Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House: We’ll take a short-term deal on the debt ceiling
Hot Air ^ | October 7,2013 | ED MORRISSEY

Posted on 10/07/2013 8:30:11 AM PDT by Hojczyk

Did the White House just blink on the debt-ceiling fight? After weeks of insisting it won’t negotiate on either the budget or the debt ceiling, a top White House adviser said this morning that Barack Obama would sign a short-term lift in the latter to gain more time for a longer-term agreement:

President Obama would accept a short-term increase in the federal borrowing cap , rather than one lasting a year or more, a senior White House official said Monday. The statement was an acknowledgment by the administration that it may not be possible to reach a deal on a long-term increase in the debt ceiling before a critical Oct. 17 deadline.

Gene Sperling, director of the National Economic Council, said members of Congress ultimately have the responsibility to decide how often they want to raise the debt ceiling, although he argued that an extended hike is preferable. …

The Treasury says it will run low on cash in as little as 10 days, placing the nation at risk of a historic default. Some Republicans have suggested that if Congress can’t reach an agreement by Oct. 17, they might try to forge a coalition to support an interim measure to increase the $16.7 trillion debt ceiling for as little as six weeks.

Sperling’s comments Monday suggested that the White House would accept such a measure. The statement was notable because administration officials had rejected a short-term debt ceiling increase during a similar impasse in the summer of 2011, when the White House insisted that the debt limit be increased to cover borrowing through 2012

(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: debtceiling; shortterm
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last
To: Hojczyk

The republican house should pass a law that says that the nations debt must be served. Only after all other sources of funds have been exhausted, including the salaries of congress and their staff, and the salaries of all administration employees have been exhausted may the talk of default even be addressed.


21 posted on 10/07/2013 8:43:34 AM PDT by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phillyred
WHERE's the BUDGET?????


22 posted on 10/07/2013 8:43:58 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Bonehead already signalled a deal on this, I don’t see any drama on this issue


23 posted on 10/07/2013 8:44:09 AM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Well, I hear that. But I’d still say that a thoughtful approach would be best. If the Republicans are perceived as shouting, “Heck no! We refuse to negotiate!” then the low information voters will really start to think the media is right about everything.

Yes, the media will always portray us as bad guys. But we shouldn’t make their job too easy.


24 posted on 10/07/2013 8:45:34 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (21st century. I'm not a fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Bammy needs a win.


25 posted on 10/07/2013 8:46:13 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

No deal, the federal government needs to get its financial house in order, just like everyone else who has to adhere to a budget. Outlaw lobbyists, and learn to spend less than you take in, and eliminate redundant services that the States already possess. If you don’t miss 90 percent of the govrnment during a shutdown, you DON’T NEED THEM!


26 posted on 10/07/2013 8:46:54 AM PDT by factoryrat (We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Any “short term deal” would be hailed by the Democrats as a win. The Republicans would be painted by the press/MSM as having given in to commonsense, given in to reality, and the Democrats would be painted as brilliant leaders having defeated the rebellious dunces of the TEA Party, and the Conservatives of the Republican Party.

Absolutely no compromise can be submitted in any way, shape, or form. No negotiation with the Democrats period.

This is what this is about. Trying to trick the Republicans into negotiating while they the Democrats will actually not.

Trying to paint a picture for the public of the Republicans on hands and knees crawling to the Democrats begging their forgiveness for trying to do what’s right for the country. It’s another OLD Democrat trick.


27 posted on 10/07/2013 8:48:33 AM PDT by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will. They ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
an interim measure to increase the $16.7 trillion debt ceiling for as little as six weeks.

Just enough to get them past the elections. Hope the Republicans don't cave.

28 posted on 10/07/2013 8:49:06 AM PDT by HarleyD (...one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

No deal! Dems must have had checked their internal polling and KNOW they are losing. Keep going..let the mid-terms sort this out.


29 posted on 10/07/2013 8:56:31 AM PDT by Blue Turtle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Note that both Obama and Pelosi cannot find a single thing to cut, not a single dollar.

Their complaint last time was that the sequester was a really dumb way to cut.

