E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn a new 2-minute Web video, President Obama is reminding people of exactly what he campaigned for during the election: higher taxes on those making $250,000 or more a year.
The clip is part of the Obama administration's social-media push to raise public support for his position of higher taxes on the top 2 percent of earners as "fiscal cliff" negotiations continue. It is one of the first times the post-election the Obama team has used actual footage from the campaign to show verbatim what he called for on the trail.
"President Obama campaigned on a clear tax plan,” graphics in the video's opening sequence read. Then, a flashback to Obama's speech on Sept. 9 in Florida: "Under my plan, first of all, 98 percent of folks who make less than $250,000, you wouldn't see your income taxes go up a single dime."
Since he won re-election, Obama has highlighted what he believes was his victory in the court of public opinion on taxes, suggesting Republicans should accept the politically popular idea of raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans.
“That's the kind of fair, balanced, responsible plan that I talked about during the campaign, and that's what the majority of Americans believe in,” Obama said in Hatfield, Pa., last Friday in a campaign-style trip to rouse public support for the White House’s position.
Leave a Comment:
President Obama learned his lesson when it comes to negotiating with the Party of "Hell NO"!
No more Mr. Nice Guy!
When you have the majority of the country on your side, you are the one who is in control...
Very impressive!
And when you get barely over 50% of the popular vote, which is less than you got four years ago, and one House of Congress is firmly in the control of the other party you have to learn that you aren't going to get everything you want.
Sorry Barry. Deal with it.
If the majority of the country is on his side, why is the House controlled by Republicans? Every House seat was up for grabs last month.
Joe
Yet the Republicans who lost still believe that their "no tax increases, no compromise" stance is viable.
Uhhhhh.....52% IS NOT A MAJORITY Flyeisty. Must be Chicago school mathematics. Still on the Obama campaign payroll ?
Yep, no more nice guy to the Progressive agenda:
It is NOT "my way or the highway" or "I won, you lost, so America can go over the Fiscal Cliff for all I care".....this is About America and NOT a one party system.
The "opposition" needs to scrutinize what "tax cut" legislation Mrs. Peloski is going to present. Buried somewhere in the unreadable wording will be to eliminate the National Debt limit. Yeah, "We won't know what is in it until we pass it."
Very un-Presidential.
The Albanian Mad Hatters sockeye Salmon must be as salty as Queen Annie's turkey .. neither one can stop sobbing of the losses on election day. Deal with it - hahahahahahaha - how many times are you going to post that?
Ha Joe, the president does not have to do a thing and the republicans will get eveything they don't want, they are boxed in by the automatic triggers they agreed to.
Cut spending!!!
Barry is dealing with it just fine, thanks for your concern!
The idiot from Albany on the other-hand, continues to *grasp* at straws...
Run along and suck your salmon, it's the only thing which seems to bring you any comfort these days!
LMAO@U little buddy!
As opposed to the infamous 47%!
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
tom
The Republican majority in the House is mostly the result of gerrymandered districts. There were actually more Democratic votes for House of Representatives in the past election but because of the re-drawing of district boundaries following the 2010 election many Republican House seats were virtually a lock.
John Stossel wrote: "If the IRS grabbed 100 percent of income over $1 million, the take would be just $616 billion. That’s only a third of this year’s deficit. Our national debt would continue to explode."
He is, Joe. And he is doing it well.
Point in case - his initial offer is simply just an initial offer, a starting point. Now where is the Republican counter-offer? You know, the one with items, facts, and statements?
And, Ido - Contrary to your "Chicago school mathematics" snark, 52% is a majority. Heck, 50% plus one vote is.
Doesn't look like it takes much to impress you Barry. Enjoy why you can.
Forrest I agree, I think its past time for those automatic triggers kicking in. So everyone gets hammered.....!
Hello?? 52% MOST DEFINITELY IS A MAJORITY. Where did you do to school, Ido?Republicans need to quit gutting public education! ...sheesh...
You're quoting John Stossel? That man is as dense as a lead brick.
Feisty,
Well said!!
Remind us again how many the RWNJ's lost again?
Three alone in my district and neighboring ones alone here in IL!
Just keep on whistling past the graveyard... you won't know what hit ya! lmao
kaybeetoys,
It must be that home schoolin' they tend to favor..... LOL
Suggestion to the Income levels of $250,000.00 plus :
If you, or your son or daughter served in Iraq or Afghanistan.... you get a reprieve from the $250,000.00 tax return to pre-Bush era.
WHY? Because YOU already PAID for the war.
The rest of you...grow-up and be RESPONSIBLE.
You can afford to SUPPORT YOUR COUNTRY.
A war that wasn't TAXED has to be PAID FOR, so dip into your savings account, or have a garage sale.
Tom says "If the majority of the country is on his side, why is the House controlled by Republicans? Every House seat was up for grabs last month."
Because house seats are not voted on by the entire state, as senate seats are, nevertheless republicans lost the oval office, they lost senate seats and in spite of gerrymandering they lost house seats as well. They lost support in republican districts, they got toasted in every single swing state, the numbers by which they lost to Latino's, blacks, and women are staggering.
Wow, the redhead is such a dip$hit!
Her God, or is it her boss, Obama believes in reaching out in a campaign forum rather than be at the WH leading the Congress to avoid his cliff.
tom8896
If the majority of the country is on his side, why is the House controlled by Republicans? Every House seat was up for grabs last month.
===================
If you were a student of House demographics you'd understand that 95% of the House hold firm grasps on their seats going both ways...those Red and those Blue. There a probably a couple of dozen, true toss up Districts even in existence. A good chunk of those areas went Dems this go around.
Speaking about the House as a whole means little to nothing. Speak about the details.
I'll give the greater weight to a Presidential win over a House win. Presidential wins are national were District wins are just that District based.
Let's keep it in perspective.
haggisbingo-2225582
How does one play bingo with haggis?
OH *snap* Haggis! You beat me to it! lol
One generation of stuck on stupid brainwashing the next...
He broke all of his campaign promises from the first election, why is he so adamant about keeping this campaign promise? Oh yeah! Somebody has to pay for his entitlement programs. With nearly half the country not paying federal taxes and his continuous spending he needs to raise revenue. He wouldn't think of having the teat-suckers contribute.
Get everything he wants? The Republican Party has blocked very nearly everything this President has tried to do. Where do you think the term "Party of No" came from? Fourteen Republicans met the day he was elected to map out opposition to this President. The fact is he was reelected. The fact is that the majority of Americans favor increased tax rate for those earning over $250,000 (I haven't seen a single poll that disputes this fact). To continue their obstruction would be political suicide for the Republicans, and they know it. Boehner knows it.
I love how the righties forget they lost seats in both the House and the Senate when they were SO SURE they were going to take control of the Senate. Now, they will probably lose the House too in 2014. They haven't learned a thing. And, the more they are radical in their demands, the more people are realizing they have no place in government.
They have no plans; can't present a plan at all; but demand the President back down on his plan - which he's put forth with specifics? Don't think so!
The radical righties in Congress can join Norquist in the "D" lister group. They're irrelevant and bordering on insane!
ldo
Okay, please tell us howa majority is calculated. Is there as secret GOP formula that we don't know about it?
www.dictionary.com
noun, plural ma·jor·i·ties.
1. the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total ( opposed to minority ): the majority of the population.
4. the party or faction with the majority vote: The Democratic party is the majority.
Seems to me, President Obama won the majority of the American vote and the electoral college.
Now, as for 'compromise' let's see... Obama wants to raise the taxes on those over 250K (campaign promise)... He offers 600 MILLION in cuts... What does the GOP offer in return.
Oh wait.. nothing.
i saw lincoln....hits home how tiny and petty obama is........
I see FauxForDumbFux is recycling their talking points from last August. That can only mean Benghazi-gate will be hitting us again around mid to late December.
Yes - it is that secret counting system used by Romney's team to calculate polls. Unfortunately, there isn't any science involved (you know how they hate science), so they remain confused as to what constitutes a majority.
mcpaddywack
It does hit home.. and how patethic the repubilcan party has moved away from the 'party' of Lincoln. Lincoln and our founding fathers would be disgusted at the entire policial system and failure to compromise.
Takin' It To the Streets
From the article above:
Fresh off his Electoral Landslide Mandate Victory, President Obama continues to get the MAJORITY of Americans rallying for what is best forthe country.
The wealthy have had 12 years of living off the government dole with their tax cuts.
12 years of taking hard-working American's money and screwing the middle class.
The chickens have come home to roost, and payback's a &%$#@.
Poor greedy Republicans, can't steal anymore from the American taxpayer.
Salud
Barack, you so good to us.
1funnygirl ... read about the Presidential options and then come back
www-polisci.tamu.edu/upload_images/9/SP13Agenda.pdf
POS, I mean POTUS is going to look very bad when he is known as the President who was in charge of the largest tax hike in the history of the United States. When will he ever quit campaigning and deal with the problem? Does he not understand that we vote for our representatives to deal with these things and he is supposed to deal with them directly? My representatives are doing what I elected them to do. If the libs don't like it, I don't give a sh*t.
