So we saw this coming. I, along with much more influential and smarter commentators, said the debt ceiling would be raised, but the deal was going to really suck and make significant cuts with no real revenues. Even the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board knows that this was a very good deal for Republicans, as shown by Stephen Moore's article declaring a victory in the debate for the Republicans. Another Wall Street Journal piece called the deal "A Tea Party Triumph" and that "the debt deal is a rare bipartisan victory for the forces of smaller government". The article said it was the biggest "victory" since welfare “reform” in 1996 under Bill Clinton.

Over 60% of people disapprove of the deal because it contains no revenues (taxes). There was a piece in Forbes (yes Forbes!) calling for private wealth that has been off-shored to be taxed. There are 15-20 trillion dollars of wealth from bankers and billionaires sitting offshore. Remember that the national debt sits at about 14.3 trillion dollars. All of the major leaders are viewed less favorably by the population because of the debt fight. Even John Kerry (who represents everything that is wrong with Washington, with his wealth and corruption) has said that he "has never seen the government process so broken". Polls show that people are pessimistic about the promised protections in the Affordable Health Care Act. Who can blame them? This whole debt ceiling facade again shows that our politicians are bought by special interests.

The cuts will be around $2 trillion long term. The Stock Market momentarily rallied on Monday, but then sunk back down because of a terrible manufacturing report, again reminding us the big problem is not the debt, but jobs. Pelosi claims that they "saved" Medicare and Social Security, but the triggers in the deal could actually make deep cuts in those programs. Harry Reid claims that "this is what compromise is all about". Speaker Boehner admits that he got 98 percent of what he wanted in the deal, can you call that compromise?

One of the more bizarre features of the deal is the so-called "Super Congress". There is debate on how the 12 lawmaker "Super Congress" will be appointed. It's pretty obvious how this will work as the National Journal hints "The so-called super committee that would be responsible for cutting $1.5 trillion from the federal deficit is poised to create a new class on K Street: The Superlobbyists." And when the 12 are picked, guess who they will listen to. The New York Times reports that Wall Street was in close contact with politicians when the deadline neared. In fact, it seems that they lectured both parties in regards of the debt ceiling. Wall Street's power in Washington was the reason that the debt ceiling was raised, and it will have a huge influence on the “Super Congress”.


Tim Carney diagnoses the situation well, by noting that the Democrats (especially Obama) "put politics over policy". He writes that Obama abandoned shared sacrifice and Keynesian economics. Instead, his goal was to "attempt to jockey for better position -- in terms of fundraising". The final kicker from Carney, "Democrats' willingness to compromise doesn't reflect superior maturity to the more rigid Republicans. Quite the contrary: It reflects caring less about policy than about politics." The New York Times correctly writes that "Mr. Obama...has adopted the Republicans' language and in some cases their policies".

Senate sources show that Obama was willing to invoke the 14th amendment and raise the ceiling himself if the vote failed. This shows that he obviously wanted this non-compromise, or he would have just raised the ceiling. John Conyers, a key Democrat out of the House, points out that Boehner and Cantor didn't put Social Security on the table, it was President Obama. Make no mistake, Obama wanted these cuts. For those that want to quickly argue with me that Obama is the "good guy" and its the Republicans that are pushing the deep cuts and working for Wall Street and Finance, please look at these statistics. Presidential inaugurations are privately paid for (this way taxpayers don't pay for it, but it allows special interests groups to pay for it and get something in return). Who was the number one donor to Obama's inaugurations? Big finance at over 9 million dollars (with over 5 million from "miscellaneous business"). Lawyers and Lobbyists combined for nearly 5 milllion. How much did Labor and Unions give? Less than $30,000. Guess who Obama is working for.


The politicians (and their special interests) won, and we all lost.