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.

(Political Wire)   Said one prominent Republican about plunging off the fiscal cliff: "It's a shiat show. Tax rates are going to go up on everyone, and we're going to get the blame"   (politicalwire.com) divider line 197
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

3374 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Dec 2012 at 9:30 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-29 10:11:49 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: This is entirely due to your party's constant refusal to behave rationally.


[this this this and this.jpg]
 
2012-12-29 10:12:37 AM  

Fubar: Don't they have some rule that no bill will be introduced unless it has majority republican support? What happens if Boehner breaks that rule?


He's probably lose his speakership.
 
2012-12-29 10:15:22 AM  

Grungehamster: I really don't see where these people see they aren't liable for more than half the blame.

1) Rather than attempt to negotiate with Democrats, Bush decided to pass his tax cuts through reconciliation, which required the tax cuts expire in 2010 unless they paid for themselves. (These cuts were extended 2 years as part of a deal between Congress and Obama after the 2010 Midterms in exchange for extending payroll tax cuts, unemployment benefits, and a few recurring issues like the doc fix for the same period.)

2) Republicans decided that despite negative real interest rates on t bills that they would hold the debt ceiling hostage, and claimed they would let the government default if Obama did not cut the budget (that Congress had passed) significantly. Ultimately they signed an agreement for a major across the board cut unless both parties could come up with a compromise that both parties would agree to.

3) The supercommittee failed to come up with a solution, and in the subsequent negotiations have refused to budge an inch on taxes, even when Democrats offered pretty severe entitlement cuts (the equivalent sacred cow for their side.) Even when their own Speaker offered to only raise marginal tax rates on millionares (while also extending estate tax and capital gains tax cuts that would primarily benefit them) their own party revolted against the idea, despite a majority of Republicans agreeing that the original tax increases on the rich Obama proposed are acceptable.

They led us here every step of the way, and are now complaining that they'll get blamed if Democrats don't swerve in this game of chicken that they proposed and have been playing for the last four years.


Four?!
 
2012-12-29 10:18:38 AM  

o5iiawah: Boehner already agreed to most of the tax increases Obama has asked for.


And the House Republicans told him to go fark himself.
 
2012-12-29 10:20:11 AM  
If you look at the current fiscal situation and find any blame in Obama, then you are either high as a kite or functionally retarded.
 
2012-12-29 10:20:42 AM  
We're blaming the Republicans because they're the ones at fault. They forced the creation of the "fiscal cliff", they caused us to lose a notch of credit rating for the first time, they're been doing everything they can to make this recovery as slow as possible, now they refused to negotiate something less severe for Jan 1.

We're blaming you because you are to blame, Republicans.
 
2012-12-29 10:21:25 AM  

Mrtraveler01: mat catastrophe: Mrtraveler01: mat catastrophe: HAHA! I'M POOR AS HELL SO MY TAX RATES DON'T GO UP.

SUCK IT, MIDDLE CLASS ASSHOLES! THIS IS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR! THIS IS WHAT YOU GET!

Does this mean you're going to "Go Galt" on us?

/Contrary to what you may think, you won't be missed

Contrary to what you think, none of what you said makes any sense. Poor people do not "Go Galt". Poor people can try to convince themselves that they are John Galt, but they are not.

So, if you'd like to make another attempt at insulting me, go ahead.

Sorry, I misread your post. I haven't had enough coffee yet this morning.


YAY! COFFEE!

LET'S DRINK!
 
2012-12-29 10:21:57 AM  
LESS FILLING
 
2012-12-29 10:23:46 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-29 10:25:06 AM  

DamnYankees: lexslamman: All because the mainline GOP is too cowardly to stand up to the conservative minority in their party.

Since when are conservatives a minority of the GOP?


it's a really big tent
 
2012-12-29 10:25:19 AM  

Karac: o5iiawah: Boehner already agreed to most of the tax increases Obama has asked for.

The best offer Boehner has proposed is not renewing the increases for people making $400,000, a damn sight higher than Obama's $250K. And that's not even mentioning the fact that the Dick knows he'd never be able to get enough votes to get that plan passed.

Negotiations in bad faith do not count as honest offers.


Obama's initial offer was 250K but he upped it to 400K AND actually agreed to the Social Security changes. Boehner's best offer was only raising taxes on those making more than $1,000,000 and that never went up for a vote because he knew he didn't have the votes of Republicans to support even that.

