What do you do when your Party shots itself in the foot? Answer, you shoot the other foot.

Yesterday the House passed the Duck, Dodge and Dismantle Bill (the phony Budget Amendment Bill that is really nothing more than a remake of the Ryan Bill except it is on Steroids) by a vote of 234 Yea to 190 Nay. As expected this was pretty much along party lines.

What the GOP/TP has done is proven beyond any reasonable doubt that they are the Party that wants to repeal/privatize or even destroy Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. They want to gut just about every middle class social safety net including Education, Medical Research, FEMA, FDA, Food and Product Safety, Food Stamps, Law Enforcement etc etc. They want to reduce regulations on Wall Street and Big Business in a society that wants more regulations not less. They want to guarantee that the top 2% will get record tax cuts that cannot ever be increased unless via a 2/3 vote which makes it very unlikely. This will increase the economic divide to a new record.

Not only are the GOP/TP on record for voting for this DRACONIAN ideology once, but now they are on the record for voting for the same thing only worse again. What the GOP/TP has done is slap America on the other side of our face.

I have written several pieces on why the Cut, Cap and Balance Act is a very bad plan for this country and now there is another article by CBPP: Nobel Laureates and Leading Economists Oppose Constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment - http://www.cbpp.org/files/7-19-11bud-pr-sig.pdf

This is a short article but sums up how bad this Bill is for our Country; read it takes only a minute or two.

Just about every economist of note from both side of the aisle has been saying from the beginning that any meaningful “Debt Ceiling Bill” must include spending cuts AND increased revenues, period. Nothing less will work for the long term and in fact one without the other would be a sure path to economic collapse. 80% of the American people say that the Debt Ceiling talks need to include increasing revenues as well and so say the economists, CEO’S of Major Corporations and even Wall Street. Why is the GOP/TP not listening to the people? Even the majority of their own constituents believe that the GOP/TP is on the wrong side of this argument and that any serious Debt Ceiling Bill must include Spending Cuts and Increased Revenues. Just look at the recent NCB/WSJ Report released yesterday. The American People support President Obama on this overwhelmingly and do not support the GOP/TP.

Examples of how drastic and bad this proposal is for America: http://www.cbpp.org/files/6-6-11bud.pdf

1. “It cuts total funding for non-defense discretionary programs by approximately 70 percent in 2021, and by more than $3 trillion over the next ten years, relative to the already reduced funding levels that Congress recently approved for fiscal year 2011 (adjusted for inflation).

This is the part of the budget that includes veterans’ medical care, most homeland security activities, border protection, and the FBI. It also includes education, environmental protection, protecting the nation’s food and water supply, and medical research, as well as services for disadvantaged or abused children, frail elderly people, and people with severe disabilities”.

2. “The budget slashes Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program by $1.5 trillion over the next ten years; Medicaid funding would be cut by 54 percent in 2021. (This is on top of the more than $600 billion in Medicaid cuts it would impose by repealing the Affordable Care Act and its coverage expansions.) It cuts SNAP by a remarkable $350 billion — or 50 percent — over ten years. And it cuts Supplemental Security Income, which provides poor people who are elderly or severely disabled with benefits that raise them to about 75 percent of the poverty line, by $238 billion over ten years; SSI would be cut in half in 2021”.

3. “It cuts at least $86 billion over ten years from Pell Grants, which help low-income students afford college. Other cuts include $84 billion in farm programs”.

The CBPP had a follow up report released on July 16th: http://www.cbpp.org/files/7-15-11bud-stmt.pdf

“Talking points that the legislation’s proponents circulated on July 15 seek to foster an impression that the measure would protect Social Security and Medicare. Such an impression would not be accurate. The legislation would inexorably subject Social Security and Medicare to deep reductions”.

“The measure does not cut Social Security or Medicare in 2012. And it does not subject them to automatic cuts if its global spending caps are missed. It is inconceivable, however, that policymakers would meet the bill’s severe annual spending caps through automatic across-the board cuts year after year; if they did, key government functions would be crippled”.

“Policymakers would have little alternative but to institute deep cuts in specific programs. And as noted elsewhere in this statement, before the debt limit could be raised, Congress would have to approve a constitutional balanced budget amendment that essentially requires cuts even deeper than those in the Ryan budget. Reaching and maintaining a balanced budget in the decade ahead while barring any tax increases would necessitate deep cuts in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. After all, by 2021, total expenditures for these three programs will be nearly 45 percent greater than expenditures for all other programs (except interest payments) combined. Big Cuts in these programs would be inevitable”.

“Moreover, because taxes — including payroll taxes — would be virtually impossible to raise as a result of the new constitutional barrier, Social Security solvency would have to be restored entirely through benefit cuts. Balanced Social Security packages that include measures to raise Social Security’s $106,000 payroll tax cap, so that higher-income Americans do not escape the tax on much of their earnings, would effectively be ruled out”.

This new CC&B is so bad for America in that even the Ryan Bill would not be passed under this new Bill. Reason – the Ryan Bill would not be DRACONIAN enough, it would be to tame.

The Debt Proposal from the Gang of 6 appears to be gaining favor as this is similar to the Bowles – Simpson plan. In short it would reduce the deficit/debt by 3.7 Trillion Dollars and includes 1 Trillion in increased revenues over the next decade. It cuts the DOD budget by 145 Billion and 500 Billion in immediate savings. I am waiting to see the whole proposal but this looks pretty close the so called “Big Deal”. It also does some heavy Tax reform as well. More later as it develops.

Also yesterday in Wisconsin State Senator Hansen (D) defeated the GOP/TP challenger in the first of 9 recall elections. One down 8 more to go.

“You are the most vile, unprofessional ,and despicable member of the US House of Representatives,” West wrote. “You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady.”

So this is how tea baggers control strong, intelligent female voices...

Why don't you tell us how you REALLY feel Alan? lol

From Politico on the Gang of Six proposal: “Speaking at the White House Tuesday afternoon, Obama gave the Gang of Six a big boost, saying its proposals were “roughly” in line with his negotiations during the stalled debt-ceiling talks.”

It makes $500 billion in cuts IMMEDIATELY. It lowers individual and corporate tax rates, changes the index for SS COLAs to one that does not go up as fast, and my favorite, moves the US corporate tax system from a worldwide system to a territorial system where US corporations don't pay tax on their international profits, just like the vast majority of other industrialized countries corporate tax systems. I’m looking forward to seeing lefty liberals argue that the U.S. SHOULDN’T use the same territorial corporate tax model as their beloved socialist icons: Canada, France, Germany, England, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Belgium, and Italy.

Lefty liberal's hair will be on fire with this one!!!!!

FR: In the Senate, we saw dozens of Democratic and Republican senators tripping over themselves to embrace the bipartisan Gang of Six deficit-reduction proposal, which Obama also praised. But in the House, Republicans passed their symbolic "Cut, Cap, and Balance" measure through a mostly party-line vote.

So once again, the House has produced legislation that puts the country on the path to solving the economic problems of the country. The Senate on the other hand has produced a "proposal". A mix of guess work, promises, and vague numbers that add up to nothing. So when does the Senate plan on voting on their "proposal"?

And nice work FR for calling the House bill, the one that passed the House by a substantial margin, "symbolic". How exactly do you term what the Senate has "produced"? Just a suggestion, "Vapor-legislation" would be a good term for the latest gob of goo the Senate has cooked up.

Louis:

Very very true. As I have been saying the GOP/TP is not concerned with the Debt Ceiling and this is just more stalling on their part.

We must remeber that the GOP/TP is betting against their own country and want the economy to fail and unemployment to increase as they see this as the only path back into the White House.

They just do not care what carnage or damage this does to our country or the global effect. As long as they get 100% of what they want is all that matters to them and the he!! with the rest of us - period.

It's been three months now, has anyone heard what they found about all those evil, oil price-gouging, corporate crooks? You would think that if there was any kind of a smoking gun we would have heard something by now. Of course, they may have just found that all the lefty liberal suspicions and accusations had no basis in fact, and they are waiting to issue a press release stating that at 5:30 PM on a hot August Friday.

April 21, 2011, 6:11 pm

Obama Sets Up Team on Oil-Price Fraud
By JACKIE CALMES

7:41 p.m. | Updated President Obama sought again to show his concern for high gasoline prices, announcing on Thursday at a public event in Reno that the Justice Department is forming a team to investigate possible fraud in oil markets.

Mr. Obama last month directed his attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., to probe any reports of price-gouging. Now, he said, “we’re going a step further,” setting up the team “to root out any cases of fraud or manipulation in the oil markets that might affect gas prices – and that includes the role of traders and speculators.”

I wonder whether any Republicans would care to comment on Allen West's e-mail to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, especially in view of Spanky's snarky comments yesterday about her appearance, as compared with Michele Bachmann's, and of course considering the battle she has fought so courageously over breast cancer.

West said, among many other pretty harsh things, that DWS was not a "lady." Would anyone care to defend that e-mail -- and/or Spanky's comments -- as having been "gentlemanly"?

In my view, "mean-spirited" doesn't begin to describe the misogynist attitude that Congressman West has displayed. Like Anthony Weiner, but for slightly different reasons, West doesn't appear to have the appropriate temperament to be a House member. Perhaps he ought to think about resigning.

By the way, compared to what DWS has been through, Michele Bachmann's migraines are like a walk in the park. Compared with what DWS has been through, Michele Bachmann's so-called achievements pale by comparison.

The House passes their Cut, Cap and Balance idea and the left immediately slips into degrade and demean mode. Oh those silly Republicans, wasting time on a symbolic action that has no chance of surviving in the Senate. Symbolic, perhaps. A waste of time? Hardly. Because it represents an unmistakable expression of the depth and breadth of support for the core idea of regaining control of our fiscal future. And we can thank the Tea Party for bringing this issue to the top of the agenda.

The Tea Party has exerted an overwhelming and dominant influence on American politics. Without them there would be no debt ceiling debate, it would just be the same old, same old business as usual. Without them there would be little if any effort by some Gang of 6 or any other gang to take a serious look at how we can regain control of our fiscal future. Without them the uber liberal Obama-Pelosi-Reid axis would remain ascendant, with little need or inclination to address the viability of our unsustainable welfare state. In short without the Tea Party, our leftist ship of state would continue to be steaming full speed ahead on its current course towards fiscal ruination.

Thank goodness for the Tea Party, they've almost single handedly dragged Obama into the church of fiscal discipline. It's nice to know that finally, there are adults in town who actually have a clue.

The new party of Reagan

By Dana Milbank, Published: July 19Washington Post
After he switched to the Republican Party in 1962, Ronald Reagan famously quipped: “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. The party left me.”
"Now, the Republican Party is doing the same thing to him — and Democrats are happy to take Reagan back."

"At Tuesday morning’s meeting of the House Democrats, caucus chairman John Larson rallied his colleagues for the day’s debt-limit debate by playing an audio recording of the 40th president.
“Congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility,” Reagan says in the clip. “This brinkmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets, and the federal deficit would soar. The United States has a special responsibility to itself and the world to meet its obligations.”
“Kind of sums things up,” Larson said, playing the same clip again at a news conference.
Nobody knows what Reagan, who died in 2004, would make of the current fight over the debt limit. But 100 years after Reagan’s birth, it’s clear that the Tea Party Republicans have little regard for the policies of the president they claim to venerate.

Tea Party Republicans call a vote to raise the debt ceiling a threat to their very existence; Reagan presided over 18 increases in the debt ceiling during his presidency.
Tea Party Republicans say they would sooner default on the national debt than raise taxes; Reagan agreed to raise taxes 11 times.
Tea Party Republicans, in “cut, cap and balance” legislation on the House floor Tuesday, voted to cut government spending permanently to 18 percent of gross domestic product; under Reagan, spending was as high as 23.5 percent and never below 21.3 percent of GDP.

That same legislation would take federal spending down to a level last seen in 1966, before Medicare was fully up and running; Reagan in 1988 signed a major expansion of Medicare.
Under the Tea Party Republicans’ spending cap, Reagan’s military buildup, often credited with winning the Cold War, would have been impossible.

No wonder Democrats on Tuesday were claiming the Republican icon as one of their own. After the caucus meeting with the Reagan clip, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) began the day’s debate by reading from a 1983 Reagan letter to Congress warning that “the full consequences of a default — or even the serious prospect of default — by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate.”

“In the year of his 100th birthday, the Great Communicator might be amazed at how far his own image has shifted from the original,” Quigley charged. “He’d see his most dedicated followers using his name as justification for saying no to honoring our debts. He’d see his legacy used to play chicken with the world’s greatest economic engine.”
Republicans have continued their ritual praise of Reagan during the debt-limit fight. Rep. Trent Franks (Ariz.) claimed that the budget caps would allow America to be “that great city on a hill that Ronald Reagan spoke of.” Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.) invoked Reagan’s belief that “the closest thing to eternal life on Earth is a federal government program.”Kevin Brady (Tex.) cited Reagan’s line that “the nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’ ” Both Steve King (Iowa) and Bobby Schilling (Ill.) informed the body that they had granddaughters named Reagan.

But while Reagan nostalgia endures, a number of Republicans have begun to admit the obvious: The Gipper would no longer be welcome on the GOP team. Most recently, Rep. Duncan Hunter Jr. (Calif.) called Reagan a “moderate former liberal . . . who would never be elected today in my opinion.” This spring, Mike Huckabee judged that “Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult, if not impossible time being nominated in this atmosphere,” pointing out that Reagan “raises taxes as governor, he made deals with Democrats, he compromised on things in order to move the ball down the field.”

During the debt-limit debate, a procession of Democrats — Vermont’s Peter Welch, Maryland’s Chris Van Hollen, New York’s Paul Tonko, Texas’s Sheila Jackson Lee and Gene Green — claimed Reagan’s support for their position. Reagan is “revered by many Democrats,” said Welch, who praised Reagan for fighting “the absurd notion that America had an option when it came to paying our bills.”

Half a century after he left the party, the Gipper is winning one for the Democrats."

Feisty:

Rep. West's comments come as no surprise. The GOP/TP considers Women as second class citizens. Just look at how they are taking away their reproductive rights defying their rights as guaranteed by the constitution. They opposed equal pay for equal work saying men are more important in the work force than women.

Joe in Albany: Lefty liberal's hair will be on fire with this one!!!!!

Let Harry Reid put the Senates "proposal" into legislation, and lets see how the Democrats vote for it. It probably would go down 2-98. I guess FR can then term that legislation "symbolic", just like they termed Obama FY2012 budget Version 1.0 (voted down in the Senate 0-97) "symbolic". Oh wait, FR never termed Obama's total failure of budget anything, kind of just let it go. Odd that they couldn't find a term for that budget of Obama's.

So how exactly is legislation that passes the People's House, and passes by a substantial margin, but yet is termed "symbolic", when the Senate can't pass anything? FR, you and the rest of the liberal media obviously have your blinders on to where the People of the country stand on these issues.

