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.

(RealClearPolitics)   Rand Paul: Why don't we let the Democrats pass whatever they want? Then we'll know who to blame   (realclearpolitics.com) divider line 141
    More: Unlikely, Democrats, Larry Kudlow  
•       •       •

1323 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Dec 2012 at 12:30 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-07 09:03:59 AM
Democrats get blamed for the monumentally stupid shiat W did from '03 to '07 when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House, including all the debt he racked up. The Party of Personal ResponsibilityTM never takes any so there's nothing new here

/and he's just as big a tool as his dad
 
2012-12-07 09:11:34 AM
if we are going over the cliff either way, i'd prefer go over the cliff at 100mph than go over the cliff at 50mph. sadly, no matter how powerless the republicans are, if anything bad happens as a result of democratic policy the state-run media will still try to blame the GOP.
 
2012-12-07 09:17:12 AM

Peter von Nostrand: /and he's just as big a tool as his dad


There's a shock.
 
2012-12-07 09:18:20 AM
Hell of an idea.
 
2012-12-07 09:21:49 AM
If someone said to me "To hell with it! Let's just do it your way, and you'll get the blame for anything that goes wrong!" I would say "Done! Now, where do I sign?"
 
2012-12-07 09:22:15 AM
Do it.
 
2012-12-07 09:26:15 AM
Sounds like a lame ass excuse for why you are about to get your ass kicked for the next 2 years. They really have backed themselves into a corner and have no way out.
 
2012-12-07 09:29:45 AM
We accept your proposal.
 
2012-12-07 09:37:59 AM
It'd look pretty bad when everything straightened out over the course of the next year, wouldn't it.
 
2012-12-07 09:57:08 AM

impaler: Do it.

 
2012-12-07 10:02:03 AM
He's 100% right. Democracy only works if the people you elected actually have the power to do what you elected them to do.
 
2012-12-07 10:11:18 AM

DamnYankees: He's 100% right. Democracy only works if the people you elected actually have the power to do what you elected them to do.


But but but, THEY didn't vote for HIM.
 
2012-12-07 10:15:53 AM

CapeFearCadaver: impaler: Do it.

 
2012-12-07 10:17:59 AM

impaler: Do it.


FloydA: CapeFearCadaver: impaler: Do it.



I actually agree with you guys.
 
2012-12-07 10:23:31 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: Hell of an idea.


It's unanimous, then.
 
2012-12-07 10:31:11 AM
I think he answered his question.
 
2012-12-07 10:45:19 AM
Because smart Republicans in Congress (and now Europe) know that austerity doesn't actually improve economic conditions during a recession. But the proper economic response might take some profit away from their wealthy and corporate backers, so its a non-starter.
 
2012-12-07 10:56:40 AM
I'm not opposed to the idea.  Better to rip the bandaid off quickly rather than slowly.  Of course, the fiscall cliff basically means next year those with income less than $250,000 will be poorer by anywhere from a few hundred bucks to five figures.
 
I'm sure that won't in turn cause other problems....like slowing consumer spending.
 
2012-12-07 11:02:47 AM

I_C_Weener: I'm not opposed to the idea.  Better to rip the bandaid off quickly rather than slowly.  Of course, the fiscall cliff basically means next year those with income less than $250,000 will be poorer by anywhere from a few hundred bucks to five figures.
 
I'm sure that won't in turn cause other problems....like slowing consumer spending.


Obama's proposal continues the tax cuts for incomes below $250K and includes stimulus. The Simpson-Bowles proposal is less stimulative but it starts with a CBO-based expected baseline that assumes the same sub-$250K tax cuts. If Democrats truly get "whatever they want", it would presumably be somewhere between those two plans, not the fiscal cliff austerity.
 
2012-12-07 11:12:26 AM

Lumpmoose: I_C_Weener: I'm not opposed to the idea.  Better to rip the bandaid off quickly rather than slowly.  Of course, the fiscall cliff basically means next year those with income less than $250,000 will be poorer by anywhere from a few hundred bucks to five figures.
 
I'm sure that won't in turn cause other problems....like slowing consumer spending.

Obama's proposal continues the tax cuts for incomes below $250K and includes stimulus. The Simpson-Bowles proposal is less stimulative but it starts with a CBO-based expected baseline that assumes the same sub-$250K tax cuts. If Democrats truly get "whatever they want", it would presumably be somewhere between those two plans, not the fiscal cliff austerity.



Have you checked the calculators on these plans?  I make less than $250K and my taxes go up under all three options. 
 
