Di Atribe: MFL: Yes. They tend to vote democrat and I work 4 months out of the year to pay for the shiat they think I owe them.

Because no one who votes democrat works or pay taxes.

And keep in mind, MFL derives no benefit from the taxes he/she/it pays. None at all. Its all to pay for stuff for those lazy people, like the 23 million children on food stamps.

Buffalo77: How did liberals go from the 1960's where it was question all authority to the 2000's where it blindly follow all authority especially if its a democrat proposing it?

How did conservatives go from thinkiers I respected, admired, and learned from, like William F. Buckley and Barry Goldwater, to dimwits playing politics like they were rooting for their favorite sports team, popping up straw men, making ridiculous, ludicrous laughable black/white statements, opposing things they themselves originally proposed, and thinking Sarah Palin is qualified to be President?

I'm guessing, its because the the idiots and the dickwads took over. Or as I call them, "Reagan Republicans".

MisterRonbo: Buffalo77: How did liberals go from the 1960's where it was question all authority to the 2000's where it blindly follow all authority especially if its a democrat proposing it?

How did conservatives go from thinkiers I respected, admired, and learned from, like William F. Buckley and Barry Goldwater, to dimwits playing politics like they were rooting for their favorite sports team, popping up straw men, making ridiculous, ludicrous laughable black/white statements, opposing things they themselves originally proposed, and thinking Sarah Palin is qualified to be President?

I'm guessing, its because the the idiots and the dickwads took over. Or as I call them, "Reagan Republicans".

You are a fan of Barry Goldwater? Think you'd support his agenda if he were dug up and re-run today?

Biological Ali: Debeo Summa Credo: Okay, it doesn't change the point that it isn't shocking that a program that the CBO projects to reduce the deficit includes revenues, taxes or otherwise. The CBO expects ACA to reduce the deficit by $100m- increased outlays of $900m, less increased taxes of $600m and other revenues of $400m.

Sure, but a statement like:

Yes, the CBO says that repealing ACA would increase the deficit by $100b, because, in part, repealing ACA would eliminate tax hikes inherent in ACA of $1,000b!

...is still inappropriate not only because the "tax hikes" in the ACA don't amount to that much, but the repeal contains tax hikes of its own (by getting rid of the various tax breaks included in the legislation). So any sentiments to the tune of "Well of course it raises deficits, after all it would eliminate all these tax hikes!" are thoroughly misplaced.

Does ACA result in higher or lower tax revenues? If higher, do those incremental revenues reduce the deficit? If yes, then repealing ACA would reduce taxes and the reduction of those taxes would increase the deficit, relative to what it would have been had taxes not been raised.

Debeo Summa Credo: Biological Ali: Debeo Summa Credo: Okay, it doesn't change the point that it isn't shocking that a program that the CBO projects to reduce the deficit includes revenues, taxes or otherwise. The CBO expects ACA to reduce the deficit by $100m- increased outlays of $900m, less increased taxes of $600m and other revenues of $400m.

Sure, but a statement like:

Yes, the CBO says that repealing ACA would increase the deficit by $100b, because, in part, repealing ACA would eliminate tax hikes inherent in ACA of $1,000b!

...is still inappropriate not only because the "tax hikes" in the ACA don't amount to that much, but the repeal contains tax hikes of its own (by getting rid of the various tax breaks included in the legislation). So any sentiments to the tune of "Well of course it raises deficits, after all it would eliminate all these tax hikes!" are thoroughly misplaced.

Does ACA result in higher or lower tax revenues? If higher, do those incremental revenues reduce the deficit? If yes, then repealing ACA would reduce taxes and the reduction of those taxes would increase the deficit, relative to what it would have been had taxes not been raised.

Listen, forget it. I'm getting into the weeds with you on this and it's not worth arguing over. I'm sure you'd agree that absent tax increases, the projected impact of ACA on the deficit would not be so benign, and that eliminating tax increases would, all else equal, result in a higher deficit than if the tax increases were allowed to stand.

Debeo Summa Credo: MisterRonbo: Buffalo77: How did liberals go from the 1960's where it was question all authority to the 2000's where it blindly follow all authority especially if its a democrat proposing it?

How did conservatives go from thinkiers I respected, admired, and learned from, like William F. Buckley and Barry Goldwater, to dimwits playing politics like they were rooting for their favorite sports team, popping up straw men, making ridiculous, ludicrous laughable black/white statements, opposing things they themselves originally proposed, and thinking Sarah Palin is qualified to be President?

I'm guessing, its because the the idiots and the dickwads took over. Or as I call them, "Reagan Republicans".

