New York Times Editorial: Budget deal "is nearly complete capitulation to Republican extremists"

Editorial
To Escape Chaos, a Terrible Deal
Published: July 31, 2011

There is little to like about the tentative agreement between Congressional leaders and the White House except that it happened at all. The deal would avert a catastrophic government default, immediately and probably through the end of 2012. The rest of it is a nearly complete capitulation to the hostage-taking demands of Republican extremists. It will hurt programs for the middle class and poor, and hinder an economic recovery.

For weeks, ever since House Republicans said they would not raise the nation’s debt ceiling without huge spending cuts, Democrats have held out for a few basic principles. There must be new tax revenues in the mix so that the wealthy bear a share of the burden and Medicare cannot be affected.

Those principles were discarded to get a deal that cuts about $2.5 trillion from the deficit over a decade. The first $900 billion to a trillion will come directly from domestic discretionary programs (about a third of it from the Pentagon) and will include no new revenues. The next $1.5 trillion will be determined by a “supercommittee” of 12 lawmakers that could recommend revenues, but is unlikely to do so since half its members will be Republicans.

Read the full editorial at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/opinion/to-escape-chaos-a-terrible-debt-deal.html?hp

here under the bus... the NYT... WOW

We need t make some space.

The first part of the above snip isn't a bad deal, but what does the last paragraph mean? Does the NYT not want the tax cuts to expire?

Here is Ezra Klein's take:


Summary: deal includes some revenues, and possible more revenues, but the House is likely to r

military cuts that they oppose. So they will have a reason to consider increasing revenues, too.

"unlikely to do so" my ass.

sacrificing 20 virgins at dawn on the third day of the month for the rest of eternity, you'd be all for it, and explaining to us how it was a good deal.

Anything other than a clean bill sets a dangerous precedent that they can use the economic nuclear option to hold this nation hostage, and we are done with now.

The good (not much), the bad, and the ugly.

But we have the mystical powers that are required to traverse beyond the present and into the future...so that we may return with "All the News That's Fit to Print."

:applause: :loveya: :applause:

Everyone knows this will work only one way, right? Republicans coming back and again to grind Democrats down and to demand a pound of donkey flesh, whittling away at the New Deal, every time there's a debt ceiling expansion.

By tying the two together, this blackmail tyranny has become the norm.

We got the loaded gun out of the little kid's hands with only minimal damage. The Bush tax cuts are now on the chopping block in the election. And the American people aren't going to be happy about being taken hostage twice by the Tea Party. I would have preferred to see the 14th Amendment solution, because I wanted to see the Tea Party humiliated. But all-in-all, I think it might have just strengthened them and made Obama look, not strong, but dictatorial. If this deal doesn't go through, then the 14th Amendment solution will be forced.

There wasn't going to be a solution involving tax increases. The Tea Party and Republicans would have let us default first. For the NY Times to portray it as discarded principles is silly. (No doubt they are as sure about it as they were that Saddam had those WMDs.) But the Times can't take election strategy into account in their editorial. We have to. The Republicans need to be kicked to the curb again. There was no opportunity to do it here. The election is the only opportunity.

It is a significant win to prevent a major loss to the country and to position ourselves well for the election. We can undo a lot of the damage before it is even done. If the Tea Party votes against the plan, as seems likely, it is even better. They helped us keep the Senate in 2010 and probably reduced our losses in the House. Their hostage taking and "let it burn" madness have left a bad aftertaste. Given the state of the economy and the short memories of American voters, our election prospects would be far worse without the Tea Party.