March 19, 2012

WaPo As Discussed by Rush: Obama Lied, the Debt Deal Died

Go here at Rush’s place and spare yourself the pain. That is, read Rush’s whole post, not WaPo’s tome.

Just a few key paragraphs:

… don’t forget: Obama wanted to be able to run against a do-nothing Congress. There was never — and I remember telling everybody in this audience back then — that I thought this. Let me take a break, and I’ll come back and tell you what I believe. The Republicans held all the cards. It was Obama that needed the deal. It was Obama that wants to spend the money beyond the debt limit. They held all the cards. But they believe gotta compromise. “The American people,” their consultants told them, “think we gotta compromise.” So they tried to compromise and Obama still stuck it to ‘em, all because he had to be able to run against a do-nothing Congress. There was no way he was gonna ever agree to a deal. That was the point.

… It was June 30th, after playing the clip from MSNBC, Halperin’s remark. I said, “Now, after they stopped giggling on the Scarborough show, Halperin made a good point. Obama does not want a deal. He really doesn’t want a deal. He wants the chaos. He wants all this to continue and that’s what generates happiness for him.” He cannot permit a deal with Congress when he’s setting up a campaign this year to run against a do-nothing Congress. There was never any way he was gonna deal. And what happened was Boehner said, “Okay, I’ll give you some tax increases,” and Obama panicked. “Oh, my God! Okay,” then he went out and lied to the country. That’s all he knew to do.

Although I’m not going to claim I knew this for sure, because I didn’t, this isn’t really big news to me for two reasons:

  • First, I was aware that the GOP was in the early stages willing to offer ways to increase revenues during the budget discussions (Reuters even dishonestly presented them as “tax increases” in one report about three weeks before the debt-deal deadline), and that they would have agreed to items which would have been scored as “tax increases” but which would have either kept marginal rates the same or reduced them.
  • Second, in a Sean Hannity interview I heard regarding the Supercommittee in December, Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey said that the Republicans offered tax changes which would have been scored as “tax increases” but would have reduced marginal tax rates. Supercommittee Democrats would have none of it, and weren’t even interested in agreeing to “easy” spending cuts that everybody really agreed on — because, just like their president several months earlier, they didn’t want a deal, no matter what, so they could (in their fever-swamp minds) have something to run against (“do-nothing Republicans”). Their approach has been consistent all along: The longer we can stay on autopilot (i.e., they’re now at over 1,000 days without a budget), the bigger and more dominant they can make the federal government.

So it turns out that Boehner and Co. were the ones interested in a “balanced approach” (the term Obama used so frequently and shamelessly during the non-negotiations) and Obama wanted a crisis — and the ability to keep spending us into oblivion to the point of hitting the debt ceiling before the election, which he is well on his way to doing.

I don’t want to hear another word about GOP recalcitrance (and yes, I understand the complaints of those who say Boehner et al may have been too interested in getting a deal) — but I know I won’t get my wish.

In Light of Last Night’s 6-Month Occupy Anniversary Post …

Filed under: Activism,MSM Biz/Other Bias,MSM Biz/Other Ignorance — Tom @ 10:36 am

… and after hundreds of criminal incidents by Occupiers during that time, we have this (HT Instapundit):

So-Called California Tea Party Spokesman/Rapist IS NOT TEA PARTY Member or Spokesman

… The So Cal Tax Revolt Coalition released this statement, via Lipstick Underground. Kobulnicky is not a member, spokesman or volunteer with the group. The whole story was made up by the media.

Nice try, guys.

Last night’s post (“AP Assigns Seven to Occupy Movement’s Six-Month Anniversary, Omits Crime, All Other Negative Items, Obama’s Endorsement”) is here.

Monday Off-Topic (Moderated) Open Thread (031912)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 8:45 am

Rules are here. Possible comment fodder may follow later. Other topics are also fair game.


Positivity: California woman’s sainthood cause opened by Monterey diocese

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 8:30 am

From Monterey, California:

Mar 18, 2012 / 03:42 pm

The Vatican is reviewing documents that would allow the cause of sainthood to go forward for a wife, mother, and possible mystic who was baptized Catholic in 1935 after becoming disillusioned with the Mormon faith. Cora Evans reported visions of Jesus and the saints and a mission from Jesus to promote the “Mystical Humanity of Christ,” the idea that Christ is always within us and we should behave always as Christ would, said Mike McDevitt, a parishioner at Our Lady of the Pillar in Half Moon Bay, who is the promoter of Evans’ cause of sainthood. The spirituality is also focused on praying the Mass.

Evans’ two children were baptized with her in Ogden, Utah, and her husband, Mack, became Catholic shortly afterward, with many family and friends following her from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints into the Catholic Church, said McDevitt. Born in 1904, she died in Boulder Creek, near Monterey, March 30, 1957. She moved to Southern California in 1941 and to Boulder Creek, Calif. in 1956.