Mitch McConnell's "none of the above"

[Anonymous]

While labeling Obama's "big deal", which did all the GOP wanted, but required some revenue-raising in return, McConnell now wants to let Obama decide the whole thing on his own, retaining only the right to throw the country into default in the unlikely case they could manage to get a two-thirds vote (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/12/mitch-mcconnell-debt-ceiling-plan_n_896254.html). I thought Obama was compromising his substantive position to gain a better political position, but it looks to me like McConnell has totally tossed his substantive position out the window for politics.

Am I wrong about that? And is it good politics -- will it get votes for the GOP in 2012?

[Anonymous]

OP here. I left the first sentence incomplete. I meant to say that McConnell labeled Obamas offer "smoke and mirrors".

[Anonymous]

I don't get MCconnell's plan at all. The only part I get is that it is basically asking the dems and Obama to fall on their swords so that the reps can save face for backing themselves into a stupid corner they should never have put themselves in any way.

First of all, why would any dems vote for it, and more important, how is it going to get through the dem-controlled Senate? Wouldn't the dems prefer to have a straight up-or-down vote on the debt limit itself, or even a real deficit-control package, to a purely political package that makes dems look bad and reps look good?

Plus, although the reps can boast about voting that they "disapprove" of Obama's move to raise the debt limit, they will still have a lot of explaining to do to constituents. "Hey, I ceded total control over the debt limit to Obama, and then I cast a disapproving vote when he did what I intended for him to do!" And yeah, they want to require Obama to list offsetting spending cuts, but naturally he's going to suggest cutting defense, raising taxes, and saving all the low-income programs, so the reps who will oppose all this will have to explain that they have made no progress, none, on budget control.

Am I missing something????

[Anonymous]

I get it. In this game of chicken, the Republicant's are s.c.r.e.w.e.d, and they know it. The ONLY way to pass a deal is to include some tax increase. But no one can do that and face the tea partiers in the primary. They tried halving the package, but Obama didn't take the bait.

So they only two ways out are: default (screwed) and raise taxes (screwed)

So Mitch McConnell comes up with his version of the Kobayashi Maru. Effectively on this vital issue that they care so much about, they want to GIVE the decision to Obama. OMG does the bill come packaged in a wooden horse? Because the idea here is that Obama raises the debt ceiling, takes ALL the blame for doing what has to be done. And EVERY SINGLE Republican can subsequently yell to high heavens in Congress about it, and vote against it, because they CAN'T override the vote.

Basically, in order to get out of this mess that they created, they have to formally abdicate the constitutional authority of Congress, power over the purse, to the President. The President can now print money at will, without a 2/3 veto. All because they are shaking in their shoes about having to face their wackadoodle tea infused lunatic primary voters.

[Anonymous]

The GOP and their corporate masters were probably expecting Obama to fold once again at this game of high-stakes poker, and now that he has called their bluff (for once!) the corporate masters are starting to panic. My guess is that Goldman Sachs called McConnell today and told him to back off, not realizing the leaders no longer control their tea-infused party.
So are we facing huge interest increases and potentially a Greek-style default if nothing gets done in the next three weeks, as seems increasingly likely?