Joe - Some people just don't understand that Alaska sockeye is the best. Alsek River sockeye is the best of the best. Progresive/liberals wouldn't understand, they accept poor quality in everything. Just look at their leaders.
Tomas and the rest of you libs
What have you got against paying more in taxes to help this country? The rich already pay far more than the middle class and we need everyone to step up. I hope we go over the cliff and you HAVE TO pay more. Will you blame Obama?
JH - you post nothing but lies. The rich pay a lower percentage than the rest of us - they do not pay a higher percentage. If you are talking actual dollar amounts then you're being stupid. A person who earns $100,000 pays more than the person making $24,000 but that is not the way to look at it. It should be a percentage of your earnings - not the actual dollar amount. And, those makine the top 1-2% in this country actually pay less.
Try being honest - I know it's a stretch but it's what you do when you want to post somehting worth reading!
Feisty, completely agree.
My favorite part is Obama put out a proposal and it's gone public. Republicans rejected it, but offer no plan.
If Boehner and McConnell want to keep denying that Congress writes the laws, that is their right. We need to remind Boehner and McConnell that prior to them becoming Congressional leaders, we had over 200 years of Congressional leaders who understood that Congress writes the laws and presents them to the President. If the President veto's a bill, Congress can override the President's veto.
Boehner and McConnell continue to believe the President of the United States should do the job of the House Majority Leader and the Senate Minority Leader.
So if the wealthy having been getting their 160B (Obamas top figure of 1.6T over 10 years) of tax cuts per year and screwing the middle class, who's been spending the other $1T of the deficit and screwing the middle class?
I like the fact that you acknowledge the fiscal irresponsibility has occurred for 12 years. There are far more parallels between Obama and Bush than Obama and Lincoln.
Obozo should try dropping the new payoff to the unions disguised as "stimulus III" and his additional 1.6 trillion dollar tax increase on top of what we already have and then, maybe the Republicans will consider passing this thing.....until he strips that garbage out of the bill, he can take all the Dumbocrats with him and jump off the cliff......good riddance....to all the lying SOS......
Wow, if I was dumb enough to say that in second grade those nuns would of bloodied my knuckles.
Come on Seeking!
You're asking this from the same RWNJ's who swear up and down 53% does NOT represent a majority? lol
Their "honesty" is as challenged as their math skills...
Notice how not a one of their buddies corrected dufus's error? Instead 9 idiots voted for it! lmao
Joe in Albany
And when you get barely over 50% of the popular vote, which is less than you got four years ago, and one House of Congress is firmly in the control of the other party you have to learn that you aren't going to get everything you want.
Sorry Barry. Deal with it.
Joey, here is a flashback We won. That means the clowns in House are in the minority. Since when did the losers become the winners? Only in right wing world's alternative universe!!!
How come uber lobbyist Grover Norquist is butting heads with Republicans who no longer want to participate in his anti-tax pledge? The answer is simple they get it it. They know what a M-A-N-D-A-T-E is.
RepubliCons are a "'Menace To Society
@1funny-lookinggirl:
Honey, Congress doesn't meet at the White House, and it is not "his" cliff.
When you get to be POTUS, you can do it your way. ;)
The largest tax hike by Reagan didn't hurt his reputation. Why, just the mention of his name in a roomful of the GOPTP causes them to fall to the knees in a fit of worship. One can only conclude the GOPTP will worship Obama once his 2nd term ends.
Forrest,
They lost support in republican districts, they got toasted in every single swing state, the numbers by which they lost to Latino's, blacks, and women are staggering.
Republican's now have the majority of states (30) with republican governors.
I wonder if he will be impressive with reducing deficit?
SeekingSanity - keep seeking you may find some someday
You say I post lies.I say you are pathetic. The rich pay a higher percentage of their hard earned money in federal income taxes. If you think otherwise you are a mindless pathetic liberal who doesn't have any grasp on reality.
@Seeking Sanity Please post a source to back up your claim.
From what I can find the more you earn, the higher your effective rate. This is in complete contradiction to your post.
JH-479998
Actually Chinook is the best of the best ... but even better is Arctic Char
Scary, isn't it?
Plotting now to make that one less. Time to hit the pike, Corbett!!
Another circle-jerk! Go figure!
All we can do is wish them well...
"52% IS NOT A MAJORITY."
Well, I guess that says it all, doesn't it?
JH - as I keep saying, seeking sanity in the GOP but as you and your cronies show daily, there is none to be found.
Let's see, 15% is not even close to what most people pay in Federal Income Taxes - if you'll recall that is the number Romney swears he has paid for the last 10 years! If your math is so bad you don't see that is far less than the average American pays, there is truly no hope for you! I'm going by the figures Romney put out - so call him and give him hell! He's your problem - well, you actually have SO many problems, he's a minor one!
Oh, and idiot, I make good money but I actually pay my taxes instead of getting out of them like little Mitt and his cronies! And, I know we will probably all be paying higher taxes after the 1st of the year. If that's what we have to do to get the country back on it's feet, it's what we'll do!
52% is NOT a majority as it was made up of second class Americans like latinos, blacks and women. I believe somewhere in the GOP platform it will arithmetically give you the breakdown as to what percent their vote counts.
Proves that Obama would rather campaign than govern.
Hey, I'm all for eliminating the EIC from all those teat-sucker, supposed family value, conservatives. It's about time they anted up and payed to raise their neo-con brats.
Obama is great!! Currently #5 on the greatest Presidents list!
The right-wing extremists and Tea Party in Congress will go down in history just like the villians of the past (confederates, kkk, McCarthyism,etc). Say hello to history you UNCOMPROMISING fools!!!
john-537378 - your post is more proof that the Republican party is made up of demented and ignorant trash. In your mind, latinos, blacks and women are "second class citizens?" What an ignorant piece of gutter trash you are. Clearly all of the people you've mentioned are heads above you in intelligence; integrity; character and importance.
Your post shows why the Republican party is dying a quick death. Your idiotcy is the problem. The fact that you don't even realize how stupid you are says everything - all of it bad - and all of it about you!
Troll much?
Or, don't. The tax rates are going up one way or the other. The reason Republicans refuse to extend the tax cut for 98% of Americans before the end of the year is named "Grover". Okay, so we'll wait until after the cuts expire on their own...over the fiscal curb we go (Democrats are smiling, Republicans are fuming). Great reading today - from those who know what constitutes a "majority".
SS - obviously that's not what he thinks. Also, if your think the republican party is going to die a "slow quick death" you're mistaken. Out of curiosity, how old are you? Did you feel the opposite way only a few years ago when Bush was re-elected? Did you think the democrats were going to "die?"
I agree with you 100% that his comment was a pice of gutter trash, but obviously that's not the republican view. For all we know he's super liberal and posting that to spread more republican hatred!
G-Dog - democrats are NOT smiling. They promised to keep 98% of people's tax rates from going up. If we go over the cliff, all of those people's rates WILL go up. Why do you think they're smiling?
We did more than "win." What Joe and most of his ilk are careful to forget is that MORE people agree with Obama on the tax issue than voted for him.
I predict that will dwindle Thetotas, when the Gov's are next on the ballot, the tend is that the wider the voting bloc the worse republicans are faring.
Because the tax cuts can (and will) be extended for 98% of Americans (retroactively) after the first of the year.
SeekingSanity - you must seek it for yourself, you really need it
Since when is 15% tax on investments considered income tax? Pathetic fool. Know what you're talking about before spewing progressive/liberal talking points. Romney's tax on his investments has NOTHING to do with income taxes.
I am a 2%er. I got to that point two years ago. I have been saying for over 4 years now that all of the tax cuts should expire. I will gladly pay more when everybody pays more. Until then you progressive/liberals can all STFU with your BS about the rich not paying their fair share.
The Republicons lost more than the Election, they lost their minds !!!!!!!!!!!
G-Dog - that's different then. I wouldn't describe your scenario as "going over the cliff"
askaboutet - so now you read minds? That is clearly what he thinks and he posted it. There is nothing "obvious" to suggest otherwise. Unfortunately we saw a lot of those comments before the election. We saw the idiot in the crowd with the T-shirt proclaiming only a White Man should be in the White House.
As a white woman in business I see far too many men who are still ignorant and believe women should not be taken seriously - unless it's to make the coffee. And, we hear degrading comments about minorities every day - our President has been the topic of many of those stupid comments.
What is Obvious to me is that there are still many ignorant people out there who are too stupid to realize that a person's race; sex; age; etc., has nothing to do with their "status" as a citizens of this country.
As to my age - I'm over 40 - but that again has nothing to do with anything!
And if you don't see the Republican party is dying - you're not looking at what is happening. When someone like Megan McCain says that if the party continues to go the route it is going she will be registering as an Independent for the next election, that should be a warning.
When more states are "toss-ups" or changing to Democratic leaning - that should be a sign. If you can't see it - you're not looking. People are tired of the party that wants to take the country back 100 years and are moving away from it.
JH - the only pathetic fool here is you and you prove it with every post you make. Again, no sanity to be found in the Republican party - as you so clearly prove.
