 29, 2011
Lawrence O'Donnell's interview with Sen. Chuck Schumer (VIDEO)
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Saturday, July 23, 2011
"What they’re looking for is somebody who’s willing to look out for them." (VIDEO)
The moment:
Q What can you say to people who are watching who work on Wall Street who might find this news a bit alarming, perhaps?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think what you should say -- well, here’s what I’d say: I remain confident that we will get an extension of the debt limit and we will not default. I am confident of that.
I am less confident at this point that people are willing to step up to the plate and actually deal with the underlying problem of debt and deficits. That requires tough choices. That’s what we were sent here to do.
I mean, the debt ceiling, that’s a formality. Historically, this has not even been an issue. It’s an unpleasant vote but it’s been a routine vote that Congress does periodically. It was raised 18 times when Ronald Reagan was President. Ronald Reagan said default is not an option, that it would be hugely damaging to the prestige of the United States and we shouldn’t even consider it. So that’s the easy part. We should have done that six months ago.
The hard part is actually dealing with the underlying debt and deficits, and doing it in a way that’s fair. That’s all the American people are looking for -- some fairness. I can’t tell you how many letters and emails I get, including from Republican voters, who say, look, we know that neither party is blameless when it comes to how this deft and deficit developed -- there’s been a lot of blame to spread around -- but we sure hope you don’t just balance the budget on the backs of seniors. We sure hope that we’re not slashing our commitment to make sure kids can go to college. We sure hope that we’re not suddenly throwing a bunch of poor kids off the Medicaid rolls so they can’t get basic preventative services that keep them out of the emergency room. That’s all they’re looking for, is some fairness.
Now, what you’re going to hear, I suspect, is, well, if you -- if the Senate is prepared to pass the cap, cut and balance bill, the Republican plan, then somehow we can solve this problem -- that’s serious debt reduction. It turns out, actually, that the plan that Speaker Boehner and I were talking about was comparable in terms of deficit reduction. The difference was that we didn’t put all the burden on the people who are least able to protect themselves, who don’t have lobbyists in this town, who don’t have lawyers working on the tax code for them -- working stiffs out there, ordinary folks who are struggling every day. And they know they’re getting a raw deal, and they’re mad at everybody about it. They’re mad at Democrats and they’re mad at Republicans, because they know somehow, no matter how hard they work, they don’t seem to be able to keep up. And what they’re looking for is somebody who’s willing to look out for them. That’s all they’re looking for.
And for us not to be keeping those folks in mind every single day when we’re up here, for us to be more worried about what some funder says, or some talk radio show host says, or what some columnist says, or what pledge we signed back when we were trying to run, or worrying about having a primary fight -- for us to be thinking in those terms instead of thinking about those folks is inexcusable.
I mean, the American people are just desperate for folks who are willing to put aside politics just for a minute and try to get some stuff done.
So when Norah asked or somebody else asked why was I willing to go along with a deal that wasn’t optimal from my perspective, it was because even if I didn’t think the deal was perfect, at least it would show that this place is serious, that we’re willing to take on our responsibilities even when it’s tough, that we’re willing to step up even when the folks who helped get us elected may disagree.
And at some point, I think if you want to be a leader, then you got to lead.
Thank you very much.
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell:
Andrew Sullivan, putting today's GOP into context:
The Republican refusal to countenance any way to raise revenues to tackle the massive debt incurred largely on their watch and from a recession which started under Obama's predecessor makes one thing clear. They are not a political party in government; they are a radical faction that refuses to participate meaningfully in the give and take the Founders firmly believed should be at the center of American government. They are not conservatives in this sense. They are anarchists.
Their fiscal anarchism has now led to their threat to destabilize and possibly upend the American and global economy because they refuse to compromise an inch. They control only one part of the government, and yet they hold all of it hostage. I cannot believe they are prepared to allow the US to default rather than give an inch toward responsibility. Except I should believe it by now. Everything I have written about them leads inexorably to this moment. Opposing overwhelming public opinion on the need for a mixed package of tax hikes and spending cuts, drawing the president into a position far to the right of the right of his party, and posturing absurdly as fiscal conservatives, they are in fact anti-tax and anti-government fanatics, and this is their moment of maximal destruction.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Chris Christie has a Murdoch Problem...
