Mirror, mirror on the wall, who was the most "childish" of them all?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Hi everyone,

This is my first post on this forum. It seems to be a reputable forum but, as I see, it does have its fair share of hacks (what forum doesn't?). However, unlike other forums, this one seems to have some thought-provoking commentary.

Anyways, I just heard that Harry Reid is offering spending cuts amounting to around $2 trillion in "his own plan" this evening that would take us past the election. The specifics aren't clear but with Boehner and Reid now seemingly having competing plans, It seems that we are, again, at an impasse.

I don't know if Reid's plan can get get Pelosi's and her liberal posse's support, however. A 100% spending cut plan would go against everything they've said previously and I don't think that Reid can get to $2 trillion without including entitlements unless he really squeezes domestic and defense discretionary...

I never thought we would get this close to default but with all these competing ultimatums... I just don't know...

Reports are it's 2.5 trillion from Reid.  The odd thing about this story is that reports last week that Obama was about to do a deal with Boehner for no revenue spurred Reid to protest against a revenue-free plan.  I apologize in advance for being a hack.  I've considered not being one, but the Republicans suck so I have no choice.  Welcome.

From David Dayen's twitter.

I guarantee Reid will use $1T gimmick savings from "ending wars" in Iraq and Afghanistan, add $1.2T discretionary cuts, interest savings

[Landslide Lyndon]

In other news, Rush Limbaugh claimed 45 minutes ago on his show that Boehner called him up a couple of hours ago and told him he had a deal that the debt limit would be raised 1.1 trillion carrying cash flow to next April, and that an evenly split by party panel of 6 members from each house would specify the spending cuts, and then there would be a round two. Although what Rush said Boehner said was not as conclusive on the matter has Rush interpreted it, Rush's interpretation was that Reid had folded and agreed to this deal, and that it would be put on Obama's desk to sign or veto.  This version of events has not yet been confirmed elsewhere in the media to my knowledge.

I just thought I would toss this one on the pile to add to the confusion and chaos of it all. Why not!

Nothing says Good Government like asking Rush Limbaugh to give his seal of approval before you take any action.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Curious that the Obama never officially "clarified" that the 400 billion was just an idea in exchange for something else, and if not acceptable, OK, we will drop it. That is the spin of this version. Obama not saying that is what happened, either by him, or his press spokesman, to wit that the original deal was still on the table, like Boehner said just yesterday, in fact, suggests perhaps the answer as to why.

So much spin, so little substance, so little ...

Why is it always the onus on Obama to prove that he is negotiating in good faith? I find it astonishing that after all the concessions he made during the last year(to the point that he strained his relationship with congressional Democrats) he is still treated by some people like some kind of duplicitous, conniving snake-oil salesman who has to constantly prove that he isn't an elephant.