The Republican/GOP/Tea Party thinks the tail should wag the dog. Or put another way: they want minority rule - which they have been trying to do for the past four years. Obama should not have tried to get along with the Republicans then and he should not try now. They have no intention of compromising on aything - ever. As far as they are concerned: The people and our country be damned!..
All this focus on the tax cuts is politics, and not what the powers that be care about. The wealthy can afford to return to 1990s tax levels without batting an eye (they are much richer today than they were in Clinton's day).
The real fiscal cliff impact will be in spending. There we are talking about major GOP-backers, like GE and Haliburton, losing a significant portion of their income. Heck, Lockheed gets 85% of its income from tax payers. That's where our income taxes really go. That's why the market is so jittery, and why I am confident of eventual successful resolution.
But here's a predict based on the path of least resistance - we will change nothing except the tax rate above $250k. Not a single spending cut, or no spending cuts of any significance. Because when push comes to shove, it is easier to raise taxes now than to cut spending. (This is why the GOP has been unable to offer an alternate plan; no one within the GOP can identify any feasible cuts of any significance.)
And this is fine. We balanced the budget in the 1990s without spending cuts (at least, total spending increased a small amount every year). Spending cuts are not important.
Is Mr Stossel a Republican? Because this seems like Republican math. The deficit for 2012 is somewhere around $1.1T. $616 billion is nowhere close to "a third."
Beyond that, the way to reduce the deficit is to get the money in the hands of job-creators? Haven't you been telling us this since Reagan times? Well, the job-creators are the middle class - jobs are created by businesses in response to consumer demand, and consumer demand comes from the consumers which is, by and far, the middle class.
@Ido: You are lost in your conservative universe. When you have 100,000,000 votes, and 50,000,001 are for Obama, and 49,999,999 are for Romney, Obama has the majority. What crack-head math class did you take in school?
What's that you say? You want a reference? How about a dictionary: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/majority
John Stossel is a Fox talking head who actually believes the conservative myth that people hire employees because they have extra money in their pockets. That is absurd. People hire employees to make them money and that happens when the population-at-large [read middle class] is expected to spend money in our economy.
Even David Stockman, Republican Saint Reagan's budget director, believes that taxes on the wealthy should go up. Case closed!
SS- I guess Ian't possibly imagine that someone would go out of there way to log in to the website, post something that is SO OBVIOUSLY going to make themselves and "their party" look so bad, give someone they're arguing with TONS of ammunition, etc., and actually think they're making a good point.
Perhaps I'm WAY out of line, but I don't know...
I don't know what the deal is with the "taking us back 100 years" - how do you mean?
States switching from red to blue would be the same thing that would have happened when Bush became president, right? (states changing from blue to red?) how else would have have won?
I'm not advocating that there aren't racist people in the republican party, but it's silly to argue that there aren't racist people in the democratic party (or to only point out that there are racists in the republican party and NOT point out that there are racists in the democratic party).
P.S. - I work at an office that is totally run by women (I and a white male) you should come join us!
Alan, NJ-
Isn't 1 Trillion the cost of the Iraq War? and, yes, Alan, BOTH Republicans and Democrats voted to go to war. But, it will be forever known as Dubya's boondoggle; No 911 terrorist came from the country of Iraq. No WMD's were found. Hundreds of inocent Iraqis killed or wounded including children. Over 5000 American Service Woman and Men killed and thousands more wounded.
The Bush tax cuts was nothing more than a complete re-distribution of wealth from the middle-class to the wealthy. Yes, I said it. The Bush Tax cuts were Class Warfare. Period.
Don't get me started on how ridiculuous ANY comparisons between Bush and Lincoln or Obama and Lincoln are.
Have a nice day, Alan.
Salud
John Stossel became a Fox talking head after he left the idiots at ABC. He is a libertarian.
SeekingSanity - keep seeking you need it. So What's your answer about Romney's 15% and income taxes. You libbies are all the same. You show your ignorance, get caught at it and then ignore it. Pathetic fools.
Tomas - The Bush?Obama tax cuts were intended to give money back to all Americans. The only re-distribution going on is the Obama re-distribution. He has said it and he is trying to implement it. He is failing at it because there are still many Americans who elect republicans to fight him. I think they're doing a good job and I hope they don't let any tax rates go up. Unless everyones rates go back up like they were supposed to do.
A lot of repubs, seemed to have skipped math classes, and it shows in all of the repubs comments. They should go back to school, and take up math again. When it came to redis. areas, it made it harder to figure out where your voting pole was. Since the repubs. goveners controled this, and pushed for voter restrictions, that is why the repubs, gat in, BUT wait till 2014, then we will see ALL these governers, are gone!
askaboutet- sorry - I've seen too many of these loons to buy what you are trying to sell. And, I have seen the Republican party be so hate-filled toward anyone who isn't a white male, it is a dying party. Many of the leaders are commenting on this. Many intelligent Republicans (okay oxymoron) are saying that if the party doesn't come into the 21st century they will not exist in the near future.
When you blast women's rights; put minorities down; deny any process to make immigation possible for those who have done no wrong; hate people for their sexual orientation; etc., you risk your party dying out.
No thank you! I'm in a good office - and I like it. But I went through the typical "glass ceiling" crap so many women have to fight. It's pitiful that someone has to think they're superior to others to feel good about themselves.
JH - again YOU are the Pathetic fool. But go ahead - with every post you make you're re-enforcing that fact!
Sorry, taxes on everybody or taxes on nobody. You see a liberal just doesn't comprehend that there "ain't no such thing as a free lunch". Liberals are GREAT at spending OTHER people's money but that is going to stop.
Yes, you elected a Community Organizer in Chief that believes he can SPEND his way out of his failed policies. Conservatives are smart enough to know you can't do that and tried to remove him. We failed. So the unintelligent decided to reelect Obama and that decision has already been made. So if you agree with his "spend spend spend" philosophy then guess what? You are also going to pay more taxes so he can do that.
If YOU want more spending then YOU help PAY for more spending. Soon you will see just how it feels to have more of your money confiscated from you and spent needlessly. So YOU get to decide: Do you STOP this unsustainable spending by our corrupt federal government or do you help PAY for the unsustainable spending by our corrupt federal government.
Your choice..................
SeekingSanity - keep it up you might find it
What's wrong with you? You made a stupid comment about Romney's 15% income tax, I proved you wrong and now I'm the fool? Most women I know are far brighter than you. If they say something stupid they can admit it and move on. You seem to think that your poop doesn't stink. Well I've got news for you.
What's more pathetic than a woman that feels she is superior to other people? Nothing.
BCWC-
Correct! I tried telling Joe that sockeye placed a distant 3rd to chinook but it seemed to irritate him for some reason. I remember sockeye being used to feed sled dogs back in the day. It was always chinook, silvers, and steelheads for us (with the occasional halibut.) Oh well, I always liked the char too.
While you vilify the republicans... you would do good to remember that it takes two to compromise.
And when it comes to compromise, your beloved democrats aren't doing any better job at it!
No... they continue to play that same old card that they have been playing for the last two year... "the republicans are obstructing our 'my-way-or-the-highway' agenda!"
A surgeon told me republican politicians are the easiest to operate on, because there's no guts, no heart, no balls, no brains, no spine, and the head and the ass are interchangeable. Tee Hee.
SeekingSanity-
Amen!
I have seen my wife go through the same BS, and she's in banking. Talk about a good old boys club.
The boys are out on the golf course when she's working, and she's a VP!!!
Some of the racist comments today are so disgustingly over-the-top it's just not worth it. Those types of Tea Bloggers can only cower behind their avatar.
Take a deep breath and remember that the Rove-bots are spoiled, self-rightous teenager-like crybabies, exactly the same personality as Uncle Karl.
Smile Amiga!!!
Salud
Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe said it best last week when he said of course Obama got re-elected but so did John Boehner and Eric Cantor and Joe Wilson. They were not sent back to Washington to raise anybodies taxes. It is not like just because you were re-elected everybody else is going to just lay down.
The really big problem with all of this rattle of the fiscal cliff, is that none of the tax or budget related legislation is sacred. It can be changed any time, so waiting until January isn't going to hurt anyone and the Republicans will have a few less extremest radicals in the House when the new group takes their place. And, if the Republicans push this thing over the cliff, the public will be even more annoyed with the obstruction form the self-centered and self-serving GOP. Apparently the GOP did not learn their lesson from this last election. So much more effort needs to be put into action for removing the radical GOP from office. To some extent, all the hype about this "cliff" has set the stage for the public to become even more annoyed at the Republicans in Congress, who receive already high wages for part-time work along with many other benefits/perks. We need to get rid of Mitch & John, who just really aren't interested in accomplishing anything (because their taxes would go up, since they earn more than $250 K annually) , and most importantly they could care less about the 98% of their constituents.
Hey, Feisty, I'm as happy you are that our prez decided to get tough with the losers...
But he's still a nice guy! ;)
So, going back to the Clinton tax rates is the largest tax hike in the history of the United States. You would almost think that the fact that those tax rates were in effect previously would be a good indicator to Republicans such as yourself that it might not be the largest tax hike in the history of the United states...Damn man.
JH-479998-
Hoo boy!
First, I'm surprised you know ANY women.