When Michael Isikoff broke the story about the FBI's beginning to zero in on a bit of American Phone-hacking by Murdoch and Corp., I wondered if this was going to get to Christie:
And now it looks like it could, courtesy Eric Boehlert:
Just what Mr. Unpleasant needs, in the middle of falling ratings, to be deposed by a U.S. Attorney (his old job!)
This is not to say that Governor Christie is guilty of any criminal wrongdoing. I doubt he did anything as unethical as taking a bribe (though it would be in character). But his hot seat is going to get a whole lot hotter.
And now it looks like it could, courtesy Eric Boehlert:
The background: A New Jersey start-up company, Floorgraphics (FGI), was created to sell large advertising decals placed on the floors of grocery stores. In 1999, FGI's founders, Richard and George Rebh, met with Carlucci who at the time was CEO of News America Marketing, an in-store advertising division of News Corp. (In 2005, Carlucci added the title of Post publisher to his resume.) At the lunch, after the Rebhs rebuffed Carlucci's offer to buy the company, he allegedly threatened to destroy FGI.
Years later company executives discovered FGI's secure website had been broken into nearly a dozen times and confidential information had been obtained. They alleged Murdoch's company was spreading lies about FGI and using its proprietary information to steal away clients.
At the time, FGI urged authorities to pursue criminal charges, but the case was not prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney General's office in New Jersey, run at the time by Chris Christie. (Now governor of New Jersey, Christie has struck up a close working relationship with Roger Ailes, chief of Murdoch's Fox News.)
A FGI civil suit, claiming a series of anti-competitive practices, was filed against News Corp.'s News America. In 2009, after only a couple of days of testimony, the case was abruptly settled with Murdoch's company agreeing to purchase FGI for $30 million, but not before News America conceded that someone using its computers had hacked FGI's website. (News America claimed it did not know who the culprit was.)
Now, in light of the UK phone-hacking fiasco, NBC's Michael Isikoff reports Department of Justice prosecutors "are reviewing allegations that News Corp.'s advertising arm repeatedly hacked into the computers of a competitor in the United States as part of an effort to steal the rival firm's business, according to a lawyer for the company."
Just what Mr. Unpleasant needs, in the middle of falling ratings, to be deposed by a U.S. Attorney (his old job!)
This is not to say that Governor Christie is guilty of any criminal wrongdoing. I doubt he did anything as unethical as taking a bribe (though it would be in character). But his hot seat is going to get a whole lot hotter.
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Lawrence O'Donnell: “The most effective Democratic Presidential campaigner we have ever seen on television” (VIDEO)
Still, while I agree with the sentiment, I'm pretty sure Bill Clinton could make a pretty good argument on his behalf. Bubba was better at the "I feel your pain" and off-the-cuff empathy speeches. The Boss is better at slowly, painful, and coldly eviscerating his opposition. Bubba was better at heightening emotion. The Boss was better at beating down his opponents.
Simply put, Clinton is a slap on the back; Obama is that hard elbow you get driving the lane that the refs don't call.
So (cough-cough) you may have noticed that I've been relying on quite a bit of Lawrence to do my blog this week. Then again, I've never seen my position on an issue, and my position on an issue so perfectly in alignment.
Strangely enough, I've never seen a intra-ideology dispute, like the one I've been having with dear ol' Dad this past week, so perfectly encapsulated in this discussion between Lawrence O'Donnell and Jonathan Alter (where I'm Lawrence and Dad is Jonathan Alter):
Simply put, Clinton is a slap on the back; Obama is that hard elbow you get driving the lane that the refs don't call.
So (cough-cough) you may have noticed that I've been relying on quite a bit of Lawrence to do my blog this week. Then again, I've never seen my position on an issue, and my position on an issue so perfectly in alignment.
Strangely enough, I've never seen a intra-ideology dispute, like the one I've been having with dear ol' Dad this past week, so perfectly encapsulated in this discussion between Lawrence O'Donnell and Jonathan Alter (where I'm Lawrence and Dad is Jonathan Alter):
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Friday, July 15, 2011
Lawrence O'Donnnell: "As the clock runs out, the President's hand only strengthens" (VIDEO)
Lawrence had a busy night, which is why I'm pretty much giving you the first half of last night's show. And he engages in one of my favorite sports, Professional Left Bashing.
You'll note the part of the first segment where he reminds America that one of the first things then-President Bill Clinton did was cut Medicare Spending, and not one Liberal howled. (I seem to remember some howling, but Lawrence is right, it was nowhere near the cacophony it is today for President Obama's head-fake.):
The Richard Wolffe segment:
Did you catch that part where Nancy Pelosi says that she too is in favor of the Four Trillion Package too? That should tell you right there, that the President's intentions on cutting Entitlements are a head-fake.
