Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Speaker John Boehner said in an interview Thursday that he is the 'most reasonable person in Washington'   (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ) divider line
    More: Sad, Boehner, House Speaker  
•       •       •

499 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Nov 2012 at 12:31 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-11-09 06:25:12 AM  
4 votes:

log_jammin: "I've made it clear to the president, and I think I laid out yesterday - raising taxes on small business people is the wrong prescription, based on where the economy is," Boehner said Thursday.

I would love to see a quote where Obama said "raising taxes on small business people is the RIGHT prescription, based on where the economy is".

or anywhere where any democrats suggested we should raise taxes on "small business people".


This is an example of how we lost the debt ceiling debate. The Democrats should have united under the same message:
1). Boehner would classify Donald Trump as a small business.
2). Boehner thinks the American people are ignorant.
3). We think you're smart enough to catch Boehner's dishonesty.
4). Under our plan, the avg. Small business owner would get x amount BACK.
5). We want to return the tax levels to the Clinton area in which Americans were more successful than previous decades.

If every Democrat ran with this script - and started an offensive line - we would have a better shot.
2012-11-09 03:30:01 PM  
3 votes:

TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.
Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.

Yes, it was Obama who caused that, and totally not Romney and the "47% percent" comment. The sky is neat here in your world. Orange is an awesome color for clouds

OMG Romney stated a FACT about this country.

Obama has run for president on nothing more than tax the rich and letting people suck the tits of the government.

I won't insult real trolls by calling you one, but I know you're just trying to get replies from people. Here's another green arrow for you. Hope this helps

Don't be a dildo.

Wait, you're coming in here, vomiting lies all over the thread, but I'm the dildo? Truly, yours is a dizzying intellect

I told no lie ya ding dong gooch!

Uh yea, the "banks being forced to give loans" is a lie, and a very poorly thought out and illogical one at that.

It's historical fact you anal bead.


Do you honestly believe this? You do don't you. What's it like in your world? Is the sky blue?

Herp Derp the CRA and government sponsored enterprises caused the mortgage meltdown.

It had nothing to do with the de-regulation of Glass-Steagal, mortgages being packaged and tranched into CDO's then sold as gold even though they were shiat. NINJA (no income no job no asset) loans had nothing to do with this in fact the government FORCED banks to give these loans to people. FORCED.

Fannie Mae was established in order to provide local banks with federal money to finance home mortgages in an attempt to raise levels of home ownership and the availability of affordable housing in 1938.

The ability to borrow at low rates that allows Fannie Mae to provide fixed interest rate mortgages with low down payments to home buyers. Fannie Mae makes a profit from the difference between the interest rates homeowners pay and foreign lenders charge. For the first thirty years following its inception, Fannie Mae held a veritable monopoly over the secondary mortgage market. In 1968, due to fiscal pressures created by the Vietnam War, Lyndon B. Johnson privatized Fannie Mae in order to remove it from the national budget. At this point, Fannie Mae began operating as a GSE, generating profits for stock holders while enjoying the benefits of exemption from taxation and oversight as well as implied government backing. In order to prevent any further monopolization of the market, a second GSE known as Freddie Mac was created in 1970.

It was investment banks that created the housing bubble after the repeal of Glass-Steagal and implementation of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act's (GLBA). This allowed investment banks to create a larger secondary market for mortgages packaging them into CDO's, rating them by bribing the rating companies and insuring them with Credit Default Swaps that brought the market to its knees, not the CRA, not Fannie and Freddie.

Seriously pull your head out of your ass, turn off the right wing echo chamber and do some research. You'll find the truth to be even more shocking than you right wing parrots have led you to believe.

The "taxes are bad" mantra is old and tiresome. Trickle-down economic policies never worked and never will. It was those policies that caused the wealth gap not the current President. I know he's a scary man and change scares you but not changing during times of economic disparity is even scarier.

No really, buy some country crock and start greasing you perineum first. I would recommend so bismuth subsalicylate as there appears to be a lot of bullshiat up there. It may take some time but I wouldn't recommend surgery as the insurance companies have a corner on the market due to the McCarran-Ferguson Act.

If you notice all of these acts have a similar theme. They are supported by the same people who make you believe that government is bad. Why? So they can regulate what they want regulated in order to fark over consumers and deregulate what they what deregulated so as to fark over consumers.
2012-11-09 02:06:46 PM  
3 votes:
TIKIMAN87:

And in the early to mid 2000's when uneployment was under 4% after the tax cuts were passed it created millions of jobs. Then the democrats waged their little "war on poverty" crap and farked it up for the country. Their system of free hand outs doesn't work, but it does get them elected....

