by JASmius
Policymaking does not take place in a political vacuum. It'd be nice if we could just have Barack Obama and Harry Reid and the rest of their leftwing extremist economic terrorists arrested and force the changes in America's fiscal direction that are necessary to avoid its inevitable economic collapse. It'd be a lot nicer still if Tea Partiers could grasp that coup de tats aren't very democratic (small "d") OR Republican (upper and lower case), nor are they politically saleable to a largely apolitical voting public.
One rightwinger who understands this is Grover Norquist:
Grover Norquist says the debt ceiling deal has his blessing.
Norquist, who heads the powerful anti-tax group Americans for Tax Reform, tells Newsmax that congressional members who signed his group's "pledge" promising never to vote for a tax increase can vote for this deal.
"The deal proved that we can cut spending without trading away tax hikes," Norquist says.
He adds that the deal is no passing congressional fad, but a milestone in Capitol Hill thinking about spending and taxes.
"The deal set a new precedent: Never again will the debt ceiling be raised without a similarly sized spending cut being attached," he tells Newsmax.
The big loser in the deal?
Norquist declares unequivocally that Obama wins that title.
"Obama's internal polling must scare the heck out of him," Norquist says. "He caved on the key Republican demands: no tax hike, spending cuts equal to the debt ceiling increase."
Just so. As policy, this deal is weak tea at best; politically, it is a retreat by the forces of "Wrenching Transformation". And that lays additional foundation for their ouster in next November's election, which, if you'll recall, is the only way the country can be saved from the Third World oblivion towards which the Chicago Cherubim has it hurtling at warp speed.
In the other corner, representing the "can't see the forest for the trees with both hands and a flashlight" faction, we have Congressman Connie Mack:
Representative Connie Mack says the American people want a solution to the debt and deficit problem, not more “gimmicks and schemes,” so the Florida Republican cannot vote for a compromise that ensures continued skyrocketing debt.
“I don’t think the American people are looking for a deal or a compromise — they’re looking for a solution to the problem,” Mack said today on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. “And the problem we have is we have a deficit of about $1.5 trillion and debt at over $14 trillion. And with this plan moving forward, we ensure ourselves that we are going to have over $17 trillion in debt without solving the problem, which is cutting spending.”
Yes, Connie, we know all that; but there's this little problem of the Democrats still controlling the White House and the Senate. As the political configuration currently stands, implementing the ultimate solution to the debt problem is impossible. It will require the GOP comprehensively winning the 2012 election, and that won't happen with people like you righteously kneecapping your own party's leadership.
This next Mack quote is, you should pardon the expression, rich:
Mack said that, although he cannot vote for the deal, he believes it will pass.
“I think that Speaker Boehner has done a great job of pushing this debate, bringing it back to the principles we believe in,” he said. “But at the end of the day, I can’t vote for something that is going to ensure that we are going to have over $17 trillion in debt without a real solution to cutting spending in Washington.
So this is a costless protest vote Mack is free to cast. Riddle me this, keeds: If Boehner needed Mack's vote to pass the deal in the House, would he be carefree to engage in such cavalier grandstanding? Don't forget, folks, Boehner can get this bill passed with at least some Democrat votes. Do we want to send, much less reinforce, the message that it was the Democrats who rescued the country from a GOP-driven default? Sure it would be crap, but it's crap that the mushy-headed swing-voter will lap up like Adam Richman does barbeque sauce.
I know the policy imperatives, my friends; probably better than you do. But we can't get the country to where it needs to go outside of the political process. And that means we have to play the public relations game at a time when the other side still holds the ol' bully pulpit.
We've now got Red Barry on the run. Why on Earth do we want to throw him a propaganda lifeline?
[cross posted at Hard Starboard]
