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 39
    More: Dumbass, President Obama, Krugman Agrees, Paul Krugman, Speaker Boehner, lame duck  
•       •       •

3207 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»



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


Archived thread
2012-11-12 10:11:31 AM
14 votes:
The fiscal cliff essentially reveals what utter frauds almost all deficit hawks are. That's been its primary function so far.
2012-11-12 10:23:19 AM
5 votes:
Representative John Boehner (R-OH) claimed that the Republican party received "98%" of what was desired following the debt ceiling negotiation. The "fiscal cliff" is a result of the debt ceiling negotiation. As such, at least 98% of the "fiscal cliff" was desired by the Republican party; for what reason, then, did they ever decry its existence?
2012-11-12 10:21:24 AM
5 votes:
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?
2012-11-12 10:48:54 AM
3 votes:
The process is simple:

1) Give the Republicans a much-publicized chance to avoid the cliff
2) Watch them drive over it
3) Dems to the rescue! Pass stimulus and cut middle-class taxes
4) Remind Dem voters they saved the day
5) Remind Repub voters they broke the Norquist pledge

The problem is that the Obama team hasn't been terribly good at sending out their message. If they are going to succeed here, they need to really drive this home as a product of the Republicans.
2012-11-12 10:41:12 AM
3 votes:

bwilson27: We should blow up the parliament.


assets.rollingstone.com
Fool, you don't know what you even talking about. We blow up every time we on stage
2012-11-12 10:29:55 AM
3 votes:
My expectation is that we'll end up with a "grand bargain" that extends the Bush tax cuts through 2014 and increases spending across the entire government. In short, a spineless repeat of the Obama-McConnell Debt Increase of 2010. The politicos will pat themselves on the backs and we'll slide further and further into debt.
2012-11-12 10:22:00 AM
3 votes:
...the cliff the Republicans wanted in the first place? Y'know, the same one that also caused the credit downgrade?
2012-11-12 11:45:20 AM
2 votes:

Hobodeluxe: Hobodeluxe: Dems have the leverage. they can let the Bush tax cuts expire. then put up a bill to restore them for the less than 250k/yr. if the GOP balks then it's on them

ftfm stupid tags lol


The Democrats also need to put a thumb on the narrative -- they need to stop the spread of phrases like "ending the cuts [or raising taxes] for people making over $200,000", and replace them with "extending the cuts on the first $200,000 of income, for everyone."
2012-11-12 11:30:29 AM
2 votes:

CPennypacker: Dog Welder: It's really more of a fiscal speed bump, to be honest.

When Reagan enacted a bunch of tax cuts and reforms, they didn't work immediately and he told everyone to stay the course.

How would this be any different?

The fact is:
1) We NEED to cut spending.
2) We NEED to raise taxes.

Period. Grover Norquist be damned.

Not right now we don't


If the US did nothing else but spend $2T in infrastructure starting today, you would grow the economy, create jobs and raise amazing revenue. In 10 years you would be in a position to balance the budge and have $2T of infrastructure to boot.
2012-11-12 10:54:28 AM
2 votes:
They should start calling it the Republican Fiscal Cliff.
2012-11-12 10:47:33 AM
2 votes:

Arkanaut: The "fiscal cliff" will actually cut the deficit, but now they don't want that anymore because they realize it's a bad time to do it when the economy is still weak. Or because they don't want their defense contractor donors to lose out.


It's that one. They don't give a rats ass about the economy, particularly since they can just blame it on Obama and people will buy it and keep electing them.
2012-11-12 10:46:54 AM
2 votes:
It's great to see the right acknowledge that deficit reduction is counter-productive to growing the economy
2012-11-12 10:37:16 AM
2 votes:

Hunter_Worthington: Red State makes a good point here, the quality of Krugman's nonacademic writing varies wildly. I don't think anyone ever tells him that.