Also (and this isn't directed at you), this "cut the rate of growth" argument is rather stupid when the rate of growth is cut below the rate of inflation and doesn't account for population growth. Real per capita spending gets cut by these proposals: I hear people saying we should go back to Clinton era spending levels in gross terms if we're going back to Clinton era tax rates, but if the population has grown 10% since then and inflation has been about 34% (once compounded) a cut of that magnitude would be devastating as anyone with an ounce of macroeconomic familiarity knows.
 
2012-12-29 10:26:57 AM  

Shrugging Atlas: lexslamman: All because the mainline GOP is too cowardly to stand up to the conservative minority in their party.

Exactly this.


Yeah...no. Look at what's happened over the past two election cycles, where any establishment GOP candidate who breathed the 'compromise' word got bushwhacked by Teatards screaming sozulizm. There's no 'standing up' when all it gets you is voted out of office.

OTOH, voters are increasingly turned off by the Teatards in the GOP, and last month they lost 8 seats to the Dems.

Good times, eh?
 
2012-12-29 10:27:43 AM  

SilentStrider: Boohoo.


Done in two.
 
2012-12-29 10:31:35 AM  
These threads always amuse me, they always instantly demonstrate who knows the different between macro and micro economics.

/hint, most of you tools arguing for the republicans don't.
 
2012-12-29 10:33:23 AM  
RINO

No real Republican recognizes reality.
 
2012-12-29 10:34:57 AM  

clambam: Thanks to gerrymandering, virtually all those repub Congressional seats are secure. Sure they've lost the White House for the forseeable future, but their personal jobs are safe. So why compromise? The American people will suffer, but the American people deserves to suffer. You had the gall to reelect the black guy for four more years? This'll teach you, slaves! Incredibly their personal constituents, who will suffer along with the rest of us and maybe more so, will support them in this victory of ideology over common sense. Go figure.


pretty much, but additionally, they're saying you voted for this level/volume of government, now you can pay for it.
 
2012-12-29 10:36:43 AM  

Knight of the Woeful Countenance: These threads always amuse me, they always instantly demonstrate who knows the different between macro and micro economics.

/hint, most of you tools arguing for the republicans don't.


Those are Greek words... Why do you love socialism?
 
2012-12-29 10:37:08 AM  

Fjornir: Grungehamster: I really don't see where these people see they aren't liable for more than half the blame.

1) Rather than attempt to negotiate with Democrats, Bush decided to pass his tax cuts through reconciliation, which required the tax cuts expire in 2010 unless they paid for themselves. (These cuts were extended 2 years as part of a deal between Congress and Obama after the 2010 Midterms in exchange for extending payroll tax cuts, unemployment benefits, and a few recurring issues like the doc fix for the same period.)

2) Republicans decided that despite negative real interest rates on t bills that they would hold the debt ceiling hostage, and claimed they would let the government default if Obama did not cut the budget (that Congress had passed) significantly. Ultimately they signed an agreement for a major across the board cut unless both parties could come up with a compromise that both parties would agree to.

3) The supercommittee failed to come up with a solution, and in the subsequent negotiations have refused to budge an inch on taxes, even when Democrats offered pretty severe entitlement cuts (the equivalent sacred cow for their side.) Even when their own Speaker offered to only raise marginal tax rates on millionares (while also extending estate tax and capital gains tax cuts that would primarily benefit them) their own party revolted against the idea, despite a majority of Republicans agreeing that the original tax increases on the rich Obama proposed are acceptable.

They led us here every step of the way, and are now complaining that they'll get blamed if Democrats don't swerve in this game of chicken that they proposed and have been playing for the last four years.

Four?!


The current game of chicken has been going on for four years; Republicans became completely instringent when Obama was elected and have decided that their brand is so toxic after Bush that any attempts to derail everything will have to hurt Democrats more than them because their public support couldn't fall much further. Besides Democrats are pussies and will roll over if you push back against them, so they should still be able to dictate policy as the minority party. The fact that Democrats would be so reckless as to fail to avoid their car when Republicans try to ram them should show they are at fault!
 
2012-12-29 10:38:45 AM  

o5iiawah: If I vow to cut 10,000 worth of spending out of my budget next year, I dont do so by purchasing a $150,000 Ferrari instead of a $160,000 Lamborghini


Um, that's exactly what you do. If I have budgeted for a $160,000 car, and I find that I'm $10,000 over, I cut $10,000 out of my budget by buying a Ferrari instead of a Lambo.

The plan Obama suggested in 2011 would allow the national debt to increase 6 trillion over 10 years instead of 13. While it would be nice to get it a lot lower than that, it's a hell of a lot better than a kick in the teeth.
 