You are a fan of Barry Goldwater? Think you'd support his agenda if he were dug up and re-run today?

No, I wouldn't support his agenda. I don't buy that whole states' rights thing, among other things.

But I respect the guy for being an honest man in a very dishonest business, one who never pandered or sold out. I admire him for having clear principles and sticking to them, and in the realm of social policy they were (to me) admirable: he saw no reason to discriminate against gays. he was a defender of the individual's rights and liberties, he didn't want the Christian fundamentalists taking over government or dictating polcy.

And I learned from him. Reading "Conscience of a Conservative" as a teenager made me actually think about my liberal views,figure out why I I held those values, and how to cogently argue for them. Probably moderated a few of my more extreme positions. Equipped me to cogently argue with conservatives, because I better understood not only their position, but my own.

Really, if you want to slam me for my original comment, Buckley makes a much easier target. He said some pretty heinous stuff in the 60s, but I didn't pay attention to him until I was in high school in the late 70s, and Firing Line was a pretty intelligent piece of television. Again, forced me to think through values, right vs wrong instead of just right vs left, and how these in turn shaped views on policy.

MFL: President Obama has added 6 trillion to the national debt (more than any other president by a large margin) and you honestly claim to have paid for what he spent?


Typical false Republican talking point

Relevant

Giltric: Thats cool, we work hard for our money.


Sure you do... computer programing is such hard back breaking work! All you Fark Libertarians who are computer workers with no real education talking about working hard are hilarious

intelligent comment below: Typical false Republican talking point

Not False.

Obama has extended the Bush tax cuts and has the power to end the wars tomorrow. For as loosely as Bush spent money, Obama has simply continued his policies.

intelligent comment below: MFL: President Obama has added 6 trillion to the national debt (more than any other president by a large margin) and you honestly claim to have paid for what he spent?


Typical false Republican talking point

Relevant

Seriously? Obama's extension of the bush tax cuts for 2011 and 2012 don't get attributed to him? Or how about the 80% of the bush tax cuts he wants to extend for 2013 and beyond? Where are those in the chart?

Trying to blame the current deficit on bush is just as stupid as trying to pin it all on Obama. You guys are farking delusional.

o5iiawah: intelligent comment below: Typical false Republican talking point

Not False.

Obama has extended the Bush tax cuts and has the power to end the wars tomorrow. For as loosely as Bush spent money, Obama has simply continued his policies.


The revenue lost from the tax cuts was from the past 8 years, the war costs was from the past decade plus. These are all past costs on the books.

Obama tried to up the taxes and Republicans blocked him

Obama ended the war in Iraq

Obama hasn't continued anything. You're a pathetic troll

Debeo Summa Credo: Seriously? Obama's extension of the bush tax cuts for 2011 and 2012 don't get attributed to him? Or how about the 80% of the bush tax cuts he wants to extend for 2013 and beyond? Where are those in the chart?

Trying to blame the current deficit on bush is just as stupid as trying to pin it all on Obama. You guys are farking delusional.


Seriously? Yes, seriously. It's obvious you are unable to grasp where the majority of the deficit comes from because you're a pathetic blind partisan.

Obama didn't extend the tax cuts, Republicans did.

Yeah blame the deficit on Bush is delusional, it's not like his policies caused almost 6 trillion in new debt for his 8 years. It's Obama's deficit! Delusion in the worst way

intelligent comment below: Obama ended the war in Iraq

Obama hasn't continued anything. You're a pathetic troll

Obama continued the Bush tax cuts for his first 2 terms in office and as far as the Iraq war goes, Obama said so, so that means we're gone right? Well if you ignore the multi-billion dollar embassy, the billions spent every year to upkeep it, the 20,000 diplomats who work there and the 5,000 security contractors still in the area, then yes, we're out of Iraq.

Calling me a "troll" is a piss poor substitute for trying to make an argument. You're supposed to tell me where i'm wrong but you cant.

Obama didn't extend the tax cuts, Republicans did.

And he had the power to veto but signed it

You missed that day in 2nd grade where they explained how our government works right?

o5iiawah: Obama continued the Bush tax cuts for his first 2 terms in office


Any attempt to repeal the tax cuts for the rich that cost the most money on its own was always blocked by Republicans. False talking point is false


o5iiawah: and as far as the Iraq war goes, Obama said so, so that means we're gone right? Well if you ignore the multi-billion dollar embassy, the billions spent every year to upkeep it, the 20,000 diplomats who work there and the 5,000 security contractors still in the area, then yes, we're out of Iraq.