As compared to RedState's writing which is universally potato.
2012-11-12 10:25:19 AM
2 votes:
Deficit hawk is a long-standing euphemism for granny starver. The fiscal cliff [sic] exposes this truth more clearly than usual.
2012-11-12 10:25:13 AM
2 votes:
You mean that problem Congress is facing that is of Congress' own making? The one that they now have to pass SOMETHING to fix - and something good, too. Obama's using the veto-o-nator on any stopgaps - or else everyone sees higher taxes? The one that will likely result in the GOP capitulating on one or more parts of party dogma (now that they're "open to revenues")?

That's less a "cliff" and more the politico-rhetorical equivalent of falling into bed with every starlet from every time period that you've ever had so much as a crush on looking her very best in that sexy little number, just waiting to fulfill whatever desire you have.

Obama may not get everything he wants, but it'll only be because he's tired at that point.

// I'm not really this optimistic, but every time I follow a course of action in my head, it ends with "big Obama win"
// so I can't wait to see what amazing derpjitsu the GOP pulls out to make the FAIL that much...failier
2012-11-12 12:29:22 PM
1 votes:
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 12:13:08 PM
1 votes:

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%.
2012-11-12 12:10:24 PM
1 votes:

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.


Good luck getting that through the Senate.
2012-11-12 11:24:29 AM
1 votes:

Dog Welder: It's really more of a fiscal speed bump, to be honest.

When Reagan enacted a bunch of tax cuts and reforms, they didn't work immediately and he told everyone to stay the course.

How would this be any different?

The fact is:
1) We NEED to cut spending.
2) We NEED to raise taxes.

Period. Grover Norquist be damned.


Not right now we don't
2012-11-12 11:23:10 AM
1 votes:
It's really more of a fiscal speed bump, to be honest.

When Reagan enacted a bunch of tax cuts and reforms, they didn't work immediately and he told everyone to stay the course.

How would this be any different?

The fact is:
1) We NEED to cut spending.
2) We NEED to raise taxes.

Period. Grover Norquist be damned.
2012-11-12 11:21:41 AM
1 votes:

MugzyBrown: How is the 'fiscall cliff' a GOP plan? It has in it most of what I've heard democrats talk about since 2004. End the 'Bush tax cuts' and cuts in military spending.


i158.photobucket.com

/And if I remember correctly, the Bush tax cut extension and the sequestration were two separate bills.
2012-11-12 11:20:57 AM
1 votes:

Cletus C.:

Ha. Bush again. Bush still. Bush always.


Shut up, Cletus C, you cock.
2012-11-12 11:18:46 AM
1 votes:

MugzyBrown: How is the 'fiscall cliff' a GOP plan? It has in it most of what I've heard democrats talk about since 2004. End the 'Bush tax cuts' and cuts in military spending.


The looming cuts to defense and other spending i.e. the "fiscal cliff" were put in place as a compromise when Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling (which triggered the US credit downgrade). I'm surprised you don't recall, it was something of a big deal at the time.

Alan Greenspan on the debt ceiling...
2012-11-12 11:18:27 AM
1 votes:

MugzyBrown: How is the 'fiscall cliff' a GOP plan? It has in it most of what I've heard democrats talk about since 2004. End the 'Bush tax cuts' and cuts in military spending.


Because they're the ones who made sequestration part of the deal, after they turned down Obama's $4 trillion spending cuts because it contained $1 trillion in tax increases.

The fact that the fiscal cliff happens to reflect what a fiscal conservative should actually look like is just a bonus. It will be entertaining to hear all you right-wing "fiscal conservatives" argue in favor of greater deficits, greater debt, and more spending.
2012-11-12 11:13:05 AM
1 votes:

Hunter_Worthington: the quality of Krugman's nonacademic writing varies wildly



He is the most accurate pundit in America.
Hamilton College Study
Of course, this is roughly the equivalent of "Disco's Greatest Hits".
2012-11-12 11:07:44 AM
1 votes:

turbidum: Hunter_Worthington: Red State makes a good point here, the quality of Krugman's nonacademic writing varies wildly. I don't think anyone ever tells him that. We do need to address fiscal issues, and a package that raised taxes, gradually, over a multi-year period starting say, 5 years out, would not be the worst thing in the world.