It's amusing (and revealing) that so many here at First Read want to praise President Obama for the hard work done by the "Gang Of Six". Revisionist history...the truth is somewhat different.

Last April, President Obama undercut the "Gang Of Six" negotiations by appointing VP Biden to head up yet another group aimed at coming up with the President's oh-so-elusive plan to address the nation's debt crisis.

Biden's effort soon collapsed in failure while the "Gang Of Six" never stopped working to produce a plan based on the debt commission Plan...the same debt commission Plan that President Obama refused to endorse.

It's funny though...

No sooner did the "Gang Of Six" announce their breakthrough agreement-in-principle than President Obama promptly appeared in the White House press briefing room to embrace it...without even having read it!

I guess he didn't want to repeat the mistake he made with his own debt commission...the same mistake that First Read's Chuck Todd made reference to at last Friday's presser.

The President sure looked like he wanted to be the 7th member of the "Gang", didn't he?

I wonder whether any Republicans would care to comment on Allen West's e-mail to Debbie Wasserman Schultz

____________________________________________

I'm not a Republican (I'm registered independent), but, my comment would be he is the Republican's Alan Grayson, just another Florida kook.

Anna Molly;

See my post above, their is no defense for West's comments. What is so sad is that he is just repeating the ideology of the right wing crazies. We see it here every day on this board.

You cannot defend what is not defensible but the GOP/TP will try and spin it. We misunderstood or this was really not a factual comment or some other BS that they continue to try to use to BS America just like they did on other issues like Bachmann's hubby comments on Gays, etc.

"Pitchforks and nooses" Louie? Seriously? The overwhelming number of Black males murdered in the US every year are murdered by other Black men...in cities controlled by Democrat administrations. Did you know that?

Kudos to Rep West for sticking it to Wasserman-Shultz. After some of the things she has said, it's about time she got some of it thrown back in her ugly face. And the fake outrage on here regarding "women as 2nd class citizens" etc... is amusing since it was only hours ago that the liberals here had a field day making jokes about Bachmann's health issues and expressed their continuing hatred for her because she's a conservative and a Christian.

Anna Molly-

My reaction would be that Ms. Wasserman-Schultz initiated the exchange with West.

You reap what you sow, AM.

The other shoe always drops doesn't it?

Actually, AM...I don't have any objections to Debbie's appearance.

Her political views are another matter entirely.

According to the tea bagging darling on the right this is how MEN talk:

Democratic U.S. Rep. Ron Klein says Republican challenger Allen West's campaign rhetoric is often "extreme" and "threatening" and "offensive."

West says Klein needs to "man up."

In the Palm Beach-Broward congressional District 22 race, Klein and West haven't merely differed over the stimulus and health care bills and other elements of the Obama-Pelosi agenda that Klein backed and West opposed.

They've also clashed over West's words - and over Klein's regular use of a Florida Democratic Party videographer to record and transcribe those words when West makes public appearances.

The practice isn't uncommon in modern politics, but West recently called the taping "Gestapo-type intimidation tactics" by foes out to distort his positions. Klein said the reference to Hitler's secret police showed "appalling disrespect to Holocaust victims and survivors."

Klein's campaign recently posted footage from March in which West calls Islam "a totalitarian theocratic political ideology," voices disdain for people with "Co-exist" bumper stickers and slams "chicken" leaders who read "memos from the feminists."

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=11&ved=0CFkQFjAK&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.palmbeachpost.com%2Fnews%2Fthats-how-men-talk-gop-challenger-west-says-911415.html&ei=JdgmTtrHFKTh0QG4iYnECg&usg=AFQjCNHFG0H8EFuuIrir1mWPlhnYZPInBQ

As you can see, he also has zero problem slandering Muslims & Jews!

What a man... what a mighty fine man... *insert snark*

The "Gang of Six" proposal may work in the longer term but it is a distraction right now. They will need at least 2 to 3 months to came up with legislation that reflects the framework, so in the time frame we have their proposals are meaningless.

On the poll question of raising the debt ceiling. If I was told that if we don't then SS and Vets would be affected , of course I would want it raised. However, if I was told that we are borrowing 40% of the money required to pay SS and Vets benefits and now we need to borrow more I would want to know what can we cut to live within our means.

@AM Yes, West should apologize for that email.

BTW I hope you have been following the earnings season of large multi-national companies. When you look at their earning most of the growth is coming from BRIC countries. The US growth is very low. Maybe this explains why they employ so many overseas workers. It's not that jobs are being shipped overseas, it is just like Honda or Toyota building plants here to employ, build and sell their products here.

AM-

In my opinion, the term "Lady" could be interchanged with "gentleman". That said, that email was wrong- as was DWS waiting until a colleague had left the Chamber to attack said colleague. So, they were both wrong, and this is not a schoolyard. Could we get some adult behavior from them?

That said- I save my umbrage for egregious affronts. I am NOT a supporter of Bachman's candidacy- I do not think her terms as a congressional representative give her the right experience for the job of president, (and we are living with the result of a president who was too inexperienced for the job)- but I DO object to the "migraine headache" stories. They are nothing more than the old "women cannot hold responsible positions because their monthly cycles and hormone fluctuations render them incompetent every month" nonsense we've experienced in the past.

Now, why did I not see you decrying that yesterday? Selective outrage?

Jody:

Outstanding Post - Kudos. Can not think of anything to add.

MB-

Watch and /or read the transcript...S/b Could never become legislation and the Go6's goal was to convert the principles of S/b into something that could be voted on...and their plan is in trouble in the house...

______________________________________________________________________________________

JUDY WOODRUFF: And the president came right out -- he's making a regular habit, I guess, of talking to reporters in the White House Press Briefing Room -- and he embraced it -- or the idea of it.

DAVID CHALIAN: He did.

First of all, he said it tracks somewhat similarly to what he and Speaker Boehner were discussing. Remember that grand bargain? We know that the president wants a large deal. He was discussing something along the lines of $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years. They're not quite the same components, but a similar goal with a mix of revenues, increased revenues, and cuts to entitlement programs.

So, that's why he immediately embraced it, because he hoped maybe that this would have a chance to work its way through Congress as a possible vehicle for a deal in the end.

JUDY WOODRUFF: So you have a couple of senators. We heard Lamar Alexander saying he's interested. But the Senate is one thing, David. The House is something altogether different.

DAVID CHALIAN: This is entirely the rub right now, Judy, are these House Republicans who have seemed unwilling to consider anything that has a revenue -- you know, enhancing revenues as a component to the deal.

I have been on the phone this afternoon with senior Republican leadership aides in the House. This Gang of Six plan, though it does have increased revenues on the side, is not dead on arrival at all. In fact, I think House Republicans, from my sense of my conversations today, might be a little more open to going down this road than that other backup plan we have been talking about for the last several days, that Reid-McConnell plan.

We will get to that in a moment. But in its current form, as the Gang of Six outlined it today, it could not pass the House. And so we're in the same sort of gridlock.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec11/debt_07-19.html

Bill, Fairfax:

The House passes their Cut, Cap and Balance idea and the left immediately slips into degrade and demean mode.

No, indeed, I waited until I stopped laughing. It took a while.

You must have us confused with Congressman Allen West.

By the way, I'm interested to hear you call CC&B an "idea." No specifics there, either.

How much does the president want to increase the debt limit and how long is this supposed meet our needs?

Damage, where did I mention anything about Black people... I said anyone that is different.

Damage, the mob mentality exhibited by TEA Party members such as yourself only makes the America we know as a contorted image of where it is we would like to go. Damage, put the pitch fork down... Frankenstein would have reacted a little differently if the people weren't so close-minded.

The Republican Leadership fan the flames by bowing down to Rupert Murdochs empire. Damage, you bow down when you defend the rhetoric of the TEA Drinkers. The more you bow down, the more your knees are sown into the ground of discontent and you become a worshipper of everything that is against what is right and good in this society. Stand up against this nonsense Damage. For when you stand, the man can't ride your back and you are United with those that want to see America and her people prosper.

Job1:

Outstanding post. One of your best and you have many.

no joe:

Now, why did I not see you decrying that yesterday? Selective outrage?

Not really. I just don't happen to think the migraines make much difference. She's not competent to begin with.

Thus, my actual comment was that those periods might be an improvement. I'm almost more afraid of her when she has her wits about her than I would if she was temporarily incapacitated by a migraine.

Pretty cool, Navy. Since Jody has not posted, one can assume that you have nothing to add to her silence.

So that I understand. All the President's supporters are for raising the debt ceiling and were supportive of ALL the times it was raised in the past will be supportive of it ANY time in the future?

I reach this conclusion because you continually cite references to when it was raised under Republican Administrations.

The irony of an Administration elected on the slogan of "Change" continually using the previous Administration's actions to support its arguments must be lost on it's supporters.

The Duck, Dodge and Dismantle passed yesterday mostly along party lines, NO surprise there. 9 GOP/TP Party memebers and 5 Democrats jump ship. Here is what they said:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0711/Who_cut_their_party_on_Cap__Balance.html

Nine Republicans and five Democrats broke with their party Tuesday night on a vote that would tie raising the debt ceiling to a balanced budget amendment.

Republicans hailed the largely symbolic measure as a milestone towards capping spending. Democrats lambasted the approach as draconian and promised to point to the vote in the 2012 elections.

Here are the members who didn't stick to their party's script:

The GOPers voting no, for the most part, did so because they believed the plan did not go far enough to slash spending or were opposed ideologically to lifting the debt ceiling.

Reps. Michele Bachmann & Ron Paul -- Two presidential contenders trying to make a statement that even this proposal doesn't go far enough. Bachmann, in particular, said the bill didn't go far enough to strip "Obamacare" of funding.

Rep. Connie Mack -- The Florida Republican is a notable 'no' as speculation swirls he just may pull a Hoekstra and take a second look at the increasingly appealing Florida Senate race. Mack's reasoning throws a bone to the right: He opposed it on the notion that the the amendment shouldn't be used as a bargaining chip to raise the debt ceiling.

Rep. Paul Broun -- The Georgia congressman who sits in a ruby red district promised his constituents he wouldn't vote to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstance and said there are other ways lawmakers can reach a balanced budget.

Rep. Morgan Griffith -- The Virginia freshman who knocked off 28-year incumbent Rick Boucher with 51 percent of the vote said he couldn't vote for a debt ceiling hike "without significant cuts," meaning $100 to $200 billion.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher -- Via Twitter, the California congressman called it a package including "dubious" spending cuts and an amendment "that may never happen."

Rep. Francisco Canseco -- Along with Griffith, Texas' Canseco had the closest 2010 race of all the Republican 'nos'. Ciro Rodriguez has already lined up for a rematch.

Rep. Scott DesJarlais -- Three days ago, the Tennessee freshman called a balanced budget amendment pivotal. But his tea party blood apparently couldn't stomach what leaders billed as a compromise.

Rep. Walter Jones -- It's no surprise that this staunch fiscal conservative ended up opposed to his party's leadership. He's known for bucking the GOP and is infamous for calling on President George W. Bush to apologize for "misinforming" Congress on the Iraq war.

The Democrats voting yes are some of the last remaining of the Blue Dog coalition -- and just happen to be the most vulnerable 2012 incumbents.

Rep. Dan Boren -- The lone Democrat in Oklahoma's delegation is already retiring and the smart bet is that whoever replaces him would've voted the same way.

Rep. Jim Matheson -- The Utah Democrat may bolt his seat to run statewide for U.S. Senate, but he's waiting to see how redistricting pans out in the fall. He said while the bill is not perfect, it takes an important step toward addressing the debt. Matheson won by five points in 2010.

Reps. Heath Shuler & Mike McIntyre -- Here are two imperiled North Carolina Democrats looking for any way to show their distance from Democratic leadership. They both will likely be selling themselves in more GOP oriented districts next year.

Rep. Jim Cooper -- The Tennessee Democrat also penned a letter to the Speaker urging him to hold a vote on the Gang of 6 plan that President Obama praised Tuesday. He also called the posturing over the debt ceiling "an extremely dangerous game of chicken."

Mixed Bag:

The other shoe always drops doesn't it?

I don't know, but to borrow a tactic from you .... does it?

And why do we need to drop shoes in the first place? Barefoot is fine by me. ;-)

Mixed Bag and Molly..

MB: I too thought it funny that the President jumped in with both feet to support to the Gang of Six proposal without reading it. It is the only balanced proposal out there and has bipartisan support in the Senate. After seeing Coburn on Charlie Rose, I gained a new respect for the man and now know why is is one of the Presidents closest friends.

What surprises me is that no one here is talking about the cuts to the democratic core programs. You can hear a pin drop. After all the debates on the sanctity of the social entitlement programs, no one is criticizing the President. Perhaps reality has finally set in here and the Senate that this is the only solution. Now the crazies in the House need to get their heads on straight and get behind this 'Plan".

Anna Molly: West is a pig who's comments do not belong in any workplace. He should, at a minimum be brought up on charges before the ethics committee. Then again AM...a Congressman called the POTUS a liar during a State of the Union address and NOTHING happened. Respect and honest debate have disappeared from the politics of today.

Off to save the tri-state area!!!

Have a good day.

So, Bill in Fairfax "The Tea Party has exerted an overwhelming and dominant influence on American politics." From the numbers in the poll, it looks like they're a minority in a minority.

House Republican leadership finds itself caught between the Tea Party and independents, huh? Like you couldn't see THAT coming?!! Calling all train wreck fans! Let's just sit back and watch the fun!

You're right Navy. That was a great post by Job1. I can't think of anything to add to it. Of course, nevermind that it's by Dana Milbank. But still, keep up the good pasting Job1.

Feisty (quoting):

The practice isn't uncommon in modern politics, but West recently called the taping "Gestapo-type intimidation tactics" by foes out to distort his positions. Klein said the reference to Hitler's secret police showed "appalling disrespect to Holocaust victims and survivors."

Taping the Congressman's actual words is a "Gestapo tactic"?

Hey, MB -- speaking of "other shoes," what do you have to say about this one?

Louis J:

Touche' point and match. The GOP/TP is so lost and impotent they are running around this board like a bunch of scared rabbits. They cannot argue from and valid ideas so they continue to spout the same lies, make up new ones and put words into people mouths. Typical Karl Rove and I guess they are trying to make him proud hoping that maybe when the country goes into the toilet Karl Rove will save them. NOT - they are all going to be in the same boat we are.

“You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady.”

Yesterday, some people on this board were picking on Wendy Wasserman Schultz for not meeting their requirements in the lady-like department. I had to laugh, after all that "pitbull with lipstick" bravado Sarah Palin displayed during the 08 election, which we all know just masked her glass jaw, the Tea Partiers are accusing Shultz-Wasserman of being unfeminine. As US Navy pointed out, Republicans may like their "barracuda" women, but they sure don't support women who stand up for young women in trouble, or single mothers, or senior ladies needing healthcare, now do they? Kudos to Wendy for standing up for Medicare recipients. That's my definition of a Lady.

dangerfield-

Good discussion on the Newshour.