Feel free to compare budgets of spending in Iraq now compared to before the troops left. I'll wait for your citation


o5iiawah: Calling me a "troll" is a piss poor substitute for trying to make an argument. You're supposed to tell me where i'm wrong but you cant.


I posted a graph showing you to be 100% wrong and disingenuous to blame Obama for the "largest deficits in history" and all you could do was make up more partisan bullshiat and ignore facts. Now you have the nerve to claim you were the one with facts on your side and I couldn't prove you wrong? Wow...


o5iiawah: And he had the power to veto but signed it

You missed that day in 2nd grade where they explained how our government works right?


The law was a bi partisan compromise where Democrats got unemployment benefit extensions and Republicans got to keep their precious tax cuts for the rich.

You missed that day in 2nd grade where they explain how our government works, right?

Satanic_Hamster: Dusk-You-n-Me: White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters yesterday that "the Congressional Budget Office confirmed once again that repealing the Affordable Care Act would increase the deficit."

Shorter Carney: We spend a lot of money, but we raised taxes by even more.

GEE. WHAT A NOVEL F*CKING IDEA

You know, I never understood why the stereotype/phrase "tax and spend liberal" was supposed to be an insult. Isn't that the way you're supposed to do it? Isn't that the fiscally correct policy?

It's actually the other way around, that's what causes the problem.

Trey Le Parc: It's actually the other way around, that's what causes the problem.


So Reagan and Bush were liberals?

intelligent comment below: o5iiawah: Obama continued the Bush tax cuts for his first 2 terms in office


Any attempt to repeal the tax cuts for the rich that cost the most money on its own was always blocked by Republicans. False talking point is false


o5iiawah: and as far as the Iraq war goes, Obama said so, so that means we're gone right? Well if you ignore the multi-billion dollar embassy, the billions spent every year to upkeep it, the 20,000 diplomats who work there and the 5,000 security contractors still in the area, then yes, we're out of Iraq.


Feel free to compare budgets of spending in Iraq now compared to before the troops left. I'll wait for your citation


o5iiawah: Calling me a "troll" is a piss poor substitute for trying to make an argument. You're supposed to tell me where i'm wrong but you cant.


I posted a graph showing you to be 100% wrong and disingenuous to blame Obama for the "largest deficits in history" and all you could do was make up more partisan bullshiat and ignore facts. Now you have the nerve to claim you were the one with facts on your side and I couldn't prove you wrong? Wow...


o5iiawah: And he had the power to veto but signed it

You missed that day in 2nd grade where they explained how our government works right?


The law was a bi partisan compromise where Democrats got unemployment benefit extensions and Republicans got to keep their precious tax cuts for the rich.

You missed that day in 2nd grade where they explain how our government works, right?

No, he missed that day in 2nd grade where they explained how it wasn't worth it to go through life as an hyper-partisan asshole troll.

intelligent comment below: and all you could do was make up more partisan bullshiat and ignore facts

What facts am I ignoring? The graph clearly states the Bush tax cuts as an 'expense' for the bush administration yet the Obama administration continued them. You apologizing for the reasons why obama re-signed the tax rates doesn't take away from the fact that he did in fact sign them and that the 10, 11, and 12 budgets are his.


intelligent comment below: The law was a bi partisan compromise where Democrats got unemployment benefit extensions and Republicans got to keep their precious tax cuts for the rich.

So Obama continued the very policies which dumbasses like you claim destroyed our economy. Just as long as we're clear on that.

I posted a graph showing you to be 100% wrong and disingenuous to blame Obama for the "largest deficits in history"

Because your graph doesn't count the Bush tax cuts which Obama extended, the war in Afghanistan which we are still fighting and the continued presence of 25,000 Americans in Iraq. Your graph (if you can read) states the total cost of "new policies" it doesn't credit Obama for continuing existing policies which he could have easily done away with since he had a congressional monopoly in 09-10, it just shows him adding more spending on top of existing spending he hasn't bothered to curtail.

When you add new spending onto the record deficits of the Bush administration and sprinkle in a promise to cut the deficit in half, it becomes clear that your graph, much like your pathetic arguments reek of bullshiat. Rather than accuse you of being a troll, I think I'll just accept the fact that you're a moron and move on...

o5iiawah: What facts am I ignoring? The graph clearly states the Bush tax cuts as an 'expense' for the bush administration yet the Obama administration continued them. You apologizing for the reasons why obama re-signed the tax rates doesn't take away from the fact that he did in fact sign them and that the 10, 11, and 12 budgets are his.


Continuing a policy you cannot end while the main cost was during the Bush presidency is disingenuous to blame it on Obama.