I might even consider the merits of said point if the author hadn't prefaced the excerpt by giving Krugman the moniker of "all around Obama fluffer."


No one ever confused RedState with being a shining example of high-quality journalism.
2012-11-12 11:05:33 AM
1 votes:
Now much of Krugman's analysis is wrong. This is not unusual. When Krugman ventures from his academic writings his is both an inveterate liar and relentlessly wrong. But in the main he is right.

This is all you need to know about Red State's "honesty". They just HAVE to name call. They can't help it. Krugman has made them look bad over and over, so he is a liar.
2012-11-12 11:00:45 AM
1 votes:

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.


And the Obama problem is Surrender = Compromise.
2012-11-12 10:59:10 AM
1 votes:

skullkrusher: Last month: if Obama is re-elected, this country will drive over a fiscal cliff. This month: what cliff?

was that a thing?


Romney explicitly said, at one point, "Elect me so that the House Republicans won't dig in their heels and ruin the debt ceiling deal"
2012-11-12 10:58:34 AM
1 votes:
Now that the GOP got what they deserve this election....

SFW


Link
2012-11-12 10:54:13 AM
1 votes:

bulldg4life: whizbangthedirtfarmer: The problem is that the Obama team hasn't been terribly good at sending out their message.

This is what I don't understand. Why can they get their message out during a campaign, but they take a back seat on message when governing? It allows the GOP to run the conversation on everything and Obama always seems to be on the defensive.


It's because they pay good money to get their message out during the campaigns. Overall, the guys that own the media aren't friends of the Democratic party when the Democrats are focused on making the standard of living better for the average American.
2012-11-12 10:52:49 AM
1 votes:

Hunter_Worthington: Red State makes a good point here, the quality of Krugman's nonacademic writing varies wildly. I don't think anyone ever tells him that. We do need to address fiscal issues, and a package that raised taxes, gradually, over a multi-year period starting say, 5 years out, would not be the worst thing in the world.


I might even consider the merits of said point if the author hadn't prefaced the excerpt by giving Krugman the moniker of "all around Obama fluffer."
2012-11-12 10:50:19 AM
1 votes:

whizbangthedirtfarmer: The problem is that the Obama team hasn't been terribly good at sending out their message.


This is what I don't understand. Why can they get their message out during a campaign, but they take a back seat on message when governing? It allows the GOP to run the conversation on everything and Obama always seems to be on the defensive.
2012-11-12 10:43:19 AM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: If they don't simply say this to the GOP and then walk away, they are massive dumbasses.


I hope you're already preparing for when the Democrats agree to a full extension of the Bush tax cuts, no defense spending cuts, and massive Medicare/entitlement reform early next year (after the requisite OMG EXTENSION through the holidays).

There may be a partial repeal of some aspects of Obamacare in there, too.
2012-11-12 10:42:05 AM
1 votes:
I was told in 2010 that it would be unfair of any congressman voted out of office to exercise their vote in the lame duck session. I am sure all Republicans voted out of office will abstain from voting on any fiscal cliff bills.
2012-11-12 10:34:37 AM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: Hobodeluxe: Dems have the leverage. they can let the Bush tax cuts expire. then put up a bill to restore them for the

Exactly right. If they don't simply say this to the GOP and then walk away, they are massive dumbasses.


I don't want to speak ill of my own party, but c'mon, man. We're Democrats. We'll figure out a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
2012-11-12 10:33:38 AM
1 votes:

sprawl15: We should prevent Obama driving us off this cliff by making it illegal for black people to drive.


you can't do that. the who would drive old white women around town?
2012-11-12 10:29:31 AM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: Dems have the leverage. they can let the Bush tax cuts expire. then put up a bill to restore them for the


Exactly right. If they don't simply say this to the GOP and then walk away, they are massive dumbasses.
2012-11-12 10:26:58 AM
1 votes:
We should prevent Obama driving us off this cliff by making it illegal for black people to drive.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report