Raise the debt ceiling. Period

[Jakes Progress]

It has become obvious that we are being shock doctrined.

If our president cares one whit about the people, or even his own election, he should say he will veto any bill other than a straight yes on raising the debt ceiling until 2013. Just get on with all other battles, get on with running the country, get on with doing the duty of elected officials.

Any congress person or president that uses this silly little rule with big consequences to further any other goal is a liar, a coward, and definitely deserves to be thrown out of office for dereliction of duty. We don't need to cut SS to help the debt. We don't need the president insisting that we do.

We need a president who will at least for a while, do what is right for the people.

Straight up and down vote and approval of a simple debt ceiling increase like the ones they did multiple times under ronnie.

[TexDevilDog]

1. I agree. Just raise the debt far enough to get past next election

Let the voters decide how they want to fix this by electing a new government.

[Jakes Progress]

2. Golly. That would almost make us a democracy.

[TexDevilDog]

6. Represented republic is what we have to work with.

Government ruled by everyone (democracy) would get nothing done. Or worst would look like current Egypt every time most of the people decided to change the policies of government without waiting to elect representatives.

[sudopod]

9. Yeah, the people are way too dumb to rule themselves.

That's why we need overlords. DUH!

[KittyWampus]

12. Look at California. Proposition 8, Recall of Gov. Davis.

[Jakes Progress]

16. So you are officially against democracy?

What happens if you don't get to be one of the ruling elite? What happens if a tiny percent of very rich people are the ones who get represented? Oh, yeah. That's what we have now with this administration and you seem to like that. So, you're good to go.

[KittyWampus]

23. There are elections. There is local government. There is state government.

[Jakes Progress]

26. Huh? What do you think a democracy is?

Do you just crank on threads for no reason? Your posts in this one don't add up to a cohesive thought.

I suggested a democracy was a good thing. You chimed in with a poster who disagreed and seemed to be offering support for his argument that people aren't to be trusted with their own government.

Then you seem to say that a democracy doesn't include elections or have anything to do with state or local government.

So I gotta ask: Huh?

[kelly1mm]

32. I think many here would agree direct democracy doesn't not always work

so well. Example number 1 - in every vote by voters to legalize gay marriage, it has failed. Are you saying that is right because it is democracy? How about a balanced budjet amendment? 60%+ favor that. Raise the debt limit? Again, 60%+ oppose that.

[Jakes Progress]

33. So your alternative is to do away with the constitution?

You would like to do away with voting?

In your imaginary world of super humans who control us all, did you worry that you might not be one of the ones to do the controlling?

[kelly1mm]

34. Actually no - I like direct democracy. What I am saying is you need to accept

that many progressive positions are not supported by a majority of voters. The flip side is many progressive ideals are. Are you willing to take the good with the bad? Tax increases for the rich as well as no debt limit increase? No to mariage equality as well as closing tax loopholes?

[Jakes Progress]

35. Apples do not equal oranges. You accept it.

We can argue about whether our money-tainted democracy works or not. We can argue about what polls show and how honest they are. We can argue about how the public is scammed with corporate money. We can even argue about the basic decency and fairness of the American citizen.

That's not what this side-tracked conversation was about. It started with my comment that a straight up vote without the amendments and "deals" would be more like a democracy. Then the prattle-heads decided to detour into a discussion of what a democracy means. A few were confused by the terms republic and democracy. A few actually seem to prefer an autocracy or as it would exist in this country a plutocracy. You post came out of nowhere, pertaining to nothing in particular to say that elections don't always go the way you want. Not a very astute or profound observation and completely un-germaine to the thread.

Whether they go the way you want is one discussion. Whether a democracy is preferable to a government run by a few elite is another. Pick one an we can discuss it. You seem to be wanting to argue from both sides. Some things are good you say and some things are bad you say. Whew. The profundity.

[kelly1mm]

36. You are right. Looking back my comment does not really fit in with

the thread and was not what you were really talking about when you wrote democracy. Sorry about that - too many glasses of wine last night!

[Jakes Progress]

37. Thank you. You are an exception.

I'm sorry if I came off cross, but this is the first time anyone every admitted to an error on DU that I know of. Classy.

I will try to learn from your post and make sure that I re-examine my positions when they are out of kilter.

[sudopod]

22. Your post fills me with despair.

I think I'll write a book. I'll title it "How I learned to stop worrying and love the King/Overlord/Master (Circle One)."

[KittyWampus]

25. First you should READ a book about Representative Government because we haz one.

[Jakes Progress]

28. You are compounding your misconceptions and misreadings.

Your unqualified support for anything the administration does is not helping if you keep this up.

[Jakes Progress]

17. Don't you love the New Democrat rhetoric.

Sounds just like the old republican rhetoric.