2012-12-29 10:40:09 AM  

o5iiawah: jayhawk88: Good, you worthless sacks of shiat. You chose to try and use the worst financial crisis in a generation solely for political gain, while the people you supposedly serve, suffered. Bad enough when you all are simply incompetent or selling your services to the highest bidder, but to actively try and make things worse, just to make the sitting President look bad, is evil and unforgivable. You all deserve to lose everything in your life that gives you any kind of financial security, I hope each and every one of you finds yourself alone and desperate on the streets.

Boehner already agreed to most of the tax increases Obama has asked for. Obama meanwhile hasn't offered a penny of spending cuts - just reductions in a proposed rate of increase. Instead of a 9Tn deficit over the next 10 years, we'd be faced with a 7.4Tn deficit over the next 10 years. New revenue, meanwhile makes up maybe a trillion or two more but Obama's still asked for half a Trillion in public works stimulus. Also, keep in mind we're going to be back here in 10 years saying that the interest in the debt has swallowed any gains that these cliff negotiations had achieved. One party is sort of serious about new revenue. The other party doesn't give a shiat about spending.

If I vow to cut 10,000 worth of spending out of my budget next year, I dont do so by purchasing a $150,000 Ferrari instead of a $160,000 Lamborghini


Don't you have some teeth to clean, Phil?
 
2012-12-29 10:40:14 AM  
The zombie chicken that the GOP has had its way with has come back from the grave and is reversing the role.

You don't have a leg to stand on when your team rejects your own abortion of "Plan B." You deserve everything that Obama serves you up. 250K, no more. The people voted for it in the election. Get it?
 
2012-12-29 10:41:19 AM  

jayhawk88: Good, you worthless sacks of shiat. You chose to try and use the worst financial crisis in a generation solely for political gain, while the people you supposedly serve, suffered. Bad enough when you all are simply incompetent or selling your services to the highest bidder, but to actively try and make things worse, just to make the sitting President look bad, is evil and unforgivable. You all deserve to lose everything in your life that gives you any kind of financial security, I hope each and every one of you finds yourself alone and desperate on the streets.


I came in here to rant about something, but I'll just go with a "this." Worthless sacks of shiat. Monitor THIS, why don't you?
 
2012-12-29 10:42:19 AM  
This is what you get when your idea of "negotiation" is to slap every single offer out of the other person's hand, and then throw yourselves a parade about how awesome you are at your jobs.
 
2012-12-29 10:46:33 AM  
Party of personal responsibility strikes again.
 
2012-12-29 10:48:10 AM  
Maybe Obama will come up with a last-minute 'bi-partisan' solution that the GOP can reject!
 
2012-12-29 10:49:21 AM  
Hey, GOP:

i78.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-29 10:50:20 AM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club:

The plan Obama suggested in 2011 would allow the national debt to increase 6 trillion over 10 years instead of 13. While it would be nice to get it a lot lower than that, it's a hell of a lot better than a kick in the teeth.


While our current deficits are in the $1.5 trillion range, so, give a second here, . . . 4 moar years and fark you I'll be in Hawaii?
 
2012-12-29 10:50:27 AM  
There are enough votes between Democrats and Republicans to get a deal done. Boehner could stop trying to force the bill to pass along party lines and it would go down.
 
2012-12-29 10:50:54 AM  

DamnYankees: lexslamman: All because the mainline GOP is too cowardly to stand up to the conservative minority in their party.

Since when are conservatives a minority of the GOP?


I think you've put your finger on it.  The modern state of the GOP is:

1) A large majority of them put themselves into the "severely conservative" camp, into the "gubbmint too big" camp, into the "must slash spending" camp, into the "income tax is EVIL" camp.

2) A majority even of Republicans want taxes on the top 1% to go up.

This has kept the party stuck in an infinite loop.  There is no resolution of these wildly-contradictory positions.
 
2012-12-29 10:51:40 AM  
You cannot argue with stupidity. My father sent this to me. I cannot even begin to try to explain the debt ceiling to him. This is why the GOP will keep control of the house, perfect gerrymandering.
duckduckgrayduck.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-12-29 10:55:44 AM  
My 9 year old nephew asked for an Xbox 360 with a Kinnect and about a dozen games, including the latest Call of Duty. On Christmas morning he opened his Xbox 360 with a Kinnect and a bunch of games. He did not get the Call of Duty game because he's nine. He then picked the Xbox up over his head and smashed it into thousands of pieces on the tile floor while screaming about lack of compromise and socialism.

It was a proud moment for the family of patriotic Tea Party patriots.
 
2012-12-29 10:58:37 AM  

Into the blue again: You cannot argue with stupidity. My father sent this to me. I cannot even begin to try to explain the debt ceiling to him. This is why the GOP will keep control of the house, perfect gerrymandering.
[duckduckgrayduck.files.wordpress.com image 850x1133]


Here's your response to dear old dad: any person who made $21,700, and owed $142,000 would not get told to just cut spending. They'd get told to get a second job and raise revenue.
 
2012-12-29 10:59:32 AM  

Kibbler: DamnYankees: lexslamman: All because the mainline GOP is too cowardly to stand up to the conservative minority in their party.

Since when are conservatives a minority of the GOP?

I think you've put your finger on it.  The modern state of the GOP is:

1) A large majority of them put themselves into the "severely conservative" camp, into the "gubbmint too big" camp, into the "must slash spending" camp, into the "income tax is EVIL" camp.

2) A majority even of Republicans want taxes on the top 1% to go up.

This has kept the party stuck in an infinite loop.  There is no resolution of these wildly-contradictory positions.


That's the problem with 'demonization'.

You can portray your opponents as ignorant, stupid, rancid, misguided, deluded... whatever... and excuse away having to make a deal with them.

However, if you convince your constituents that your opponents are evil minions of Satan, how can you later justify compromising with the hellspawn?
 
2012-12-29 11:01:18 AM  

Into the blue again: You cannot argue with stupidity. My father sent this to me. I cannot even begin to try to explain the debt ceiling to him. This is why the GOP will keep control of the house, perfect gerrymandering.
[duckduckgrayduck.files.wordpress.com image 850x1133]


Oh, and for lesson 2: after you clean up the mess, you'd most likely biatch to the city that they need to spend money to fix their sewer system.
 
2012-12-29 11:02:03 AM  

mat catastrophe: HAHA! I'M POOR AS HELL SO MY TAX RATES DON'T GO UP.

SUCK IT, MIDDLE CLASS ASSHOLES! THIS IS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR! THIS IS WHAT YOU GET!


I



If you have children, the child credit goes away. It was part of the Bush tax plan that the democrats in the Senate refuse to extend
 
2012-12-29 11:02:43 AM  

Xetal: We're blaming the Republicans because they're the ones at fault. They forced the creation of the "fiscal cliff", they caused us to lose a notch of credit rating for the first time, they're been doing everything they can to make this recovery as slow as possible, now they refused to negotiate something less severe for Jan 1.

We're blaming you because you are to blame, Republicans.



But, Moooooooooom, the president is still presidenting while not being a white Republican from an old-money family.

Great. You just made Boehner cry. I hope it makes you feel like a big man to pick on such a sensitive, precious flower.
 
2012-12-29 11:03:26 AM  

Karac: Into the blue again: You cannot argue with stupidity. My father sent this to me. I cannot even begin to try to explain the debt ceiling to him. This is why the GOP will keep control of the house, perfect gerrymandering.
[duckduckgrayduck.files.wordpress.com image 850x1133]

Here's your response to dear old dad: any person who made $21,700, and owed $142,000 would not get told to just cut spending. They'd get told to get a second job and raise revenue.


Man, I must be tired. Simple and perfect response.
 
2012-12-29 11:04:39 AM  

Into the blue again: You cannot argue with stupidity. My father sent this to me. I cannot even begin to try to explain the debt ceiling to him. This is why the GOP will keep control of the house, perfect gerrymandering.


Ugh. I saw that on Facebook, and it's so I dunno, symbolic of the tea partiers.

They like to condense complex social/economic governmental duties into caveman, brut like talk. Me no likey gubment.

I guess it's working, we do have the least productive Congress right now, that's what they were elected to do.
 
2012-12-29 11:04:56 AM  

Fubar: Don't they have some rule that no bill will be introduced unless it has majority republican support? What happens if Boehner breaks that rule?


Well it's a 'rule' in the sense it's something Boehner came up with for cover in situations like this where he's scared to death to offend the 20 or so Tea Party idiots in his caucus...but it's not a real rule. And hell, they've been breaking plenty of their own rules lately when it suits them.

The bottom line is this bill would pass easily. It would have massive Dem support, and there are GOP House members who have said they would vote for it. It's a maintaining of the status quo and NOT voting on it leads to a tax increase.

When you stop to think about this, it's just farking amazing. There's a bill to keep taxes at their current rate for something like 98% of Americans. A rate dictated by a GOP President. Not voting on the bill means a tax increase. And they won't farking vote on it!
 
2012-12-29 11:05:34 AM  

TheOther: Kibbler: DamnYankees: lexslamman: All because the mainline GOP is too cowardly to stand up to the conservative minority in their party.

Since when are conservatives a minority of the GOP?

I think you've put your finger on it.  The modern state of the GOP is:

1) A large majority of them put themselves into the "severely conservative" camp, into the "gubbmint too big" camp, into the "must slash spending" camp, into the "income tax is EVIL" camp.

2) A majority even of Republicans want taxes on the top 1% to go up.

This has kept the party stuck in an infinite loop.  There is no resolution of these wildly-contradictory positions.

That's the problem with 'demonization'.

You can portray your opponents as ignorant, stupid, rancid, misguided, deluded... whatever... and excuse away having to make a deal with them.

However, if you convince your constituents that your opponents are evil minions of Satan, how can you later justify compromising with the hellspawn?


Bingo.

Do you all remember that 'open session meeting' that the GOP offered to Obama and he took? And then sat in front of the GOP House and openly TOLD them that they were painting themselves into a corner by pretending like he was the Devil or some murdering communist? That they would find it 'very' hard to actually compromise down the road if they didn't start acting more sensible and get back to the business of governing?

That was back in...2010, I think. Or 2009.

And here we are, with that very same reality staring them in the face and they have the unmitigated gall to act surprised.
 
2012-12-29 11:05:46 AM  
Two words... Strategic Deficit.

Two more words... Fuk Republicans.
 
2012-12-29 11:07:32 AM  

starsrift: Why the absolute flying fark are we babbling about tax increases instead of the broadaxe of spending reductions that's going to be driven through the government across the board, instead of smartly, selectively, precisely cutting away the parts that do the least damage and are the least necessary?


Not many people know about the details of those other cuts. Defense contractors are going to get butchered, and states like Florida and California with high percentages of defense contract firms are going to lose a ton of jobs.  One of my friends has hopped around defense contracts for the past decade and had to take a lower-paying non-defense job recently so as not to be at risk.
 
2012-12-29 11:09:52 AM  

Shrugging Atlas: Fubar: Don't they have some rule that no bill will be introduced unless it has majority republican support? What happens if Boehner breaks that rule?

Well it's a 'rule' in the sense it's something Boehner came up with for cover in situations like this where he's scared to death to offend the 20 or so Tea Party idiots in his caucus...but it's not a real rule. And hell, they've been breaking plenty of their own rules lately when it suits them.

The bottom line is this bill would pass easily. It would have massive Dem support, and there are GOP House members who have said they would vote for it. It's a maintaining of the status quo and NOT voting on it leads to a tax increase.

When you stop to think about this, it's just farking amazing. There's a bill to keep taxes at their current rate for something like 98% of Americans. A rate dictated by a GOP President. Not voting on the bill means a tax increase. And they won't farking vote on it!


That unofficial rule is the backbone of the GOP's strength. Strength through Unity. Unity through Faith. They simply cannot have a vote on a bill where half of the GOP votes for it and the other half votes against it. It's unimaginable for them because then...they're in disagreement with each other. That means, one group is wrong and has to be purged. But which side? Both sides are going to think that they're the pure GOP, so...The knives come out.

That's why boehner ran from the Plan B vote when he realized he wasn't going to get a united GOP vote for it.
 
2012-12-29 11:10:16 AM  

EnviroDude: mat catastrophe: HAHA! I'M POOR AS HELL SO MY TAX RATES DON'T GO UP.

SUCK IT, MIDDLE CLASS ASSHOLES! THIS IS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR! THIS IS WHAT YOU GET!

I

If you have children, the child credit goes away. It was part of the Bush tax plan that the democrats in the Senate refuse to extend


Good. We are overpopulated. It's time for the government to stop subsidizing child rearing. Make people confront the full cost of raising a kid, so more will choose to have zero or one instead of three or four. You could lower marginal rates to compensate, but I'm sick of paying taxes to raise other people's contributions to global warming and unemployment.
 
2012-12-29 11:10:41 AM  

EnviroDude: It was part of the Bush tax plan that the democrats in the Senate refuse to extend


What? Republicans and Democrats agreed to the current plan (lots of "good" stuff goes away unless a new plan is agreed to).

The republicans refuse to let middle class keep the chid deduction unless rich get a tax break as well.

That is what the republicn party is hanging their hat on. Keeping tax breaks for the wealthy is more important than anything else.
 
