Tonight, cuts totaled 38.5B. Cost of extending Bush tax cuts to the richest 2%: 690B

[nashville_brook]

Think Progress tweet.

[Poboy]

1. Oh, but this is an autorec. -nt

[nashville_brook]

25. :)

[KeepItReal]

2. Remember Obama wanted to *INCREASE* spending by $40 billion

He gave that back also.

[nashville_brook]

13. can't wait for the 'fight' for Social Security! boy, that's going to be fun

[russspeakeasy]

46. If history is any indication, it will take about 1/2 hour.

"Sure Boner, you can have whatever you want, but pretend
we're fighting about it. It will help us both get reelected.

[Hannah Bell]

3. this shutdown crap is just a way for the admin to be "forced" into nickel & dime, drip by drip

social cuts.

what a charade.

[nashville_brook]

4. precisely

[EFerrari]

5. Yep.

[Cameron27]

6. Exactly

[butterfly77]

32. ...

The full list of policy riders in HR1 includes: (from http://www.ombwatch.org/files/budget/OMB_Watch-HR1_Poli ... ):

Policy Riders in H.R. 1

Sec. 1284 - Prohibits funding for fresh fruits and vegetables in the school lunch program. under section 19 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act.

Sec. 4013 - Prohibits funds to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., or any of its affiliates.

Sec. 1112 - Prohibits transferring detainees from Guantanamo Bay.
Sec. 2237 - Prohibits HUD funding for rental assistance to the elderly.
Sec. 4006 - Blocks the FCC from implementing Net Neutrality.

Sec. 1802 - Prohibits funding new Job Corp centers.
Sec. 4017 - Strips funding for any provision of the health care reform law.
Sec. 4030 - Prohibits BATF from collecting information on multiple rifle/shotgun sales to the same person.

Sec. 1590 - Prohibits DC from using its own, non-federal funds, for abortion services.
Sec. 4046 - Prohibits finding for a govt-sponsored consumer product complaints database
Sec. 1746 - Prohibits funding for EPA efforts to regulate greenhouse gases

Sec. 4027 - Prohibits funds to carry out medical loss ratio restrictions in the health care reform law. (These provisions require insurers to spend at least a certain percent of their premium revenues on medical care.)

Sec. 4009 - Prohibits funds to pay the salaries and expenses of the following Presidential �czarsŽ: Obama Care Czar, Climate Change Czar, Global Warming Czar, Green Jobs Czar, Car Czar, Guantanamo Bay Closure Czar, Pay Czar and Fairness Doctrine Czar.

[me b zola]

41. Swet Jesus, I'm moving to Ebberon

[Logical]

7. +1

[Tripod]

8. k&r

[andym]

9. The Democratic party has been seriously outmaneuvered by the GOP

since at least last Fall, and the country will pay the price. The economic damage done by this anti-stimulus may well damage the economy and cost the President reelection.

[Hannah Bell]

10. outmaneuvered? ha. by design.

both parties are pushing austerity, union-busting, & depression.

[nashville_brook]

11. from the standpoint of economic critique, it's an inescapable conclusion

[andym]

14. yup outmaneuvered

and NOT be design. By political incompetence. Cutting funding will hurt the economy, thereby hurting both the President's and the Democratic Senate's chances of maintaining power.

And although both parties may be pro-business/corporate, they are so in different ways.
Democrats like the government to "help" corporate America by promoting big government "partnerships" with business. Government bailouts are a good example. Corruption is often the outcome.

GOP conservatives want to help business by ending the Federal government as we know it. No regulations, no need for government partnership. Allow big business to operate unfettered, in a completely "free market:" a return to the 19th century.

[Hannah Bell]

15. you think democrats don't understand that cutting gov't spending tanks the economy?

you really think they don't know that?

the pubs don't want to end the federal government as we know it. not by a long shot. they just want to divert income into their own pockets. (not much different than what a lot of dems want as well.)

big capital couldn't survive one minute without big government. or private armies. which may come.

[andym]

16. Strawman: Dems understand, they just played a losing hand

Of course, the Dems know they did damage to the economy and themselves. They were stuck because they misplayed the budget last year when they had more power, and didn't anticipate the strength of the tea party freshmen. They are trying to minimize the damage, but it will still bite them.

