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.

(RedState)   Last month: if Obama is re-elected, this country will drive over a fiscal cliff. This month: what cliff?   (redstate.com) divider line 174
    More: Dumbass, President Obama, Krugman Agrees, Paul Krugman, Speaker Boehner, lame duck  
•       •       •

3208 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Nov 2012 at 10:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



174 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-12 12:16:55 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Good luck getting that through the Senate.

Also, the Senate has already passed a bill extending tax cuts for the middle class. The House is sitting on it. If all rates are raised, the House GOP will be the ones perceived as holding the 98% hostage in favor of the 2%.


? Taxing bills have to start in the house ?
 
2012-11-12 12:18:27 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: The GOP has no reason to cave right now. They simply pass a bill in December calling for all the cuts to be extended. Obama can sign or choose to let taxes hike across the board.

/as I've said before, that would be a good thing for the country over the long term....so I'm hoping he has the guts to let it happen. However I'd bet they all get extended for some finite period of time.


Why would Obama sign that, thought, when on January 1st he can simply ask them to consider a bill which cuts all taxes under $250K?
 
2012-11-12 12:22:06 PM

rufus-t-firefly: If only the House - you know, where all tax and spending bills must originate - had done anything since January 2011 to deal with spending or taxation beyond the last short-term deal.

Hey, who has been running that half of Congress, anyway?


BUT BUT BUT the president signed our retarded bill. He last touched it, it is ALL his fault!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
 
2012-11-12 12:23:42 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: The dems control the senate. It is Obama by proxy. If he wants it passed in the senate it will be.


Dusk-You-n-Me: Also, the Senate has already passed a bill extending tax cuts for the middle class. The House is sitting on it. If all rates are raised, the House GOP will be the ones perceived as holding the 98% hostage in favor of the 2%.


Checkmate
 
2012-11-12 12:24:29 PM

Saiga410: ? Taxing bills have to start in the house ?


Apparently not.


25 July

The Senate on Wednesday narrowly approved a plan to preserve tax cuts for the middle class while letting them expire for the wealthy... Link
 
2012-11-12 12:26:33 PM

Saiga410: ? Taxing bills have to start in the house ?


Appropriations i.e. spending bills have to start in the house.
 
2012-11-12 12:29:22 PM
If you look at the Beame administration negotiating for assistance for NYC in the 70s, I think you're going to see a similar thread here.

Beame tried negotiating and his opponents found they could screw with him. He tried appeasing them, and knowing he could be messed with, NYC slid into stagnation.

When Ed Koch came along, he knew that this process had to be outright broken in order to escape its clutches - no negotiation, no settling for bad financial tactics. Everything came to a halt. Koch did this to end the city being held hostage.

Now, I don't have to tell you how ugly NYC was in the mid 70s and how everything fell into disrepair. The subways covered in graffiti, all infrastructure decaying; the West Side Highway could have been used in Fallout 3. However, Koch's tactic worked. It destroyed his opponents.

I predict that if the House does not come back with anything but the desire to work, we're going to see this tactic repeated. I can easily see Obama spending his political capital and ceasing any and all negotiations. He's got the support from the Country; all he has to do is point out to how obstructionist the House is being. The Republicans will wear the final red letter of being the bad guys, and while the country goes off the fiscal cliff, be painted firmly as those who have brought this about.

Once this cycle is broken, things will radically improve. NYC jumped back to life. I should know, I lived it.

We don't negotiate with Terrorists. Dangling our futures in front of us is our own fault; we put them in your hands erroneously thinking all the bluster and puff could help us. You've proved that wrong. We voted.

The hardest medicine to take is the one that causes pain while it works. The House has a choice, work with the Country, or face the election in 2014.
 
2012-11-12 12:29:29 PM

DamnYankees: Debeo Summa Credo: The GOP has no reason to cave right now. They simply pass a bill in December calling for all the cuts to be extended. Obama can sign or choose to let taxes hike across the board.

/as I've said before, that would be a good thing for the country over the long term....so I'm hoping he has the guts to let it happen. However I'd bet they all get extended for some finite period of time.

Why would Obama sign that, thought, when on January 1st he can simply ask them to consider a bill which cuts all taxes under $250K?


Because he has to start from scratch on a new bill, that would have to be originated in the house. A GOP controlled house. A new bill that probably wouldn't even get out of committee unless tax goodies for all are included.

You can line up all your talking points now, but the fact of the matter is the law of the land is that all Bush and Obama tax cuts will expire on 12/31/12. Obama is president and will take the majority of the heat for letting them expire if the House provides him with a bill that maintains the status quo and the Dems don't agree. And honestly, that would be correct. Obama would be letting the 98% taxes rise because he didn't get what he wanted, which is an expiration for the rich that will raise less than 1/4th the revenue the expiration for the 98% will.