Second, Women NEVER say anything stupid.
and Third,
oh forget it. There's no hope for you.
Salud
We like the obstruktionist Tea Party congress. Theys just doing the lords work creating Kaos in this sinful country. Amen!
Tomas
Maybe, just maybe, your wife isn't as smart as the others? Just a thought. Maybe she's a self-rightious teenager-like crybaby. Tell her to work harder and smarter and she may climb higher on the corporate ladder.
Tomas, the president of my bank took all the men to a strip club on the bank's dime. It's a sad commentary on banking in America.
JH -
Mitt Romney does pay only 15% on his INCOME because that is how he had his compensation set up. He uses several tax-avoidance strategies to avoid having his compensation taxed as earned income, including having a portion going directly to a 401k.
While these strategies are (arguably) legal, it doesn't mean Romney's compensation is not INCOME.
I hope you didn't hurt anything while you were patting yourself on the back.
Oh, and your latest comment to Tomas Grande just proves what an idiot you really are.
Then please explain the GW Bush years...2 wars, Medicare Part D and the Bush Tax Cuts all unfunded! Perhaps the Republican Party now believes GW Bush was a Democrat. That actually wouldn't surprise me in that I'm pretty sure with his tax hikes, Ronald Reagan couldn't get the nomination from the Party if he were alive today.
Some spending is excessive and/or misallocated, and there is discussion over what spending should be cut or reallocated. The tax rates for the wealthiest are going to go up, confiscated "needlessly" to pay for things like FEMA's response to Sandy, food safety, the military (two 'wars') etc. When people talk about the government spending "other peoples money" they don't seem to realize that (nearly) all money is created out of debt. Money and debt are created by us in order to facilitate the flow of goods and services. Currency in circulation is reduced when vast amounts are consolidated in a few piles (also by designed, legal, confiscation) - which reduces the ability of the general population to pay down the debt while increasing poverty and stress. Trickle down economics...do The People receive their fair share of wealth generated? No, because currency flow is impeded by the massive hoarding at the top, done to gain power over policy in order to ensure continued ability to dominate others. Very nice for the few, not so for the many.
RE: Stossel comments: All the millionaires are saying that! It would eventually "catch up" at that scenario-a hell of a lot quicker too!
JH-479998-
Yeh, remember that $600 check us po' folk got?
As I CORRECTLY stated, the intention of the Bush tax cut of 2001 and 2003 was to re-distibute income FROM the poor and Middle Class, TO the wealthy.
Sorry you pea-brain can't accept that. I'm sure Rush has told you otherwise.
That's a Rush/Faux talking point lie.
Republicans ran in 2010 on JOBS JOBS JOBS.
Once again, you can't get enough of Rush's Kool-aid.
The election's over, JH. Your side lost horribly, and they are about to get a can of Whoop-azz compliments of the MAJORITY of the American People.
Salud
@ItsAboutTime-3704531
Actually, they do have a plan..they just can't tell us until we approve of it. Just trust them....
Oh, you and your daily dose of BS. Is it really that hard to understand that the poor and working class have it hard enough already that they can't stomach a tax increase the same way the wealthy can? Is it that hard to understand that, for the poor, a tax cut can mean the difference between being able to buy new clothes at least once a year or —God forbid— putting food on their table every day, but that is not the case for the rich?
More importantly, is it hard to understand that a majority of us, Americans, want taxes to go up on the rich but not on everybody else? Even if this isn't a direct democracy, the voice of the people MATTERS. We elected a leader that ran on letting tax cuts for the rich expire but not those for the middle class. So don't say, "Sorry," as if you had any say. You had your say and you lost.
Is that why the last three Republican presidents have a record of having increased annual government spending at a higher rate than the last two Democratic presidents, including Obama? Is that why Obama has increased annual, inflation-adjusted spending less than any other POTUS since Eisenhower? Oh, right, you're all blah blah blah and no facts.
Yes, we did. Get over it.
You mean, that "he can spend his way out of other presidents' policies."
And no, he doesn't believe that. That's why he's offering spending CUTS along with revenue increases, because that's a FASTER way to reduce deficits. Mitt Romney campaigned on INCREASING discretionary spending (because our Navy is too small, remember?) along with cutting taxes. Neat way of reducing the deficit, eh?
Also, as an economist you should know that there's this dark, almost mythical, belief among scholars (fact: MOST scholars) in the field, that governments are expected to run deficits during recessions, both because of a shrunk income and the necessity to keep outgo at a level that spurs the economy. I know, shocker. Not the politically correct thing to say, what with faux authorities like you saying that it's an unfathomable act of communism, but that's what those nasty books say.
"I will boost military spending by $2 trillion over 10 years." —Mitt Romney.
Hypocrite.
Yes. People with a postgraduate degree overwhelmingly voted for Obama, but we all know they are society's unintelligent.
Too bad Reps haven't gotten the memo.
Yeah, I know. If only there was a national supermajority that agreed with his tax plan. Oh, wait, there is one.
I take it you are of the school of thought that 47% of the country pays nothing in taxes, are you? If so, I'm not going to go through every kind of tax that the 47% does pay. I'll only refer you to one of your comments above: "that decision has already been made."
Because none of us has long-term memory. We just can't remember what it's like to live under the Clinton-era tax levels, above which Obama has never said he wants to take us. Oh, the memories from the Clinton era come back: poverty! Tyranny! Confiscation!
Medical R&D is unnecessary, education is unnecessary, roads are unnecessary, helping the elderly is unnecessary — OK, OK.
Yes, it is, and we chose!
The consensus building on the republican side is that the democrats want the fiscal cliff to occur. This is so they can blame them for raising taxes like they really wish they could without being blames.
The Republicans dilemma is that the democrats have out manuveured them to the point that that even if the republicans compromise, the democrats still win.
Andres
Approved Spending is the combined efforts of the House, the Senate, and the president.
The president requests, congress approves what it will.
The spending stopped in 2011 when the Republicans took over the House.
Look at the budget history compared to all three units of government. Republican houses cut spendiong far more often than increasing spending. Democrat anything spends, but hides the spending by increasing taxes.
The biggest republican spending cuts was from 1919 to 1920. They cut a $18.49 Billion dollar budget down to $6.6 Billion.
Only the Simpletons beleived Obama's rhetoric when he talked about raising taxes on the 1% .... now, in his post-election "brain cramps" period it has quickly been raised to the top 2% !! Of course, Obama also talked about raising taxes on "millionaires and billionaires" but the TRUTH is that the increases start at $200k.
Then, there are the taxes from Obamacare ....21 or 23 of them, something like that, some of which have already kicked-in, some start in 2013 and MANY of these increase taxes on the poor and middle class.
Oh, and Tomas ... winning by a few percentage points and NOT controlling the House ... you libs are not in touch with reality are you ? Obama was neutered politically in November, 2010 and he still has not been able to "grow them back".
Obama's enduring legacy will be to have doubled the national debt of ALL HIS PREDECESSORS COMBINED !
Why Joe in albany has not responded back. I guess he got tired of everyone correcting his BS. Talking about Obama barely won. Is this guy serious. I don't call 332 EV barely winning.
Joe in albany is stuck in "denial". Good, i hope he stays there. Loser!!!
Hey Joe how much did romney received in Popular vote. Well let's see 47%, yeah thats a winner right there.. Idiot
I see things different like both parties want us to go over the cliff one lays out a plan they know the other will not agree with. It doesn't matter which party you are for we are all being played and according to the posts on here it's working well. Keep the populace against each other while they do a reach around and smile thinking what puppets we are. Untill we get the jobs back from say china and abroad close the boarder well maybe not the boarder since illeagals are returning home and stop all foreign aide we will never become solvent again. when we get our country under controll we can start giving money away again ha ha.
Congrats, DB... you're right! Heads we win, tails you lose.
It sure feels great to outmanuever those GOP S.O.B.'s!!
I'm a moderate, I'm all for EVERYONE getting a tax hike, the wealthy need to pay what they owe, all we have to do is close all those loopholes and the revenue would start pouring in.
As for my fellow lefties, you should want to pitch in, even if you are hurting as it is! This country is the greatest on earth, but it needs ALL of us to pitch in, not just a few!
Now, that said, Republicans.... get off your high horse and get some legislation to stabalize this economy, we are TIRED of yelling just to get you to do YOUR job!
LOL!!! FLIP-FLOP!!! Obama said he was going to do away with lobbying and now he's doing it. LOL!
The bottom line is taxes are going up on the top 2% and there is nothing that these right wing tea bag folks can do about it.
Jim-
Winning the Electoral College 332 to 206 is a HUGE humiliating Landslide defeat for Republicans!!!
We also have the Senate, so, that means Democrats rule 2/3ds of our government, and that means you Repugs are "out of touch with reality".
Too bad George W. Bush has done that already and alreadyclaim to that distinction.
But keep trying to shovel that Limbaugh BS. At least you're getting some exercise!!! You can work off all that weight you've been gaining from all those Cherry-Lime Kool-Aid you've been swilling.
Salud
Raise taxes on everyone and really cut the spending of everything... put their skin into the game you Demos and Repubs ... this joke of a tax raise and cuts, which will run the our inept government for 8.5 days.