You're wrong about the GOP tea partiers not wanting to return the federal government to the 19th century. Just talk to their supporters or visit their websites: it's one of their big themes. They go on and on and about and are convinced that the free market is God, and "freedom" is their Goddess. Many of their politicians will line their pockets after retiring and being rewarded by corporate America for eliminating all of the "bothersome" EPA/FDA/FCC/antitrust regulations that big business abhors.

They would be very happy without big government. All they want the federal government for is a strong military to protect their riches (or dreams of future riches).

[Hannah Bell]

18. i don't believe any of that for a minute. the dems could have painted the pubs

as far-right wreckers, threatening gov't shutdown if they didn't get their way. the last time the pubs shut it down it created big negatives for them.

but no, the dems rolled over & gave them more than they asked for.

big capitalism cannot survive without big government -- to enforce contracts, for one thing & referee disputes between capitalists -- especially between big capital & smaller capital. to make rules that reinforce big capital's position & hurt small capital's.

the pubs don't want small government; that's just a talking point. and it's because "big government" often hurts the little guy that it's such a good one. "big government" is 95% good for big capital.

[andym]

20. We just disagree (I understand you won't be convinced)

I agree that the Dems would have tried to paint the GOP as wreckers had the shutdown occurred. But the Dems know that ultimately the public will only care about how the economy looks in the Fall of 2012. The shutdown would have caused even more economic damage than the current agreement. It would have reversed the tepid economic growth that is now occurring, created new big job losses and resulted in a bad enough economy that the GOP would be guaranteed wins next year. Dems were too afraid of this to allow a shutdown (even if they could temporarily assign blame-- they may also remember that in the 1996 elections, the GOP retained congressional control after the shutdown). That's why the Dems gave the GOP more than half of what they wanted.

It's true that big business needs the courts to adjudicate their disputes. But the judiciary is not usually considered part of big government by the GOP (or the Dems) in that it does require much funding relative to social programs, regulatory agencies etc. It doesn't even require that the government be particularly strong, just strong enough to enforce "property" and pro-monopolistic laws.

As for their talking points, I believe that they do believe them. I only hope we don't get to see what happens if they GOP gets full control in 2012 with the Tea Party at the helm. Because I think you will be the one surprised by what they do to the government. I agree that big government is good for big capital, but they believe that small government is even better. I take them at their word, because it seems sensible: with no regulations they can operate as they did before minimum wage, child labor laws, etc. At that point they do not need the government to send them money (except the Military-based companies which would still be needed), they can take what they want from the people and labor directly, recreate company towns etc.

[nashville_brook]

31. this budget guarantees the economy will tank by 2012

[andym]

37. Agree. Only question is how much? How many jobs will this budget cost?

I was surprised that the tea party wing of the GOP didn't force a long shutdown to guarantee not only a bad economy, but a severely bad economy. Dems will continue to play a losing hand through next year at least.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[andym]

54. Not a well reasoned response. NT.

[russspeakeasy]

48. The dems "rolled over" it looked like the monkey roll we see

in jr. high school.

[newspeak]

33. Bingo--outmaneuvered or by design

You have savvy economists, you have Reich stating that you need to spend to save the economy--that the money that is given in benefits, unemployment, etc. helps our economy. The cuts to the wealthy have done NOTHING to aid the recovery of our economy--some of these greedheads have been sitting on the wealth or sending it overseas--tax their asses.

Watched Bill Maher last night he made a comment about the Randians (Ayn Rand)--Ayn Rand was no economist-she was a bitter human being who saw her family's wealth taken away and decided to make up her own philosophy. She was nothing but a sociopath who apparently admired a damn serial killer for his alleged conscious free acts of cold blooded murder. And now we have a bunch of soulless creatures worshipping at the altar of Ayn Rand.

This budget will do more harm with the economy; thus harming most americans. And if they attempt to privatize the shite out of public agencies this country is going to be in a whole lot of trouble. We'll be paying for crappy service, poor wages--probably will be paying more because after all the vampires got to make a profit!!!!

[Lorien]

39. Absolutely. nt

[_ed_]

28. It's not an accident

Just knowing that Obama's #1 campaign contributor was a bank should tell you all you need to know. Results: Bush tax cuts extended on the backs of the poor, sick, and elderly.

[hfojvt]

12. I still say that $700 billion is a serious underestimate

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/140

[leftstreet]

17. K&R

[TomCADem]

19. But The Corporate Media Narrative That Republicans Are Fiscally Responsible...

...and concerned about the deficit won't die.