But can you explain to me why virtually all of the media attention is focused on the problems the "Gang Of Six" proposal will have with House Republicans...while ignoring the fact that so many House Democrats are bitterly opposed to the spending cuts that would be a part of any House legislation?

Any bill in the House that's based on what the "Gang Of Six" envisions will face fierce bipartisan opposition...that's certain.

I'm more interested in focusing on the extent of the bipartisan support for such a measure, dangerfield.

Granted...that's not the media's focus, is it?

How can anyone miss the biggest problem in this budget debate? The budget is about negotiating. We have a monstrous budget deficit and we cannot close the gap overnight.

TIME OUT! Let's go back about ten years and take a look at the CBO projections. In 2001, CBO told America, we would have a zero national debt right now, this very minute. That's right, we would not owe anyone a cent. However, in 2001, the entire government was put in the hands of the G.O.P. and remained there until 2007 - that's six years of uninterrupted Republican rule. To be fair, it must be noted that Dems did have the power of the filibuster. (This isn't about blame. This is fact, and it points to outright mismanagement.) What was then the Bush tax cut, and is now the Obama tax cut was put into place. That cut is now the single largest component of the debt. Remember, we were supposed to be out of debt right now. Two invasions and a large medical bill also pumped up the debt. Then we have the Wall Street debacle, which has an enormous impact through the entire economy.

Unemployment skyrockets. The housing market collapses. Retail sales stall. Debt increases - enormously.

We'd better get this under control and we elect President Obama and hand power to the Democrats in 2009. Unemployment finally begins to slow. The housing market continues its decline, but slows. Retail sales show signs of improvement. The costs associated with all that continue to add to the debt and of course the costs of the wars are now out in the open and on the books and the Dems continue the tax cuts - still the largest driver of the debt. But, in typical American style, we are angry that this problem wasn't solved in 15 minutes.

We'd really, really better get this under control. So, in 2011 we hand the House to the G.O.P., which is telling us the problem is jobs, jobs, jobs. They immediately begin an assault on citizens' rights. The "culture war" now comes front and center. Rhe rhetoric - white-hot rhetoric - is the weapon of choice. They fiddle - America burns.

Do the warring factions negotiate? Hell no! From my perspective, the Republicans have set the tone - and it's nasty. They send forth their bullies and punks - actually just flip sides of the same coin. I ask myself how I could negotiate with a punk like Eric Cantor. He's a sellout and it is crystal clear he has no intention of budging from his Grover mandate. "Sit, Eric! Beg, Eric! Roll over, Eric!"

I ask myself how I could negotiate with that insufferable punk/bully from Illinois - Joe Walsh. When pressed to show us the 100-billion-plus-dollars in cuts, he deflects. He runs and hide behind talking points. That's all we get. The punk/bully doesn't have the guts to tell us where he'll cut. He might piss off someone who's bigger than he is, you see.

He tells his interviewer Chris Matthews that the President hasn't put forth a plan. That's the President's job you know, even though the Constitution puts that responsibility on Congress. However, as a matter of fact, the President has presented an outline. But Walsh is an ignorant ideologue who doesn't know that, "The President proposes and Congress disposes."

He taunts Matthews about his remark about the tingle up his leg - not once, but twice. Now, he can go back to his staff and snicker about his nasty little remarks. The punk/bully is a fifth-grader.

Then comes Alan West, a real man. No doubt this guy isn't a punk - he's the flip side of that coin, a bully. He's a real man because he served in the military, that's why he's tough enough to call out Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who wouldn't break a sweat debating this intellectual lightweight. How many times have we heard Republicans tell us that liberals are afraid of strong, intelligent women? This, when they refer to the jokes known as Palin and Bachmann. Put a genuinely intelligent woman out there and they tell us she is not a lady. Hey Jack, you're in the world of politics. Go buy a pair of man pants and quit sniveling.

Really, does anyone see how you negotiate with people like that? Really?

I can't answer for MB, but, for myself, AM-

Where were you when Navy went on his "Nazi", "fascist", "Brownshirt" binge?

Selective outrage again?

Anna Molly..

As you know, I get a little riled about all things Nazi...

Wow AM...Nixon must have been a member of the Gestapo also. How many hundreds of hours of taped conversations took place in the Oval office without anyone's permission. Brought down his Presidency.

The man is just an inarticulate boob and his comments just give further proof that he is.

This comment points out the extent to which Conservatives see their position as good vs evil instead of differences in philosophy;

And to top it off, freshman Tea Party Rep. Allen West (R-FL) fired off a mean-spirited email to DNC Chair and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), after she suggested that West’s support for “Cut, Cap, and Balance” would increase costs for Medicare recipients. “You are the most vile, unprofessional ,and despicable member of the US House of Representatives,” West wrote. “You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady.”

What's it take to be "vile, unprofessional, and despicable"? Just to disagree with the Gospel of Conservatism. This comment just backs up the David Brooks column which FR highlighted yesterday. The GOPTP is unable to deal with governance in a rational matter because of their conviction that this is a hero's battle and they are the heroes. Their ideology has blinded them and they are unable to function as elected representatives should.

Bill Clinton said recently that if he were president, he would invoke the "constitutional option" and simply continue paying what the government owes and ignore the debt ceiling. An historian who was a guest on one of the MSNBC shows last night said that the president would be on the most sound constitutional grounds if he waited until Republicans forced the country into default and then invoked the option.

After the stock market starts losing 500 points a day and interest rates start to skyrocket, the Republican leadership wouldn't oppose Obama very forcefully, and the Roberts Supreme Corporate Court would be unlikely to block Obama since he would be saving the mega corporations whose interests the Court serves from financial ruin. Right now, I think that's the most likely scenario. I just don't see how the teabaggers in Congress will ever go for the "Gang of Six" deal because it does raise revenues.

However, in 2001, the entire government was put in the hands of the G.O.P. and remained there until 2007

Get your facts right. Tom Daschele was the Senate Majority leader from June 2001 to January 2003

When the 107th Congress commenced on January 3, 2001, the Senate was evenly divided—that is, there were 50 Democrats and 50 Republicans. Outgoing Vice President Al Gore acted in his constitutionalcapacity as ex officio President of the Senate, and used his tie-breaking vote to give the Democrats the majority in that chamber. For the next two weeks, Daschle served as Senate Majority Leader. Then, upon the commencement of the Bush administration on January 20, 2001, Dick Cheney became President of the Senate, thereby returning Democrats to the minority in that body; Daschle reverted to the position ofSenate Minority Leader. However, on June 6, 2001, Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont announced in that he was leaving the Senate Republican caucus to become an independent and to caucus with Democrats;^[15] this once again returned control of the body to the Democrats and Daschle again became Majority Leader.

Hello dumb Tea Baggers!

Hello fanboi Tree Huggers!

'Scuse the sane people while they run roughshod over you and actually work out a deal.

When this goes through, and all the radicals who drew their line in the sand go back to their constituents with nothing in their hands, I'll sitll be laughing. :D

I've already said it, AM.

If you're going to call out a fellow House member on the floor of that chamber, expect a vigorous response.

None of this would have occurred but for Rep. Wasserman-Schultz's initial comments to Rep. West.

West's response was inappropriate...

But it WAS a response, wasn't it, AM?

He did not initiate the exchange.

West is a career combat soldier...he isn't accustomed to pulling his punches...obviously, even when he should.

Deb will get over it...like everyone else.

Just like here at First Read, AM.

It's been three months now, has anyone heard what they found about all those evil, oil price-gouging, corporate crooks?

Yeah. We found out that Republicans are still willing to go to the mat in order to protect the "corporate people" who are stealing from the rest of us through speculation.

When will Conservatives recognize that excessive speculation is hurting the economy and get out of the way of reasonable regulation?

Did anyone else see the tea bag for brains Rep. Joe Walsh (R) IL screaming he's YOUR President at Chris Matthews last night?

I was laughing my butt off watching Joey's face get redder & redder as the interview wore on... it's probably best it ended when it did, otherwise, the dude just might of stroked out on camera!

America is regretting having mainstreamed CRAZY and their days are numbered... ;o)

Alan, NJ: So that I understand. All the President's supporters are for raising the debt ceiling and were supportive of ALL the times it was raised in the past will be supportive of it ANY time in the future?

I reach this conclusion because you continually cite references to when it was raised under Republican Administrations.

When Senator Obama in 2006 made his now famous speech of why he wouldn't vote for raising the debt ceiling because of Bush's "lack of leadersip", the vote in the Senate was 52-48 or so to raise the debt ceiling, with ZERO Democrats voting for it.

Now of course, the Democrats are all for it. "Changing circumstances" as Johnnie B, from Des Moines says.

No Joe:

Where were you when Navy went on his "Nazi", "fascist", "Brownshirt" binge?

Since I have no idea what you are talking about, probably at work. Sorry I can't help out. But I'm guessing that Navy at least knew how to use the terms, which West obviously does not.

Ira:

The man is just an inarticulate boob and his comments just give further proof that he is.

I'm surprised that you, in particular, would be so forgiving of someone who misuses the "Gestapo" reference in that way.

But, otherwise, you certainly are correct. Trouble is, West is in a position where he can be a REALLY dangerous "inarticulate boob."

@ Bag Boy ~ Nice deflection. ;-)

MB- forgive me for repeating myself, but...

I sincerely hope that "I want to be quotable" politicians from BOTH niches can hold their powder and something actually gets done. Tomorrow there will be tales of who is in a hissy-fit about what, and some will be "walking back" their initial statements and or suspected inclinations. If it bleeds it leads journalism dictates that the focus will be on the dissension rather than the concurrence within the ranks. And there is NO WAY to control the "true believers" on either side.

So I feel like the character in That old Woody Guthrie tune "worried man", because while I have never held a single doubt about the outcome of the debt ceiling "crisis", I am sure as hell worried that the Go6 plan is destined to become a watered-down version of their watered down version of S/b, ultimately no more than a band-aid.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Sometimes I hate being right...You?

____________________________________________________________________________________

Any bill in the House that's based on what the "Gang Of Six" envisions will face fierce bipartisan opposition...that's certain.

I'm more interested in focusing on the extent of the bipartisan support for such a measure, dangerfield.

Granted...that's not the media's focus, is it?"

______________________________________________________________________

I think we get "something" out of this, the question is how diluted it has to be to pass through the strainer of The parties ideological sacred-cows...

Feisty:

Did anyone else see the tea bag for brains Rep. Joe Walsh (R) IL screaming he's YOUR President at Chris Matthews last night?

I was laughing my butt off watching Joey's face get redder & redder as the interview wore on... it's probably best it ended when it did, otherwise, the dude just might of stroked out on camera!

Yes, it was so nice, I saw it twice. Matthews gets credit for patience. I'd have cut him off a lot sooner.

Another guy whose intellect and authoritarian temperament simply aren't up to the task.

Anna Molly..

I didn't forgive the Gestapo reference..

I wrote another post about that reference.

Totally inappropriate and, as I said earlier, he should be brought up on charges before the ethics committee.

He needs to apologize, publicly, for his remarks.

I don't care what is background was. He's a US Congressman now and not in combat and there are is a definite decorum that needs be followed. He broke Parliamentary decorum.

There is NO excuse for language like that by anyone at anytime.

Hope that clarifies my stand on his outrageous remarks.

AM ; Since I have no idea what you are talking about, probably at work

I see you scroll through Navy's long winded, often repetitive posts as well.

So the Gang of 6 proposal consists of a total $4T in deficit reduction achieved through a balanced combination of spending cuts and revenue increases...just like President Obama wanted in the first place.

JoAnna:

Now of course, the Democrats are all for it. "Changing circumstances" as Johnnie B, from Des Moines says.

I'll take a break from de facto ignoring you to agree with you for a change. "Changing circumstances" are no doubt the very same reason why the four top Republicans in the House and Senate, who oppose raising the debt ceiling now, collectively cast at least 20 votes to raise the debt ceiling during the George W. Bush administration.

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2011/07/07/bush-raised-debt-ceiling-five-times/

White Collar:

AM ; Since I have no idea what you are talking about, probably at work

I see you scroll through Navy's long winded, often repetitive posts as well.

I didn't say that. Some days I read everything, and some days I read only what I can. Some days I read nothing. That I missed it completely is surprising, however; if what no joe said is true, it must have drawn a lot of fire and generated a lot of comments.

Ira:

There is NO excuse for language like that by anyone at anytime.

Hope that clarifies my stand on his outrageous remarks.

It does. Thank you, Ira.

Mixed Bag

My reaction would be that Ms. Wasserman-Schultz initiated the exchange with West.

You reap what you sow, AM.

There's no bad behavior that Bag won't excuse from a Republican. This is the statement Wasserman-Schultz made that triggered West's insane rant:

http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpps/news/allen-west-calls-debbie-wasserman-schultz-vile-dpgonc-20110720-fc_14207313

"The gentleman from Florida, who represents thousands of Medicare beneficiaries, as do I, is supportive of this plan that would increase costs for Medicare beneficiaries, unbelievable from a Member from South Florida," she said.

Compared to the hateful attacks against President Obama made routinely by Republicans, that's pretty mild criticism. But Schultz was wrong about the "unbelievable" part. West is a nut case who got in trouble when he served in Iraq for conducting a mock execution of a prisoner, something that is considered a war crime except by tyrannical regimes and terrorists.

Alan, NJ:

Argue as you will. The majority in the Senate from 2001-2003 changed hands several times in that period. Here's the specifics:

"Note: From January 3 to January 20, 2001, with the Senate divided evenly between the two parties, the Democrats held the majority due to the deciding vote of outgoing Democratic Vice President Al Gore. Senator Thomas A. Daschle served as majority leader at that time. Beginning on January 20, 2001, Republican Vice President Richard Cheney held the deciding vote, giving the majority to the Republicans. Senator Trent Lott resumed his position as majority leader on that date. On May 24, 2001, Senator James Jeffords of Vermont announced his switch from Republican to Independent status, effective June 6, 2001. Jeffords announced that he would caucus with the Democrats, giving the Democrats a one-seat advantage, changing control of the Senate from the Republicans back to the Democrats. Senator Thomas A. Daschle again became majority leader on June 6, 2001. Senator Paul D. Wellstone (D-MN) died on October 25, 2002, and Independent Dean Barkley was appointed to fill the vacancy. The November 5, 2002 election brought to office elected Senator James Talent (R-MO), replacing appointed Senator Jean Carnahan (D-MO), shifting balance once again to the Republicans -- but no reorganization was completed at that time since the Senate was out of session."

I'll concede your point. That does not alter the fact that the agenda put into law had an unmistakeable Republican imprimatur.

Now, why don't you talk about the debt that we weren't supposed to have. Nope. It's always about deflection. You'll dwell on a minor error - anything - to divert attention from the fact that the G.O.P. created this morass.

ONE CHANCE before 2012 for Tea Party Patriots to put the Washington SPENDING ADDICTS on COLD TURKEY therapy?