Link

Change the starting date to 1992 and what do you see? Taxes went up, unemployment went down.
What happened after 2000? Taxes went down, unemployment went up.
2012-11-09 07:38:04 AM  
3 votes:

Bontesla: This is an example of how we lost the debt ceiling debate. The Democrats should have united under the same message:
1). Boehner would classify Donald Trump as a small business.
2). Boehner thinks the American people are ignorant.
3). We think you're smart enough to catch Boehner's dishonesty.
4). Under our plan, the avg. Small business owner would get x amount BACK.
5). We want to return the tax levels to the Clinton area in which Americans were more successful than previous decades.

If every Democrat ran with this script - and started an offensive line - we would have a better shot.


and then the media coverage starts.

Wolf: Boehner has been accused of dishonesty. was he dishonest?

Pundit 1: Of course he was!
Pundit 2: Obama raped a baby

Wolf: I'm afraid we're going to have to leave it there. Up next, we read your tweets!
2012-11-09 02:24:03 PM  
2 votes:

TIKIMAN87: And in the early to mid 2000's when uneployment was under 4% after the tax cuts were passed it created millions of jobs. Then the democrats waged their little "war on poverty" crap and farked it up for the country. Their system of free hand outs doesn't work, but it does get them elected....


Yes, that's my point. Unemployment was under 4% when the cuts were passed in 2003. They went into effect in 2004, and unemployment doubled in next 4 years. And you want us to pretend that this was just a coincidence.

I don't know specifically what legislation you're referring to by "the war on poverty", but yeah, you're probably right that the reason you're unemployed is that there are not enough children sleeping under bridges.
2012-11-09 12:42:53 PM  
2 votes:

TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.


This is a good example of a true fiscal conservative and his deep, deep concern for the deficit.
2012-11-09 06:39:30 AM  
2 votes:

Bontesla: log_jammin: "I've made it clear to the president, and I think I laid out yesterday - raising taxes on small business people is the wrong prescription, based on where the economy is," Boehner said Thursday.

I would love to see a quote where Obama said "raising taxes on small business people is the RIGHT prescription, based on where the economy is".

or anywhere where any democrats suggested we should raise taxes on "small business people".

This is an example of how we lost the debt ceiling debate. The Democrats should have united under the same message:
1). Boehner would classify Donald Trump as a small business.
2). Boehner thinks the American people are ignorant.
3). We think you're smart enough to catch Boehner's dishonesty.
4). Under our plan, the avg. Small business owner would get x amount BACK.
5). We want to return the tax levels to the Clinton area in which Americans were more successful than previous decades.

If every Democrat ran with this script - and started an offensive line - we would have a better shot.


I've often wondered why the Democrats roll over and never call the Republicans on their dishonesty. It's like think they don't want to denigrate their opponents, and have respect for them, while the Republicans are drawing penises on their heads and mailing it to the entire state.
2012-11-09 01:46:46 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.


What's the argument for making the tax cuts permanent? They were supposed to create jobs, but they did the opposite. They were supposed to spur growth, but instead they were just a vehicle for the rich to remove wealth from circulating within the economy.

They weren't paid for when they were passed. Think about that: we borrowed money from our children and from the Chinese in order to fund this massive regressive system of handouts. They are the single biggest line-item in American budgetary history, and the primary source of the deficits and debt we have today, and that's an objective fact that can't really be debated.
2012-11-09 01:46:18 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.

Yes, it was Obama who caused that, and totally not Romney and the "47% percent" comment. The sky is neat here in your world. Orange is an awesome color for clouds

OMG Romney stated a FACT about this country.

Obama has run for president on nothing more than tax the rich and letting people suck the tits of the government.

I won't insult real trolls by calling you one, but I know you're just trying to get replies from people. Here's another green arrow for you. Hope this helps

Don't be a dildo.

Wait, you're coming in here, vomiting lies all over the thread, but I'm the dildo? Truly, yours is a dizzying intellect

I told no lie ya ding dong gooch!


Uh yea, the "banks being forced to give loans" is a lie, and a very poorly thought out and illogical one at that.
2012-11-09 01:13:16 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: iaazathot: TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.

Derp! No, that didn't work. Why would we continue the same failed policies that crashed our economy in the first place? Are you retarded or do you just play the part on the internet?