The Republicans should say — OK, the price is $200Billion to cut THIS FISCAL YEAR — (with a projected deficit of $600Billion, it is a start) -— you democrats pick the programs, and legislation to cut them will be part of the extension.

They won’t.

So the Republicans should pick $100billion of the Democrat favorite programs (e.g., EPA, czar salaries), and invite the Democrats to identify programs of their choice to swap , and work it out in conference).


30 posted on 10/07/2013 8:56:33 AM PDT by Mack the knife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spunky

Thank you but I think the repubs are pretty stupid.

The white hut can’t be trusted, we both know that, and they don’t play by any rules any half way decent person understands.

Stay firm, don’t blink. Make obastard negotiate and if he does not go right back to the previous position... shut it down.

As far as I can see a compromise has already been offered... delay obamacare but it is a bit late for that isn’t it?

What else though? The borrowing cap really has to be increased some but not without spending cuts and not like the sequester mess and joke. Real spending cuts of entitlements and reduction of regulations.


31 posted on 10/07/2013 8:56:46 AM PDT by Sequoyah101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rockinqsranch

I think the separation of the debt limit from the CR/Obamacare crap is actually in the best interest of conservative politics. The debt limit potentially affects the standing of the US on the world economic stage (although Obama would have to specifically choose to shaft creditors, as opposed to his own voting base - but that’s a perception fight I don’t see as winnable at this time).

The CR/Obamacare showdown has caused the dems to massively overplay their hand by deliberately trying to inflict the maximum pain on the American public in defense of a law the public by and large rejects.

The “pure” (quotes because I do not wish to start a fight over the purity concept in politics) principled stand is to fight on both fronts. The disciplined political approach is to continue the CR standoff, pointing to the Dems sudden willingness to deal on the debt limit as critical evidence that the dems, and not the GOP, are playing politics on the CR. It may not work, but it has a significantly better chance of being successful than giving Obama the ability to crater the economy even further while convincing the majority of voters it’s because of the GOP’s actions.

In this case, I think the two-front war hurts us more than it helps.


32 posted on 10/07/2013 8:57:11 AM PDT by MortMan (Disarming the sheep only emboldens the wolves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

MSM, the Congress and pResident need to stop the lie that reaching the debt ceiling means default. STOP IT NOW. Reaching the debt ceiling has nothing to do with FedGov™ paying interest on the debt.


33 posted on 10/07/2013 8:59:43 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mack the knife

Democrats will take 100% of the needed cuts right out of Defense — and they will have no stronger supporter than John McCain.


34 posted on 10/07/2013 8:59:52 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (21st century. I'm not a fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Who is the congressman that has a list of all the government abuse and waste? Think he was featured on Stossell a couple of months ago. Should just pass those on his list en mass.


35 posted on 10/07/2013 9:07:16 AM PDT by hoosiermama (Obama: "Born in Kenya" Lying now or then)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MortMan

We disagree.

The Dems have to be brought to the table by the scruff of their necks so to speak. That can only be accomplished by out aggressing them. The upper hand is in the House per the Constitution on this one. Let them come to the House. It would cost so much more to move the House to them.


36 posted on 10/07/2013 9:07:44 AM PDT by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will. They ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Do NOT give Obama and his filthy democrats ANY breathing room. Suffocated the treasonist bastards.


37 posted on 10/07/2013 9:09:55 AM PDT by Gator113 (The mighty Bear ate the cowardly rat. Obama must resign.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
"Article I of the Constitution grants the legislative power entirely to Congress. Under what constitutional principle has Obama unilaterally amended the law? Yet when the House of Representatives undertakes a constitutionally correct, i.e., legislative, procedure for suspending the other mandate — the individual mandate — this is portrayed as some extra-constitutional sabotage of the rule of law. Why is tying that amendment to a generalized spending bill an outrage, while unilateral amendment by the executive (with a (Valerie Jarrett blog) item for spin) is perfectly fine? "
Charles Krauthammer

POTUS de facto

38 posted on 10/07/2013 9:10:37 AM PDT by yoe ( Defund Obamacare now — or risk voter backlash in 2014)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

39 posted on 10/07/2013 9:12:03 AM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

IOW, we will LIE to get a deal.


40 posted on 10/07/2013 9:20:18 AM PDT by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal the 16th Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson