Speaking of "surrender", the GOP are a combination of Monty Python's Black Knight and the WWII Japanese soldiers left on tiny islands, still fighting in the 1950's.

This is not the doomsday option.

The GOP lets the tax cut expire and the GOP heroically pushes through a plan to cut the middle class taxes even deeper than the Bush did, and make them permanent.

This way, the GOP achieves a couple goals

1. Dems are forced to argue that middle class taxes should be higher
2. Dems are forced to argue that middle class tax cut should not be permanent and may have to go up later, sewing cynicism about the Dems that the "tax and spender" party inevitably will.
3. By cutting revenue more deeply, Dems will be forced to cut "entitlements" more deeply.
4. By decoupling the over the top generous tax cut from spending negotiations, the GOP have an easier negotiating position to push for the deepest domestic spending cuts. To prevent the decoupling, Dems in the Senate will be forced to nuke the bill. The Dems will be forced to vote against a middle class tax cut bill. Not good for the 20 Dem Senators facing re-election in 2014.

That's how the GOP tries to make this a doomsday scenario for the Dems.

And all, proud members of the Very Silly Party.

Mr. Messerly, brilliant. I wish I had thought of that myself.

Shooter, what makes you think they haven't? This is national politics- the major leagues. Surely you are not suggesting that the GOP leaders are dunces.

The big question is not whether the Dems have figured out the stagecraft of the counter move to this DC theater of appearances, but whether the DEM leadership understands they must apply OFA techniques to the 2014 congressional races. Really, the only Dem leader who has the power to push for it is the President.

Frankly, I have my doubts he would take the political risk of cutting OFA loose from the White House.

After continuing to live with a economy in a death spiral...how much clout will this pathetic administration have come the mid terms...can you say "Albatross"?

The Democrats had better offer all kinds of amendments, like extension of unemployment, debt ceiling, raising the #$1.6 trillion, because once the middle class tax cuts are OKd, the gnat-like attention span of the average American Fool, er, I mean voter, is going to disappear, and the Republicans in the House will be in a position to block everything and hold the debt ceiling hostage again.

WHAT ? They [gop/tp] Started a doomsday plan for America 50+ years ago ! U - Kiddin' ME ?

Get For-Real - people !!

@JohnMesserly

This is not a problem for the Democrats at all. If the Republicans attempt to spike the reveue punch-bowl by attempting to cut deeper into the middle class tax rates than before the Democrats actually gain the upper hand.

It's worth remembering that this entire contrivance only exists because of the G.O.P. and that the only reason we are having this discussion is their dogmatic resistance to enabling any future spending on social programs to go forward.

The Democrats at this point accept the G.O.P. vote and say "thank you for agreeing with us!" It's at this point that the Democrats back up and allow the G.O.P. to grandstand over the debt ceiling and destroy their brand in the court of public opinion over their intransigence on social spending.

The debt ceiling this time around will be a real hoot because if the G.O.P. does not manage to undo the sequester they're going to be unable to argue that we need to just "cut spending" since we're already doing that and they only want to shift those cuts onto social programs.

So now, instead of making this about some abstract issue relating to borrowed money it becomes quite clearly about their desire to destroy the social safety net and not about deficits. The Democrats of course will propose their own ideas on entitlements and the G.O.P. will balk at them and then when they play chicken this time the public will hold them completely accountable when last time only the credit agencies did.

The thing to remember is Democrats have three pieces of leverage, expiring Bush Tax Cuts, winning the election, AND the sequester. The Democrats are willing to accept temporary cuts to social spending to force the G.O.P. to the bargaining table and that gives them leverage to, in the entitlements phase of negotiation, argue for deficit reduction that expands coverage and makes programs more efficient rather than slashes benefits and cuts membership and if the Republicans argue against that the optics will be terrible for them.
This really is President Obama and the Democrats battle to lose here.

They have submitted their counter-proposal. Until today it was known as the Ryan Plan - you know, the one that even their presidential and vice-presidential candidates wouldn't run on ... oh, wait

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/house-gop-offer-fiscal-cliff-counteroffer

Greetings from Pig-Headed Republican Land (also known as Texas). Just so you know, people here are fools and they have a very self-righteous attitude where they think the Republicans were doing the right thing by not raising the debt ceiling - darn those spendthrift Democrats! NEVER underestimate the fact that the largest supporters of the Republican party are the uneducated white men, and "internal polls" is just another way of saying "God's honest truth" to them. Everyone I hear blathering on and on tells me that the Democrats are the reason why Republicans "had" to stop our country from spending too much money. They will usually scream "balanced budget" when they do. They have NO IDEA that isn't what a debt ceiling is....*sigh*

Largenose,

I guess they don't understand that debt ceiling=credit limit. And it is to authorize actually paying bills that are due, not to approve increased spending.

