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.

(Reuters)   Obama to Boehner: "Blink harder"   (reuters.com) divider line 194
    More: Followup, obama, White House, Republican, Republican leaders, Mitch McConnell, school shootings, Boehner  
•       •       •

8644 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Dec 2012 at 8:34 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-16 03:49:21 AM
fta It was unclear on Saturday if the president had communicated his response to Boehner.

img.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-16 07:08:44 AM
thehairpin.com

Yes. Please Republicans: Blink long, blink often.
 
2012-12-16 08:37:47 AM
I don't think the GOP understands that Obama has more leverage than they do.
 
2012-12-16 08:38:25 AM
Just what kind of "serious cuts" to Medicare and Medicaid are we talking about? If it's adopting Ryan's plans on those wholesale, he can go fark himself up his ass.
 
2012-12-16 08:38:54 AM
You know, I never thought I'd sympathize with Lucy in this picture:

www.districtdiva.com

But what do you know? I am.
 
2012-12-16 08:39:31 AM
This is going to hurt isn't it?
3.bp.blogspot.com

www.mocradio.com

media.komonews.com
 
2012-12-16 08:41:38 AM

Muta: This is going to hurt isn't it?
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 390x285]

[www.mocradio.com image 650x366]

[media.komonews.com image 660x440]


Of course it's going to hurt. Obama's black. He's got an anaconda.
 
2012-12-16 08:42:12 AM

DammitIForgotMyLogin: [thehairpin.com image 400x300]

Yes. Please Republicans: Blink long, blink often.


Too late. They're already living in the past.
 
2012-12-16 08:43:48 AM
You know, after dealing with a whole mess of dead kids, I wouldn't be in too good a mood to argue about rich people and their money either.
 
2012-12-16 08:44:30 AM
I wonder who the next speaker of the house will be. Could be worse.

/Who am I fu*king kidding?
 
2012-12-16 08:45:57 AM

lemurs: Too late. They're already living in the past.


Liberal ideas are not new. You've been trying this socialist utopia thing in one form or another since at least the late 1800s and early 1900s. That's putting aside the fact that total government control of peoples lives is not new, and it's not progress, it's precisely what the United States was founded against.
 
2012-12-16 08:47:26 AM
It's a shame that it took 4 years and two big election wins to get this Obama to show up
 
2012-12-16 08:48:00 AM
I think Boehner is going to remain Speaker, unless he decides to "fall on his sword" and resign from Congress (obviously to become a lobbyist or join the Heritage Foundation, or one of those RealAmericaPAC things). There's no way a surprise competitive caucus vote is going to throw him out of the position.
 
2012-12-16 08:50:10 AM

randomjsa: total government control


DRINK!
 
2012-12-16 08:51:40 AM

randomjsa: lemurs: Too late. They're already living in the past.

Liberal ideas are not new. You've been trying this socialist utopia thing in one form or another since at least the late 1800s and early 1900s. That's putting aside the fact that total government control of peoples lives is not new, and it's not progress, it's precisely what the United States was founded against.


My god, I can hear you pissing yourself as you wrote this. Nice use of "socialist utopia," though. That Glenn Beck word of the day calender is really paying off stewmadnomore2jsa.
 
2012-12-16 08:53:49 AM

RminusQ: I think Boehner is going to remain Speaker, unless he decides to "fall on his sword" and resign from Congress (obviously to become a lobbyist or join the Heritage Foundation, or one of those RealAmericaPAC things). There's no way a surprise competitive caucus vote is going to throw him out of the position.


But just think of the weapons-grade derp we'd get if Cantor became Speaker.
 
2012-12-16 08:54:37 AM

randomjsa: lemurs: Too late. They're already living in the past.

Liberal ideas are not new. You've been trying this socialist utopia thing in one form or another since at least the late 1800s and early 1900s. That's putting aside the fact that total government control of peoples lives is not new, and it's not progress, it's precisely what the United States was founded against.


i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2012-12-16 08:55:07 AM

randomjsa: lemurs: Too late. They're already living in the past.

Liberal ideas are not new. You've been trying this socialist utopia thing in one form or another since at least the late 1800s and early 1900s. That's putting aside the fact that total government control of peoples lives is not new, and it's not progress, it's precisely what the United States was founded against.


You've got to be drunk to be posting this same crap day in and day out. There's no other explanation for someone to be so wrong, so consistently on everything.
 
2012-12-16 08:55:23 AM

bulldg4life: It's a shame that it took 4 years and two big election wins to get this Obama to show up


Well, how long did it take you to accept just HOW bad the Republicans were willing to screw things up, just to "get" Obama and "the libs?"? I mean, America has never had perfect politics, but compromises have been made and we've gotten business done. These people are not conservatives, they're radical fundamentalists.
 