Debt ceiling

Thanks, AM.

But we're not sparring back-and-forth in a courtroom.

It's not serve and volley.

I meant what I said.

If you consider it to be deflection, I'm OK with it.

Was this a deflection, too?

Are they all deflections, AM?

Bill Clinton said recently that if he were president, he would invoke the "constitutional option" and simply continue paying what the government owes and ignore the debt ceiling. An historian who was a guest on one of the MSNBC shows last night said that the president would be on the most sound constitutional grounds if he waited until Republicans forced the country into default and then invoked the option.

_____________________________________________

I really do enjoy the fact that lefty liberals have no problems with asserting the power of the office of the President to simply ignore a law passed by Congress and signed by the President. They say it's OK for Barry to order the Treasury secretary to sell debt that has not been legally authorized by Congress despite the wording in the 14th amendment:

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

Imagine their OUTRAGE if GWB took this position if a Dem Congress didn't raise the debt ceiling and you will see how ridiculous their position is. They'd be screaming for his impeachment!! But, it's OK with them for Barry to do such an unconstitutional power grab.

Bill in Fairfax, yes, the teabaggers did get the country talking about debt reduction (exactly what the POTUS wanted so he wouldn't take the blame for cutting programs citizens want). Too bad, however, that those teabaggers didn't want to compromise and take a balanced approach with tax increases for the WEALTHY, like every sane person wants. They could have taken their ideas straight to the white house in 2012......Now, no matter what happens, the POTUS looks like the decent, compromiser, we get our financial house in order, and Republicans and teabaggers fight and look as bad as they really are.

Thankfully we have a intelligent POTUS and can turn conservative, right-wingers and teabaggers in circles and still do what's best for the country.

Good morning, Houston.

As one who's been accused (by you, oddly enough) of "brainless teabaggery" on this board, I'm having a little trouble accepting your credentials as an arbiter of appropriate standards of civility in political debate.

Was that "bad behavior", Houston?

You're simply not to be taken seriously on this particular topic, Houston.

Sorry.

AM: I'll take a break from de facto ignoring you to agree with you for a change. "Changing circumstances" are no doubt the very same reason why the four top Republicans in the House and Senate, who oppose raising the debt ceiling now,

Of those four Republicans, are anyone of them voting "Nay" for raising the debt ceiling regardless of what conditions (if any) are placed on raising that limit? If the answer is no, you just told a lie.

House Republican leadership finds itself caught between the Tea Party and independents, huh? Like you couldn't see THAT coming?!! Calling all train wreck fans! Let's just sit back and watch the fun!

Are you serious? Are you trying to tell me you can't see the direction the train is moving, i.e. running roughshod over the vaunted leftist vision of government? Let's review the bidding.

Obama embraces the Gang of 6 plan, a plan that includes tax code reform that lowers the rates and broadens the base by eliminating loopholes. Hmm, kinda sounds similar to Paul Ryan's plan (which the left demonized) as well as the Bowles-Simpson commission. The Gang of 6 plan also reforms Social Security by changing the basis for cost of living increases, takes real money out of Medicare and Medicaid, and repeals the Class Act from last year's HCR – again, all sacred pillars of the left. And you want to tell me that any of this would have happened in the absence of Tea Party influence? HA, gimme some of that dope you're smoking.

The Gang of 6 plan as well as the Bowles-Simpson plan on which it is based leans heavily towards the Republican position – maybe 80%, eh? Some Tea Partiers may choose to maintain their hard line stance and still reject that plan. Others may not because the Cap, Cut and Balance vote gave them enough political cover to shift to an approach that is more doable.

It remains to be seen whether or not that will happen. But there is NO DENYING this basic point: we're having this debt debate because of the influence of the Tea Party. AND their influence has had the effect of moving both Bowles-Simpson and the Gang of 6 much closer to the Republican position and farther away from leftist Democratic position.

So we'll see about that train wreck. Right now the train is running all over cherished Democratic ideals.

You know what, Louis? I just read your post and suddenly I being bathed in white light! OMG!!!! I think I'm beginning to see it! I'm seeing the truth! I really do believe that Saint Barack will make the oceans recede! I believe the whole world loves us again! I believe that soon there will be no more rich people, we'll all be equally poor! YES!!! I see the light! I can't wait to join the crowd here and have my knees be dirty, not from bowing to the Tea Partiers, but from bowing to Barack The Great! I love welfare mothers and illegal aliens too!!!!!!

Hi Feisty,

I did see that A-hole Rep. Joe Walsh (R) IL. It was funny.

Now, why don't you talk about the debt that we weren't supposed to have. Nope. It's always about deflection. You'll dwell on a minor error - anything - to divert attention from the fact that the G.O.P. created this morass.

Thing is David, I agree with you on this. It would have been wonderful if the debt had been paid off. I could not believe Alan Greenspan argued against this when he was still "Maestro". So I accept that the GOP, and the Bush Administration started us down the path to the current debt mess we are in.

However, they are no longer in power, and all I see from the current Administration are the same policies of the Bush Administration. They allowed the tax cuts to be extended. They spent $1T on a stimulus. They are borrowing $0.41 of every dollar they spend (Even Bush didn't achieve that feat). They have admitted that the SS trust fund is a sham. They escalated the war in Afghanistan. They expanded the Medicare-D program. They started a kinetic, non-hostile action in Libya. They still use rendition. They have a prison at Bagrham airbase that is as bad as Gitmo.

So why don't you explain to me exactly how this current Administration is such an improvement on the last fiscally irresponsible one, or do accept my view that there is no substantial difference between them.

So we'll see about that train wreck. Right now the train is running all over cherished Democratic ideals.

_______________________________________

There is always the hope that it's a train using green technology and alternative fuel.

Hey it's a start Damage... it's a start. I believe the president is capable of doing some things, but not all things.

There's no need to bow to any man. Just stand for the issues such as the less fortunate and those that wish to seek a better life in the land called the United States of America. Nothing wrong with that.

Well, Bag Boy, if you won't respond to Houston directly, then I hope you might at least respond to what Representative West said in his e-mail in light of what DWS said actually said on the floor of the House, as Houston quoted it in his own post, and I copied it directly from the linked article:

"The gentleman from Florida, who represents thousands of Medicare beneficiaries, as do I, is supportive of this plan that would increase costs for Medicare beneficiaries, unbelievable from a Member from South Florida," she said.

And then let me know whether, in your opinion, West's e-mail to DWS qualifies as "reaping what you sow."

If you can still justify those remarks in your own mind, and then also accept without comment his misuse of the term "Gestapo," that's just fine by me.

I'll stand by my earlier comments, too.

As the stakes become higher the drama and associated white noise increase exponentially and voices of reason appear to be drowned out. But as proved time and time again in this nation's history though the extremists get the lion's share of publicity our system of government, imperfect as it is, generally disallows radical swings left or right. This country is way to big for a one-size-fits-all economic solution. No matter what emerges next month, it will not please everyone.

As acrimoniously divisive as the Tea Party appears to be I can not agree with some of the utter doom and gloom postings on this board. References and comparisons to Nazis, Brownshirts, and fascists are just inaccurate within a historical context.

That being said, c'mon guys, get the budget done! We did it in California with surprising compromise.

It has come to my attention that the Republican Party (at least the rational ones) are starting to realize that, contrary to what their previous leaders have said, deficits do matter. They are also starting to come to the understanding that the Tea Party is a very, very small, if vocal, MINORITY. As such, they can be ignored without any true consequences.

Due to the presence of people like Sarah Palin, Grover Norquist, Paul Ryan, Michelle Bachman and other extremists supporting the Tea Party, it is slowly being marginalized by its own actions. Whenever a politician takes an extreme view which he/she is unwilling to adjust to the circumstances, they eventually will lose favor of the public.

As an example, there are not doubt some people in the National Rifle Association are against gun control of any type, in all circumstances. If those people are in leadership positions of the NRA, that becomes the position of the NRA. However, most members would be in favor of not allowing persons who have been convicted of using a gun in the commission of a felony from possessing a gun while on probation. Such a position is, of course, untenable.

A similar situation is present with the Tea Party and taxes. The inability to increase revenue, despite circumstances which require it, makes the Tea Party position ludicrous. Any politician who strongly supports such a position is likely to find themselves marginalized and, hopefully, losing their seat in the next election.

dirp1: They are also starting to come to the understanding that the Tea Party is a very, very small, if vocal, MINORITY. As such, they can be ignored without any true consequences.

What do you think the debt ceiling would be today if the GOP Tea Party hadn't won the House in 2010? $16 Trillion? $18 Trillion? Think we'd be talking about cutting government if the Tea Party hadn't made it an issue? The current GOP has certainly got the message that deficits matter, but the far left extremists like Obama and the leadership in the Democrat party seem to be blind to the new paradigm as they are being dragged kicking an screaming to the "changing circumstances".

It has come to my attention that the Republican Party (at least the rational ones) are starting to realize that, contrary to what their previous leaders have said, deficits do matter.

From this statement I assume that you think deficits matter? If so, what cuts in entitlement programs have been proposed by the rational Democrats?

Right on, dirp101. I like your concept that extremists are eventually marginalized by their actions. Hopefully over the next few months the torches of the extremists will have burned out and maybe, just maybe the GOP can field a quality candidate - like Mr. Huntsman.

dangerfield-

Last night I listened to a discussion between former Democratic Senate chief-of-staff Larry O'Donnell, and "Gang Of Six" member, Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND).

Senator Conrad insists that because of the way the instructions to the various Senate committees dealing with elements of the "Gang's" proposal are structured, there will be no "watering down". As I understand it, on spending cuts, for example, the committees will be provided with a total number, and will be expected to fill in the details of the cuts.

If they respond with a different, lower total figure for spending cuts, or are unable to agree, a separate panel would choose the numbers instead in order to reach the original target for that particular committee.

Listening to Conrad, it sounds as though the "Gang Of Six" has come up a method to ensure compliance with the parameters of their plan. Whether that plan will ultimately have the votes to pass both Houses of Congress is another matter entirely.

Also, I want to hear the reactions of all the interested parties to the final legislation as written...not what they have to say now. That said, I don't think any final bill will deviate much, if at all, from the original proposal.

Now...

"Sometimes I hate being right...You?"

Hmmm...let me think about that...

No...I don't believe so.

lol

Bill from Fairfax wrote:

The Gang of 6 plan as well as the Bowles-Simpson plan on which it is based leans heavily towards the Republican position – maybe 80%, eh? Some Tea Partiers may choose to maintain their hard line stance and still reject that plan. Others may not because the Cap, Cut and Balance vote gave them enough political cover to shift to an approach that is more doable.

Bill, i don't know what you're smoking but, with means testing for social security and medicare, capping the mortgage interest deduction, eliminating the mortgage deduction for second homes, and doing away with tax loopholes (all raising $1Trillion), we're finally getting the rich to pay their fair share.

Sounds like Democratic principles to me.

Mixed Bag addressing Houston - I'm having a little trouble accepting your credentials as an arbiter of appropriate standards of civility in political debate.

Mixed Bag - Note how others involved in the last week's flare up, Ira for example, did not try to cover for Allen West. Why are you rationalizing West's email rant?

MB - If you're going to call out a fellow House member on the floor of that chamber, expect a vigorous response.

MB it doesn't sound like you to use the well she attacked him first defense (which she didn't).

Too other FR readers sorry if this is another one of my unnecessary hurt feeling thin skinned moments. Next comment will be about the Gang of six.

Mixed Bag..

Remember last week.

Politics aside.

Ms. Wasserman Schultz is Jewish.

The Gestapo reference to a Jew is way out of line.

Read my post to you from last week about Holocaust Distortion.

This is no different.

Mr. West needs to apologize for the words.

They are offensive to Ms. Schultz regardless of how he meant it, his prior occupations, etc.

You can't excuse it here and call someone out over it somewhere else.

Every time you see it or hear it, you call it out for what it is.

StC: we're finally getting the rich to pay their fair share.

Lets be real. For the Liberals/Socialists, the "rich" will never be paying their "fair share".

Anna Molly-

Here's what I said:

"West's response was inappropriate"

That's "INAPPROPRIATE", AM.

And;

"West is a career soldier...he isn't accustomed to pulling his punches...even when he should."

That's "EVEN WHEN HE SHOULD", AM.

Sorry...but, that's all you get.

:-(

You could always draft a statement more to your liking, and try to get me to sign it...

:-)

Ira-

West should apologize for the "Gestapo" reference...that was merely insensitive and in poor taste, given Ms. Wasserman-Schultz's ethnicity. Not sure that it qualifies as anti-Semitic language, though.

What say you?

Bag Boy:

You could always draft a statement more to your liking, and try to get me to sign it...

Much as I would no doubt enjoy that, this will also do nicely, Bag Boy. For now.

@ Ira:

I don't believe that West's "Gestapo" comment was addressed toward DWS, but rather was an accusation applied to another Congressman who had the audacity to have West's public remarks video-recorded.

So, even though DWS is Jewish, I agree with Bag Boy that we can't draw the conclusion his remarks toward her were anti-Semitic, although misogynist still seems like fair criticism.

West's use of that term was still inappropriate, however, given what the real Gestapo was and did.

Mark-

You're asking for trouble when you call out a fellow House member by name on the floor.

You're virtually assured a negative response.

I've already commented on the details of West's response.

Mixed Bag..

Read my post...I think he needs to apologize.

Any reference that compares the actions of the Gestapo to a taping of a conversation is Holocaust Distortion and a form of Antisemitism.

On this my friend we disagree...

Ira-

I think we would certainly have to disagree. I (apparently) mistakenly believed that West's Gestapo reference was directed at Ms. Wasserman-Schultz. Your comment implied that this was the case...evidently, it is not.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Ira, but...

Are you saying that any use of the word "Gestapo" whatsoever, that is, any context outside of a direct historical reference to the Gestapo as the murderous police arm of the Nazi regime, is an example of anti-Semitic hate speech?

If that's the case, there are many more anti-Semites among the general population than I ever imagined.

I'm simply glad that I'm not personally fond of using the "Gestapo" analogy or comparison when engaging in debate, Ira...because it's certainly a widely accepted practice, isn't it?

Bill, Fairfax, VA

"And you want to tell me that any of this would have happened in the absence of Tea Party influence?"

Since the last balanced budget occurred in the CLINTON administration, yes I do! The Tea Party is the 21st century's answer to the Know Nothings of the 19th century, soon to be skidmarks on the undershorts of American history. They're too rigid and uncompromising to have anything to do with a sensible plan! Hell, they think letting the debt ceiling expire is a good thing! You think BOEHNER'S up to being the ringmaster in this circus? Based on what? Good freakin' luck with THAT!

And we are YET AGAIN seeing this thread hijacked by Ira Lapin and his thin skin trying to extract some sympathy for the 'voilation' of his sensibilities of being Jewish by what Rep. Allen West said, and deflecting from the REAL thrust of this thread which is the debt ceiling and how the Democrats and Republicans are dealing with it.