Put up some real reform and quit blaming... Lead.. like we saw in the Repubs in the movie Lincoln do..
I can't stand either party. No Leaders in our government today, just a bunch of inept elite rich people who can't do the right thing for our country.
So amazing that the group that decried the Romney "47% remarks" are now saying "eff the other 48% who voted against Obama."
We didn't elect a dictator. The GOP won the House, the Dems won the Presidency. Nothing more, nothing less.
What's more ironic is that nearly half of voters for Obama want more spending cuts than they do taxes raised (See today's poll on politico.com). They don't want taxes only.
On compromise:
GOP has offered 800 billion over 10 in new tax revenue.
Obama has offered nothing in return. This is not compromise. Obama even asked for MORE SPENDING, and maybe some Medicare cuts 10 years from now. How are all those Medicare cuts in ACA coming along?
Liberals did this in 82 and 91 as well, tax revenue now, cuts later... the cuts later never came. Liberals are proven liars. Current Congress can not bind Future congress.
"But taxes were higher under Clinton! And times were good!"
Yes, but spending was much lower. Under Clinton (which liberals love to praise), spending was down to 18.2% of GDP. Under Obama spending is at 24% of GDP... hmm... if those raises are so good, what about the spending?
If it was so good under Clinton, if the Federal Government grew at the rate of inflation as Clinton's last year, the total Federal spending would be 2.6 Trillion, last year it was 3.4 Trillion. Yeah... it's the revenue that's the problem.
Liberals fail to actually analyze reality. They only have appeals to emotion, and screwing other people over.
Liberals are nothing but the kids in class who expect an A for merely showing up. They won't do the work. They won't live up to their previous agreements. Liberals are ruining this country.
America will survive until the day Congress discovers it can bribe the American people with their own money - De Toqueville
That time has come.
By the way, Obama campaigned on Tax revenue of 760 billion and spending cuts. His newest proposal does neither. He lied to America once again. Go screw.
Actually, spending is lower under Obama. The sad thing Obama got stuck with the W. Bush bar tab that Bush skipped out on.
I fail to see how taxing small business 160B per year deals with the over 1T in deficits.
I say let it go over the cliff...then everyone gets what they want....The Empty Suit gets more taxes including the 2% and the Orange Face get his big cuts.....a win-win!! Sounds like the perfect solution.........
I've come to the conclusion that everyone here spouts their points to thump their chests and try to sound like they know more than the next person....There's nothing anyone can do here except see what happens next...it's all theater...Neither side cares what anyone here thinks...and nothing changes until the next election cycle....Maybe it's therapy to be able to attack one another without physical harm....My fear is that there's a nut job on here that will take to the next level out in the physical world influenced by some of the rhetoric here.....
NBC has everyone doing what they want by making you think your opinion matters...they could care less...the only reason NBC wants you to come to this site is to read the ads that they're paid to have on here......
@Tomas
And this has what to do with your original point? Even if the Iraq war cost 1T, that is only one yera's deficit of the Obama Administration. The point is that there is a deficit of 1.1T and it is inceasing due to the entitlement demands of SS and Medicare. Simply taxing the top 2% at the Clinton rates will not close this gap, and neither will taxing the rest of us at the Clinton rates. The math doesn't work.
Sorry but this statement is way beyond me. How can you re-distribute income from the middle-class to wealthy by cutting their (the middle class) taxes. Due to the fact the Bush tax cuts lowered rates, moved many from paying any income tax, and increased the EITC most objective observers agree that the Bush tax code is much more progressive than the Clinton tax code.
Raise taxes... we do not make a dent. Cut programs.. we do not make a dent. Blame the other party... it doesn't help.
We last had a surplus in the "Dot.com" bubble of the nineties. Both Gore and Bush ran on a pledge to lower taxes. The bubble burst, as we have seen with other "bubbles", because the money wasn't real nor was the business. The Dot.coms manufactured... nothing.
The government is suffering from systemic and unending mismanagement. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans want to cut programs yet we don't take in enough money to cover what we pay for. All of you clammering for raising taxes and those for cutting programs, do you have ANY idea how much taxes would need to be raised and how many programs would have to be cut to balance and reduce the deficit?
It would take a combination of both but the trick here is, each side can say they agree that both are needed (and each has at times) but NEITHER side WILL cut and tax what is needed as it is political suicide. If a politician came out and told us what we needed to be done truthfully, he would be the most vilified man in Washington.
Seeking Sanity - sorry, I was away for a while. I think the racism thing is blown way out of proportion, and it is because of the media.
What are your thoughts on black republicans? Are they racist against black people? And are women republicans trying to keep themselves down? Obviously not, so there must be more to the racist/sexist argument.
Thomas - thanks for the back-up - went into a meeting and of course I knew JH wasn't going to stop attacking. When you prove he's said absolutely nothing - then he puts you down. It's all he and his ilk have.
He truly is a pathetic fool who chooses to call others names when he can't actually come up with anything of value.
Isn't is interesting the Republicans forgot all about the "JOBS!" they campaigned on in 2010? They will see the light in 2014 - but too little, too late!
What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. ~Mark Twain
And "Who" exactly does President Obama think is going to pay this "Extra Tax" on the 2%?
The loaf of bread cost $0.33 to raise. The farmer pays 33% in Taxes adds a 10% profit and passes it on, the Miller pays 33% in Taxes adds a 10% Profit and passes it on, the Baker pays 33% in Taxes adds a 10% Profit and passes it on, the Distributor pays 33% adds a 10% Profit in Taxes and passes it on, the Grocer pays 33% adds a 10% Profit in Taxes and passes it on.
Next when we buy our daily "Bread" the Government adds an additional 9% sales tax and that is how we end up paying $2.00 or more for a Loaf of Bread that costs $0.33 and the 2% who own all of this process will just "Tack" that extra "Tax" on to US too!
We do not need more taxes. What we need a "Much Smaller Federal / State / Local Government" an end to the War On America (oops Terror) and No More Federal Reserve Bailouts.....
As is when you count all of the "Hidden" Taxes (like Accumulated Taxes on Necessities & Endless Inflation) we are the Highest Taxed Country on Earth and get the least benefits of any civilized country in the world for our money! Maybe the Citizens of ZIMBABWE pay more Taxes than US...But I doubt it!
President Obama want more money? Lay-off 33% of the Federal Employee's, Release all Marijuana Prisoners from Federal Prison, stop Bernanke from printing all of the money he wants, and bring Our Troops Home TODAY!
Then you'll have all of the "Money" you could possibly need for your "Special Obama Phone Projects"....Otherwise please do not have your Masters Corporate Mouth Pieces telling US how "Lazy & Stingy" we are and how "Lucky" we've got it in NEO Amerika!
Impeach Obama in 2012 for the Criminal Conspiracy to Cover Up Murder, Secret CIA Prisons, and aid to Al Qaeda in Benghazi-Gate!
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. ~Thomas Jefferson
TO: Joe in Albany who wrote:
Majority still rules in the United States of America, and, by the way, George "Curveball" Bush didn't win the popular vote at all, in fact Bush lost the election, lied to the world about have "527 more votes than Al Gore", and got his friends in the Supreme Court to appoint Bush POTUS and even in the face of losing the election Bush defied everyone and everything in order to get his way and ONLY his way.
We're not going to be dealing with any Aparthied minority rule in this country, so sorry but you need to get over it!
It's my guess that Republican Congressmen are fighting this tax increase on incomes over $250,000 because that would include a tax increase on them personally.
askaboutet- I was gone too. Lots of meetings today.
If you go back and watch videos of the Republican convention you see very few minorities. Why any person of color would join the Republicans frankly is beyond me. Women and the Republican party makes no sense at all.
The rhetoric of the far right has driven the GOP over the last two elections. People like Akin and Murdoch as well as Ryan make it a party that is so derisive about women I don't think a woman who values herself can - in good conscience - stand with the GOP. And, they've done this to themselves.
When you look at representative women in the GOP - Bachmann, Palin, etc., there isn't a lot of good you can say about them or their intelligence level. I believe most of the sane women of the GOP - Olympia Snowe for example - will be leaving in droves. Why belong to a party that shows you no respect?
SS- what do you mean they forgot about the JOBS! they campaigned for? Why do you think they forgot about them?
@SeekingSanity
Oh the irony of this statement.
Why do you think the republican party shows no respect to women? (Or minorities?) I'm being serious, because I'd like to actually discuss this. What specific platforms do you think it is that the republicans run on, which disrespects women and minorities?
Let me explain something, if the taxes were raised on the top 2% to what they were under Clinton it would generate about 86 billion per year more in taxes (per gov spending in physical years 2010 to 2012).
That's it, 86 billion and when it cost 10.75 billion a day to run the government you've accomplished running things for 8 more days, good job idiots. What can the economy potentially get from 86 billion dollars? 2,150,000 jobs at 40,000 a year. So tell me again how you complete MORONS think this will do ANY GOOD?
Take 100% of all the wealth of the top 50% and it will run the Government for 8 months, it's not a taxing problem like you useful idiots were propagandized into believing, it's a spending problem.