It's like this. We are spending more money than we are taking in. Yes, it's all budgeted money, but our income has fallen.

So we are paying bills with credit cards, and then paying only the minimum on those cards, and in another month or two we will have maxed out the cards and won't be able to keep up the minimum payments on those, and keep current on the utilities, etc.

So raising the debt ceiling is like getting a new credit card. We keep getting new offers in the mail for zero interest cards, so it's not costing us much. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling is like throwing out all those CC offers and resolving never to get another one.

MikeinMichigan:

You have explained exactly what the debt ceiling IS NOT.

The debt ceiling raise will allow "us" to keep paying the bills we have already incurred . The money we have already spent.

If you stop paying, the collectors call. They won't lend you more money (altho that is not really a problem for reasons left to another day.) You default and they resent interest rates to a usurious amount. Noone believes you when you make promises.

Please, please ... It's really ok if you want to support so-called conservative principles, but you must do your homework so you understand what you stand for.

I find it hilarious whenever I hear repubs scream for a balanced budget. They haven't proposed one in decades, and the only president who has delivered a balanced budget with a SURPLUS was Bill Clinton....the guy they tried to impeach and now hold in an awe similar to that of Reagan. Even the vaunted Ryan plan doesn't balance the budget...in fact, it produced larger deficits than the budgets that the dems were proposing. When they produce a balanced budget proposal, one that is based on reality rather than fantasy, such as "growth based on tax policies", then I might take them seriously. Until then, I'll continue to laugh at those hypocritcal, math- and reality-challenged fools.

Tracy - you might want to remind your pig-headed neighbors in Texas - that they don't put into the kitty as much as they take out, and anytime their really serious - remind them to tell Social Security that they don't want those checks every month when they reach the eligible retirement age.....

Largenose -

I too don't see the problem. Isn't this just what Obama asked for in a news conference a couple weeks ago when he brandished his pen?

In January Republicans would have to propose cutting off Unemployment checks entirely - not a good PR move.

They would have to oppose the Payroll Tax Cut - again not a good move.

They would have to hold the full faith and credit of the US hostage again - I just don't think it would fly again in the pubic arena.

And they would have to engage in the particulars of the sequester - also a no win for them.

I don't see the problem.

I do see more Democratic hand-wringing and self doubt that has become sadly familiar.

Fave: Everything happens at year end.

Tom-3671033

Yup - things happen at year's end. Which is why those "things" will be addressed in January with the new congress.

Fave:Still a Repub controlled House, which also controls the purse

Zora Renee, sorry to have to correct you, but it's what we liberals do on occasion (but politely).

Texas is just above the break-even point on the revenue/tax curve on the last list that i saw. it's one of the few (only?) red states that is.

Can we all get on the same page here "entitlements" are what's gifted to BIG OIL/COAL/PHARMA/Agriculture, CEO's paying nothing on their $16 million salaries, and those companies that are off-shoring jobs!

Defined benefits are what working stiffs pay into so that after working 50 years in low paying jobs, they can retire and not HAVE TO EAT CAT FOOD!

And as soon as House rethugniCons consider stripping out those "entitlements" to their fat-cat donors; then we might consider a reform of Medicare.....Nah...Got'cha....

So. let me understand this. The Repubs vote to extend lower tax rates for everyone having taxable incomes of either 200 - 250K. Then they go home.

What about the sequester cuts, payroll tax cuts, unemployment extension, etc? Sounds like the Repubs would have leverage.

But to be serious, in my opinion, the Pres is over playing his hand. He campaigned on raising the highest rates only. His offer is rediculous. This latest suggestion lets the Pres say he fulfilled his promise, but he's still in the hole by about 3-4 hundred billion. So much for cutting the deficit in half during his first term.

And, everyone should put aside the argument over who or what caused the problem. We are where we are. Get over Keynes and supply side, both dated theories. Get over Reagon and Clinton. We need to grow the economy and neither will do in todays global economy.

In January Republicans would have to propose cutting off Unemployment checks entirely - not a good PR move.

They would have to oppose the Payroll Tax Cut - again not a good move.

They would have to hold the full faith and credit of the US hostage again - I just don't think it would fly again in the pubic arena.

And they would have to engage in the particulars of the sequester - also a no win for them.

Okay. I'll bite. Suppose Dems do "pivot and starting beating R's over the head with threatening the credit of the US -- again."

What leverage do Dems have with that? We can point out that the GDP dropped significantly during the "uncertainty" of that last hostage crisis, and I suspect more voters will agree that it's a stupid move for the R's.

But the R's are patently unafraid of going against public opinion: they just lie and lie and expect that the reasonable among us will just weary of them and give up (also known as 'get on with our lives').

So what will be different, except that the fight *may* be less complicated to explain? Will the Pres hold fast?

Next step?