2012-12-16 08:56:01 AM

RminusQ: I think Boehner is going to remain Speaker, unless he decides to "fall on his sword" and resign from Congress (obviously to become a lobbyist or join the Heritage Foundation, or one of those RealAmericaPAC things). There's no way a surprise competitive caucus vote is going to throw him out of the position.


No, but if he doesn't give in, and we go off the cliff, the American people are going to blame the Republicans, and I say they will lose the House in two years.
 
2012-12-16 09:03:17 AM
Eh...off the cliff we go. The whole point of it was to keep really bad things from happening. No sense in stopping a mildly bad thing from happening just so we can eventually hit the bad thing.
 
2012-12-16 09:08:20 AM

randomjsa: lemurs: Too late. They're already living in the past.

Liberal ideas are not new. You've been trying this socialist utopia thing in one form or another since at least the late 1800s and early 1900s. That's putting aside the fact that total government control of peoples lives

is not new, and it's not progress, it's precisely what the United States was founded against.

You mean like deciding who can get an abortion? Who can marry who? Federal illlegalization of a plant? That kind of control?
 
2012-12-16 09:09:59 AM
Was I reading that right about capping the tax hike at $1m ? So, tax hikes for 250k-1m !? Over that and its business as usual. Lick my taint Boehner. Its a start, but you def. have to do better.

What I kind of find interesting is that I haven't heard any talk from them of 'we'll give you the increase, but raise the base earnings to 300k' (or some number higher than 250). They know they have to cave on the issue. Why not try to gain the support of the people on the edge of the tax hit? The rich know they are farked, try to help as many escape the hike as possible. Oh, thats right... Its the present Republican party....
 
2012-12-16 09:10:57 AM

randomjsa: You've been trying this socialist utopia thing in one form or another since at least the late 1800s and early 1900s. That's putting aside the fact that total government control of peoples lives is not new, and it's not progress, it's precisely what the United States was founded against.


The goal of most 18th century monarchies was to create a socialist utopia.
 
2012-12-16 09:11:09 AM
The GOP is filled with unrealistic motherfarkers.

After 2 general elections, they still don't get this.
 
2012-12-16 09:12:18 AM
FTFA: However, Republican leaders in both chambers are leery about seeming to cave on taxes. "There's concern that if we did that, Obama would simply declare victory and walk away and not address spending," said one aide. "We don't trust these guys."

Right. Because it's the Democrats who have a history of pulling stunts like that.
 
2012-12-16 09:13:02 AM

bulldg4life: It's a shame that it took 4 years and two big election wins to get this Obama to show up


Yeah, that health care reforming, DADT repealing, gay marriage promoting, military streamlining, Iraq war ending, global admiration getting, stimulus passing, auto industry saving, Gaddafi toppling, torture policy reversing, student loan program reforming, bank regulating, veteran supporting, credit card reforming, nuclear proliferation ending, wilderness protecting, Fair Sentencing Act passing, school lunch reforming, hate crime law expanding, stem cell research expanding, and Bin Laden killing Obama we've had these past four years was a real wet noodle.
 
2012-12-16 09:13:09 AM

Mrbogey: Eh...off the cliff we go. The whole point of it was to keep really bad things from happening. No sense in stopping a mildly bad thing from happening just so we can eventually hit the bad thing.


What was that bad thing again?
 
2012-12-16 09:13:47 AM

thamike: bulldg4life: It's a shame that it took 4 years and two big election wins to get this Obama to show up

Yeah, that health care reforming, DADT repealing, gay marriage promoting, military streamlining, Iraq war ending, global admiration getting, stimulus passing, auto industry saving, Gaddafi toppling, torture policy reversing, student loan program reforming, bank regulating, veteran supporting, credit card reforming, nuclear proliferation ending, wilderness protecting, Fair Sentencing Act passing, school lunch reforming, hate crime law expanding, stem cell research expanding, and Bin Laden killing Obama we've had these past four years was a real wet noodle.


+1
 
2012-12-16 09:14:18 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Mrbogey: Eh...off the cliff we go. The whole point of it was to keep really bad things from happening. No sense in stopping a mildly bad thing from happening just so we can eventually hit the bad thing.

What was that bad thing again?


UFIA?
 