Again - do we REALLY care what Rep. Allen West said? I know I don't.

You want him to apologise, Ira? Then make it your personal quest to hound rep. West's office and get your apology.

We need to STAY ON TOPIC here and not fall for this 'faux outrage' over a supposed 'anti-semitic' remark that Rep. Allen West made.

And Ira - you SERIOUSLY need to grow a thicker skin if you want to hang around here.

Seriously.

Mixed bag...

...and now you are finally getting it from an old Jewish man's perspective.

It doesn't matter that the comment was not directed at DWS.

The fact that West would compare the taping of a conversation to the Gestapo is to trivialize the vile acts of the Gestapo as being...well...that's not so bad....is a gross distortion. That sort of comparison when the 2 acts aren't close to comparable is unacceptable.

The fact that it may be widely used...so are many other derogatory or insensitive remarks. Does it make it right?

Even if Wests comments were not intended to be anti-Semitic...and upon reflection they probably were not.....don't you think that the less we use Nazi comparisons to everyday events the better we will be.

When appropriate though, go for the jugular.

Pietro...

Don't you have me and Ira on ignore?

I thought you did...

Is there a "conditional ignore", or "periodically ignore" setting?

Auntie - and clinton still added to our debt by abourt $1.1 trillion or do you wish to dispute the federal governments historical debt numbers??

Bill of fairfax - nice analysis

Poor, poor Navy. What a disconnect YOU show.

On one hand the libs proclaim that the right and business america are out to increase their holdings, but yet navy says...

We must remember that the GOP/TP is betting against their own country and want the economy to fail and unemployment to increase as they see this as the only path back into the White House.

Seems that Navy has neglected to understand anything approaching economics...One doesn't destroy an economy and its workforce to increase ones holdings. Any destruction of the economy is well under way by obama and company with a continued desire to raise taxes and irresponsible spending, via credit by using the good name of America as collateral.

The only consistancy in navy's rhetoric is his desire for one party rule and the stifling of all who shoul disagree with him and his cohorts.

Pietro..

I do have you on ignore and had to go look up what you posted.

FYI....My posts were in reaction to Anna Molly's posts and questions I was asked by AM and MB.

You need to calm the hell down....the President is not going to read your posts today or the posts of anyone else on this blog before he makes any decisions today.

It's just a blog...one of thousands on the net.

If it's ok with you, I will continue to respond to questions and comments directed at me.

RogueAmerican, once again we see the canard that only the rich are successful! There are millions of success stories that AREN'T all about the benjamins! Seal Team 6 comes to mind.....

Ira-

I agree that the fewer the Nazi references in ordinary, contemporary political discourse, the better.

By the way Ira, thanks for posting the link to the Shoah website the other day. Thanks for sharing a little bit.

Your comments and posts are not always 100% political in nature, I will share that trait with you. As with anyone else I appreciate all comments and posts that add to this forum whether they come from a D, R or I. Keep them coming no matter who says otherwise.

edit...... PS. Ok I have to hold my nose to appreciate comments from the R's.

Mixed Bag..

See conservatives and quasi liberals can get along.

Why doesn't it work with the rest of the world and, of course, FR!

Tea party Mottos:

"America the beautiful. Land of the free and the brave, where everyone is free to agree with me."

"Everyone has the freedom to express their opinion as long as it agrees with mine."

"We are free to debate everything and anything, for example:
-"Should gay people be lobotomized or castrated?"
-"Should liberals be tried or simply thrown in jail?"
-"Should women who consider having an abortion be branded with a hot iron or have their heads shaved?"
-"Should handicapped people be denied any health care or should they simply be put to death?"
-"Should education be funded or just left to rot?"
-"Should the elderly receive partial SS at the age of 85 or should SS be eliminated and the elderly fend for themselves?"

Let's hear it for the new wave of American fascism. Hitler must be doing back flips in his grave.

Don't you just love how the right wingers here, not to mention Boehner and Cantor themselves, love to bandy about the term "The People's House"?! ROFLMAO! Over the past several weeks, poll after poll shows that the People do NOT support what the House is doing, do NOT support the Ryan budget, but want a MIX of spending cuts and increased taxes on the superwealthy/closing of corporate tax loopholes. The Repub/Tea Party congresspeople and senators could not care less about "the People"! Protecting the superwealthy and the corporations, as they've been HIRED to do, is their only motivation. After all, they never cared about the deficit or the debt ceiling before, when Repub presidents were in the WH.

Yellowdog-Mark D..

Thanks for the kind comments and in fact I read your posts also.

The Shoah website is one of the saddest places to visit on the web and as counter intuitive it is, one of the most fulfilling. It brought closure to my family and I'm guessing to many other families who wondered what happened to their families.

We better cut this short...Pietro doesn't like it we're distracting from the thread.

Good talking to you.

Ira Lapin - you are absolutely right. I need to employ the IGNORE button on your posts so I can see and respond to what is important.

Have a good day, Ira.

Job1:

Excellent post.

If I can add one more point . . . the son of Ronald Reagan, his very own SON, has publicly stated that his father would NOT be a part of the current GOP or Tea Party. Yes, the son of Ronald Reagan, perhaps the single person who knew him best, has come out and let the world know that Reagan himself would be more aligned with current liberal policies.

Conservatives HATE this fact, and have chosen to completely ignore it . . . changing the subject whenever someone points it out.

JoAnna

Lets be real. For the Liberals/Socialists, the "rich" will never be paying their "fair share".

I'm sorry, I think you missed the memo from Fox News. As Jon Stewart reported, Republicans are no longer allowed to use the word "rich" in any sentence . . . you must now replace it with "job creator".

Let me give you an example:

Recently, I ate a delicious chocolate souffle and eagerly proclaimed, "Oh wow, this souffle is good . . . it's so job creator"

If you happen to watch UFC, you must now refer to Rich Franklin as Job Creator Franklin.

And the title of a well known, best selling book, has been changed to "Job Creator Dad, Poor Dad"

Please heed this advice as we move forward. Fox News desperately needs your help in controlling the will of the people.

Thank god all the paid bloggers and parrots out here are only used for propoganda and they dont actually think that thier "arm-chair politician" status means that they are actually smart enough to run this country. If any of these "cut and paste mis-information junkies" ever made it to washington, we would be cast into the dark ages under the likes of navy, redhead, and the rest of the peanuts gang o' merry,dilusional winged monkeys. Sqwak! Sqwak! you nasty little parrots.

The reality of the entire situation is that there does need to be cuts made to the federal budget. Ending our involvement in two ( 3 ?) multi-trillion dollar wars which, more importantly, have cost far more in the blood of young men and women, would be a start. A further requirement should be that there needs to be a reevaluation of the continued existence of each and every military base, ship, plane, boat, submarine, helicopter, etc.

Every line item in the federal budget and the tax code needs to be closely evaluated to determine is cost, effectiveness and whether their is duplication.

You can not have effective budget action when 1/3 of the budget (revenue) is taken off the table.

And there you go, everyone. No good deed goes unpunished.

Consider my career as a junior moderator to be done.

soon to be skidmarks on the undershorts of American history

Nice line, tip of the cap to AF. A bit crude and not quite as as eloquent as Reagan's "swept into the dustbin of history" remark, but plenty good enough for this board.

RogueAmerican: I don't recall anyone stating that profits are a "social and economic injustice", that Corporations are (in and at itself) inherently evil, or that "the rationale is expressed perfectly under the guise of '"from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"' (Marxism). The only people I hear say those things are Republicans like your hero Hannity (I notice you borrowed all of his sound-bites).

What people do oppose is the Republican mantra that everyone making over $250,000 a year are necessarily "job-creators", that imposing ANY higher taxes on them would "kill jobs" (in this economy, businesses need is customers, not tax breaks - and if they're not making any money they don't pay any tax), and that, without regulations, jobs would be falling out of the sky. Your solution would be to go back to the days without any requirements for businesses to have any social or economic responsibilites. We see how that worked in the early 19th and 20th centuries, and as recently as 2008.

Corporations are doing fine in this economy (I guess it doesn't take a PHD to lay off workers when business turns bad). They can certainly sacrifice (if that's even the right word), like the rest of us, to help the country return to more prosperity for everyone willing to work.

It seems like you're trying to teach something that just doesn't make many believe, and worst yet, isn't true. Maybe you need a lesson about teaching.

Goood posts Damage and JAS1. I sincerely hope the House stops the Gang of 6 bill. While it does some good things such as lowering corporate tax rates and simplifying the tax form it does it in ways that will cost everyone more except for the 48% that already get a free ride. I cannot believe that all of the charities that rely on donations are not in Washington today to find out if these folks are crazy eliminating deductions for charitable giving. Talk about really nuts, now eveyone will only buy homes that cost $499,999. That really solved the problem. It is just hopelessly depressing that these people are supposed to be some of the brightest minds we have to offer. I am sorry I don't see it. but the House had the right idea passing their bill and hopefully they can stop the Gang of 6. If Obama (or France) agrees with you, you are probably on the wrong side.

robert@mo: since there is not (yet) a GO6 bill, I wonder if the House TeaPublicans plan to hold a Default party and will Paul Ryan, Michelle Bachman, Eric Cantor or Ron Paul be the host. Do any of them play the violin or fiddle? If so, they can do their best Nero impression.

Did everyone hear the latest Tea Party / GOP theory? Oh yes, Rush recently let us all know the REAL reason behind these debt ceiling talks.

Apparently, according to Rush, this has nothing to do with the economy. Rush just let everyone know that the REAL reason we are working on the debt ceiling is because Ramadan starts on August 1st, and Obama has put the deadline as August 2nd. Obviously this is a huge Muslim conspiracy.

That's right . . . the new TP/GOP theory is that this entire discussing is a giant Muslim conspiracy revolving around Ramadan. *facepalm*

Really, Republicans? REALLY?

Do you want to know why everyone thinks you are absolutely crazy, nut-jobs, freaks, and psycho? Because you believe in these retarded conspiracy theories. As if the whole birth certificate theory was not crazy enough, now you have decide to one-up yourself.

Do you honestly think that any logical person can hear your stupid, f**ktard conspiracy theory and then take you seriously?

Bag:

As one who's been accused (by you, oddly enough) of "brainless teabaggery" on this board, I'm having a little trouble accepting your credentials as an arbiter of appropriate standards of civility in political debate.

And here you are defending a brainless teabagger, which is exactly what West is. In other words, you're once again engaging in brainless teabaggery. Nobody has lower standards than you do when it comes to "appropriate standards of civility in political debate." And we are talking about how members of Congress are supposed to behave, not how I respond to trolls like yourself. Wasserman-Schultz' comment about West was totally in bounds but West was out of bounds by the usual standards of conduct in Congress.

Thanks, Houston...

Exactly the response I expected from you.

You would have made a wonderful subject for one of Ivan Pavlov's conditioned reflex experiments, had he been able to simply have you glance at one of my posts here at First Read.

You simply can't resist can you?

Have you noticed yet that I virtually never initiate an exchange with you?

I've pointed it out to you before.

It's always you, Houston.

Always.

lol

Were it anyone else, I wouldn't bother to reply...but, you seem to enjoy our exchanges so much.

:-)

RogueAmerican: You really need your head examined!!

David Walker: Your posts are always on the mark....keep 'em up!

Enough said!

Bag:

Have you noticed yet that I virtually never initiate an exchange with you?

Uh, so what? You think you're hurting my feelings? In case you didn't know, I'm allowed to reply to any post I choose. I only reply to yours when they're exceptionally disgusting or stupid -- as opposed to when they're only average in those categories. Your comparison of West's insane rant to Wasserman-Schultz mild criticism was exceptional in both categories.

And you never reply to the substance of anyone else's post that you disagree with. You only change the subject. Your lame defense of West is a new low for you.

I see now where the Dear Genteel Democratic"Ladies" of the House have sprung to Ms. Wasserman-Schultz's defense demanding an apology from Mr West for hurting the poor Woman's feeling's ,(and I am sure the only reason they, and the other greatly outraged Dems on this site did not jump to the defense of Ms. Palin and Ms. Bachmann, when They and their families, were being savaged ,for the last three years, in the most vile and hateful ways imaginable, was that the shock and trauma of the language used against those Republican Ladies must have thrown You mighty defenders of the fairer sex into coma's, from which You have just recently recovered),but as far as an apology, good luck with that, the woman did lie,(she herself voted to cut 500 billion dollars that was supposed to go to seniors from the budget and put it into Obama Care and then lied about Mr West's actions, from the Floor of the Chamber after he had left, absolutely despicable. ), Mr West was just addressing her, one Professional to another , giving her his honest and direct appraisal of her actions,it happens between men of Honor and Integrity all the time. So, to the offended Democrats on this site, and the "ladies" of the House,Republicans did not start this, Democrats made the rules, the Republicans are just playing the game,so stop Your whining, if You can't stand the heat,(as Ms. Palin and Ms. Bachmann have demonstrated they could do), I suggest You get back to the kitchens.

Houston-

Had you been paying attention, you might have noticed that I said that Rep. West's response to Rep. Wasserman-Schultz was inappropriate...and that West should know when to pull his punches.

That said, Wasserman-Schultz and West have a history of animosity...when Wasserman-Schultz went after West by name on the floor of the House, she knew that West would respond.

Thus, when all is said and done...Wasserman-Schultz initiated the whole regrettable affair.

Sorry that you disagree...too bad, too sad, Houston.

Try again.

A Broken Congress:

It is not surprising that the House passed the Cut, Cap and Balance Bill, thus appeasing the Tea Party base. Republicans voting for the Ryan Bill and now voting for Cut, Cap and Balance could cost the GOP/TP control of the House. Severe cuts in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are not what the majority of the American people have in mind.

Likewise the Gang of Six has presented their plan which includes some tax increases and modifications in Medicare. President Obama looks with favor at this plan, but I have dim hopes that this bill will become law. House liberals don't like the Medicare provisions and House conservatives don't like the tax provisions. I expect this plan will ultimately end in the circular file.

So what is left is the McConnell—Reid back-up plan B. It is a relatively clean plan that will raise the debt ceiling, but solves very few existing problems. Even that plan may not pass as the conservatives in the House prefer to stick with their ideology and allow America to become a nation that does not pay its debts. That is crazy and those legislators will likely be looking for a job in 2012.

Important Numbers from the NBC/WSJ Poll:

38% favor raising the debt as opposed to 31% saying no – this is a total flip flop from last poll

58% support the Obama Plan and only 36% support the GOP/TP Plan

62% of Americans say compromise AND raise taxes on the 2%

58% do not want any cuts to Medicare and/or Medicaid

The bottom line is that President Obama is winning this fight with the American People and the right wing crazies are losing. As more and more information comes out his (President Obama) numbers looks better. Could change tomorrow but who knows, today he is winning.

Ron, The teaparty folk are just rolling along on the wrong track with their Cut,Cap and Balance nosense yesterday.