2012-12-07 11:14:39 AM

Lumpmoose: Obama's proposal continues the tax cuts for incomes below $250K and includes stimulus.


You mean like the last stimulus that worked so well we need to do another stimulus?
 
2012-12-07 11:17:04 AM
so what happens when the Democrats get what they want...and things get better?
 
2012-12-07 11:18:09 AM

I_C_Weener: I'm not opposed to the idea.  Better to rip the bandaid off quickly rather than slowly.  Of course, the fiscall cliff basically means next year those with income less than $250,000 will be poorer by anywhere from a few hundred bucks to five figures.
 
I'm sure that won't in turn cause other problems....like slowing consumer spending.


meh. companies are shipping our jobs overseas by the bucket load as it is...shouldn't be a problem really.
 
2012-12-07 11:19:17 AM

Weaver95: so what happens when the Democrats get what they want...and things get better?


We'll know who to blame.
 
2012-12-07 11:20:23 AM

SlothB77: Lumpmoose: Obama's proposal continues the tax cuts for incomes below $250K and includes stimulus.

You mean like the last stimulus that worked so well we need to do another stimulus?


This stimulus contains added fiber.
 
2012-12-07 11:22:22 AM

I_C_Weener: Lumpmoose: I_C_Weener: I'm not opposed to the idea.  Better to rip the bandaid off quickly rather than slowly.  Of course, the fiscall cliff basically means next year those with income less than $250,000 will be poorer by anywhere from a few hundred bucks to five figures.
 
I'm sure that won't in turn cause other problems....like slowing consumer spending.

Obama's proposal continues the tax cuts for incomes below $250K and includes stimulus. The Simpson-Bowles proposal is less stimulative but it starts with a CBO-based expected baseline that assumes the same sub-$250K tax cuts. If Democrats truly get "whatever they want", it would presumably be somewhere between those two plans, not the fiscal cliff austerity.


Have you checked the calculators on these plans?  I make less than $250K and my taxes go up under all three options.


I was talking specifically about the Bush tax cuts.

SlothB77: Lumpmoose: Obama's proposal continues the tax cuts for incomes below $250K and includes stimulus.

You mean like the last stimulus that worked so well we need to do another stimulus?


Exactly. It was a little crimped but much better than the alternative: a massive double-dip recession.
 
2012-12-07 11:27:21 AM

SlothB77: if we are going over the cliff either way, i'd prefer go over the cliff at 100mph than go over the cliff at 50mph. sadly, no matter how powerless the republicans are, if anything bad happens as a result of democratic policy the state-run media will still try to blame the GOP.


Let's find out. Let the GOP announce that they'll pass whatever the Democrats want to pass, and we'll just see how it pans out.
 
2012-12-07 11:34:34 AM

Lumpmoose: SlothB77: Lumpmoose: Obama's proposal continues the tax cuts for incomes below $250K and includes stimulus.

You mean like the last stimulus that worked so well we need to do another stimulus?

Exactly. It was a little crimped but much better than the alternative: a massive double-dip recession.


Just to clarify: TARP had a huge role to play as well in avoiding the double-dip recession/depression but hopefully that won't be repeated.
 
2012-12-07 11:41:36 AM

Weaver95: so what happens when the Democrats get what they want...and things get better?


If things get better because of what they do then you give them credit for it! I know I'm repeating myself but I would rather have a booming economy under a D than a recession under an R. Winning internet debates doesn't put food on the table, doesn't help add to the kids college fund and doesn't help pay the mortgage.

However if we have another FDR maneuver where this spending makes everything so bad it takes a world war to get us out, then no I'm not giving them credit.
 
2012-12-07 11:41:56 AM
What do you know, Rand Paul can have a good idea.
 
2012-12-07 11:42:43 AM

Lando Lincoln: SlothB77: if we are going over the cliff either way, i'd prefer go over the cliff at 100mph than go over the cliff at 50mph. sadly, no matter how powerless the republicans are, if anything bad happens as a result of democratic policy the state-run media will still try to blame the GOP.

Let's find out. Let the GOP announce that they'll pass whatever the Democrats want to pass, and we'll just see how it pans out.


we can't just give you guys anything. some things cannot be undone. but i'm all for letting you own tax increases.
 
2012-12-07 11:45:34 AM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Weaver95: so what happens when the Democrats get what they want...and things get better?

If things get better because of what they do then you give them credit for it! I know I'm repeating myself but I would rather have a booming economy under a D than a recession under an R. Winning internet debates doesn't put food on the table, doesn't help add to the kids college fund and doesn't help pay the mortgage.

