GOP Has the Economy Begging for Mercy

     It's ugly now and it's perhaps going to get uglier. Greg Sargent this morning raised the spectre of the government shutdown spilling into the next game of debt ceiling chicken. In other words we could be dealing with both a govt. shutdown and a government default at the same time.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/02/the-morning-plum-governing-crisis-set-to-escalate-dramatically/

    He also suggests the Dems may be hanging tough and even ready to refuse a CR without a debt ceiling hike included:

     "In another sign Dems may well hold firm and not let Republicans escape from this predicament on terms more favorable to them, there’s now serious talk among Democrats of not accepting a GOP budget offering unless it also includes a debt limit hike if this shutdown crisis drags on."

    "Several Senate Democratic aides told me this morning that this is seriously being considered, confirming a report in Politico. As one put it to me: ”We are less than two weeks away from the deadline. If we were not having this shutdown fight, this is the week we would be moving a debt ceiling bill.” A second said: “It doesn’t make much sense to do a short term CR only to have to turn around and do it again with the debt ceiling.”

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/02/the-morning-plum-governing-crisis-set-to-escalate-dramatically/

     You do wonder when it ends. When the GOP has their explosives confiscated and are slowly walked off the ledge. In any case, the idea that the Dems give anything here is unthinkable. It would establish that it's normal to have to give into GOP blackmail to simply fund the government or raise the debt ceiling. 

    Sargent points out there's an additional reason the Dems can't let the GOP get away with it: we need to clarify if the GOP is really ready to go over this cliff once and for all. 

    It is the way Republicans themselves have defined the terms of the debate — specifically, what counts as “leverage” for them, and the ”concessions” they want from Dems – that strongly argues for Dems not to give any ground whatsoever, no matter what.

     "Here’s why: We don’t even know whether Republicans are actually prepared to allow default if Democrats don’t give them what they want. John Boehner has already conceded Republicans won’t allow default because: “I’m not going to risk the full faith and credit of the federal government.” Yet Ryan claims the debt limit gives Republicans leverage, anyway. But why? If Republicans are not prepared to actually default, why should Democrats give them anything in exchange for averting it? And if they areprepared to allow default — which Boehner himself defines as placing the country’s full faith and credit in jeopardy — then how can Democrats give them anything without rewarding and legitimizing a strategy based explicitly on a deliberate threat to unleash massive economic havoc if Dems don’t give Republicans what they want?"

    "This is the “strategic ambiguity” that Democrats cannot allow to stand. If Dems do give in to GOP debt limit demands without calling this bluff, Republicans will know that they can do this again next time while again keeping their actual intentions ambiguous. If they don’t give in, Republicans will be forced to clarify those intentions once and for all. Unfortunately, the only way to get this clarification might also require finding out that Republicans really are prepared to default. That’s awful to contemplate, but the alternative — making major concessions now only to be faced with this dilemma again later and to discover the worst at that point – is hardly a better one. Indeed, it’s arguably worse. This dynamic cannot be allowed to remain. It isn’t tenable for Democrats or for the country."

     As Sargent points out, there are the usual Green Lantern members of the media who are trying to draw a false equivalence between the Dems' stand and GOP blackmail. 

    "But what about Democrats? Aren’t they planning to use the debt limit as leverage, too?

     "Yes. But here again, the difference in how each side is using it as leverage again requires Dems not to give ground."

      "Republicans suggest — again, without saying so outright — that the debt limit gives them leverage because their refusal to raise it threatens a level of harm to the country that Dems will not be able to accept. They suggest (with varying degrees of candor) that because of this, Dems will make unilateral concessions to them that otherwise they wouldn’t have to make. (Remember: In agreeing to raise the debt ceiling — and enabling the U.S. to pay debts already incurred – Republicans would not be conceding anything; they agree it must happen to preserve the country’s full faith and credit.)

     "By contrast, Democrats say the debt limit gives them leverage in the sense that it will mean Republicans will ultimately have to drop their demand for unilateral Dem concessions. Because Republicans ultimately will not allow widespread harm to the country, goes this reasoning, they will in the end have no choice but to stop asking for a reward in exchange for averting it. Get the difference? One side is dangling the threat of widespread economic harm (again, without clarifying whether they’re actually willing to let it happen) to extract concessions from the other. The other side is evoking that awful prospect in order to rebuff efforts to use it to extract concessions from them."

     "I’m hardly the first to point out this basic imbalance. Jonathan Chait, Steve Benen, Brian Beutler, James Fallows, and others have all done so at length. And yet, no matter how many times it is outlined, Republicans and their sympathizers, and even some neutral commentators, refuse to acknowledge the basic dimensions of the situation. In the end, the only way to clarify it adequately may be for Dems to simply refuse to give in, no matter what the consequences."

     Think of the GOP as an abusive father-this is its general nature. This is why, for those of you would reproach me that 'we shouldn't hate' why I hate Republicans: all abusive fathers deserve to be hated. If you feel differently then maybe you are the one who's of kilter here. 

    The Dems are like the mother desperate to protect her children while the police are failing to do their jobs and help her. The GOP is saying 'Do whatever I say or I'll kill all three of our children and it will be all your fault.'

     It's clear then how perverse the usual media false equivalence is. Another example is of a bully and his victim in school. The Green Lantern media is like the Principal who chastises both boys for fighting in class. 

     P.S. There are times to compromise and times to fight. Anyone who reproaches the Democrats right now for failing to compromise has such a distorted perverse view of compromise that it simply takes the breath away. 

     P.S.S. One article of hope: most Americans apparently get that the GOP doesn't care about anything as much as they care about defeating Obama. They get that's all this is about. 

    "a new National Journal poll finds a plurality of Americans — and of independents — think the GOP’s top priority is causing political problems for Obama, far more than say the same about Dems. As I’ve argued here before, it’s very possible public perceptions of a protracted standoff will be shaped less by details of the budget debate and more by already existing perceptions of which side is more committed to constructive governing and which is actively trying to prevent the system from functioning for political reasons."
   
     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/02/the-morning-plum-governing-crisis-set-to-escalate-dramatically/