The debt added is all listed in that graph, and that's the doing of Bush and the Republicans

o5iiawah: Because your graph doesn't count the Bush tax cuts which Obama extended, the war in Afghanistan which we are still fighting and the continued presence of 25,000 Americans in Iraq. Your graph (if you can read) states the total cost of "new policies" it doesn't credit Obama for continuing existing policies which he could have easily done away with since he had a congressional monopoly in 09-10, it just shows him adding more spending on top of existing spending he hasn't bothered to curtail.


I'm still waiting for that citation about how much Iraq is costing. Start pumping out numbers instead of rhetoric

o5iiawah: When you add new spending onto the record deficits of the Bush administration and sprinkle in a promise to cut the deficit in half, it becomes clear that your graph, much like your pathetic arguments reek of bullshiat. Rather than accuse you of being a troll, I think I'll just accept the fact that you're a moron and move on...


The Bush deficits are the cause of 80% of the new deficits, but you still want to blame Obama for that 20% and say he's to fault for "the biggest deficits in history"

Your argument falls flat on its face. And your attempt to pin the blame on Obama for some policies continuing under him when Republicans force it as part of compromise is the 2nd disingenuous thing you've done.

You have no argument, no legs to stand on. You're boring and you should feel bad.

Dusk-You-n-Me: [www.americanprogress.org image 600x960]

Obamacare equals a tax cut for 16 million middle class Americans.

But 85 million Americans pay taxes... Soooooooo

Tor_Eckman: Satanic_Hamster: Dusk-You-n-Me: White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters yesterday that "the Congressional Budget Office confirmed once again that repealing the Affordable Care Act would increase the deficit."

Shorter Carney: We spend a lot of money, but we raised taxes by even more.

GEE. WHAT A NOVEL F*CKING IDEA

You know, I never understood why the stereotype/phrase "tax and spend liberal" was supposed to be an insult. Isn't that the way you're supposed to do it? Isn't that the fiscally correct policy?

BORROW and spend is the fiscal conservative way. After all, Reagan proved deficits don't matter. Dick said so.

Glad to see we're focused on solving the problem and moving forward by pointing fingers.

Corvus: Republicans really seem to not understand this simple math, do they:

Deficit/Surplus = REVENUE - Spending

So clearly we need to spend more!

tjfly: So clearly we need to spend more!


You sure were all for it during the 8 years of Bush, and if you were alive, the 8 years of Reagan.

What's different now?

Oh right, taxes are at their lowest levels in history so the government cannot properly pay down deficits.

intelligent comment below: but you still want to blame Obama for that 20% and say he's to fault for "the biggest deficits in history"

Because he has continued the same policies along with adding more spending. Address this point or GTFO

intelligent comment below: Continuing a policy you cannot end while the main cost was during the Bush presidency is disingenuous to blame it on Obama.

Right, the Democrats had no way of ending the Bush tax cuts with a Senate, house and presidency...they just didn't want to raise taxes their first year in control. Call it for what it is

o5iiawah: intelligent comment below: but you still want to blame Obama for that 20% and say he's to fault for "the biggest deficits in history"

Because he has continued the same policies along with adding more spending. Address this point or GTFO
He didn't. He continued *SOME* of the same policies, and spending has increased. He also changed many policies, developed some of his own, some are cost saving others increase spending, some of these new policies don't come from Obama at all, but congress.

intelligent comment below: Continuing a policy you cannot end while the main cost was during the Bush presidency is disingenuous to blame it on Obama.

Right, the Democrats had no way of ending the Bush tax cuts with a Senate, house and presidency...they just didn't want to raise taxes their first year in control. Call it for what it is

Your understanding of US government is really flawed, but I can't figure out how. You must know about how the filibuster actually works, so that's not it. And I'm positive you understand cloture rules. Maybe you're hung up on the composition of the house and senate in 2009 and 2010? I mean it's understandable what with all the misinformation about the "HUGE SUPER-MAJORITY!" enjoyed by the dumbo-crats for the first 175 years of the Obama tyranny, or whatever, but there were something like... 2 days... during which the Democrats could've broken a filibuster. If they'd voted COMPLETELY in lock step.

o5iiawah: Because he has continued the same policies along with adding more spending. Address this point or GTFO


Address what point? The point was already addressed. You made the claim of BIGGEST DEFICITS EVER and I proved that wrong and disingenuous to blame on Obama.


o5iiawah: Right, the Democrats had no way of ending the Bush tax cuts with a Senate, house and presidency...they just didn't want to raise taxes their first year in control. Call it for what it is


Democrats never had enough votes to override a Republican veto. They never had 60 votes