The Ezra Klein segment:
Now, apparently, the President said something in today's Press Conference that suggests that a Clean Bill is his least favorite option:
I can't wait to see what Lawrence has to say about that one, but my bet is, it continues to corner the Republicans. After bailing on the President's Four Trillion dollar plan to preserve tax cuts for the rich, their one major play remains, pass a clean Debt Ceiling Bill and blame the President for it.
It seems to me, at least following my logic, that the President is saying: "Hey, I don't want to do that either. I'm all for spending cuts. But, if this is all we can agree to, I guess we have to do it. Heavy sigh."
Even though, as Lawrence says, it was his original position at the start of this debate.
You'll note the part of the first segment where he reminds America that one of the first things then-President Bill Clinton did was cut Medicare Spending, and not one Liberal howled. (I seem to remember some howling, but Lawrence is right, it was nowhere near the cacophony it is today for President Obama's head-fake.):
The Richard Wolffe segment:
Did you catch that part where Nancy Pelosi says that she too is in favor of the Four Trillion Package too? That should tell you right there, that the President's intentions on cutting Entitlements are a head-fake.
The Ezra Klein segment:
Now, apparently, the President said something in today's Press Conference that suggests that a Clean Bill is his least favorite option:
"The fall back position, the third option, and what I consider the least attractive option, is one in which we raise the debt ceiling without making any significant progress on reducing the deficit."
I can't wait to see what Lawrence has to say about that one, but my bet is, it continues to corner the Republicans. After bailing on the President's Four Trillion dollar plan to preserve tax cuts for the rich, their one major play remains, pass a clean Debt Ceiling Bill and blame the President for it.
It seems to me, at least following my logic, that the President is saying: "Hey, I don't want to do that either. I'm all for spending cuts. But, if this is all we can agree to, I guess we have to do it. Heavy sigh."
Even though, as Lawrence says, it was his original position at the start of this debate.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Lawrence O'Donnell: "Deadly coldness..."
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Lawrence O'Donnell: "Nothing is agreed to, until everything is agreed to..." (VIDEO)
Lawrence doing all the hard work for me.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Lawrence O'Donnell: Republicans aren't the only ones who know how to move the goalposts.
By the way, the more Liberal Democrats (and Democrats period) hue and cry about this, the better the hand the President has to play, so Professional Left (and I can't believe I'm saying this) keep up the good work!
It's simple math. Boehner's losing 54-80 Republicans on a Debt Ceiling vote. That means for a Debt Ceiling to pass (and yes, Boehner wants it to pass), needs Democratic Votes. And now Steny is saying that without revenues in a deal, he can expect zero Democratic votes.
My bet is that we're going to go right up to the wire with this Kabuki Dance (Copyright, 2011, R.Johnson Ltd.), and at the end of the day, when there are neither votes to pass a "Grand Bargain" with Revenues, nor the maximalist, 100% spending cuts the Republicans want, and instead they pass a (mostly) clean bill with mostly Democratic votes, and the votes of Republicans who don't want to feel the wrath of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. At most, the GOP gets cuts that the President wanted to do anyway, and don't harm the overall Economy.
Remember, the Chamber of Commerce is our ally in this matter, threatening to go after any Republican who stands in the way of the Debt Ceiling being raised.
Thursday, July 7, 2011
"[By Sunday], the parties will at least know where each other’s bottom lines are..." (VIDEO)
From the prepared remarks:
Hello, everybody. I’m going to make a very brief statement.
I just completed a meeting with all the congressional leaders from both chambers, from both parties, and I have to say that I thought it was a very constructive meeting. People were frank. We discussed the various options available to us. Everybody reconfirmed the importance of completing our work and raising the debt limit ceiling so that the full faith and credit of the United States of America is not impaired.
What we decided was that staffs, as well as leadership, will be working during the weekend, and that I will reconvene congressional leaders here on Sunday with the expectation that, at that point, the parties will at least know where each other’s bottom lines are and will hopefully be in a position to then start engaging in the hard bargaining that’s necessary to get a deal done.