There are a few options ... the most likely is the invocation of the 14th Amendment and statement by PBO that says something like:

Go ahead, make my day

The virtue of invoking the 14th Amendment is that it eliminates debt limit arguments going forward as well as in the immediate circumstances.

@Helena - I fully expect the GOP to fly in the face of public opinion over the debt limit. It's what they do. The only difference between now and last year is this: Wall Street and normally Republican-friendly business interests were seriously not happy with Boehner's brinksmanship last year, and (I believe) put enough pressure on Boehner to cut a last-minute deal in '11, but at least they were in the hopeful position that Obama would lose re-election and the debt limit would suddenly not be an issue anymore; Republicans would raise it, as they'd done countless times before because there wouldn't be the motivation to wreck the economy if an R were in charge. But they don't have that now, and they have to deal with Obama for another 4 years. So (again, I believe) Wall Street and business interests are going to make it even more clear to Boehner not to do an encore of last year's clusterf*ck. And yes, I do believe the messaging will be a hell of a easier this time around, bolstered by the re-election and the GOP's flailing, warmed-over rationales that people didn't find appealing the first time around.

Of course, nothing could possibly go wrong with this except Democrats.

Helena:But the R's are patently unafraid of going against public opinion: they just lie and lie and expect that the reasonable among us will just weary of them and give up (also known as 'get on with our lives').

It's that kind of defeatist attitude that will let them win every time. They tried that kind of nutty stuff during this past election and look what happened.

If they try that they will lose - as long as we don't back down.

Your approach is surrender without even trying.

The President has made on offer.

And apparently, it's an offer they can't refuse. Looks like they will have gotten nothing -- not even the "gaming license fee."

kevo, i hope they keep it that simple but i hear noise out there that there's an alternative "doomsday scenario."

this involves actually increasing the tax reductions for the 250k and below crowd above and beyond the shrub's. this would get them two things.

thing the first is a reduction in revenue generated by the increases on the top brackets. this keeps their "starve-the-beast" strategy alive.

thing the second is that it could force the democrats to vote against it for that reason. too great a reduction, even for the 98%, is hugely counterproductive. this then becomes a giant issue in 2014 as they point out that the democrats voted against a tax cut for the 98%.

i'm confident that plans and strategies are being formulated to counter this kind of proposal. the best-of-the-worst may be to have all the democrats in shaky seats vote for it and let the president take the heat when he vetoes it. as long as this doesn't constitute enough of a majority to override a veto it's safe because the republicans can't block President Obama's reelection any more. the downside is the bad press for the ones voting against it and the major hit to the President's approval rating and ability to use his "bully pulpit."

LOL! I have been thinking that the more nuttier republicans are counting on the end of the world or civilization on 12/21/012 so that they will not even have to address debt and taxes and they have, for the moment, convinced Boehner et al to just hold off and God will take care of it all(debt, taxes and those pesky dems). In fact, maybe this is why they don't seem to have much of a vision for the US - after all, why should one put out any effort to help one's country if it's just gonna get wiped out in a few weeks? Wonder how many of 'em are gonna hunker down in a million dollar bunker?

Adelson was said to be in line for $2 billion in tax cuts under the Romney/Ryan plan (which if Romney won, the GOP figured to expand their house majority and at least come close to even in the Senate, if not a takeover).

$150 million was a calculated bet that the 0.01%ers could buy a national election. Adelson and his confederates rolled the dice, and crapped out.

It's been pretty obvious what this guy's taxation and EPA policy has "done" for this economy. And if you are stupid enough to believe you can tax your way to prosperity...Liberals will get what is coming to them in the mid-terms.

@Scott - everyone is getting a tax cut through the President's plan. The first $250,000 of everyone's income is exempt from a higher tax rate. If your income is beyond that, please don't bother trying to convince us you'll miss a meal if you pay at least the same tax rate I do. If your income is below $250K, you'll receive a tax cut on all of your income. And please don't trot out the bogus GOP talking point about small businesses. Hedge funds, lobbying firms and other wealthy "small businesses" will see an increase in taxes. The other 97% of small businesses have already seen some 18 different tax cuts during President Obama's first term, and will receive help providing health insurance for their employees -- what they won't see is a tax increase.

Obama was REALLY popular on the coasts...with the economy STILL in a death spiral and the recession caused by these cuts, how popular will Hussein be?

"The days of the free ride are over..."

Glad to hear you support 90% marginal rates on all income over $2 million. President Eisenhower (also USA ret) would be very proud of you!

Just out of curiosity, when are the corporations going to sending the subsidy checks back to the Treasury? When are those subtracting the mortgages on all 4 or 5 of their homes going to limit themselves to their primary residence? When are such people as Mitt Romney going to demand the tax rate on "interest income" and capital gains be the same as the general rate on income?

Shall I continue?

Though not.