Debt Deal Cuts, Do They Survive?

We now have a debt "deal" that calls for an increase in the debt ceiling, and yet again "reductions" in the future "out years".  As in my previous blog entry, we are dependent on the trustworthiness of this group of leaders to see to it that the reductions actually happen, rather than end on the cutting room floor, where all such deals have finally reposed.  Given the motivation of Obama, Reid, and many more, to create an ever expanding government and to insist on opposing any Republican plan, it would seem to be against their nature to relinquish a dollar of spending. 

Realclear Politics on Why Obama voted against a debt ceiling increase in 2006
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjnN_J6wPmk&NR=1


April 14, 2011 President Obama on why he voted against raising the debt ceiling as a Senator in 2006:

"When you’re a Senator, traditionally what’s happened is this is always a lousy vote. Nobody likes to be tagged as having increased the debt limit for the United States by a trillion dollars. As President, you start realizing, 'you know what? We-- we can’t play around with this stuff. This is the full faith in credit of the United States.' And so that was just a example of a new Senator, you know, making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country."

In other words, he states he was lacking in depth and understanding two years before he became president!  Did he learn a lot in the intervening years?  Watch his speeches during this debt debate and see if he is a statesman, or a little less effective.

And then there's Harry Reid also apologizing for his role in politicizing the debt limit in 2006.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT7HT4RpvmI&feature=player_detailpage#t=121s

He voted against it simply because "the Republicans were in power". Earlier in the video he said he is willing to "work with Republicans" but it seems only as long as he's driving the truck, usually over them.  He claims this was the "one time I tried to make a political issue of it, I wish I hadn't".

"I shouldn't have done that. I'm kinda embarrassed I did. It was a political maneuver by we Democrats. The Republicans were in power -- there were more of them," Reid said. "The president voted when he was in the Senate the same way. I heard him apologize for it. We all should take a look at how we handle these issues, but that doesn't take into consideration the numerous times, the numerous times I voted to raise the debt ceiling. The one time I tried to make a political issue of it, I wish I hadn't."

Is this what we want from our representatives in Washington?  Through out this discussion, it has been the Republicans who put forth the proposals and took the ire from the media. While Harry Reid would not even bring the proposals to the floor to consider. And for that effort they were called:
1) Hobbits by the WSJ,
2) Arsonists with a Satan Sandwich

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) called it a “Satan sandwich,” and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) seemed to enjoy the heat analogy, saying: “the Tea Partiers and the GOP have made their slash and burn lunacy clear, and while I do not love this compromise, my vote is a hose to stop the burning. The arsonists must be stopped.

3) and terrorists by Biden and Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) at a two-hour, closed-door Democratic Caucus meeting. 

“We have negotiated with terrorists,” an angry Doyle said, according to sources in the room. “This small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.”

Aside from the obvious inaccuracy, and especially that last statement, I believe that sums up the progressive goal succinctly.  Spend more at any cost, and tell the people we're not!