Thanks to the person that gave me a +1 because I think this really needs to be discussed!
askaboutet- the Republicans campaigned on jobs then tabled EVERY jobs bill the President proposed - even those they were in favor of before Obama proposed them. Their main objective - as we have all found out - was making the President a one-term President. See how THAT worked out for them!
No respect to women - you are joking, right? Let's see - they want laws passed that makes a woman's body the property of the government to do with as they see fit. If a woman wants to take birth control - nope, that's off the table (per Ryan's plan); should she get raped and get pregnant (because any action that would be taken to prevent that pregnancy would be illegal, per Ryan's plan) that's a gift from God - NOT MY GOD! The entire premise that a woman should not have the sole choices about her own body is anti-women. What part of that don't you get?
Oh, and I'm the one who voted you up!
Actually plurality rules in the USA as Clinton became President with only 43% of the vote in 1992.
This is now moving into Urban Legend but there is no scenario under which Al Gore would have carried Florida.
The only way Gore would have won is if West Palm beach had not screwed up with the Butterfly ballot that allowed Pat Buchanan to garner 8,000+ votes from a predominantly Democratic district. However, as the Elections Board was Democratic, and they came up with the confusing ballot, you can hardly blame this on Curveball Bush.
BTW I am not a supporter of GWB and consider him the worst President in living memory.
poor alan of n.j. you are truly one misinformd and stupid s.o.b.....
SS - I don't get what you're saying about Paul Ryan - that he is against birth control? Or that he wasn't going to mandate insurance coverage? My understanding is that he just wasn't going to mandate insurance companies to include birth control... is that correct?
@dave w
Yet more insightful response from a troll. How was third grade today? That remedial English class helping?
So (and this is a sort of exaggerated point) but on the birth control note - wouldn't you say that everyone in history has been out of touch with women because no one (republicans or democrats) has ever advocated mandating insurance companies covering things like birth control? And to take it one step further, if republicans are out of touch with women because they didn't advocate mandating insurance coverage for birth control, would you say it was IMPOSSIBLE for ANYONE (male or female) to be politically "in touch" with women before whoever invented birth control invented it? (if it's not possible to be "in touch" with women without wanting to mandate insurance coverage for birth control?)
askaboutet - no Ryan's plan was against all birth control; against abortions for ANY reason - even in the case of rape and to save the life of the mother. He is a radical right wing nutcase and he and his cohorts want total control of women's lives. THAT is but one reason the Republican party is dying. How many young people did you see at their convention? Did you notice how there was no excitement at the convention - unlike the Democratic convention that was filled with people of varying ages; a diverse group; and total excitement? That should be a clue to everyone!
Wait - are you saying Paul Ryan was going to outlaw birth control?
@askaboutet
I don't think that us Dems really believe that Republicans don't support women. It is just a talking point we use.
No, it has nothing to do with controlling a woman's body.
It has nothing to do with some whacko congressmen that believe we can abort all non wanted pregnacies.
It is all just fun to poke a stick in the eyes, unless someone knows something different than I do.
True, some whacko's out there don't respect women, just like Jesse Jackson Jr.
Tax's should go up on 100% of Americans, screw it , everyone should have to pay for the stupid spending.
you think they want "total control of women's lives?" that's a "nutcase" thought right there.
And yes I saw a young person at the democratic and republican conventions. One of the young people at the democratic convention that was interviewed (the first person interviewed after the results were announced (on MSNBC, or NBC or something)) said she wanted OPRAH to be the next president.
I truly believe young people (specifically young women) saw commercials about Romney saying things like"planned parenthood? gotta get rid of that!" and thought that Mitt Romney litterally wanted to get rid of Planned PArenthood, even though that is FAR from the truth. But young women would see that and think that Mitt Romney is "against women."
I run a charity with my friends which collects toys for toys for tots. Mitt Romney would (like being against federal funding for planned parenthood) be against federal funding of my charity. Would you say he is "out of touch" with children because he doesn't think tax payer's money should go to supporting my private charity? THAT would be a weird stance, right?
lil michelle - thank you. (I think - you're being serious, right?)
oh, sorry - and thank you for that +1! I just +1'ed you back!
Lil Michelle - you don't speak for me so please don't try to. And, you clearly don't speak for many women. Yes, Republicans WERE advocating for control of women's bodies. If you don't understand that you probably need to do a little research.
No Republicans DO NOT support women - unless they are ones they can control. Look at what is happening within their own party. You really need to get a clue.
askaboutet - I'm talking about the entire convention groups. There was a total difference in the two. The Republican convention was made up of mostly middle aged or older white people. There were few minorities or young people there. If you didn't notice that - you weren't looking.
Planned Parenthood helps poor women get medical services for themselves and their children - these are necessities. While I support Toys for Tots - that is not a necessity to live. You are talking apples and onions.
LilMichelle . . .
Don't speak for me, either and please don't attempt to again. Have you been in hibernation for the past year? It's pretty apparent what the Republican party thinks of women and minorities. It's up to them to convince the world it's untrue.
Thomas - it's pretty clear JH has issues with strong women. He keeps referring to women as crybaby teenagers - my guess is he is constantly one-upped by most women and that women of intelligence won't go near him. So, he puts them down. Pretty easy to see through his hatred of women. He can't keep up!
Yes that is true. But the point I'm trying to get at is WHY? Why would minorities be more in favor of one party over the other? why would women be in favor of one party over another?
In all seriousness, poor people have gotten poorer under obama, minorities have gotten poorer under obama, and more people have been deported under obama than they did under bush. Why would someone from a certain race or economic background, who got worse under 4 years of a president, think the same president is the answer to get better?
I voted for Obama in 2008, and didn't in 2012 with the above mindset. The more I learned and the more I thought about everything, I figured (even though most minorities would disagree with me) that TRUE CONSERVATIVES, in the long run, would provide better futures.
I'm not sure what your point is about Planned Parenthood - they also provided medical services to my wife when she was in college, but she wasn't poor. Should the federal government provide funding to supermarkets because they provide food for poor people? (seriously - is there a difference in what your point is?)
Well, I asked if anyone knew any differently, to please post...
Some facts would be nice Seeking.
As for Planned Parenthood, the Republicans wanted to stop funding abortions THRU planned parenthood, they were not against it, as far as I know
Like I said, some whacko's out there on both sides of the fence are truly scarry, but the party that I left to come over to the Dem side, was NOT against women, blacks, hispanics or anyone - as a party, just like us Dems are not against God like Limbaugh said we were...
Sure, there are some talk show hosts that say quite a few lies to the sheeple... but YOU have to look at all the facts, not just what some TV personality says... FACTS people!
Republicans don't really care too much for ANY social issue, they really don't. I so don't mean that in a bad way
Also, I'm glad some people like to actually discuss issues, listening to all the goofy rhetoric gets old quick.
Lil - I love your unbiassedness... I typically try to be the same way.
I typically try to represent myself as someone who is more republican than democrat, but want to try to show that I am NOT what the average person on here thinks of republicans, I guess? (not a racist, gaycist, sexist, ignorant, biggot)
yw askaboutet!
Lil Michelle - again, where have you been the past year? Paul Ryan had proposed a bill that would prohibit all birth control and all abortions - no matter what! He backed off when teamed with Romney but it was clear he planned to enact his program, if they were elected. And, Akin and Murdoch pointedly stated that no woman should have an abortion. If she were raped and got pregnant it was God's gift.
This is not about being unbiased - it is about facts - which you appear to totally ignore.
The Republican party has shown itself to be racist; sexist and just plain stupid!
Lil Michelle-
askaboutet-
Kudos to a rational discussion. Thank you both.
I don't really understand why people would call someone "racist" for being a republican. Are they trying to reverse the Civil Rights Act? Are they trying to make rich people richer, but only white rich people and not black rich people? Are they trying to make poor black people poorer and poor white people richer? The answer to these questions is obviously "no" but for some reason people still argue that republicans are racist.
There are PLENTY of black, gay, women republicans, I feel like most liberal people who talk on here actually just don't even realize this. THAT (in my mind) is the real ignorance.
I also think it's a weird argument, when I point out that there are plenty of women and black republicans, that the typicaly answer (basically every single time) is that they are either idiots, being tricked, or are "only hurting themselves" as if there is nothing going on in this world besides abortions and food stamps.
I honestly hope to god that there is a strong, popular, black republican nominee next time around, or at least a very strong, popular minority that becomes a major player both politically and in the media, because it won't be until people realize that democrats and republicans are not really a black and white issue (pun intended) and that there are no "wars on women" or anyone else.
Again, facts would be nice.
Akin and Murdock are way out there, I'm not sure if they are dumb or just flakes.
Ted Kennedy killed a woman, so I guess saying that all Dems are against women would be right?
It would be beneficial to all parties to actually weed out the extremist, on both sides, and start working for the good of America, not the good of their party.
Seeking Sanity - there is no way that if Mitt Romney won the presidency that birth control would be outlawed.
Additionally, pegging one or two republican's view's quotes on "women's rights" would be like campaigning against democrats for not respecting women because Bill Clinton had affairs and used his power to hook up with a younger woman in his office - you want to talk about unfair tactics against women at work?