I want to emphasize that nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to. And the parties are still far apart on a wide range of issues. But, again, I thought that all the leaders here came in a spirit of compromise, in a spirit of wanting to solve problems on behalf of the American people. Everybody acknowledged that the issue of our debt and our deficit is something that needs to be tackled now. Everybody acknowledged that in order to do that, Democrats and Republicans are going to be required in each chamber. Everybody acknowledged that we have to get this done before the hard deadline of August 2nd to make sure that America does not default for the first time on its obligations. And everybody acknowledged that there’s going to be pain involved politically on all sides, but our biggest obligation is to make sure that we’re doing the right thing by the American people, creating an environment in which we can grow the economy and make sure that more and more people are being put back to work.
So I want to thank all the leaders. I thought it was a very constructive meeting. And I will be seeing them back here on Sunday. A lot of work will be done between now and then.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Pandora's Box, Jurassic Park 2, the 83-17 split and how the Debt Ceiling gets raised...one way or the other.
It’s clear that the volume has suddenly turned up on the 14th Amendment argument.
Basically, where we’re at is this. Talks on the Debt Ceiling have broken down. The GOP was originally invested in a Debt Ceiling deal that had an 85-15 split of spending cuts to tax increases, that number coming from a report from the Conservative American Enterprise Institute. This was a report highlighted in fact on Speaker Boehner’s website. (Bet you dollars to doughnuts that that report has been taken down).
The good news in all this is that the spending cut number (around 2.4 Trillion over ten years) has pretty much been agreed to. This would be the 85 number.
Well, the Democrats offered an 83-17 split on spending cuts to tax increases (which included ending subsidies for Oil Companies and a Payroll Tax Cut), and that’s when Eric Cantor bailed on the talks and things pretty much collapsed.
Then the President spoke in a Press Conference that I enjoyed mightily. Still, the fact that the President had to speak was bad news because (as Ezra said on the day of the presser):
Let me take a moment to answer one of Lawrence's questions. He asked, why didn't the Obama White House just use the Clinton model for deficit reduction?
Ummm, Lawrence. Have you met today's Republican party?
So what happens now?
Well, frankly…it depends on how batshit insane the Republicans are, and how pissed off the Chamber of Commerce actually gets.
Remember the Chamber of Commerce warned Republicans flat out, that should they fail to raise the debt ceiling; “We will get rid of you”. Of course the Teabagger Caucus did not react kindly to that threat, but I have no doubt that the Chamber is serious. A Debt Default is going to have catastrophic and frankly, unpredictable consequences to the greater, planet-wide Economy. Remember September 15th, 2008? (aka, the day Barack Obama won election), well…that only times ten.
If you’re a conservative, things look pretty simple. You’ve got a President in the White House you don’t like. You’ve got a stalled economy that stalled because of your policies and ideas, but you’re still committed to those same policies and ideas because even though they make the middle class miserable, they don't count in your world. All that does count are the people you really work for (Rich folks and Multinational corporations). If you cooperate with the sitting President (aka, doing your job) there’s a chance things will get better for the people. Can't have that, because that would mean the President would get re-elected. However, if you hold out for your most cherished, bat-shit insane policy ideas that you wouldn’t even let see the light of day under a Bush Administration, well, not only can you stall any economic momentum for a recovery (thereby damaging the President), but you can also appeal and excite your own base in the process. WIN-WIN!!!
I would first refer the Chamber of Commerce to the story of Pandora’s Box. You let these batshit insane Teabagger shitheads into the tent, this is what you get:
In case, you don't understand why I'm making this particular movie reference, or have (rightfully) forgotten Jurassic Park 2. The idiots (aka, the main characters) decided to "rescue" a baby T-Rex. That'd be Mama in the video, sniffing clothes that are soaked in the baby's blood. Think of them as tax breaks for Corporate Jet owners for the purposes of this argument. "Hilarity" ensues after that.
The more the Chamber stands by its threat to destroy any Republican who stands against a raise in the Debt Ceiling, the more likely there is to be a deal. Period.
Fortunately, we are seeing signs of life from the Democrats. One, they've pretty much thrown down a hard marker on Medicare cuts. Ain't happenin' chief, what else you got? Senator Schumer is taking to the airwaves repeatedly to accuse Republicans publicly of the scenario I’ve outlined. And yesterday, on Keith’s new Countdown show, he brought forth Ryan Grim to first discuss the 14th Amendment scenario.
My inclination the moment Keith brought it up was to dismiss it (after all, this is Keith we’re talking about). But then Lawrence brought it up as well.