2012-12-16 09:14:25 AM

Barricaded Gunman: FTFA: However, Republican leaders in both chambers are leery about seeming to cave on taxes. "There's concern that if we did that, Obama would simply declare victory and walk away


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-12-16 09:19:02 AM

thamike: bulldg4life: It's a shame that it took 4 years and two big election wins to get this Obama to show up

Yeah, that health care reforming, DADT repealing, gay marriage promoting, military streamlining, Iraq war ending, global admiration getting, stimulus passing, auto industry saving, Gaddafi toppling, torture policy reversing, student loan program reforming, bank regulating, veteran supporting, credit card reforming, nuclear proliferation ending, wilderness protecting, Fair Sentencing Act passing, school lunch reforming, hate crime law expanding, stem cell research expanding, and Bin Laden killing Obama we've had these past four years was a real wet noodle.


But aside from that, what has Obama done for us?
 
2012-12-16 09:19:12 AM

iron_city_ap: Was I reading that right about capping the tax hike at $1m ? So, tax hikes for 250k-1m !? Over that and its business as usual. Lick my taint Boehner. Its a start, but you def. have to do better.

What I kind of find interesting is that I haven't heard any talk from them of 'we'll give you the increase, but raise the base earnings to 300k' (or some number higher than 250). They know they have to cave on the issue. Why not try to gain the support of the people on the edge of the tax hit? The rich know they are farked, try to help as many escape the hike as possible. Oh, thats right... Its the present Republican party....


I thinl they waned to hike taxes on those making over 1 million instead of 250k. Not just people making 250k- 1 mil.
 
2012-12-16 09:20:51 AM
It's hilarious how Mitch McConnell still thinks he's relevant.
 
2012-12-16 09:21:04 AM
I wish we'd make a law that we fight no more wars we don't pay for. If they want to fight a war, fine, raise taxes on the highest wage earners and corporations. That's total cost, including taking care of our wounded vets. When the last vet from that war dies, then we cut taxes for the rich. The "poors" already do enough by sending their kids to die.
 
2012-12-16 09:22:10 AM
I swear I'm not drunk, just typing on a phone in a car on a bumpy road. (Not driving)
 
2012-12-16 09:24:06 AM

Summoner101: I don't think the GOP understands that Obama has more leverage than they do.


I don't think the idiot f*cks in the GOP understand that cake is tasty.
 
2012-12-16 09:24:34 AM
Somebody please tell me that in American schools you don't learn to conflate liberalism with socialism. That the troll must have dropped out, or at least failed his history class.
 
2012-12-16 09:25:01 AM

Zarquon's Flat Tire: iron_city_ap: Was I reading that right about capping the tax hike at $1m ? So, tax hikes for 250k-1m !? Over that and its business as usual. Lick my taint Boehner. Its a start, but you def. have to do better.

What I kind of find interesting is that I haven't heard any talk from them of 'we'll give you the increase, but raise the base earnings to 300k' (or some number higher than 250). They know they have to cave on the issue. Why not try to gain the support of the people on the edge of the tax hit? The rich know they are farked, try to help as many escape the hike as possible. Oh, thats right... Its the present Republican party....

I thinl they waned to hike taxes on those making over 1 million instead of 250k. Not just people making 250k- 1 mil.


Thanks. After another cup of coffee and re reading I see that now. $1m is too high of a floor IMO. I think 300-400k is a fair range.
 
2012-12-16 09:26:14 AM

iron_city_ap: Zarquon's Flat Tire: iron_city_ap: Was I reading that right about capping the tax hike at $1m ? So, tax hikes for 250k-1m !? Over that and its business as usual. Lick my taint Boehner. Its a start, but you def. have to do better.

What I kind of find interesting is that I haven't heard any talk from them of 'we'll give you the increase, but raise the base earnings to 300k' (or some number higher than 250). They know they have to cave on the issue. Why not try to gain the support of the people on the edge of the tax hit? The rich know they are farked, try to help as many escape the hike as possible. Oh, thats right... Its the present Republican party....

I thinl they waned to hike taxes on those making over 1 million instead of 250k. Not just people making 250k- 1 mil.

Thanks. After another cup of coffee and re reading I see that now. $1m is too high of a floor IMO. I think 300-400k is a fair range.


Why isn't $250k fair? That's 1-2% of taxpayers.
 
2012-12-16 09:27:20 AM

randomjsa: lemurs: Too late. They're already living in the past.

Liberal ideas are not new. You've been trying this socialist utopia thing in one form or another since at least the late 1800s and early 1900s. That's putting aside the fact that total government control of peoples lives is not new, and it's not progress, it's precisely what the United States was founded against.


