, chapters 7 and 8: Telltale Marks and Welcome. Hope you will join in the discussion.Guess who voted against raising the debt ceiling in 2006? Not just then Senator Obama,either (although, deliciously, he said that being in a situation which required a vote to raise the debt ceiling is a failure of leadership, and America should stop shifting the tax burden onto the backs of our children and grandchildren).
Go ahead, make a guess. Then click through and see if you're right.
... and did you notice who *did* vote to raise the debt limit? All (or nearly all - I didn't look very closely) of the Republicans.
ReplyDeleteFive years later, and the roles are reversed. When you boil it all down, they're all the same, aren't they?
I'm not sure that's at all a fair comparison. In 2006 the the debt ceiling was 8.2 trillion and the Senate ended up voting to raise it to 9 (I think that was wrong, for the record) . But today it's over 14 trillion (the last time it was raised was just a few months ago) and Obama wants to raise it again. I am not sure it's fair to call somebody who was willing to raise the debt limit to 9 trillion a hypocrite because 15 trillion is more than they could stomach.
ReplyDeleteThat isn't two sides of the same coin. In fact, that seems *substantially* different to me than refusing to raise the limit to 9 trillion because that's irresponsible, but calling people who don't want it to go to 15 trillion obstructionist, partisans, irresponsible, etc, etc.
Republicans Coburn, Ensign, and Burns voted against it.
We might assume that several of them would still be voting to raise the ceiling if a Republican was president, but it is an assumption, not a fact, because the deficit hasn't been this high, ever. We can, however, say for a fact that the Democrats would have voted to cap it if a Rep. were President, because 2006 is proof of that, since they did vote not to raise it even though it was much, much less than it is now.
The thing that makes the Democrats so much more hypocritical (in this instance) is that they were arguing that much smaller numbers were thoroughly irresponsible, and now they are saying that tripling that deficit is responsible. It doesn't even make sense.
I don't think any Republicans were ever saying "there is no limit we wouldn't vote for."
That said, the two groups in general are certainly are not nearly far enough apart. But obviously not one of the Freshman senators voted to raise the debt limit then, and they ran on fiscal responsibility. I have some hope that the new guys are different.
I agree that it's morally repugnant to say that 9 trillion is too much, but 14 trillion is necessary. The Democrats have proven themselves to have no shred of decency. We can only make assumptions as to what the Republicans would have done in the same situation. As for me, I'm cynical enough to think that a large majority of the Republicans would vote to raise it if John McCain were the president. They were spendthrifts back then, and I see no reason why they would have changed their tunes except that Obama was elected president and gave birth to the Tea Party. IMO they are against raising the debt limit now because it's politically advantageous to them. Obviously we can't prove this now, and I may be proven wrong eventually. But they've given me no good reason to believe they cared a bit about spending prior to January 2009.
ReplyDeleteThe freshman Republicans are, I think, mostly sincere. We need more like them - and quickly.
You are correct that the GOP senators who voted for the debt limit increase in 2006 are not necessarily hypocrites, because they could sincerely believe that the ideal debt limit figure is some intermediate value (e.g., 11 trillion). Unfortunately this would only mean that they are colossal fools instead of hypocrites.
ReplyDeleteI love that you say 'deliciously'! Ha! Repeal Obama care and several trillion disappear.:) Honestly do they really think telling us the government will grind to a hault is a threat? If they aren't in session they aren't passing new taxes or regulatios sounds good. (Plus we get enough each month to service the debt and make SS, Military & disablibty payments that they keep threatening won't be paid.) I don't mean to be such a meanie but I have to live within my means and I think the governement can do it too. :) Ahhhh I feel so much better now I can sleep and tackle swimming lessons in the morning!
ReplyDeleteNow see... I see on the nets that the "tea party" movement started in 2009. But I seem to recall sending in tea bags to Washington D.C. way before that. And there were red envelopes we sent too. Maybe even during the end days of George Bush as president?
ReplyDeleteOne of the ways I know it was before 2009 is that I was doing this stuff when I lived in Washington (state) and we moved to Texas in September 2008 (I listened to Sarah Palin's choice as VP/speech while cleaning up our apartment prior to moving out!)