I still kinda dismissed it, but the fact that he's got Bruce Bartlett to agree with the notion carries some weight with me.. But now, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has brought it up today, even though he has his doubts.
Also, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's brought it up as well.
I still see this as officially a push by the Democrats to get this idea out there.
The Senator from Wall Street is right. We don’t know what the economic consequences would be of a debt default, we also don’t know how markets would react to the President simply ignoring Congress and continuing to borrow money.
If you were interested in buying up U.S. Bonds, how would you react to the President taking the podium and saying, basically, screw Cantor and Boehner. We’re going ahead, business as usual. My guess is a Bond buyer might hesitate, and say “Should we be buying this stuff. Is it safe? What does it mean?”
Between this threat, this new Nuclear Option, and the release of a new drop-dead default date of July 22, it’s clear the full court press is on.
Basically, what I see happening is this. The Democrats rattle the Nuclear Option theory. Republicans howl in protest. Jim DeMint says the Constitution didn’t mean what it says. Someone tries to change the Constitution on Wikipedia, and ultimately, the GOP quietly agrees to the 83-17 split a week before the deadline and declares victory.
Of course, that'd mean dealing with a sane GOP. And frankly there's no evidence that they're out there.
I mean, for pity’s sake, you watch the Teabagger shithead caucus, always crying for their love of the Constitution is going to attack the President for sticking to the letter and law of the Constitution. Watch it happen. There’s never an egg-timer around when you need it. (Hat tip, Randi Rhodes).
The President is going to have to carry through with his unspoken threat, and while dear ol' Doctor Dad would disagree, I think the dire nature of what could happen would force to President to do it. I mean, if the GOP won’t deal fairly. If any bill the Democrats propose gets filibustered in the Senate. If the Teabaggers bite the hand of their Chamber of Commerce masters, what option is Obama going to have left?
As ugly as the consequences might be, they’d be worse if he did. If DeMint won’t come back to reality, pick the Constitutional fight, and pull the Debt Ceiling trigger. What would we have to lose?
Basically, where we’re at is this. Talks on the Debt Ceiling have broken down. The GOP was originally invested in a Debt Ceiling deal that had an 85-15 split of spending cuts to tax increases, that number coming from a report from the Conservative American Enterprise Institute. This was a report highlighted in fact on Speaker Boehner’s website. (Bet you dollars to doughnuts that that report has been taken down).
The good news in all this is that the spending cut number (around 2.4 Trillion over ten years) has pretty much been agreed to. This would be the 85 number.
Well, the Democrats offered an 83-17 split on spending cuts to tax increases (which included ending subsidies for Oil Companies and a Payroll Tax Cut), and that’s when Eric Cantor bailed on the talks and things pretty much collapsed.
Then the President spoke in a Press Conference that I enjoyed mightily. Still, the fact that the President had to speak was bad news because (as Ezra said on the day of the presser):
The best advice I’ve gotten for assessing the debt-ceiling negotiations was to “watch for the day when the White House goes public.” As long as the Obama administration was refusing to attack Republicans publicly, my source said, they believed they could cut a deal. And that held true. They were quiet when the negotiations were going on. They were restrained after Eric Cantor and Jon Kyl walked out last week. Press Secretary Jay Carney simply said, “We are confident that we can continue to seek common ground and that we will achieve a balanced approach to deficit reduction.” But today they went public.
Let me take a moment to answer one of Lawrence's questions. He asked, why didn't the Obama White House just use the Clinton model for deficit reduction?
Ummm, Lawrence. Have you met today's Republican party?
So what happens now?
Well, frankly…it depends on how batshit insane the Republicans are, and how pissed off the Chamber of Commerce actually gets.
Remember the Chamber of Commerce warned Republicans flat out, that should they fail to raise the debt ceiling; “We will get rid of you”. Of course the Teabagger Caucus did not react kindly to that threat, but I have no doubt that the Chamber is serious. A Debt Default is going to have catastrophic and frankly, unpredictable consequences to the greater, planet-wide Economy. Remember September 15th, 2008? (aka, the day Barack Obama won election), well…that only times ten.
If you’re a conservative, things look pretty simple. You’ve got a President in the White House you don’t like. You’ve got a stalled economy that stalled because of your policies and ideas, but you’re still committed to those same policies and ideas because even though they make the middle class miserable, they don't count in your world. All that does count are the people you really work for (Rich folks and Multinational corporations). If you cooperate with the sitting President (aka, doing your job) there’s a chance things will get better for the people. Can't have that, because that would mean the President would get re-elected. However, if you hold out for your most cherished, bat-shit insane policy ideas that you wouldn’t even let see the light of day under a Bush Administration, well, not only can you stall any economic momentum for a recovery (thereby damaging the President), but you can also appeal and excite your own base in the process. WIN-WIN!!!