You mean the policies that liberals forced banks to give home loans to poor people with no way of paying them back causing the housing bubble and crash?

Yup those.


Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday. From 2004.
Link

Real liberals
2012-11-09 01:12:22 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: Your Zionist Leader: TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.

Yes, it was Obama who caused that, and totally not Romney and the "47% percent" comment. The sky is neat here in your world. Orange is an awesome color for clouds

OMG Romney stated a FACT about this country.

Obama has run for president on nothing more than tax the rich and letting people suck the tits of the government.

I won't insult real trolls by calling you one, but I know you're just trying to get replies from people. Here's another green arrow for you. Hope this helps

Don't be a dildo.


Wait, you're coming in here, vomiting lies all over the thread, but I'm the dildo? Truly, yours is a dizzying intellect
2012-11-09 12:58:21 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: iaazathot: TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.

Derp! No, that didn't work. Why would we continue the same failed policies that crashed our economy in the first place? Are you retarded or do you just play the part on the internet?

You mean the policies that liberals forced banks to give home loans to poor people with no way of paying them back causing the housing bubble and crash?

Yup those.


I'm a little confused as to where this whole "banks forcing people to take home loans" came from. I have worked in the banking industry for years and I'm quite certain this never happened. Where is your source for this misinformation? Or are you just making crap up again?
2012-11-09 12:55:01 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.


What's the point of making soldiers wear camoflage? It's not the Predator's invisibility field, you can still see them.
What's the point of making my car payment this month? It's not enough to pay off the whole loan.
What's the point of asking that blonde from accounting out? She's not going to let me do anything on the first date.
What's the point of responding to a troll? One reply pointing out his idiocy isn't going to make him better.
2012-11-09 12:46:14 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.


"Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems"

What's the point of putting that cancer patient through more chemo? It's not enough to completely eradicate the cancer, so why bother?

"Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it"

Stupid is as stupid does.

You sound that stupid
2012-11-09 12:45:40 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.


Derp! No, that didn't work. Why would we continue the same failed policies that crashed our economy in the first place? Are you retarded or do you just play the part on the internet?
2012-11-09 12:43:08 PM  
1 vote:

TIKIMAN87: wotthefark: TIKIMAN87: Borhner doesn't need to give Obama anything.

He should take a stand at extending the tax cuts for good and if Obama doesn't like he he can let them expre then it will be on his hands.

And then when the economy recovers they'll say see I told you so?

No.

Obama already won by dividing the country and making people hate the rich. Whats the point of making them pay more taxes? Its not enough to solve any of the countries financial problems.

Make the Bush tax cuts permanent and be done with it.


Yes, it was Obama who caused that, and totally not Romney and the "47% percent" comment. The sky is neat here in your world. Orange is an awesome color for clouds
2012-11-09 12:42:19 PM  
1 vote:
House Speaker John Boehner, talking about the prospect of negotiating with President Barack Obama on a deal to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff, said in an interview Thursday that he is the "most reasonable, responsible person here in Washington"

I agree. Barack Obama is reasonable and responsible. Much more so than those cocks over in the House of Represenatives.
2012-11-09 12:37:07 PM  
1 vote:

log_jammin: "I've made it clear to the president, and I think I laid out yesterday - raising taxes on small business people is the wrong prescription, based on where the economy is," Boehner said Thursday.

I would love to see a quote where Obama said "raising taxes on small business people is the RIGHT prescription, based on where the economy is".

or anywhere where any democrats suggested we should raise taxes on "small business people".


An increased tax on incomes above 250k would be a tax on small businesses. Sure, only on 3% of them, because 97% of small businesses make less than 250k, but who's counting? Details and context are liberal ploys, after all.  It's technically correct, which quite frankly is better than usual for the Party of Lies.
2012-11-09 11:16:22 AM  
1 vote:
If there were three people in Washington, and the other two were Eric Cantor and Mitch McConnell, yeah, this would be accurate.
2012-11-09 09:16:27 AM  
1 vote:
Hey may very well be. Until the rest of the GOP tells him to get in line.
2012-11-09 02:09:34 AM  
1 vote:
"I've made it clear to the president, and I think I laid out yesterday - raising taxes on small business people is the wrong prescription, based on where the economy is," Boehner said Thursday.

I would love to see a quote where Obama said "raising taxes on small business people is the RIGHT prescription, based on where the economy is".

or anywhere where any democrats suggested we should raise taxes on "small business people".
 
Displayed 21 of 21 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report