Obviously, though, in no way would I ever use that argument, because it doesn't have anything to do with the democratic party's "in touch-ness" in women.
I completely understand that there were going to be more rights for women because of abortion rules, and also that it would be nicer for women to have free birth control than to have to pay for it, but really, that is the case for anything. Also, I think people think that Obama can walk into the white house and snap his fingers and say "okay! gay people can get married and women can have abortions!" even though really, he is not in charge of that.
also, SS, I hope you're having fun with this discussion. I really only wanted to do it to try to learn something, maybe let you know that not all republicans are "bad," and pass the time with good lively discussion with someone who is not just sitting here yelling names at people.
Either way, I'm having fun, and I hope you are too!
TO: john-537378 who wrote:
If Republicans count porch monkeys, then I see no reason why they should't count real people.
Lil Michelle - Although many of us may believe Ted Kennedy was in the wrong, no one has facts to support your accusation. Laura Bush killed a man - have you made an issue of that? And, let's not forget that through his insane need to get Sadam Hussein, George Bush killed hundreds of thousands of people.
Although Ted Kennedy clearly did some things that were bad, he also helped thousands during his time in office. The people of his area would dispute your characterization of him.
The Republican Party that you left no longer exists. As I said, when people like Megan McCain say it has been taken over by people who are filled with ignorance and hatred and that she may very well register as an Independent, there is more to what I am saying than you acknowledge.
What exactly do you think it is that she is referring to? Do you think the "shift" she is talking about is not forcing insurance agencies to cover birth control? Because that has never been the case, so I don't know what "shift" she's really talking about. What is different now, vs. 4 years ago in terms of racism?
Or sexism? - that is such a defining issue that it causes someone to change parties (based, presumably on fundamentals?) I mean, to me, at least, it seemed like the republican party wanted to decrease federal spending, not increase taxes, foreign policy was ABOUT the same, then there was the war on women. Is it the "war" she is talking about?
ALSO, sorry - yes. I do think it is a very telling sign that she is switching. Extremely telling. BUT, I'd be curious to know exactly what it is that made her switch (other than "ignorance and hatred" (which I'm sure can be found no matter what party you're in).
And if the party she is registered for is too out of control, different, hateful, ignorant, etc., why wouldn't she have already changed parties? In all honesty, if someone is more interested in their PARTY, as opposed to ther fundamental beliefs on issues, I tend to take them LESS seriously. If she is against "her party" why is she in it?
*this is NOT trying to belittle the fact that I do think it is crazy/important that she came out and said it. I'm just tyring to comment on it. I do think it is serious, especially from a political/media standpoint.
Ted Kennedy's carelessness/ drunkenness/ failure to accept responsibility caused the death of a woman. I don't think anyone of either party found that incident to be anything other than tragic and shameful. Kennedy pled guilty to leaving the scene of the accident but was given a suspended sentence. His political career was justly curtailed because of what he did and what he failed to do.
Isn't it beyond reason to conclude that Democrats are against women because of that single incident?
If you really want to have a discussion of how the GOP has tried to turn back the clock on women's rights, Chappaquiddick is a ludicrous place to start.
kaybeetoys - everything you posted is true. But Ted Kennedy seemed to "grow up" after the accident and he did great things for his constituents and for the country in his continued service. What he did is between he and whatever God he believes in. However, I do think people can change and he worked hard to help those less fortunate in his latter years in office.
Just sayin....
Seeking Sanity... I totally agree that Ted Kennedy was one of the best Senators this country has ever had.
He made a huge mistake in his youth and paid a price for it, but at the end of the day he redeemed himself with his long and committed career in public service.
He was not a misogynist, unlike so many in the GOP.
At the rate Obama is going he will spend more taxpayer dollars getting this paltry tax increase passed then it will generate in revenue. Liberals are all screaming to Obama to get it done, as if 86 billion dollars is a meaningful solution to the 1.2 trillion in annual deficits Obama is running. Obama simply does not care one bit about the debt or deficit, this is all for show and produces no dough. You can take to the bank that Obama will leave office with our national debt in excess of 20 trillion. Obama has no intention of doing anything but kicking the can down the road. After all liberals swoon over the promises of freebies and handouts, even if future generations have to pay for them.
This is an article making its way all around the web:
It's really amazing to see political reporters dutifully passing along Republican complaints that President Obama's opening offer in the fiscal cliff talks is just a recycled version of his old plan, when those same reporters spent the last year dutifully passing along Republican complaints that Obama had no plan. It's even more amazing to see them pass along Republican outrage that Obama isn't cutting Medicare enough, in the same matter-of-fact tone they used during the campaign to pass along Republican outrage that Obama was cutting Medicare.
This isn't just cognitive dissonance. It's irresponsible reporting. Mainstream media outlets don't want to look partisan, so they ignore the BS hidden in plain sight, the hypocrisy and dishonesty that defines the modern Republican Party. I'm old enough to remember when Republicans insisted that anyone who said they wanted to cut Medicare was a demagogue, because I'm more than three weeks old.
Whatever. I realize that the GOP's up-is-downism puts news reporters in an awkward position. It would seem tendentious to point out Republican hypocrisy on deficits and Medicare and stimulus every time it comes up, because these days it comes up almost every time a Republican leader opens his mouth. But we're not supposed to be stenographers. As long as the media let an entire political party invent a new reality every day, it will keep on doing it. Every day.
Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/30/fiscal-cliff-fictions-lets-all-agree-to-pretend-the-gop-isnt-full-of-it/#ixzz2E0ZYzEZK
Yes, indeed they do. Instead of shedding light on the issues, they stir up controversy to garner the interest of the apathetic and uninformed viewer.
The media has become lazy and cynical, forgetting that they are responsible in this democracy to inform the people in an unbiased and honest manner.
You're right!! We need the Media to only report the views of Barack Obama and his party. We need to arrest and detain all the subversive Tea Party members. We need to outlaw Republicans and appoint Obama Supreme Commander. Without any dissenting views we can get things done easier and efficiently.
Good Gawd - stuff it up your Tass!! Shall we re-open the door on the number of times Bush squelched free speech?
Obama cuts campaign-style video on raising taxes for top 2 percent
Dissenting views are necessary and welcome. Blatant, destructive obstructionism is not.
New Republican Definitions
alternative energy sources
n. New locations to drill for gas and oil.
bankruptcy
n. A punishable crime when committed by poor people but not corporations
Cheney, Dick
n. The greater of two evils.
class warfare
n. Any attempt to raise the minimum wage.
climate change
n. The day when the blue states are swallowed by the oceans.
compassionate conservatism
n. Poignant concern for the very wealthy.
DeLay, Tom
n. 1. Past tense of De Lie 2. Patronage saint.
democracy
n. So extensively exported that the domestic supply is depleted.
Fox News
fict. Faux news.
free markets
n. Halliburton no-bid contracts at taxpayer expense.
God
n. Senior presidential adviser.
growth
n. 1. The justification for tax cuts for the rich. 2. What happens to the national debt when Republicans cut taxes on the rich.
gun control
n. The index finger, usually on the right hand. No other definitions or usage.
habeas corpus
n. Archaic. (Lat.) Legal term no longer in use (See Patriot Act).
healthy forest
n. No tree left behind.
honesty
n. Lies told in simple declarative sentences--e.g., "Freedom is on the march."
House of Representatives
n. Exclusive club; entry fee $1 million to $5 million.
laziness
n. When the poor are not working.
leisure time
n. When the wealthy are not working.
liberal(s)
n. Followers of the Anti-christ.
neoconservatives
n. Nerds with Napoleonic complexes.
9/11
n. Tragedy used to justify any administrative policy. (see Terra, Terra, Terra)
No Child Left Behind
riff. 1. v. There are always jobs in the military.
ownership society
n. A civilization where 1 percent of the population controls 90 percent of the wealth.
Patriot Act
n. The pre-emptive strike on American freedoms to prevent the terrorists from destroying them first.
pro-life
adj. Valuing human life until birth.
Senate
n. Exclusive club; entry fee $10 million to $30 million.
simplifiy
v. To cut the taxes of Republican donors.
staying the course
interj. Slang. Saying and doing the same stupid thing over and over, regardless of the result.
voter fraud
n. A significant minority turnout.
Wal-Mart
n. The nation-state, future tense.
water
n. Arsenic storage device.
Pat Boston MA.
As long as the media let an entire political party invent a new reality every day, it will keep on doing it. Every day
Pat , Did you see this?
Menace To Society Murdoch Wants To buy Chicago News
Rupert Murdoch — the guy who’s under investigation in England for phone hacking, influence peddling and bribery — wants to get his mitts on the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune. These are the major papers in the nation's second- and third-largest cities (where, incidentally, Murdoch already owns TV stations).
http://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2012/10/22/murdoch-mccarthywhos-the-greater-menace-to-the-dignity-of-chicago-journalism
It will make Murdoch very powerful
It will make media less diverse for women and people of color.
