Screen Shot 2018-12-16 at 12.31.37 PM
PM Carpenter, your host. Email: pmcarp at mchsi dot com.
Screenshot 2024-05-27 at 11.05.06 AM


  • ***


« Unrestrained lunacy | Main | A bit more brooding »

August 01, 2011


Anne J.

Well, now that it appears this crisis is coming to an end, I wonder what is next on the agenda. The country can ill-afford one congressional crisis after another especially when they are so unnecessary. Yes I have my concerns about Obama's negotiating skills, but when viewed in the context of the mess that W. left behind, and teabagger/republican maniacal opposition to all things Obama, he's actually done a helluva job. And the fact is, this president has shown himself to be a leader who is full of surprises. (ie: the killing of OBL.) He accomplished making health care more available to more people something no president since Theodore Roosevelt was able to accomplish. One can only imagine the possibilities of legislative accomplishments had he been granted an equally or at least somewhat pragmatic opposition party to work with. I am confident he will be reelected and when that happens maybe even larger accomplishments may be in store.


The problem with insisting on a clean debt ceiling hike is that it's so easily spun as a fiscally irresponsible, head-in-the-sand leadership failure. Hell, Obama himself took that route as a Senator (when of course it didn't matter to the outcome of the thing); how much more aptly would the teahadists run with such a well defined line of bullshit?

If the President stops paying lip service to the austerity bugaboo, the extremism of the Tea Party Republicans stops being insane partisanship and becomes "balance" against the administration's perceived profligate tendencies.

You think this deal is hard to chew, tie on a bib for the $#*! sandwiches a deeper Republican majority and/or a GOP POTUS will serve up in 2013.


"...the $#*! sandwiches a deeper Republican majority and/or a GOP POTUS will serve up in 2013."

Meaning of course, if the President were to have taken a hard line approach on the debt ceiling, or if he abandons his strategy in favor of such 'pragmatic' toughness. Right now, he's giving the public a chance to *see* the lunacy of the GOP very clearly; let's not exhort him to abandon that approach.

I've no doubt we'll have a reelected President Obama in 2013; I believe he's maneuvering for a Democratic majority to enable real progress in that second term. Godspeed to him.

Susan Zoon

The only way the Republicans win in 2012 is if Democrats don't vote for Obama.

I've been reading lots of posts decrying the CAVE on the debt ceiling and calling for liberals to sit out this election or try to primary the President; both very stupid ideas.

Sure, let's revisit the wisdom of staying home on election day to spite the President and the Democrats:
2000- Yea, let's vote for Ralph Nader. FAIL!
2010- Republican landslide which brought us to this lovely place today. FAIL!
2012- We'll show that traitor Obama- Hello President Bachman!

When will the left get it? Don't vote for Obama... he will be just fine. He will go on to a distinguished post Presidential career. You, on the other hand, will be loosing what's left of your jobs, savings, and freedoms. Wake the fuck up and play the hand that you have.

Susan SC

I hope you are right, P. M...I really hope Obama has some magic up his sleeve he can pull out before the 2012 election gets into full swing.. I hope he has somehow attracted a pile of independent voters with his compromises and pragmatism; his willingness to bend and listen to the other side, and actually govern, should be in stark contrast to the ridiculous and dangerous inflexibility of the Tea Partiers.

However, I am truly concerned because every left of center person I know that voted for Obama is disappointed and feels betrayed, and I am worried they won't show up to vote, worried that they have lost hope, I am still hanging in there, hoping he has a grand plan to turn this thing around.

We can see where this is going on from the Monday morning quarterbacking; now that Obama has worked with the Republicans on this deal, they won, he lost, he capitulated, they got everything they wanted, he is a loser, (Rush Limbaugh was pushing that one last week). They Republicans will take it and run with their superior messaging (brainwashing) skills...

I need to check out for a while.


I note that Batshit-in-Chief Michelle Bachman isn't going to vote for this bill, and many of the Tea Partiers feel they were sold out (What, no Prop 13-style 2/3 majority to raise taxes?!). So the insanity remains on both ends of the spectrum.

The crucial difference is that the Progressive Caucus is a much, much smaller % of the Democratic Party, while the Tea Party effectively control the GOP.

A Bachman candidacy isn't out of the question, nor a third party "pure" Tea Party candidate if Mitt or another establishment Republican gets the nod.

Lastly, let's not forget that while the Tea Partiers are fervent believers in no-tax hikes ever, that's not what they ran on. They ran on jobs, jobs, jobs, and so far have delivered nothing, nothing, nothing.

You Don't Say

To be honest, I am less worried about getting Obama re-elected than getting reasonable, intelligent, sane people elected into Congress. We have got to work to eliminate, at least diminish, the power of these know-nothing Tea Partiers.


"He could have established from Day One that a clean bill is absolutely required. Period. Any variation would lead to a veto. Period. And -- "Make no mistake" -- all catastrophic economic consequences of legislating otherwise would be on the insurrectionist GOP's head. Period."

If only the political world worked that way. Had he opted for a clean bill with a veto threat, we surely would have ended up in default. And while you could argue that the blame would have been on the GOP's head (I doubt it would be due to Beltway both-sides-do-it-itis, the white noise of government ineptitude, and the rightwing noise machine loudly bellowing that Obama killed the economy...if only he had been willing to compromise, etc.), there would be the very messy reality of managing our way out of default. Getting into that quagmire would be anything but pragmatic. Political points may or may not have been won but the country would have been even more disastrously damaged. It was that damage that the pragmatic president was trying to avoid.

Regarding the 14th amendment - had he pursued that, the next 18 months would have been consumed with impeachment discussion, hearings, proceedings. (fwiw - the Clinton impeachment analogy does not apply. He wasn't seeking re-election.) There wouldn't have been room for anything else. The economy would continue to suffer. The whole game would have been over and we would be welcoming our new Republican overlord - Bachman/Perry - in 2012.


For once I do not agree with you. You can't paint the other party as terrorists or nihilists willing to tank the economy and shoot the hostage and then claim that Obama should have just put his foot down.

Magical thinking.

The comments to this entry are closed.