McConnell pounds his chest and stomps his feet
by digby
Mitch McConnell enters the fray:
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell told President Obama on Thursday that he must agree to cut spending on federal agencies over the next two years and make significant changes to Medicare and Medicaid as part of a deal for raising the legal limit on government borrowing.
During a White House meeting with the entire Senate Republican caucus, McConnell (Ky.) told the president that the battle over the debt limit is a critical opportunity to overhaul the popular health-care entitlement programs, which are projected to be the biggest drivers of future borrowing.
Gosh, it seems like only yesterday that ole Mitch was writing op-eds about Medicare that had a significantly different angle:
[P]ollsters also caution Democrats to reassure seniors that Medicare will not be cut. But that too will be a tough sell, since the new law takes more than $500 billion from Medicare to pay for an entirely new government program and since we already know that millions of seniors will be forced from Medicare Advantage plans they already have and like.
These cuts are so severe, Medicare's own actuary warns, "providers for whom Medicare constitutes a substantive portion of their business could find it difficult to remain profitable and, absent legislative intervention, might end their participation in the program."
In other words, the law could jeopardize access to care. Maybe that's why the pollsters warn their liberal allies, "Women in particular are concerned that health law will mean less provider availability -- scarcity an issue."
Yes, there was a time when Mitch was the big protector of Medicare, falsely warning that the president was snatching money from the ancient hands of the elderly to give them to gawd knows who. Six months later, without missing a beat he's now demanding cuts to the program or he'll bring the economy down.
And if that isn't enough chutzpah for you, get a load of this:
A bipartisan agreement to curb entitlement costs would reassure financial markets concerned about the nation’s ability to rein in its spiraling debt, McConnell told reporters after the meeting. Doing it now, he said, would neutralize the issue for the 2012 presidential campaign.
“If there’s a grand bargain of some kind with the president of the United States, none of it will be usable by either side in next year’s election,” McConnell said. “That is the importance of this debt ceiling moment.”
Hahahaha! Whew, that's a good one. That Mitch is quite the comedian. He said "neutralize the issue for the 2012 campaign!"Yeah, we know all about that.
And by the way, Karl Rove and David Koch haven't signed on to this "neutralize" pact so I wouldn't count on them. I don't think they have the quite the same definition of "neutralize" as the rest of us. The Republicans may want Democratic cover to destroy the safety net, but considering recent history I think the Democrats probably should be a teensy bit skeptical that they will get the same benefit in return.
I would say that even the Democrats won't be dumb enough to fall for this --- and some are saying explicitly that they won't --- but for some reason this doesn't make me feel any better:
“It’s premature to be optimistic, but I am clearly not pessimistic."
Update: It's looking as if the progressive position is inching toward a Grand Bargain on this --- meaning cuts to entitlements in exchange for tax hikes and defense cuts. Uhm, no. That's not a bargain, that's a suckers play. The entitlements will stay cut while the tax hikes and defense cuts will be reversed the first time the Republicans gain the power to do it. That's always their first order of business.
These politicians have to raise the debt ceiling or their pals on Wall Street will have a fit. You know and they know it. There is zero reason to give even one inch in this ridiculous, unnecessary negotiation.
.