If there is to be a deal similar to the gang of six proposal or just the McConnell/ Reid deal, the House will have to pass this without the Teaparty faithful. It will be moderate Rpublicans and Dems. John and Nancy better be talking to work this out.

Joanna, I know you are disappointed but the train wreck needs to be prevented , because the Teaparty folks can't see the lay of the land or read the polls.

Can you give me the actual specifics of the Obama plan so I can compare them to the GOP plan and make an informed judgement???

I don't want to get back from you "He supports cutting Medicare, changing SS and cutting discretional spending by 4 trillion". I want to see the real specifics just like the GOP did.

Hiya, Navy-

I thought that the most important numbers in the new NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll were the numbers on President Obama's job approval; for the first time since last December, he is again underwater in job approval:

47% approve;

48% disapprove.

Gosh, the Tea Parties started in February 2009. That was one month after President Obama took office. I wonder where they were before that when under W. Bush was in charge and our nation was bought to its knees with a threat of a great depression under W. Bush, and the massive spending that took place under his reign.

Well, the answer becomes clearer after some common sense reflection is used and I know us Progressives have a pretty good idea as to why this Tea Party was suddenly formed once President Obama took office.

The good news is that this party is being exposed for what they really are and their days are numbered.

So, we Progressives have to fight this group of people commonly known as "Tea Baggers", "Hillbillies", "Brown Shirts", and Racists."

Call them what you want, because they are bad for our nation, and I can't wait for their demise.

Northstar:

Excellent analysis. I might add that all meaningful legislation will have to be passed without the Tea Party.

Ron-

Thanks for making reference to the difficulties faced by the "Gang Of Six" proposal among House Democrats.

If the President's support for this plan is sincere, he will have to lobby House Democrats vigorously...even aggressively, if legislation based on the proposal is to pass that chamber.

Likewise, Speaker Boehner will be busy with the Tea Party caucus.

Ron Indiana: Excellent analysis. I might add that all meaningful legislation will have to be passed without the Tea Party.

So will the Senate "proposal" be labeled"symbolic" by the media because it has no chance of passing in the House?

Lets watch and see!!

Mind a reference to those "specifics"? There were no "specifics" in the Republican Cut, Cap, and Balance plan if that is what you refer to. Just generalities. They knew it was symbolic but they feel the need to play to the knee jerk crowd. They are wasting the country's time, their ideology isn't washing any longer with independents. They have lost the message, which may have had some valid points, due to their approach of holding the country hostage to what many now see as the extreme. They need to compromise and quit the tantrum. I was glad to see yesterday that most of the house freshmen are not interested in reelection as I'm no longer interested in voting for them. This was no way to conduct the country's business.

The top 1% of the population owns 20% of the Wealth in America!

How about that factual data. One percent of the population in America owns almost a quarter of the Wealth, and the Citizens don't believe the Rich are turning the rest of us into serfs and peasants!

These are the provable Facts and everyone seems to be okay with it?

For the Riches 1% to pay their fair share of taxes will not put them in a "financial bind"!

The Teatards are truly retards and so are the people who think they are the next best 'movement" since the Whig Party. Populist Parties always creates a Divided States of America!

Because, until they come along the Nation is United!

No ONE party has all the answers never have and never will, or else America would have been a ONE PARTY COUNTRY.

That is way the occupier of the White House swings back and forth like a pendulum.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

Important Numbers from the NBC/WSJ Poll:

38% favor raising the debt as opposed to 31% saying no – this is a total flip flop from last poll

58% support the Obama Plan and only 36% support the GOP/TP Plan

62% of Americans say compromise AND raise taxes on the 2%

58% do not want any cuts to Medicare and/or Medicaid

The bottom line is that President Obama is winning this fight with the American People and the right wing crazies are losing. As more and more information comes out his (President Obama) numbers looks better. Could change tomorrow but who knows, today he is winning.

The only problem with this little popularity contest is that the top 2% do not have the money to pay for a system where there are no cuts to Medicare and/or Medicaid - It's because of a little fact called the Baby Boomers Demographics.

All this poll tells you that the country would like to be like California where you have great social services that you don't pay for.

I ask you seriously, how long do you think people will lend money to the Federal government so they can pay for social services? The bottom line is neither party has come up with a fiscally responsible budget and told the American people that they can't get what they currently have. I mean the Administration is not asking for the debt limit to be raised to build bridges or plants. It's to pay seniors a retirement and they're health bills. And there 8 times the numbers of seniors we have now are in the near future. So you math geniuses where is the money coming from?

Wilberta, the top 1% have always owned 20% of the wealth and have done so and it was worse in the days prior to the creation of America. In socialistic type countries or entitlement welfare countries like Europe its even worse as its impossible to move up and be successful on your own. So people like Soros just pass their wealth down and it becomes generational wealth or fiefdoms. Why shouldnt you be ok with that fact? Dont be jealous, go out and start your own business and become one of them? Nothing is stopping you. Since the richest 1% probably pay 40% of government's income tax, it all depends on what you think is fair. But your right taxing them is probably not going to hurt them individually but at what point does it become just wealth transfer because of a lack of self reliance or government spending controls. But comments like this are just so class warfare and its comes across as lets punish success. Lets go punish Lady Gaga and Beyonce because they are talented. Beyonce has made over $200 million dollars in her career but in your views, she is already losing $100 million to tax and she cant possibly spend that other $100 million so I need some more money so I want to reach into her pocket and take her money. Doesnt matter that she is super talented and its hers and the market is willing to pay her, I personally think she has too much so I am going to take it so I can give it to someone else.

Actually I thought the most important number was the 60% plus saying that america was stll heading down the wrong path.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement of obamas' leadership skills to be a unifier rather than a divider.

It is refreshing to hear obama praise the gang of 6 efforts, does this mean he was disappointed in bidens lackluster efforts?

As the left continues to hide from us the cuts they say they support and continue to villify the rights insistance on no new taxes, It is obvious that they are taking us to the brink of default by their inaction. With less than two weeks to go before a default it is obvious that they care as little as they say the right cares.

There is no longer time left to impliment any legislative action other than a relatively clean passage of the debt ceiling. Regardless, the left will get their tax increases when the obama tax cuts expire at the end of 2012 and the left will still not provide us with the hard choice written spending cuts they say they support.

Other than obama and companies consistant use of campaign rhetoric can anyone give us specific numbers and programs he wants to put under the knife? The only numbers I have heard about is for the military

As per usual Kirk is making statements of fact without any back up. That's because the facts don't back up his argument;

Here are some dramatic facts that sum up how the wealth distribution became even more concentrated between 1983 and 2004, in good part due to the tax cuts for the wealthy and the defeat of labor unions: Of all the new financial wealth created by the American economy in that 21-year-period, fully 42% of it went to the top 1%. A whopping 94% went to the top 20%, which of course means that the bottom 80% received only 6% of all the new financial wealth generated in the United States during the '80s, '90s, and early 2000s

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

The argument is that since "the top 1% have always owned 20% of the wealth" there's no point in even trying to change that, and in fact to do so might even be detrimental.

The argument is vapor. Wealth is accruing RAPIDLY to the already wealthy at the expense of the middle class. The Conservative agenda created this reality, and their plans for the future would only accelerate the trend.

THAT is what offends Liberals. We DON'T hate the wealthy--we hate all the work the wealthy are doing to steal OUR future. We AREN'T trying to take their success--we're trying to keep them from impoverishing everyone else. Our goal is NOT to bring everyone to the same level--it's to make sure everyone has equal opportunity.

THe Gang of 6 proposal may be Obama Care Part 2. I just love things we have to pass to find out the details

Kirk, that is not it at all. What it is is that a person making $50000 a year pays a percentage of their income--say 25% and someone like Beyonce made over $200 million and with fancy accounting pays 18% or less. Does that seem fair to you? That is the problem in a nutshell, and why people are saying the rich need to pay their fare share.

John, we have had this discussion before. First I want you to control for legal and illegal immigration so remove the bottom quartile from that study as that skews the results. Second, you need to control for the change in the tax code in 1982 which is why that study you cite starts in 1983. When you eliminate the impact of flow through entities which now make up over 70% or business enterprises, you would find that reporting your business income on your personal return rather than having it show up in say Microsofts tax return is a huge difference. Finally, my point is that you can also show other factors that create income disparity that have nothing to do with wealthy accumulating wealth.

Finally, let me ask you a more fundamental question, if you were to find out that the wealthy were getting a bigger share of the created wealth at the expense of the middle class and you also found out that it was because these same people were creating this wealth through smart behaviorial choices like choosing to be doctors rather than being landscapers. choosing to open their own business rather than being a doorman at a hotel and that much of the middle class loss was because they joined unions which eliminate upward mobility, or immigrants were replacing their jobs, or they choose not to get higher education, or they choose to get pregnant at 18 and drop from the work force or they choose a lifestyle not conducive to higher incomes or they were part of generational welfare entitlement programs and got used to it and never learned basic life skills to work, does your belief system mean that you take from those who were successful and created their wealth and give to those who made different choices in life? You act like you want to change the fact that wealth is accumulated by those who are successful. How is that even wrong? We in America used to celebrate people who have done well and you act like Beyonce, Derek Jeters etc stole from the middle class and you have the right to reach into their pockets and give it via the government to those you feel made bad choices?

I am lost at this idea that the wealthy are trying to impoverish everyone else. Maybe small town midwest just has different value systems than you have. You are trying to take their success and you are trying to punish making good choices and good decisions. Where I grew up, we never expected someone to give me something for nothing. It was our own personal responsibility to be educated, work hard and accept the level of income that we strove for. I didnt want to pilfer money from the wealthy and successful so the government could make my life easier. It was my job to make my life easier. Its not what offends you, its what you should be ashamed of, punishing success trying to make people like my parents who have worked hard to make their small business successful enough to send 3 kids to college and employ 25 people working 14 hour days 7 days a week and make them feel like they are stealing from the people in town who somehow chose the life they live but make less and give it to them via government programs. Stop using people like Gates and Buffet as rich examples, its people like my parents who make this country a success that you want to steal back from as if its a shame to be successful.

Quoting Kirk-2957282:

Since the richest 1% probably pay 40% of government's income tax

RNC spin & untruth

In fact, what people like Kirk won't say and don't want you to know is that the richest avoid the greatest percentage of taxes owed:

Bob Williams, a tax policy specialist at the nonpartisan Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center, said this is largely carried out through popular tax breaks, which are sometimes called "tax expenditures."

"There are lots and lots of them," he said. "We estimate they total more than a trillion dollars a year in reduced taxes, and in fact the bulk of those go to the top end of the income distribution."

And also unlike Kirk, I will supply the source for this authority:

www. politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jul/08/john-cornyn /john-cornyn-says-51- percent-american-households-pa/

Andie, your example is just wrong. Someone making 50,000 a year pays almost zero income tax. They pay 7.55% into their social security retirement program and state tax, but if they are married with 2 kids they pay zero income tax. If single at most they have an effective rate of maybe 5%. Beyonce would be wishing she pays 18%. Dont believe Navy's statistics he puts out without explanation. The non working wealthy , including the vast majority of seniors most of who will be getting social security pay a much smaller dividends and capital gains tax which might average 18%. Someone like Beyonce who earns her money is paying 35% federal income tax, 7.55% on the first 106k of payroll and 2.55 on all the rest plus state tax in every state she performs which probably averages in the 8% range. Plus in 2013, Obamacare imposes another 3.9% health insurance tax on her. So she is paying at least 45% and soon to be 50% tax on every dollar she earns. Yes, I do think thats fair. So the rich are paying their fair share. The problem isnt are they paying thier fair share, its how to address the fact that 50% of people dont pay any income tax and the wealthy continue to invest and accumulate additional wealth and we have huge unfunded entitlement programs for the elderly that we cant afford.

Quoting Kirk-2957282:

Someone like Beyonce who earns her money is paying 35% federal income tax

Spin & RNC talking point

Andie, your example is just wrong

unsupported opinion and inaccurate spin

Dont believe Kirk's statistics he puts out without explanation and cited unbiased authority;

(he is in the habit of spewing right-wingnut rhetoric, RNC talking points, and inaccurate information.)

Stupid, why do you keep posting that cite, are you that dense? It has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Go to the tax foundation website www.taxfoundation.org and you can get all the statistics. The top 1% paid in 38% of all federal income tax and realized 20% of the total taxpayer income. So they made 20% of the income but paid 38% of the total tax. Why do you keep saying spin and untruth? Your cite talks about the tax cost of deductions. This isnt tax avoidance, no different than you taking your mortgage deduction. The value of all of their itemized deductions, personal business deductions like depreciation or cost of goods like inventory adds up to one trillion. My response is so what? By the way your talking to someone who used to do taxes for a living so come back when you have something constructive to provide.

Stupid, so you must be getting paid to follow me around and spew garbage and make up statements about me. You have gone over the edge with this one because everyone who pays attention on this cite knows that the top tax rate is 35% and I dont need to cite. So your know going to use the art of personal destruction by saying I am a right wingnut, RNC talking points and lieing about inaccurate information just to get me to leave. Does it bother you that much that I have a different viewpoint?

John B, Pietro, Anna Molly, Clara, so this is what you mean by being treated with respect. This board has obviously asked Stupid to follow me around and just try to discount anything I say with this garbage. Its not a matter of having thick skin as Pietro wants me to have against silly people like this its more of a concerted effort to keep me from even bothering coming here.

Stupid, I feel sorry for you inability to actually to critically think. Do you know how much thinking skills it takes to be confronted with basic facts or the latest news and respond "Lies and spin" "RNC garbage" instead of actually thinking through what was just told you and trying to engage and figure out why it is what it is. For example, if I was thinking on your side, you should have responded to me that even though the current polls continue to show dissatisfaction with both Obama and congress's handling of the economy, history shows that reverses quickly as the economy gets better. You should have said that I believe that government spending and making sure that corporations and wealthy individuals as defined as those making over 250k paying much more in tax so we can afford to provide the unions, seniors and poor additional funds and this policy will stimulate the economy and provide millions more jobs before the 2012 election reversing the current poll numbers. You should have said that I believe that making the 15% of people along with the illegal immigrants have access to health care and the additional costs associated with that and will get past on to corporations and the rest of us with health care insurance can be absorbed and is worth it and will stimulate even more jobs. You should say that I believe that stopping those evil corporations from outsourcing and making sure they pay all the tax on that cash sitting overseas so we can have additional revenue will again stimulate the economy and create more jobs for the unions here in the US. You should say we dont need to worry about the 100 trillion unfunded liability for future social security benefits and medicare as we will tax the wealthy even more to pay for that and that will definitely stimulate the economy and create more jobs. Why is it that I can critically think and respond better than you on your own platform ideas? Lies and Spin responses are useless in the face of current news and facts that you dont like.

