January 3rd, 2013
11:38 AM ET
10 years ago
Borger: Fiscal cliff was bound to collapse
Editor's note: Gloria Borger is CNN's chief political analyst, appearing regularly on shows such as "AC360˚," "The Situation Room" and "State of the Union."
Washington (CNN) - So I remember thinking, when Congress and President Obama concocted the supercommittee on the deficit - and the fiscal cliff as a last resort if all else failed - that it was a generally boneheaded, albeit necessary, idea.
Conceived in desperation as a way to come up with a deal to raise the debt ceiling (and pay our bills) in the summer of 2011, it seemed like the only way out: a way to agree to do what needed to be done in the short term and to force action in the long term on the bigger picture.
FULL STORY
From CNN Politics
- Untitled
- 10 Cards Charging 0% Interest Until 2024
- US and Canada reach a deal on decades-old asylum agreement
- Sen. Graham 'admonished' by Senate Ethics Committee for soliciting funds in Capitol
- Before he represented Trump, defense attorney speculated Stormy Daniels saga was true and payment could be seen as an in-kind campaign contribution
- Untitled
The no-tax diehards kept the House speaker from cutting any real and meaningful deal. Then again, liberal Democrats wouldn't touch Medicare and Social Security.
-----------------------------------------------–
All the more reason why we should have went off the cliff. No one in Washington is willing to stick their necks out to get the best outcome for the country. Washington lacks cojones.
from the article:
"So I remember thinking, when Congress and President Obama concocted the supercommittee on the deficit ..."
--------------
I think your memory fails. Pres. Obama did not concoct the deal. He and Boehner had worked out a compromise. The Tea Party House rejected it, proposing the sequestration bill, instead. Pres. Obama had nothing to do with which bill the House voted on and which one they did not.
funny how the gop only talk about the cutting the entitlement to the middleclass and poor but not the entitlements given to the oil companies, wall street and themselves.
So after years of posturing and doing nothing the known end result occured with only slight modification – Really a good show Republicans – country goes to hell while you try and shame the President and look like fools in the process – Thank God for mid term elections – with the right money in the right places even your childish gerrymandering won't help you now!
This Amy gal that is the head of the tea party has go to Go. I mean, somebody needs to sit her down, and give her some civic lessons. If they keep on, the way they are going ( the tea party movement) they are going to end up destroying this country, as far as our government getting anything done. Amy Kremer needs to be honest, and since she's their Queen, she needs to tell them that they are going to "disband" and tell everyone of her gang, they need to quietly ride into the sunset. Otherwise, our congress will continue to be "defunct" and be more of a "do nothing" congress.
Higher taxes from the Spender and Chief. Got his wish. Higher taxes on small business and special favors for wind and Hollywood. Its his redistributionist tax agenda and "reforming government" if thats not a laugh. He is expanding government at alarming rates. Most of the new revenue is already being given away to special interests as favors so we are in worse shape than when those idiots started. Just another phony deficit reduction show and America will be worse in the end. Hey but Obama got what he wanted.
Larry in Houston wrote:
This Amy gal that is the head of the tea party has go to Go. ...
-----------------
She's a typical case of ideological myopia. Just this past Sunday she said something in back to back sentences that made no sense, and no one called her on it. Probably because it would left the show one guest short for nearly the next hour.
First, she re-asserted the Tea Party dogma that they fair and balanced. That the Tea Party would never condone raising taxes on anyone. Next talking point. She says something needs to be done about the 47% of individuals who pay no taxes, corporations who pay no taxes, and that the Tea Party was *for* broadening the base. Doesn't that entire talking point mean she wants to raise taxes?