[KittyWampus]

24. WTF? So now, we have the Far Right saying this is a Republic (fuck Democracy) and the Far Left sayin

this is a Democracy (fuck Representation)?

[Jakes Progress]

30. You lack a knowledge of history and governmental nomenclature

You do cuss nicely. I've noticed when people back themselves into a corner by taking on subjects about which they have no knowledge they often begin cursing a lot.

Again. You contributions to this thread show either a lack of knowledge or are evidence of just not paying attention. Either way your posts are contradictory and incoherent.

[woo me with science]

29. Mind boggling, and despair-inducing.

I have to keep reminding myself to be angry rather than demoralized.

[Jakes Progress]

18. That's what we got now.

It's just that most of us aren't represented. Only about 1% are.

[sudopod]

20. Exactly! nt

[Warren DeMontague]

15. Exactly. Come the next election, we can return the house of representatives to the grownups

these fucking fleabaggers aren't capable of operating anything more complicated than a go-cart.

[Poll_Blind]

3. +1

My own representative called this a manufactured crisis on the House floor yesterday.

He said:

In December the president caved to the Republicans and extended all the Bush Tax Cuts, immediately increasing this year's deficit by 400 billion dollars and the ten-year deficit by four trillion dollars, precipitating the Great Debt and Deficit Crisis. Now, we're hearing from the press today that the President is preparing yet another great cave! We will have some revenues to solve this problem. He is apparently about to cut a deal that is all cuts.

So that's ironic: He cuts taxes to create a crisis and then we cut spending to protect the tax cuts because "tax cuts create jobs" except they haven't created jobs but "we've gotta continue to protect them!" It's all very, very sad.

If we get rid of all the Bush Tax Cuts? 4 trillion dollars!

No cuts in Social Security!

No cuts in Medicare!

No cuts in Veteran's Benefits!

Now that would be an equitable solution.

PB

[Jakes Progress]

5. Must be nice.

I live in Texas. Clowns to the left of me, Clowns to the right. With very few exceptions, a state wholly represented by idiots (did you think george was the only one), liars, and disgusting pigs.

[Poll_Blind]

8. I'm very pleased with the guy. He has served us all tirelessly.

When I get in the dumps about how far down Shit Road the Democratic Party has gone, I remember that there are still a few good ones fighting for us. He got 69 other Democrats in the house to sign a petition for the President to keep his goddamned mitts off Social Security so I can hope at least that number is on our side.

PB

[Skink]

4. He wants to do big things.

[Faryn Balyncd]

7. +1000...The only other reasonable option seems to be 14th

[woo me with science]

10. Thank you. nt

[customerserviceguy]

11. No spending cuts at all?

Two things: One, the Repuke House is simply not going to produce such a bill, and two, the President will sign any bill that can come through both houses of Congress, no matter what it contains. If he vetoes, he gets 100% of the blame for the consequences.

[hfojvt]

13. their talking point though, is that they will not raise the limit

until they have dealt with the deficit problem. It's a powerful talking point that makes it look like they are standing on principle for the long-term good of the country.

[Jakes Progress]

19. Takes four words to shoot that crap down.

18 raises under reagan.

[AndyTiedye]

14. The PigBaggers Will Not Pass a Clean Debt Ceiling Bill

Why should they? Everyone will blame Obama when the economy crashes. The RepiggieBaggers have nothing to lose.

[Jakes Progress]

21. Only if Obama lets them.

What happened to the great orator and his powers of speech that we were supposed to elect.

Simple speech. "I want revenue. They want cuts. Let's keep the nation from going under and fight about the rest later."

He had a little of that in the speech Friday. But he kept wanting to be proud of how much SS and Medicare he was cutting. Wall Street and the Banks and the rich will take a hit on this. Their pledge was to not raise taxes. The debt ceiling doesn't raise taxes. It only pays for the things the congress already said they would pay for.

[woo me with science]

27. K&R

[hairyHans]

31. POLITICIANS FIRST!! GET REALITY!

 Why do Americans not insist(RALLY, RANT & RAGE) that the
first cuts to ANY taxpayer-supported wages/benefits are those
of ALL the politicians... President, congressmen,senators,
upper political civil servants!  
 If this were to happens you would have NO problem coming up
with PRAGMATIC not rhetorical solutions. 
 WHY do AMERICANS NOT JOIN TOGETHER EN MASSE AND INSIST
" POLITICIANS FIRST!" . 
 Don't forget: they put themselves first on EVERYTHING ELSE: 
Best benefits, best expense accounts, best health care, best
working environment .... all at taxpayers' expense.`
  
Will you allow them, by dithering, to further reduce your
common American's well-being?