[nashville_brook]

26. correct, and as the economy tanks, Obama will pay the price in 2012

[russspeakeasy]

49. And the really sad part, he won't notice.And he'll still win.

[_ed_]

29. And Obama never argues against that talking point

He just adopted Republican framing for his "historic" spending cuts.

[DirkGently]

35. Never thought I'd hear a Dem President refer to "tax & spend liberals"

[I Drink Water]

21. And yet, the GOP insists that they are the party of fiscal conservatism.

[newspeak]

36. yeah, fiscal conservatives

that's why Reagan increased the deficit to the tune of approximately 128% and then there's Little Boots. How clueless can the public be? After *'s reign, we have these same repukes crying about how they are concerned about the deficit they created. Please give me a break!!!!

[Poboy]

22. .

[ladjf]

23. Tax the greedy bastards. They should pay their fair share. nt

[xchrom]

24. Recommend

[Autumn]

27. K/R

:dem:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

30. Number hurt by budget cuts: millions - Number helped by tax cuts: thousands

[Logical]

34. And no war money will be cut! n-t

[louslobbs]

38. First they hold the unemployed hostage until they get the tax cut bonuses for the richest among us

tacked on to the deficit that they constantly scream, needs to be cut. Then they bring us to the brink of a government shut down, cutting necessities for the poor and middle class, to allegedly bring down the deficit that they added $800 billion dollars to so the rich got another tax cut bonus and now want to make that up on the backs of We the People. Also, they use these riders, especially the title 10 (kill women's health care) de fund Planned Parenthood to continue to force more cuts to a budget that does nothing to hurt rich people, but everything to make everyone else do without more and makes them suffer just a little more. While the millionaires and billionaires laugh all the way to the bank. Where is the shared sacrifice shit they always talk about? It doesn't exist, it's bullshit, if you can give the rich $800 billion in tax cut bonuses attached to the future deficit that they don't need and some did not want, why can't the same be done for programs that help those who have close to nothing and are suffering greatly even now, before these killer Republicon cuts to the poor and middle class go into effect. This has become a country that takes care of the rich and corporations, while forcing cuts that cause further suffering for those already suffering. Where are their lobbyists? Where is their voice? Where is the fight for economic equality? Why must those with the least, suffer the most? When will we wake up and take a stand for We the People, us, ourselves before it's too late? 40 billion in oil subsidies, $800 billion to rich and powerful, no taxes paid by the biggest corporations and Drastic, Dramatic, cuts for Necessities for the majority, We the People. And we sit here and take it why? And women will vote for a Republicon why? And the suffering poor will vote Republicon why? And the middle class (what's left of it), will vote for the Republicons why? If you want to see the Republicon wet dream for this country, just look at Rick Scott in Florida, Kasick in Ohio, Walker in Wisconsin and all of the other states with these rabid, extreme Republicon "rulers" or if you prefer, Dicktators. Their actions are dicktating what they want for this country and their words mean nothing because most of those are lies. What will it take to finally move the masses to say STOP! enough is enough?
When are we all going to take a stand for ourselves and the future of our country? If not now, then when?
Lou

[hankthecrank]

40. plain and simple and to the point

[Imagevision]

42. Obama has gone so 360 it's hard keeping up with all his new changes we can believe in...

[Initech]

44. Greedy fucking bastards.

[Major Hogwash]

45. I thought the extension of the Bush tax cuts were only for 2 years.

So they were only about $150 Billion dollars.

[Incitatus]

47. And what happens in 2 years if we don't control both houses with a supermajority?

another extension?

[Major Hogwash]

53. According to my crystal ball, you won't be posting here. LoL

In 2 years.

[Incitatus]

57. Your crystal ball sucks.

I've been here for almost 6 and I'm not going anywhere. It doesn't take a psychic to know what the cons are going to pull.

[Incitatus]

56. .

[russspeakeasy]

51. Right, and toll roads were temporary. And property taxes would

drop to near zero. And everythin g else is under control..Send
money to the re-election campaign.
Or you could spend it on food and shelter...Nope, send it to
the re-election campaign.
Obama's whole staff is so fucking tone deaf.

[Taft_Bathtub]

50. Ralph Nader was right

Both parties are the same. They're simply different factions of the Pro-Business Party.

[kath]

52. Cost of the "war on some people with some drugs" = $50 B per YEAR.

[grahamhgreen]

55. So simple even a Harvard grad can get it.