I would first refer the Chamber of Commerce to the story of Pandora’s Box. You let these batshit insane Teabagger shitheads into the tent, this is what you get:
In case, you don't understand why I'm making this particular movie reference, or have (rightfully) forgotten Jurassic Park 2. The idiots (aka, the main characters) decided to "rescue" a baby T-Rex. That'd be Mama in the video, sniffing clothes that are soaked in the baby's blood. Think of them as tax breaks for Corporate Jet owners for the purposes of this argument. "Hilarity" ensues after that.
The more the Chamber stands by its threat to destroy any Republican who stands against a raise in the Debt Ceiling, the more likely there is to be a deal. Period.
Fortunately, we are seeing signs of life from the Democrats. One, they've pretty much thrown down a hard marker on Medicare cuts. Ain't happenin' chief, what else you got? Senator Schumer is taking to the airwaves repeatedly to accuse Republicans publicly of the scenario I’ve outlined. And yesterday, on Keith’s new Countdown show, he brought forth Ryan Grim to first discuss the 14th Amendment scenario.
My inclination the moment Keith brought it up was to dismiss it (after all, this is Keith we’re talking about). But then Lawrence brought it up as well.
I still kinda dismissed it, but the fact that he's got Bruce Bartlett to agree with the notion carries some weight with me.. But now, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has brought it up today, even though he has his doubts.
"It's certainly worth exploring," Schumer said. "I think it needs a little more exploration and study. It's probably not right to pursue at this point and you wouldn't want to go ahead and issue the debt and then have the courts reverse it."
I still see this as officially a push by the Democrats to get this idea out there.
The Senator from Wall Street is right. We don’t know what the economic consequences would be of a debt default, we also don’t know how markets would react to the President simply ignoring Congress and continuing to borrow money.
If you were interested in buying up U.S. Bonds, how would you react to the President taking the podium and saying, basically, screw Cantor and Boehner. We’re going ahead, business as usual. My guess is a Bond buyer might hesitate, and say “Should we be buying this stuff. Is it safe? What does it mean?”
Between this threat, this new Nuclear Option, and the release of a new drop-dead default date of July 22, it’s clear the full court press is on.
Basically, what I see happening is this. The Democrats rattle the Nuclear Option theory. Republicans howl in protest. Jim DeMint says the Constitution didn’t mean what it says. Someone tries to change the Constitution on Wikipedia, and ultimately, the GOP quietly agrees to the 83-17 split a week before the deadline and declares victory.
Of course, that'd mean dealing with a sane GOP. And frankly there's no evidence that they're out there.
I mean, for pity’s sake, you watch the Teabagger shithead caucus, always crying for their love of the Constitution is going to attack the President for sticking to the letter and law of the Constitution. Watch it happen. There’s never an egg-timer around when you need it. (Hat tip, Randi Rhodes).
The President is going to have to carry through with his unspoken threat, and while dear ol' Doctor Dad would disagree, I think the dire nature of what could happen would force to President to do it. I mean, if the GOP won’t deal fairly. If any bill the Democrats propose gets filibustered in the Senate. If the Teabaggers bite the hand of their Chamber of Commerce masters, what option is Obama going to have left?
As ugly as the consequences might be, they’d be worse if he did. If DeMint won’t come back to reality, pick the Constitutional fight, and pull the Debt Ceiling trigger. What would we have to lose?
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Better question @Lawrence, why does the American Public keep thinking Celebrities can Govern? (VIDEO)
Only Lawrence O'Donnell goes there. Fort McHenry is a little seen, seldom-used blog, so I can say things like "One of the biggest problems with America, is the American people"...meaning the mistakes the American people keep making...
...but Lawrence went there, if only a little bit.
...but Lawrence went there, if only a little bit.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Lawrence O'Donnell spikes the football... (VIDEO)
Still think he should've named names...
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Lawrence's Busy Night...Part 3 (Racists from Moldova Edition)
It was almost unfair, but...
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Lawrence's Busy Night...Part 2 (David Remnick Interview)
"We need to call this by it's proper name: Race Baiting."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)