Maybe he is going to stop the buck and let the all expire, or propose something that would phase them all out, and his class warfare rhetoric is merely posturing for position right now. (he already won reelection, now is the time to be gutsy and pragmatic!) It would be the best thing he could do for the future of this country.
 
2012-11-12 12:31:01 PM

mediablitz: Cletus C.: It comes down to the same shiat. Obama thinks taxing rich people more is the panacea for all the country's problem.

It comes down to the same shiat. You lying to make yourself feel better.

Well that, and (apparently) willful ignorance.

Obama has NEVER said taxing the rich will solve our problems. You just NEED to believe that because you are morally bankrupt and intellectually dishonest.

Not a surprise.


Yes, it does seem to be the base upon which he builds all his proposals. Raise the tax rate for everyone earning more than $200,000 just to see if he has anything else to offer.
 
2012-11-12 12:35:03 PM

Cletus C.: Yes, it does seem to be the base upon which he builds all his proposals. Raise the tax rate for everyone earning more than $200,000 just to see if he has anything else to offer.


Closing the revenue gap created by the Bush tax cuts is a *huge* step in the right direction. Closing out Iraq and Afghanistan is budgetary win as well.

Personally, I'd love to seem him take Congress out of the loop with respect to military appropriations. It's clear that Congress can't be trusted with pork of that magnitude.
 
2012-11-12 12:39:14 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Because he has to start from scratch on a new bill, that would have to be originated in the house. A GOP controlled house. A new bill that probably wouldn't even get out of committee unless tax goodies for all are included.


The phrase "originated in the House" is a technicality. The House would have to pass it no matter what, it doesn't really matter where it 'starts'.

Debeo Summa Credo: Obama is president and will take the majority of the heat for letting them expire if the House provides him with a bill that maintains the status quo and the Dems don't agree. And honestly, that would be correct. Obama would be letting the 98% taxes rise because he didn't get what he wanted, which is an expiration for the rich that will raise less than 1/4th the revenue the expiration for the 98% will.


I just disagree on the politics. I don't think people will blame Obama, someone just re-elected - they are going to blame the institution they already hate more than anything, Congress.
 
2012-11-12 12:44:06 PM

DamnYankees: DI just disagree on the politics. I don't think people will blame Obama, someone just re-elected - they are going to blame the institution they already hate more than anything, Congress.


So congresses aproval rating will shrink to negative numbers but who doggy my rep and senators shure kick butt.
 
2012-11-12 12:46:45 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: DamnYankees: Debeo Summa Credo: The GOP has no reason to cave right now. They simply pass a bill in December calling for all the cuts to be extended. Obama can sign or choose to let taxes hike across the board.

/as I've said before, that would be a good thing for the country over the long term....so I'm hoping he has the guts to let it happen. However I'd bet they all get extended for some finite period of time.

Why would Obama sign that, thought, when on January 1st he can simply ask them to consider a bill which cuts all taxes under $250K?

Because he has to start from scratch on a new bill, that would have to be originated in the house. A GOP controlled house. A new bill that probably wouldn't even get out of committee unless tax goodies for all are included.

You can line up all your talking points now, but the fact of the matter is the law of the land is that all Bush and Obama tax cuts will expire on 12/31/12. Obama is president and will take the majority of the heat for letting them expire if the House provides him with a bill that maintains the status quo and the Dems don't agree. And honestly, that would be correct. Obama would be letting the 98% taxes rise because he didn't get what he wanted, which is an expiration for the rich that will raise less than 1/4th the revenue the expiration for the 98% will.

Maybe he is going to stop the buck and let the all expire, or propose something that would phase them all out, and his class warfare rhetoric is merely posturing for position right now. (he already won reelection, now is the time to be gutsy and pragmatic!) It would be the best thing he could do for the future of this country.


Remind me again which group has to be re-elected? Congress or the President? If Congress doesn't play they know they have to go back and defend themselves from a very, very weak position in the next election. The President can just lay back right now and wait and he will already get a large portion of what he wants.
 
2012-11-12 01:08:08 PM

TofuTheAlmighty: Deficit hawk is a long-standing euphemism for granny starver. The fiscal cliff [sic] exposes this truth more clearly than usual.


Granny starver, I'm so stealing that.
 
2012-11-12 01:13:41 PM
Grannystarver Republicliff
 
2012-11-12 01:23:36 PM

bwilson27: Smeggy Smurf: The derp coming from both parties reminds me of an old money family trying to hide the fact that the money is all gone. Somebody is lying and whoever it is (likely both sides) is going to be in shiatload of trouble soon.

I'm pretty sure we know who that will be.


Yup. Everybody. Bunch of lying bastards. I'm happy to say I didn't vote for any of them.
 
2012-11-12 01:24:18 PM
So Republicans got 98% of what they wanted during the debt ceiling compromise, but now that the reality of government spending cuts actually do affect jobs has cut into their echo chamber, they're blaming Obama for it?