Kirk you are right, John you are wrong. If 80% of the people have to share 6% of the newly generated wealth, and 48% of those pay no taxes at all and even receive more back than they paid in, that leaves 32% in the middle that have the worst of both worlds. If I were in that 32% I would be working on a way to better my position rather than complaining that some people are wealthy. This is still America (for now) and it is not only OK to be wealthy but the goal that we should all have.

quoting politifact is like quoting obama

We DON'T hate the wealthy--we hate all the work the wealthy are doing to steal OUR future. We AREN'T trying to take their success--we're trying to keep them from impoverishing everyone else. Our goal is NOT to bring everyone to the same level--it's to make sure everyone has equal opportunity.

And you are correct, John! Whereas some will make their decisions based upon what is morally correct and best for our nation, there are still those who worship the dollar and practice greed simply for greed's sake regardless of the effect on anyone else or to this nation. To them, it is not enough to be successful, everyone else must fail. Sad.

Do not allow right wing talking points deter you; I gaurantee they will try - loud, long and often, regardless of how illogical their position may be.

Yes Kirk, we did have this conversation before. Then as now you insisted that your unsupported arguments trumped facts, that some of the facts should be thrown out because they don't agree with your preconceptions, and that a previous tax change somehow invalidates data that was collected during a period which post-dates the change to which you refer.

That's why I no longer discuss anything with you. I just point out your logical fallacies, which are great in number and mostly of the most basic in nature.

Wealth has concentrated dramatically in our society beginning in the days of Reagan. It's not a universal event, occurring mainly in the United States while all the other developed societies have stayed much more egalitarian in their concentration of wealth. Those are the facts. Denying them is a deliberate attempt to prevent examination of the facts or debate over whether or not this is a healthy situation.

Oh, and it's a tremendously unhealthy situation, which is exactly why Conservative leaders don't want it examined.

John, whether you want to believe my arguments are unsupported is somewhat irrelevant to me if they are true or at the very least important factors in my arguments as you completely dismiss them. I am not sure why you dont want to discuss anything with me just because I hold different views than you as I respect your views and dont dismiss them out of hand. I ignore Stupid because he doesnt even bother with the most basic of facts or understanding but at least you give your honest held opinions. What is interesting though is lets just say that I take your premise as fact for a second, you never answered my question or even addressed the injustice you are trying to correct. So far you havent given me any reason as to why you want to punish success to provide entitlements for those who made behaviorial choices beyond the huge billions that is being spent today all funded by the wealthy. I know you think they should spend more, but what happened to go old midwestern values. You dont want to touch the issue that I raised is that you want to punish success and not put it up on a pedestal for small business owners, american idol contestants, immigrants to strive for, you want to take that away because you think Warren Buffet has too much money. Wealth didn concentrate during Reagan did you ever hear of the Morgans, Vanderbilts, Rockefellers etc come on you know better than that.

Actually I thought the most important number was the 60% plus saying that america was stll heading down the wrong path.

And who does the same poll say is the blame? Not just our President Obama. They blame a dysfunctional Congress as well. Forgot that point didn't ya.

IR, Thanks for posting this on the first page. I read the post early this morning on another thread.

My prayers are with Journey and his family.

Journey was taken to the hospital this afternoon and is not expected to return home

Godspeed to Journey...

To his/her family & friends, please find some comfort in knowing, they will NEVER be forgotten by the FR family!

Thanks to IR for reposting this, like Northstar, I just saw it this morning on another thread.

IR:

Thank you for putting this up. My prayers to his family and friends.

It is so moving to know that someone facing so much would take the time to shine a little light in all of our lives . . . God bless Journey towards peace and their loved ones.

Thank you, IR. Thoughts and prayers to his family and friends.

Thank you IR. God Bless you Journey.

Thanks so much for sharing this, IR. Blessings and prayers to Journey and his/her family and friends.

Amen.

Powerful words.

Thanks, IR. I already posted this on the other thread, but in case Journey's family/friends are reading here, I'm re-posting.

To Journey's family and friends -

Please tell Journey it's been an honor having him stop here along the way and to know that his posts will live on - not just in the First Read archives, but in our hearts and minds. I hope your journey has been a good one and that your final destination is worthy of you. Peace to you, Journey, and to all those who love you.

Why have the RWNJS not offered one post of condolence to Journey Toward Peace's family and friends??

Why have the RWNJS not offered one post of condolence to Journey Toward Peace's family and friends??

Because they're incapable of feeling empathy? Doesn't stop them though, from 'pimping' out their own for some sympathy around here from time to time...

Ask yourself, why do the RWNJ's collapse Birthday greetings?

I can't imagine going through life with such cold dark hearts...

USNavy:

Holy smokes. I may never again have a chance to offer a defense for the right wing nut jobs. In answer to your question on the absence of condolences - here it is: Maybe they, like I, don't know who Journey is.

Who is Journey?

He/she was just a fellow poster here like the rest of us. It is a sad day when one from this board leaves because he maybe moving on to meet his maker. For that we all should be sad if we knew him/her or not. Just my opinion.

Oh wow...I just saw this. Can't say that I ever interacted with him on here, but nevertheless, my thoughts, prayers, and condolences to him, his family, and all who know him. Not sure the exact situation but it certainly doesn't sound good from the posting above. :-(

Feisty I do not know Journey but my thoughts and prayers go to his loved ones.

AttyGen Holder doesn't have time to investigate the evil oil people, he's to busy ducking fast and furious.

West also sent the following email out to House Majority and Minority Leaders:

From: Z112 West, Allen
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 04:48 PM
To: Wasserman Schultz, Debbie
Cc: McCarthy, Kevin; Blyth, Jonathan; Pelosi, Nancy; Cantor, Eric
Subject: Unprofessional and Inappropriate Sophomoric Behavior from Wasserman-Schultz

Look, Debbie, I understand that after I departed the House floor you directed your floor speech comments directly towards me. Let me make myself perfectly clear, you want a personal fight, I am happy to oblige. You are the most vile, unprofessional ,and despicable member of the US House of Representatives. If you have something to say to me, stop being a coward and say it to my face, otherwise, shut the heck up. Focus on your own congressional district!

I am bringing your actions today to our Majority Leader and Majority Whip and from this time forward, understand that I shall defend myself forthright against your heinous characterless behavior……which dates back to the disgusting protest you ordered at my campaign hqs, October 2010 in Deerfield Beach.

You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady, therefore, shall not be afforded due respect from me!

Steadfast and Loyal

Congressman Allen B West (R-FL)

AM I see nothing in his e-mail that approaches anything that has been said about Governor Palin, Congresswoman Bachmann and other conservative women. He didn't curse at her or make fun of her looks, etc. He went after her character perfectly ok considering their feud. She could have avoided this if she had commented while he was there in the chamber vice waiting for him to leave. Had this been a republican woman and a democratic congressman all of you would have been just fine with it. I don't see any of the liberals come to the defense of a conservative woman when they or their families are attacked by the left.

Now I wonder who leaked this e-mail to the press and what their political agenda is.

Who is journey??? Sounds like there is a clique here.

"Journey towards peace" has been posting here pretty regularly since January of this year and as far as I know, was not a member of any cliques. Here are a few of his posts that may indicate why not:

From April: "Please keep in mind those "receiving handouts": The mentally challenged, the physically disabled, military veterans...the list goes on. They are a small sector of our population and we are big enough to extend a helping hand. It is called compassion."

From May: "Survivors of the recent tornadoes (may God bless them all) have provided us with a great lesson. Stay organized and do all that you can to protect yourself and family. But most important don't panic!! You would do well to heed their example. Don't follow those with radical views. Try to remember, everything in moderation."

I can see where someone advocating compassion and "everything in moderation" would get lost in the daily cacophony that rules here......

I am sure that all the paid bloggers and political nut jobs on this thread would never send thier condolences to a sick or dying poster that they were at odds with or never agreed with or had an opposing political view. You should be ashamed of yourselves to take a familys berievement and use it to find criticism or to insult others with. It goes to show that bloggers like navy and redhead and thier gang will take advantage of anyone or anything to spew thier hatred and vile political rhetoric. You pathetic excuses for human beings have proven that you are completely without soul.

God be with you Journey towards peace.

Biteme:

You couldn't be more wrong. I really, really look forward to the day I can offer condolences to your survivors.

Yeah. Don't you just hate that Harry Reid praising Obama for not having that "Negro dialect?" Or how about that ladies man John Edwards? Did we mention Dem congressman Jim Moran the wifebeater?

Gotta admit...

Harry's comment took me back...I wasn't aware that prominent, modern-day lawmakers used that sort of language.

Sounded like an old southern Democrat, didn't he?

MB and Damage, you sound like you support him. Is that what you are saying? When you support prejudice and bigotry, the discussion goes nowhere.

Racist and sexist remarks need to be called out regardless of political affiliation - period.

The problem with the President is that he thinks he's the smartest adult in the room.... he's not (maybe in his last job as a Chicago neighborhood organizer he could have been)!

He micromanages, has an enormous ego, is thin skinned, and very narcissitic! Not good charachteristics for POTUS!

Honestly, Louis...

You're not even as smart as you sound.

Where in my comment did you detect approval for Majority Leader Reid's remarks about President Obama?

Reid's comments were reprehensible, Louis.

Do you need me to be more emphatic than that?

I can adjust to your level of reading comprehension, Louis...I'll do that if you still don't understand what I said.

MB, relax. You didn't respond to the initial post. Instead you attempted the same tired deflection Damage attempted. The initial comment was about Herman Cain and his bigoted stance toward the Muslim community. He's running for President of the United States of America.

But instead of denouncing Cain, you numbingly still reference Reid. While we're on the 'intellect' reference, you are obviously smart enough that is what I was referring to in the first place.

As I said before, When you support prejudice and bigotry, the discussion goes nowhere.

Exactly, Louis J.

I wasn't responding to your comment, I was responding to Damage's comment about Majority Leader Reid.

I said nothing whatsoever about Mr. Cain, one way or the other.

Honestly, I'm far more familiar with Reid's stated views of President Obama that Damage referenced...so let's stick to that, shall we?

As far as Reid goes, his remarks strike me as something out the Jim Crow era.

How does the Reid comment that Damage referenced strike you, Louis?

It's obvious that you support Cain's bigoted TEA Party stance. As for Reid, I don't know anything about him, could care less and have never heard the comment.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid apologized Saturday for making racially insensitive remarks about Barack Obama during the presidential campaign.

Journalists Mark Halperin and John Heilemann reported the remarks in their new book, "Game Change," which is scheduled to be in bookstores Tuesday.

The authors quote Reid as saying privately that Obama, as a black candidate, could be successful thanks, in part, to his "light-skinned" appearance and speaking patterns "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

Unless he wanted to have one? Next you'll have Joe Biden calling Obama "clean" and "well-spoken".

All the Puritans on here. Just because you don't say it out loud doesn't mean you don't think it. C'mon, admit it. You won't as it will mess up the perception of you that you want people to see. Love hypocrites. I suppose you wouldn't say s__t if you had a mouthful either. But....you WOULD think it. That is the trouble these days. People don't (or feel they can't) say what is really on their minds. That is why no one trusts anyone. They know themselves that what they think and what they say are sometimes 180 degrees apart.

Why is that obvious, Louis J?

I've said nothing whatsoever about Herman Cain, his comments about Muslims, or anyone else.

Talk about reading between the lines...

Just make note of the fact that I did condemn Reid's anachronistic, Jim Crow-like remarks.

Though I'm wondering, Louis J...

What "obvious" conclusions may be drawn from your refusal to do the same?

It's obvious that the Ass/liberals own the thread today. I do enjoy their rantings though. Dumb liberals.

They do everyday Yak. I think this a place for them to come to feel good and pat each other on the back for their agenda. All these people flabbergasted by West's comments (in an e-mail) to DWS rantings AFTER he left the room shows he has got a pair. She wants to play that way, she had better be ready for the recourse and response to her behavior. She is just another politician. The gender enters not into it. The job demands that you have thick skin and as so many libs have demonstrated, they want to be PC and touchy feely while at the same time THINKING the very same way that West did when the back is turned.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

Racist and sexist remarks need to be called out regardless of political affiliation - period.

Navy when was the last time you took someone to task for their sexist and filthy remarks concerning Governor Palin or any other conservative woman. our words sound kind of ---hollow.

PS - To the dude who popped ol' Rupert in the face with the shaving cream pie, call me...I've got your bail money!

DaNoid:

It is in their genes. It is never their fault, or they play the victim and if that does not work they blame the victim. This is the right wing crazies mental makeup. Nothing new here.

I will split the bail money with ya.

Da Noid---I had the thought last night that Rupert had to protect himself by declaring himself a mere figurehead. Didn't seem to bother her to do it.

If we use DA's logic......

Obama should have been impeached long ago.

Yup. After announcing yesterday was the most humble day of his life he disavowed all responsibility for the corporation he founded and runs.

Is it even worth pointing out the irony coming from the "blame Bush" crowd"? Nah. Probably not. Way to condone violence, too, oh great and wonderful party of peace, love and acceptance.

Suzy - It was shaving cream. Violence? Learn to laugh a little.

Would you say the same if it was Pelosi, Reid or Obama getting a shaving cream pie in the face from a Tea Party member? Yeah, I think it's funny. Its about as non-violent an act of aggression you can accomplish, but the fact is it's still an act of aggression and I thought we were supposed to avoid those at any cost. You know, tone down the rhetoric, be nicer, that sort of thing...

Yes, I would find it funny for, say, Pelosi or Reid to be hit with a shaving cream pie.

(Let's not kid ourselves...nobody is going to get close enough to President Obama to get him with a pie...Secret Service, you know.)

Senator Carl Levin was hit with an apple pie in August last year at a town hall meeting. He joked that he preferred blueberry.

Nash:

Your statement is very true. As more information comes out about what the crazies are trying to do to this country the more they lean toward President Obama.

The big deal with the Poll is that the majority of America supports President Obama and not the GOP/TP. Even his lowest numbers are higher the the GOP/TP numbers overall.

Kind of explains why education expenditures often lead the way in budget cutting, doesn't it?

I feel the same way.

The only way the repubicans can take and keep control of our country is to totally dumb down America. If they have to slash and burn education, so be it.

With the election of the tea-partiers, I think we are dumb enough.

Oh why not, I will dance a little. Interesting that the president's approval number remains steady despite a significant majority thinking he's doing a rather lousy job of being President, don't you think? Apparently enough people find him a darn nice young man to forgive everything else that goes on. Neat. Interesting also how the numbers flipped once our fearless leader threatened grandma and our military if he doesn't get his way, err, I mean the debt ceiling isn't raised, and says it's all the evil republicans fault, you know, even though HE is the one that decided what payments he'll cut (or at least which ones he'll instruct his little minion Geitner to chop since it is, in fact the Treasury Secretary's decision what order to pay the bills in should we bump up against that ceiling) based on the political capital he stood to raise. Again, neat! Some days I wish I was a democrat. The absolute lack of personal responsibility would be refreshing for a day or 2.

Just pass a clean debt celing bill and you will have nothing to complain about.