However if we have another FDR maneuver where this spending makes everything so bad it takes a world war to get us out, then no I'm not giving them credit.


you...aren't very familiar with the modern incarnation of the Republican party, are you?
 
2012-12-07 11:58:27 AM

SlothB77: Lumpmoose: Obama's proposal continues the tax cuts for incomes below $250K and includes stimulus.

You mean like the last stimulus that worked so well we need to do another stimulus?


Yeah, the one that prevented a full-blown depression.
 
2012-12-07 11:59:56 AM

Weaver95: you...aren't very familiar with the modern incarnation of the Republican party, are you?


I havent been elected to run the Republican party, I can only speck for myself
 
2012-12-07 12:13:35 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Weaver95: you...aren't very familiar with the modern incarnation of the Republican party, are you?

I havent been elected to run the Republican party, I can only speck for myself


if the GOP lets the Democrats get everything they want and things get better...the GOP will implode. they wont survive another election cycle.
 
2012-12-07 12:20:08 PM
This seems like a fair arrangement. Republicans got to do every single thing they wanted for 8 straight years, and we went from record surpluses, employment, and peace to record unemployment, deficits, and the longest war in our history. I say we give the Democrats their turn, and see what happens.

But I bet you $1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.01 to a handful of sand that would never let it happen. And if they did, they'd fall all over themselves in Year 9 to try and claim the credit.
 
2012-12-07 12:32:21 PM
[imokwiththis.jpg]
 
2012-12-07 12:33:37 PM
Please... Proceed, GOP.

I'd rather give the Democrats complete control, as well, after the GOP's behavior for the last four or so years.

Those shameless, regressive, plutocratic assholes don't deserve to be in change of anything more extensive than a middle school bake sale... And they'd probably still fark that up.
 
2012-12-07 12:34:09 PM
I'm down with this. Get the fark out of the way, and we'll see where we are in two years.
 
2012-12-07 12:34:22 PM
It's almost like the plutocrats know the country's doomed and are just looting it for all they can before the party's over.
 
2012-12-07 12:34:41 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Democrats get blamed for the monumentally stupid shiat W did from '03 to '07 when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House, including all the debt he racked up. The Party of Personal ResponsibilityTM never takes any so there's nothing new here

/and he's just as big a tool as his dad


Ha. Nobody blamed Bush for any of that? He's still being blamed for everything wrong in this country.
 
2012-12-07 12:35:07 PM
Pretty please? With lobbyists on top?
 
2012-12-07 12:35:16 PM
Please proceed, Senator.
 
2012-12-07 12:38:11 PM

Cletus C.: Peter von Nostrand: Democrats get blamed for the monumentally stupid shiat W did from '03 to '07 when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House, including all the debt he racked up. The Party of Personal ResponsibilityTM never takes any so there's nothing new here

/and he's just as big a tool as his dad

Ha. Nobody blamed Bush for any of that? He's still being blamed for everything wrong in this country.


Well, a hell of a lot of it is the fault of his administration...
 
2012-12-07 12:38:23 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Democrats get blamed for the monumentally stupid shiat W did from '03 to '07 when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House, including all the debt he racked up. The Party of Personal ResponsibilityTM never takes any so there's nothing new here


and democrats have taken how much responsibility for 07-12 when they've largely controlled the government?
 
2012-12-07 12:38:36 PM
Is Rand Paul going Galt?


/doitdoitdoitdoitdoitdoitdoitdoitdoitdoitdoit
 
2012-12-07 12:41:42 PM

o5iiawah: Peter von Nostrand: Democrats get blamed for the monumentally stupid shiat W did from '03 to '07 when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House, including all the debt he racked up. The Party of Personal ResponsibilityTM never takes any so there's nothing new here

and democrats have taken how much responsibility for 07-12 when they've largely controlled the government?


Your comparison is bad and you should feel bad. The Republicans controlled all three branches from '03-'07; the Democrats controlled all three branches for about half a year in 2009.
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2012-12-07 12:43:13 PM

SlothB77: if we are going over the cliff either way, i'd prefer go over the cliff at 100mph than go over the cliff at 50mph. sadly, no matter how powerless the republicans are, if anything bad happens as a result of democratic policy the state-run media will still try to blame the GOP.


Wait, what? Say that again? Is it really your position that no matter what happens with the GOP getting out of the way, the mass media will still blame the GOP?

If I really do understand that position, what led you to it? Are there examples you can reference, or is this more of a 'I just feel it in my gut' type thing?
 
2012-12-07 12:44:40 PM
 
2012-12-07 12:45:43 PM
I'd agree.
Do it, lets see what happens.
 
Displayed 50 of 141 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report