Let me show you my shocked face... :|
 
2012-11-12 01:34:13 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Yup. Everybody. Bunch of lying bastards. I'm happy to say I didn't vote for any of them.


Yeah, you showed 'em!
 
2012-11-12 01:43:59 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: Debeo Summa Credo: DamnYankees: Debeo Summa Credo: The GOP has no reason to cave right now. They simply pass a bill in December calling for all the cuts to be extended. Obama can sign or choose to let taxes hike across the board.

/as I've said before, that would be a good thing for the country over the long term....so I'm hoping he has the guts to let it happen. However I'd bet they all get extended for some finite period of time.

Why would Obama sign that, thought, when on January 1st he can simply ask them to consider a bill which cuts all taxes under $250K?

Because he has to start from scratch on a new bill, that would have to be originated in the house. A GOP controlled house. A new bill that probably wouldn't even get out of committee unless tax goodies for all are included.

You can line up all your talking points now, but the fact of the matter is the law of the land is that all Bush and Obama tax cuts will expire on 12/31/12. Obama is president and will take the majority of the heat for letting them expire if the House provides him with a bill that maintains the status quo and the Dems don't agree. And honestly, that would be correct. Obama would be letting the 98% taxes rise because he didn't get what he wanted, which is an expiration for the rich that will raise less than 1/4th the revenue the expiration for the 98% will.

Maybe he is going to stop the buck and let the all expire, or propose something that would phase them all out, and his class warfare rhetoric is merely posturing for position right now. (he already won reelection, now is the time to be gutsy and pragmatic!) It would be the best thing he could do for the future of this country.

Remind me again which group has to be re-elected? Congress or the President? If Congress doesn't play they know they have to go back and defend themselves from a very, very weak position in the next election. The President can just lay back right now and wait and he will already get a large portion of what he w ...


I disagree, but we'll see. It's going to be interesting. The GOP has already shown a willingness to use the filibuster excessively in the Senate in 2010 (then won seats in the next election), and a willingness to hold the debt ceiling hostage last year. If they're willing to act irresponsibly and provocatively in those instances when they were largely in the wrong and looked like assholes, why wouldn't they be willing to be obstinate in this instance, when their offer will be an extension for everyone and avoidance of the negative short term economic implications of tax increases, and be able to portray themselves as the good guys?
 
2012-11-12 02:05:30 PM

YoungSwedishBlonde: So Republicans got 98% of what they wanted during the debt ceiling compromise, but now that the reality of government spending cuts actually do affect jobs has cut into their echo chamber, they're blaming Obama for it?

Let me show you my shocked face... :|


I recently figured out that "98%" of what he wanted was something he could try to hang around Obama's neck. I don't think you will see Mr. Empty Chair Speaker saying he wants sequestration to happen.
 
2012-11-12 08:13:42 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: fta "Mr. Obama did win re-election with a populist campaign, so he can plausibly claim that Republicans are defying the will of the American people."

Hey Paul, did you notice that the American people also wanted the House firmly in the hands of the GOP to follow up on their shellacking of 2010 and get government spending under control?

Or did you think Pelosi's big push actually succeeded?


Ha! That's a hot one. When have big spending Republicans ever gotten a deficit under control? All they ever do is increase the debt, and then try to keep it off the books until there's a Democrat in office.
 
2012-11-12 08:17:04 PM

the opposite of charity is justice: A deal against your own interests is not a deal, it is capitulation.

And there we have the teabagger problem summed up nicely. Compromise = Surrender.

Heck, maybe in 2014 their antics can give dems a Senate supermajority and lose them the House as well!


2014 probably won't do it, as the 2010 class of teabaggery won't be up for reelection. 2016 I think will, so long as the Dems put up a candidate for Pres that gets people to the polls. 23 R seats up, and only 10 D seats. The R's are largely first-term teabaggers that people are quickly getting fed up with. The Dems are the ones that survived and kept their seats during 2010, so I don't think they'll be easy targets.
 
2012-11-12 08:54:26 PM

Don't Troll Me Bro!: 23 R seats up, and only 10 D seats. The R's are largely first-term teabaggers that people are quickly getting fed up with. The Dems are the ones that survived and kept their seats during 2010, so I don't think they'll be easy targets.


There is much truthiness here. 2016 will see a unified government under the DNC banner.
 
2012-11-12 10:46:53 PM

kg2095: tenpoundsofcheese: fta "Mr. Obama did win re-election with a populist campaign, so he can plausibly claim that Republicans are defying the will of the American people."

Hey Paul, did you notice that the American people also wanted the House firmly in the hands of the GOP to follow up on their shellacking of 2010 and get government spending under control?

Or did you think Pelosi's big push actually succeeded?

Ha! That's a hot one. When have big spending Republicans ever gotten a deficit under control? All they ever do is increase the debt, and then try to keep it off the books until there's a Democrat in office.


This is Politics Tab. There's a chart for that.

img.photobucket.com
 
Displayed 24 of 174 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report