In an op/ed for the Wall Street Journal, US Sens. Patty Murray (D-WA), Max Baucus (D-MT), and John Kerry (D-MA)---all Democratic members of the budget-cutting congressional supercommittee---argue that Congress will have to embrace compromise and bipartisanship to solve the ongoing economic crisis.

This moment demands leadership, but it also demands consensus. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction was set up to require bipartisanship, and we are going to work hard to achieve it. We know that each of us comes into this committee with clear ideason the issues and what our priorities are for our nation. But a solution can only be found by merging these priorities across party lines and finding a solution that works for the American people.

We know that our goal is to reduce spending. But we also know that America faces not just a budget deficit but also a jobs deficit. Nobody on this committee would be happy if we reduced the budget deficit but even more Americans end up losing their jobs.

So we are ready to get to work with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to report out a balanced plan, with the shared sacrifices thismoment requires. One that moves past the partisan rancor,puts our nation back on strong fiscal footing, and allows us to continue shining bright in the world in this generation and for generations to come.

To which Digby responds : Oh, great.

I guess the "compromise" the SuperCommittee Dems will be agreeing to is to sell-off the safety net (because the pain won't hit for a while) in exchange for some mealy mouthed tax cut stimulus and maybe a little infrastructure to goose the economy. Oh, and hopefully some minor help for the long term unemployed --- until the election anyway.
I've got a stupid, barely applicable family metaphor for you, since everyone loves them so much. Suppose you found yourself out of a job w
ith some long term debt --- say a mortgage --- on your hands. You have numerous friends and family offering you loans at very low interest to help you get back on your feet, maybe spruce up your job search wardrobe, get a new car so you can commute to work. Under these circumstances, does it make financial sense to kick your spouse into the street, cash out your IRA (with penalties) and sell your house at a loss instead of taking the money? I suppose there are some people who would find that virtuous, but the reality is that it's penny wise and pound foolish to destroy your retirement savings, it's cruel and pointless to kick your spouse into the street and selling your house at a loss is dumb unless you have no other choice.

Meanwhile, at the New Yorker, James Suroweicki arguesthat the GOP's "austerity" plan isn't just bad for the unemployed---it's bad for business, too.