You're not going to find historical support for your position, Scalia's inaccurate construing of the 2nd Amendment notwithstanding. The Founders were nearly all "liberal" in the 18th century sense and firm believers in the values of the Enlightenment. (With the exception of a few medieval types like Rutledge, from places like South Carolina.) They also accepted the concept of an activist government, otherwise why bother with a constitution? Even strong believers in "states' rights" like Jefferson would want nothing to do with the modern GOP. Not to mention the Founders would be horrified at the essentially unregulated gun-fetishizing culture of today's conservatives.
 
2012-12-16 09:27:20 AM

Ilmarinen: Somebody please tell me that in American schools you don't learn to conflate liberalism with socialism. That the troll must have dropped out, or at least failed his history class.


We don't. It's just the idiots that confuse liberalism with socialism think the American education system is liberally biased.
 
2012-12-16 09:28:39 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Thanks. After another cup of coffee and re reading I see that now. $1m is too high of a floor IMO. I think 300-400k is a fair range.

Why isn't $250k fair? That's 1-2% of taxpayers.



What about the other elements (cap gains, corp taxes et al)?
 
2012-12-16 09:29:09 AM

mksmith: randomjsa: lemurs: Too late. They're already living in the past.

Liberal ideas are not new. You've been trying this socialist utopia thing in one form or another since at least the late 1800s and early 1900s. That's putting aside the fact that total government control of peoples lives is not new, and it's not progress, it's precisely what the United States was founded against.

You're not going to find historical support for your position, Scalia's inaccurate construing of the 2nd Amendment notwithstanding. The Founders were nearly all "liberal" in the 18th century sense and firm believers in the values of the Enlightenment. (With the exception of a few medieval types like Rutledge, from places like South Carolina.) They also accepted the concept of an activist government, otherwise why bother with a constitution? Even strong believers in "states' rights" like Jefferson would want nothing to do with the modern GOP. Not to mention the Founders would be horrified at the essentially unregulated gun-fetishizing culture of today's conservatives.


It continues to baffle me at how many people forget what a colossal fail the Articles of Confederation were and that the US Constitution was created in response to that failure based on the thought that they thought that we needed a stronger central government.
 
2012-12-16 09:29:55 AM

monoski: cameroncrazy1984: Thanks. After another cup of coffee and re reading I see that now. $1m is too high of a floor IMO. I think 300-400k is a fair range.

Why isn't $250k fair? That's 1-2% of taxpayers.


What about the other elements (cap gains, corp taxes et al)?


I think those should be raised too. They were what, 25% under Clinton? Still too low IMO but a 25% rate certainly didn't scare off investors in the 90s.
 
2012-12-16 09:35:53 AM

cameroncrazy1984: What was that bad thing again?


Every tax dollar the US takes in going to something that we've promised voters and can't cut back realistically.
 
2012-12-16 09:36:41 AM

Summoner101: I don't think the GOP understands that Obama has more leverage than they do.


Obama has a Royal Flush and the GOP has a pair of 2's. The cards are already all face-up on the table and the GOP is still trying to bluff.
 
2012-12-16 09:38:00 AM

Mister Peejay: thamike: bulldg4life: It's a shame that it took 4 years and two big election wins to get this Obama to show up

Yeah, that health care reforming, DADT repealing, gay marriage promoting, military streamlining, Iraq war ending, global admiration getting, stimulus passing, auto industry saving, Gaddafi toppling, torture policy reversing, student loan program reforming, bank regulating, veteran supporting, credit card reforming, nuclear proliferation ending, wilderness protecting, Fair Sentencing Act passing, school lunch reforming, hate crime law expanding, stem cell research expanding, and Bin Laden killing Obama we've had these past four years was a real wet noodle.

But aside from that, what has Obama done for us?


Killed pirates?
 
2012-12-16 09:38:56 AM

cameroncrazy1984: I think those should be raised too. They were what, 25% under Clinton? Still too low IMO but a 25% rate certainly didn't scare off investors in the 90s.


It`s inherently baffling to me. If there`s any kind of income that should be taxed in a progressive manner it`s cap gains. Why it`s treated as separate from income bears no reasonable explanation. The most popular argument I've seen, it's already been taxed, makes no sense since almost all monetary transactions in the modern world are taxed.
 
2012-12-16 09:38:56 AM

Serious Black: Muta: This is going to hurt isn't it?
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 390x285]

[www.mocradio.com image 650x366]

[media.komonews.com image 660x440]

Of course it's going to hurt. Obama's black. He's got an anaconda.


And his anaconda don't want none unless it's got no cuts to entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, hon.

/Doesn't quite have the same je-ne-sais-quoi, does it?
 
Displayed 50 of 194 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report