Talk about lack of personal responsiblility the republicans have nothing to do with where our country is today. If bush hadn't started two wars, cut taxes to the richest of americans in war time think where we might be today.

The only reason we still have those tax cuts today is the republicans held unemployment insurance hostage until the democrats agreed to extend the tax cuts.

I don't know what you are talking about you don't think you are responsible for anything now.

Tom, Y:

Short, simple and to the point. I like it - got my vote.

And to top it off, freshman Tea Party Rep. Allen West (R-FL) fired off a mean-spirited email to DNC Chair and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), after she suggested that West’s support for “Cut, Cap, and Balance” would increase costs for Medicare recipients. "

I am with West. He is a distinguished and valued member of Congress after a long military career. DWS is an attack machine and she always has been. She replaces the vile A.Weiner in that department. There is nothing positive that ever comes out of Schultz or Weiner. They attack,attack,attack. They are very UN-professional. I can only hope Schultz will go away just like Weiner.

Spoken like a true California liberal. Nice talking point, does'nt hold water. Run scared liberal.

Leona, what was wrong with what Rep. Wasserman Schultz said? How does that make her "not a lady" and not worthy of respect? She and Rep. West live in the same area, an area with a relatively large population of people who depend on social security and Medicare, and she is honest in saying that she is surprised he would "support" his constituents by voting for a bill that will mean cuts to those programs.

Nothing upsets a republican more than truth and honesty.

Most of all West does not want Florida to know what he really intends to do to them.

The republicans lie to get elected and then turn and stab the people in the back just like in Wisconsin. All to give more tax breaks to the richest in our country.

In the 1990's we could raise taxes and grow jobs, but we can't do that anymore because the republicans signed a pledge against our country. They are now bound to Lord Norquist to kill American before we raise taxes on the richest in America. Way to show love for America, tea-partiers.

kate 1855079: Kate, The President already took money from Medicare with his Obamacare plan. Any "fix" to fiscal problems must decrease Medicare payouts and everyone needs to take the hit. The plan is no longer sustainable and everyone knows it. We have all the so called babyboomers about to become eligible and there is not enough money to pay for it.

Everyone need to take a hit except the rich.

The republicans think we can no longer take care of the poor and old and continue to turn our country over to the rich. The rich come first and you know where that leaves the rest of us.

I disagree, you would need an extra crazy left wing liberal to be on one end and a tvangelist on the other if you hope to reach sanity in the middle.

I see the GOP insane and the tvangelist really insane. I see no sanity anywhere on that rope.

This balanced budget is how they destroyed California with the 2/3 crap to raise revenue. There was no way to fix problems with all the knots they had tied in their state government.

You really think America should go down that rabbit hole just to keep from raising taxes on the richest of Americans.

If republicans hadn't started two wars and given tax breaks to the richest we wouldn't here with people like you thinking the whole debt should be paid with cuts to education, social security, food for the poor and the rich should get off scott free. You sound like another republican ready to cut their nose off to spite your face.

Unless you are in the 2% of the richest in America, when the republicans take down American you will be screwed just like the rest of us.

The republican want to build in never raising taxes on the rich again into their balanced budget. No jobs nothing for America just protection for the rich.

RICH FIRST the new republican campaign slogan.

disinterested third party-----this country has had debt since it's founding!!!!

I find it interesting that republicans are on this bandwagon since the bulk of this debt was caused by their administrations. Ronald Reagan increased the debt by 189% and GW Bush doubled it. So they got us here and now they have a problem with it.

So it wasn't the high taxes and billions spent on illegals or the onerous business killing regulations that destroyed Cali? Just the fact that some tried to prevent the state from taking all the people's money?

Liberalism destroyed Cali. It is the model for how not to govern a state.

Look no further than Proposition 13 to determine why California's finances are a mess. With property tax increases limited to far below the rate of increase in valuation and 2/3 majority of BOTH legislative houses required for any increase in other taxes there's no way to actually meet the revenue needs of the state.

U.S. navy retired disabled I see you have written that the cut cap and balance bill will repeal/privatize or destroy medicare, medicaid and social security. How nice if it were true unfortunately it doesn't do that, in fact it protects them. Summary of the bill:

Let's start off with "entitlement" programs as many have tried to claim that
this bill would eliminate or drastically change Social Security and Medicare.
Directly copied from the text of the bill is the following section.

(b) Exempt From Direct Spending Limits- Direct spending for the following
functions is exempt from the limits specified in subsection (c):

`(1) Social Security, function 650.

`(2) Medicare, function 570.

`(3) Veterans Benefits and Services, function 700.

`(4) Net Interest, function 900.

Isn't it strange that if it supposedly will do harm to Social Security and
Medicare that they are both specifically excluded from the direct spending cap
this bill would impose. Notice also that Veterans benefits and debt service
interest payments are also excluded. Source...newsvine.com Source...112th CONGRESS
1st Session H. R. 2560 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES July 15, 2011

What really killed California is all the bills that we Californians voted for but failed to realize that they had to be paid for somehow! We wanted the world, but we didn't figure out how to pay for it! That, among other things, was part of our downfall. That, along with the Prison union, etc., is continuing to cause the problems! It's also pretty much the same problem that we have in Washington, except that in California, it's the Democrats who are causing the problems and not the Republicans! It seems that NO one can compromise....it's a lost art!

Diane:

You should write more often. Good points all and they happen to be very true. Kudos and gets my vote.

Diane, absolutely agree with your post.

I too work and can only post in early am or in evening. Wish FR would have a thread that starts in the evening.

Glad you got a chance to share your thoughts today, Diane. It does seem to me that the people who were elected last fall have misread what the vote was about----I do think people were expressing frustration with the economy and looking for jobs. Tea Party seems to think something else and I think they will be surprised in 2012.

Diane,

Very Good.

Great post Diane. Good to see a liberal on here that actually works for a living. Plus, you got the stamp of approval from US NAvy and Job1, two of the intellectual heavyweights on First Read. Of course, that's not saying much considering some of the others.

Damage - Didn't you mean two of the intellectual "copy/pastes" on here?

Diane: Let's hope that this brings the Democrats out to vote in 2012!! We need to get EVERYONE out to vote so that these TP/GOP's are OUT!! We need a group of politicians that know how to compromise instead of holding people hostage to get their way! It's ridiculous to see how things are being run in Washington nowadays.....like a bunch of school children in the play yard!

You are exactly right. Wait 5 years, and it will be much worse because what we will have with the Obuma plan is slightly higher taxes, no real spending cuts, and 2 or 3 trillion more in debt. Obuma's argument, tranlated into what one spouse might tell another at home looking at their bills is: "Honey, I know we owe a bunch of money to everyone, and I know we spend more than we take in each year. Here is my plan! We are going to try to bring in more money from somewhere, not balance our budget, continue spending more than we make, call our credit card company and tell them to raise or spending limit, and just ignore our credit card balances in 5 years because, according to my whacky math, they should be lower balances?" Duh

are you really that off the wall or have you been practicing at it ??? your a perfect example of disconnect with reality dude........

I have serious doubts you even know what the reality of the situation is "dude".

If people can't even spell the President's name correctly, one wonders how much information they do absorb.

Where did your reality come from Doug? Being you started out calling President Obama a liar I could make a wild guess and say faux.

You are the one that has bought into the propaganda. Only faux hold the Democrate responsible for the mess the republicans have gotten us into.

The tax breaks to the rich caused a lot of our debt, so why should their taxes never be raised again?

In the eight years before bush took office we were able to increase taxes several times and grow jobs. In republican land this can not happen but it did. Had we continued to follow that plan we could be out of debt today. If you look at what really happened tax cuts killed jobs in America.

Clinton tax increases, jobs and growing healthy economy.

Bush tax cuts, no jobs and declining economy.

How that for reality for you?

Oh, to have the Clinton tax rates back would certainly improve this budget problem.

did you read it?

Apparently, Doug, you haven't done your research. Bush took more vacations than President Obama has even dreamed of, and he was out of office in Texas a lot more! As for playing golf with celebrities, having fundraisers, etc., ALL politicians do this. How do you think they get money for their candidacy? Even ol' Bush played golf and had fund raisers.....so quit blaming our current president for doing EXACTLY the same as every other ex-president!!

Bush get not take vacations all over the US and World, he did work from his ranch in Texas which was nicknamed The White House South while he was in office. There's a major difference of getting out of Washington and it's BS to a remote location that it not subject to distracts and constant interruptions; it allows you to get something done. Just ask anyone who works in the corporate world that comes in early, stays late or works weekends when the office is empty. Obama hops all over the country playing golf, going to the beach, going to the theater and out to eat and don't try to tell me he does business the whole time since the only people going alone and some of his stops/meeting are with his wife, kids and secret service agents, at best you can give him points for trying to be a good husband and father. Of course flushing the country down the toilet is not a great step for your kids future; then again all politicians have pretty much set their kids on the untouchable easy street for a generation or two so it will be his great grand-kids that will pay for his lack of knowledge and vision into the real world and not the socialistic democrat utopia.

No.

It's been obvious to all but those who worship at his altar. He has proposed nothing. Except more borrowing and spending.

Yes, its obvious. Franklin said, "Citizens get the government they deserve." Some few years from now when the debt is much higher, and the interest payments begin to choke the governments ability to sustain the global money give-away, a balanced budget amendment will look much better to all the Americans who think Uncle Sam is here to make every problem in their lives all better.

those who worship at his altar

REFUSE to ADMIT that OBAMA SKYROCKETED Federal SPENDING from 19% to 24% GDP in ONLY 2 1/2 YEARS

Madison, Bush doubled the debt from 5T to 10T and crashed the world economy. so 5% increase to save the country is kind of small don't you think?

Yeah, that's why the Wall Street Journal is on board with that very same polling, right?

I see that your knowledge of polling techniques wouldn't fill Sarah Palin's brain.

I continually ask myself this same question? I too thought when these Congressmen and women took the oath of office it was for the United States as a whole not for a select few. How voters can still vote with the extreme right Republican's is beyond me, they want to massively cut spending, except for the defense budget, when the Pentagon has already said there are cuts that can be made and they want to keep the low taxes on the wealthy. Their massive spending cuts will not help our economy and raising taxes on the wealthy will not keep them from hiring, if that is their logic then I would say it is alittle off, taxes are at a historic low, yet we still see an unemployment rate nationally of 9.2% and in some states it is alot higher. All this Republican Congress is doing when they draw a line in the sand and say we will honor our pledge that we took to Grover Norquist is screwing themselves. Let's see how good they do in the 2012 elections if they fail to raise the debt ceiling and our gov't defaults. Especially since this default is alittle more than just our credit rating being affected, try higher interest rates for consumers when buying a house (assuming the banks are still willing to lend), student loan rates, car loans. What happens when they furlough federal employees, unemployment benefits are interuptted for the many who are without jobs? This Republican congress has shot itself in the foot which is sad because I honestly don't think our economy can handle another 4 yrs of Obama. This Congress should have compromised and when things didn't go as the Democrats planned they could have made their case for the White House, retaining control of the House and possibly gaining control of the Senate in 2012. Unfortunately for them their base is not enough to help them, they need the independents to win in 2012, it's not looking so good for them right now. Maybe they should be willing to piss off a few people for the better of the majority.

Let me see if I understand this, republicans shot themselves in the foot for refusing to compromise. You seem to understand why the debt ceiling needs to be raised. You appear to be smarter than the average republican.

You think maybe it was the republican economic plan that has gotten us where we are today?

After eight years of bush voodoo economics - tax cuts create jobs.

Somehow the answer is to get rid of President Obama and its his economic policies that aren't working.

Sorry your party left you and any vote for a republican is a vote to end social security.

Americans First, So True.

Per all reports the social security truss fund has the money to cover commitments until 2037. Obama claiming the checks not going out is a scare tactic unless the Democrats continue to rob it for their pet projects and to run the govt in the debt ceiling isn't raise then all bets are off. The US dollar used to be worth something but continual borrowing and printing of unbacked money has deflated it to crap. A balance budget is a start to recovery and if we paid back our debts the euro would be like the peso with an exchange rate of 1000 to 1. Even if we start now it will likely take decades to pay back and if we don't we will be a third world country to all the countries that are buying are debt now.

To the US Navy Disable Veteran -Retired; First thank you for your service but if your worried about destroying medicare, have you looked at what Obamacare is going to do to it? As far as financial issues you bring up I politely question your judgement, depending on your age and length of service you should have VA benefits, military retirement pension, social security? Now that may not get you a penthouse at the beach but I question your ability to budget and save that minor change in medicare are going to drastically change your like. I could be totally off base here but you may have made up your sign on for thearetrical effect to get attention and sympathy. If not I know the VA has programs to help teach financial responsibility and budgeting and I suggest you look into it. Sorry for have to say it but my sympathy for everyone with a sad sorry has run out and I'm not responsible to keep everyone else eating steak and living the easy life while I struggle to get by and live on the cheap.

Well......you covered all of the talking points. Not one original thought or even an inkling that you have a clue as to what the issues are. Just another drone typical of FR.

I agree Anthony, how dare them tea baggers want a balanced budget amendment!! Totally unreasonable!

and i say how dare the teagaggers for not asking corporations and the wealthiest americans to forgo their tax loopholes, corp welfare and subsidies in order to help the country....and if your idea of an original thought is swallowing the teagagger B.S. your right , i havnt one........

How dare us liberals not want to balance the budget on the backs of education, social security , food for children.

The balanced budget is all about the republicans never having raise taxes on the rich again and the wars and the tax cut for the richest in America are to be paid for by the poor.

The republican plan is to make continued cuts to education, social security, unemployment, food stamps, any social program aiding the poor. Above all, never raise taxes on the richest in America again.

If I was rich this would be my plan.

Did I mention the main part of this plan was to never raise taxes on the richest in America again.

It's amazing to me how so many people buy into the class warfare bs propagated by the party of the poverty pimps. I can only assume they do so out of lack of knowledge or envy. What is happening is exactly what was predicted.

So, how 'bout you educate us all with some facts instead of name calling and talking points?

@Americans First-3238795 I don't think you mentioned that the planwas to never raise taxes on the richest in America again. LOL

Anthony and America First; yes God forbid, sorry you don't believe in god, government forbid that the tea party get it's way and America tries to return to the principles that the country was form on. We should change the history books to show what bastards our founding fathers where.

Anthony,

'this kind of group is in no way , shape , nor form good for the people of this country , the gaggers have sold their sole to big buisness'

I resent your implication that the tea party has somehow damaged the country by marketing footwear to big business. :)

Realist >>> i neither said anything towards god or our founding fathers so dont try and put your spin on my words....typical teagagger M.O. Ya got to make things up to try and prove your off the wall point.......speaks volumes about your point in the 1st place..........and i damn sure dont believe cutting the programs people depend upon to feed corporations and the wealthy tax cuts is returning to the principles our nation was founded on as you put it you can keep your off the wall thoughts