

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Last night the Republicans offered to do a short term increase of the debt ceiling to prevent default and President Obama angrily dismissed it according to the Huffington Post:
At issue was Cantor's repeated push to do a short-term resolution and Obama's insistence that he would not accept one.
Last night the Republicans offered to do a short term increase of the debt ceiling to prevent default and President Obama angrily dismissed it according to the Huffington Post:
At issue was Cantor's repeated push to do a short-term resolution and Obama's insistence that he would not accept one.
"Eric, don't call my bluff. I'm going to the American people on this," the president said, according to both Cantor and another attendee. "This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."
At this point though I don't see why Eric Cantor won't try to call President Obama bluff over threatening to veto a short term deal.
As I have explain in more detail Obama threat to veto any short term increase has created a serious credibility problem for the President. You can't both say default would be a huge problem and that you will single-handily cause a default simply because you won't grant the GOP request for a short term increase so they can have a few more days to negotiate.
The Republicans are already trying to shift the responsibility for the debt ceiling unto Obama. From their perspective I see no reason why on July 29th the GOP shouldn't bring to the floor a 30 day increase paired with a small amount of some of the most politically palatable cuts. They could message such a move with something like, "we need more time but we are unwilling to risk the full faith of the US credit."
If Obama rejects the short term increase Republican will wash their hands and claim whatever bad happens to the economy because of a default is now totally Obama's fault for unreasonably rejection their modest request for more time.
Either Obama will be forced to break his veto promise, forced to prove he lied about August 2nd being the drop dead date, or risk allowing the GOP to have a believable story for why Obama should be solely blamed for the bad economic consequences of default.
At this point I see no good reason from a political perspective Cantor shouldn't call Obama's bluff.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Last night the Republicans offered to do a short term increase of the debt ceiling to prevent default and President Obama angrily dismissed it according to the Huffington Post:
At issue was Cantor's repeated push to do a short-term resolution and Obama's insistence that he would not accept one.
"Eric, don't call my bluff. I'm going to the American people on this," the president said, according to both Cantor and another attendee. "This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."
At this point though I don't see why Eric Cantor won't try to call President Obama bluff over threatening to veto a short term deal.
As I have explain in more detail Obama threat to veto any short term increase has created a serious credibility problem for the President. You can't both say default would be a huge problem and that you will single-handily cause a default simply because you won't grant the GOP request for a short term increase so they can have a few more days to negotiate.
The Republicans are already trying to shift the responsibility for the debt ceiling unto Obama. From their perspective I see no reason why on July 29th the GOP shouldn't bring to the floor a 30 day increase paired with a small amount of some of the most politically palatable cuts. They could message such a move with something like, "we need more time but we are unwilling to risk the full faith of the US credit."
If Obama rejects the short term increase Republican will wash their hands and claim whatever bad happens to the economy because of a default is now totally Obama's fault for unreasonably rejection their modest request for more time.
Either Obama will be forced to break his veto promise, forced to prove he lied about August 2nd being the drop dead date, or risk allowing the GOP to have a believable story for why Obama should be solely blamed for the bad economic consequences of default.
At this point I see no good reason from a political perspective Cantor shouldn't call Obama's bluff.
Last night the Republicans offered to do a short term increase of the debt ceiling to prevent default and President Obama angrily dismissed it according to the Huffington Post:
At issue was Cantor's repeated push to do a short-term resolution and Obama's insistence that he would not accept one.
"Eric, don't call my bluff. I'm going to the American people on this," the president said, according to both Cantor and another attendee. "This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."
At this point though I don't see why Eric Cantor won't try to call President Obama bluff over threatening to veto a short term deal.
As I have explain in more detail Obama threat to veto any short term increase has created a serious credibility problem for the President. You can't both say default would be a huge problem and that you will single-handily cause a default simply because you won't grant the GOP request for a short term increase so they can have a few more days to negotiate.
The Republicans are already trying to shift the responsibility for the debt ceiling unto Obama. From their perspective I see no reason why on July 29th the GOP shouldn't bring to the floor a 30 day increase paired with a small amount of some of the most politically palatable cuts. They could message such a move with something like, "we need more time but we are unwilling to risk the full faith of the US credit."
If Obama rejects the short term increase Republican will wash their hands and claim whatever bad happens to the economy because of a default is now totally Obama's fault for unreasonably rejection their modest request for more time.
Either Obama will be forced to break his veto promise, forced to prove he lied about August 2nd being the drop dead date, or risk allowing the GOP to have a believable story for why Obama should be solely blamed for the bad economic consequences of default.
At this point I see no good reason from a political perspective Cantor shouldn't call Obama's bluff.