2012-12-29 11:12:11 AM  

Infernalist: Do you all remember that 'open session meeting' that the GOP offered to Obama and he took? And then sat in front of the GOP House and openly TOLD them that they were painting themselves into a corner by pretending like he was the Devil or some murdering communist? That they would find it 'very' hard to actually compromise down the road if they didn't start acting more sensible and get back to the business of governing?

That was back in...2010, I think. Or 2009.

And here we are, with that very same reality staring them in the face and they have the unmitigated gall to act surprised.


They don't care. People like Tim Huelskamp literally believe they are on a holy crusade for God. The true believers are completely convinced that the Democrats are casuing America's apocalypse. Losing to Obama and the Democrats only makes them more hardened in their fight against evil because it brings the apocalypse that much closer in their eyes.
 
2012-12-29 11:12:26 AM  

Tommy Moo: EnviroDude: mat catastrophe: HAHA! I'M POOR AS HELL SO MY TAX RATES DON'T GO UP.

SUCK IT, MIDDLE CLASS ASSHOLES! THIS IS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR! THIS IS WHAT YOU GET!

I

If you have children, the child credit goes away. It was part of the Bush tax plan that the democrats in the Senate refuse to extend

Good. We are overpopulated. It's time for the government to stop subsidizing child rearing. Make people confront the full cost of raising a kid, so more will choose to have zero or one instead of three or four. You could lower marginal rates to compensate, but I'm sick of paying taxes to raise other people's contributions to global warming and unemployment.


I agree with the sentiment of 'too many kids', but we're not overpopulated. A few cities might have some congestion, but the nation itself is far from overpopulated.
 
2012-12-29 11:13:42 AM  

Tommy Moo: EnviroDude: mat catastrophe: HAHA! I'M POOR AS HELL SO MY TAX RATES DON'T GO UP.

SUCK IT, MIDDLE CLASS ASSHOLES! THIS IS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR! THIS IS WHAT YOU GET!

I

If you have children, the child credit goes away. It was part of the Bush tax plan that the democrats in the Senate refuse to extend

Good. We are overpopulated. It's time for the government to stop subsidizing child rearing. Make people confront the full cost of raising a kid, so more will choose to have zero or one instead of three or four. You could lower marginal rates to compensate, but I'm sick of paying taxes to raise other people's contributions to global warming and unemployment.


People aren't going to stop having kids over this. They are just going to be in a worse position to raise them.

Which, in the long run, is going to lead to more unemployment, and more kids.
 
2012-12-29 11:13:58 AM  

Serious Black: Infernalist: Do you all remember that 'open session meeting' that the GOP offered to Obama and he took? And then sat in front of the GOP House and openly TOLD them that they were painting themselves into a corner by pretending like he was the Devil or some murdering communist? That they would find it 'very' hard to actually compromise down the road if they didn't start acting more sensible and get back to the business of governing?

That was back in...2010, I think. Or 2009.

And here we are, with that very same reality staring them in the face and they have the unmitigated gall to act surprised.

They don't care. People like Tim Huelskamp literally believe they are on a holy crusade for God. The true believers are completely convinced that the Democrats are casuing America's apocalypse. Losing to Obama and the Democrats only makes them more hardened in their fight against evil because it brings the apocalypse that much closer in their eyes.


So, it's a religious delusion. Isn't there a requirement clause about 'sound mind' when operating in government?
 
2012-12-29 11:14:14 AM  

Into the blue again: You cannot argue with stupidity. My father sent this to me. I cannot even begin to try to explain the debt ceiling to him. This is why the GOP will keep control of the house, perfect gerrymandering.


That's the most frustrating part of politics, and it's not new or unique to America. How the hell do you have a debate about, say, healthcare reform, if the public at large doesn't understand the difference between a single payer system and a private system with a public option (hell, I still hear people saying that "Obamacare" nationalizes hospitals so they can make the rich pay for all the poor people)? How do you discuss a potential Medicare overhaul when the public (and some of the candidates even) have no clue what seperates a defined benefits plan ("this is what care we will pay for") from a premium support plan ("this is how much money towards your care you receive").

Republicanism is supposed to safeguard against this: the public at large might not understand the issues well enough to have an informed opinion on them, but they should have a say in who does decide these things. The problem is that those who study these things enough to know what the pros and cons of each are often outgunned by populist rabblerousers who argue that you know more in your gut than anyone who studied a subject could ever learn with their brain.
 
Displayed 50 of 197 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