It will create local monopolies
It will mean less news
It will go against the will of the people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You remember Silvio Berlusconi? He started out as a cruise boat lounge singer and small-time hustler. But then he bought a newspaper, then a small television station, then a radio station, then another TV station, then another newspaper, then another radio station, then another TV station, then another newspaper, then a radio network, then a TV network, and suddenly Berlusconi ended up owning about 95 percent of all the media seen, heard, or read in Italy.
And with control of the information in Italy, Berlusconi decided to run for Prime Minister, and wouldn’t you know it – he won!
Rupert Murdoch will NOT be running for president, since he was not born in America. But, there's no doubt that his Fox News Channel operates as a communications outlet for the Republican Party. Know that he has not hesitated to interfere with American politics. There is every reason to be concerned about what might happen if this loathsome, greedy, old goat, with his tongue hanging out, got even more of our precious media resources.
Murdoch got kicked out of Australia for his tabloid politics? We don't want that a** hole here polluting our air waves and print media There is a petition going around to stop this ole fool.
Excellent, Doc... so very true.
Hey DOC, good one but you left out the Voice of the GOP - Rush Limbaugh !!!!!!!!!!
Bev, wow, that is so troubling.
You have to remember - those in the GOP aren't interested in how loathsome this creep is. He has been in all kinds of trouble because of his journalistic practices, yet here in America, he's welcome. I don't care how much he pays, anyone with an ounce of integrity should never accept a paycheck from him. Working for him is about as low as you can get in your career. They aren't journalists and should never be mistaken for journalists. Never.
Doc, terrific!
That's frightening news, Bev. I hope Murdoch is stopped in his tracks.
If you want to balance the budget you have to look at where the money is. We spend 20% on military, 20% on Social Security and 20% on Medicare. Everything else is 40%. If you cut welfare completely out you don’t make a dent. We have to address military spending. Why do we have 11 aircraft carriers and then country with the next largest fleet is 2…and that is our friend the UK!!. Even our old foe Russia only has 1.
Why do we spend our money on social security? That money goes primarily to old people. I can see giving money to young people just starting their lives. But old people 65 and older have had 40 years to work and amass huge sums of cash. But they didn’t. So why are we spending our precious money bailing out intelligent (supposedly) people that spent every penny they made for 40 years and now have nothing’s mistakes.
Pat
That is not amazing.
What the media is doing is framing the Republicans as complainers and do nothing. Just like you want them to be seen as.
Republicans ARE do-nothing complainers, DB. We don't need the media to tell us that.
Now that the election is over, why don't you try working on your perception of reality?
DB...the media knows exactly what it is doing. It's painting the Republicans in a negative light no matter what they do.
This is the same media that never, and I mean never asks Obama a question in a press conference that requires an answer of facts if those facts will in anyway come across negative.
The media are like referee's in a game. And Obama and the Democrats own the refs.
slimy
we old people don't have money because our investments went down the flusher we paid for our kids education on credit most of us spent our money on the family needs not parties and now have to listen to young people the its all about me generation make stupid comments ya duck waddler
Boo Hoo Hoo.
Good one Doc.
hehe -- Rupert Murdoch??? ...yup he is a POS...
do not forget good ol' George Soros... just in case you have, here is the link to him marrying a 40 year old after ditching a early twenties babe... GEORGE IS 82
Partisan Rhetoric...blah blah and BLAH
What a bunch of bozos. I can't believe you lefties get so easily sold on these continued campaign 'one-liners'. This guy never stops. Can't he get off TV for 5 minutes?
The SPENDING has to be dealt with. The Government sucks at managing anything they touch, so I don't get why you're so eager to give them more money and more power to do a bad job.
We bitch about Bush all the time, about how he spent too much, so I don't get why you guys don't hold Obama's feet to the fire for spending a TRILLION more EVERY SINGLE YEAR of his presidency than even Bush spent.
OBAMA, Democrats, Republicans, For Fu*)'s sake STOP SPENDING!!!
slimyone - you DO KNOW people pay into Social Security and should be able to get that money back, right? It is not "free" money. Most have paid into the system for their entire life.
Perhaps knowing what you are talking about would help you understand.
I am ready to go back to the Clinton tax rates- but for everyone - to make the Democrats happy. I am also ready to go back to the Clinton spending by department - that will make the GOP happy. Then 0-zero can explain to his cronies why they are not getting their kick-backs anymore.
Most of the people who make $250,000 or more earn it. You do not punish the people who are the top tax payers. when they earn more money they pay more taxes at the tax rate they are in.
Now the people who do not pay taxes use the same services that the rich do but they are exempt from paying any taxes! According to the last survey on the system, it stated that 42% of the American public received some sort of government assistance.
Get the illegals out and have those jobs taken by American citizens and legal residents. The tax revenue will grow and the number of people on government assistance will decrease.
Better yet is a flat tax. I think 17% is the number bandied about. If every American citizen can vote, than every American system has the responsibility to contribute to the fund to run the country.
correction system=citizen
The community organizer is organizing the community, republicans have mocked him for that ever since the 2008 campaign season, however he is the one who handed them their heads in the last two elections.
Forrest---I never understood why the GOP thought it was a good idea to deride the President's past experience as a community organizer---they practiced saying it with a sneer and it still turns up today. When is it smart to debase the way anyone earns a living, yet alone someone trying to help those less fortunate? The best part is that the "community organizer" organized two of the most effective campaigns for the Presidency ever. I'm glad to see him keeping the momentum going.
have you ever dealt with community organizers???
You have it so right Forrest. The community organizer has more intelligence and more integrity than just about anyone in DC.
And the nation recognizes that.
The best part is that the "community organizer" organized two of the most effective campaigns for the Presidency ever.
Well said Steeler. The Obama campaigns cleaned the Romney campaign's clock. And they're supposed to be the smart ones? They're out of date and out of their minds.
You people forget he was a Senator.
Hey Forrest, i would not call a less than 3 million vote majority (out of over 110 million) "handing someone their head"! This is why i did not vote for the guy, his idea of bi-partisan discussions is to bludgeon the other side until they either give in or the whole process collapses.
Absolutely pathetic leadership!
Steeler Fan, the very first words I ever heard come out of Sarah Palin's mouth were her put-down of Obama, her sneeringly calling him a "community organizer"... and it immediately turned me off to her.
If anyone ever failed to live up to their own arrogance, it's Palin. Give me the community organizer any day.
Well, I guess they did!
Steeler Fan-380417
The best part is that the "community organizer" organized two of the most effective campaigns for the Presidency ever. I'm glad to see him keeping the momentum going.
Steeler Fan
The right just can't stand the fact that they got out-organized by...
"The Community Organizer"
Yeah right Heavy Shoulders, Obama must be the reason this Congress has a 14% approval rating, the lowest ever recorded-bar none. For people who try to make this president seem ineffectual and irreverent they sure cry a lot about needing his leadership to do the jobs they were elected to do. Why do republican lawmakers consider Obama their Saviour and Messiah, the only man who can save them from themselves.
What Mr. O failed to mention that he was going to increase the debt, add more stimulus and he wants absolute power to raise the debt limit at will without congress. Those are the facts folks, face it you voted for a community organizer AGAIN, an arrogant narcissitic one at that. The reason why people "defile" the term community organizer is because it takes far more VAST experience to run a country than a community. Also as far as being a senator -- yeah he voted "present" most of the time and started running for prez the rest. He has no experience is the art of negotiation, tact, uniting, understanding of the country, congress, senate and obviously either ignorant of the constitution or doesn't believe it applies to him. Stick up for him and turn a blind eye, you're only taking down the future generations with your "gimmee mine" attitude. Selfish votes for selfish.
Dottiesgirl ...
No he doesn't. What he wants is it NOT to be at the hands of Congress because we all know how they play that game. They wait too long to do anything as they have to give everyone their turn at the mike. While waiting for them to act, the country suffers. I sreiously doubt as usual that you know what you're posting about.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/06/29/full-text-geithner-letter-responding-to-republicans-on-debt-limit/
Dottie's Girl, the country has more confidence in him than the last two republican tickets. His approval rating is at least four times that of the republican controlled house, your opinion is that of an ever shrinking minority of Americans.
Oh my, Dotties girl. Isn't someone in a snit today! You're not a sore loser, are you?
Don't go away mad, dear... just go away.
If you let the man bypass Congress-we are all lost! That is SUPPOSED to be our voice (I know, I know), and I don't think you should speak for the "country" Mr. Grump-I am part of this country and I don't approve! I may be in the slight minority now-because the majority is not working for a living and Obama Entitlement packages are far better than having a job!
Turn off Fox News and get back to work!
Dotties girl-
He has tons of experience. In fact, he's been President of the United States of America for almost four years.
He is one of the more brilliant Presidents in modern times, and being a constitutional scholar, knows more about our Constitution then you ever will a hundred times over.
As keybeetoys said, "just go away".
Salud
And what does that the republicans savior Mitt romney. He lost to a "community organizer". Wow you must feel bad about yourselves huh. Losers!!
@Forrest Grump, The last 2 elections ! LOL !! In November, 2010 you libs suffered MASSIVE LOSSES in the House and Senate prompting none other than Barack Obama to say "we got shellacked" !!! So, you regain "some seats" back in 2012 and you think the world is obligated to fall down on their knees and worship at the altar of fiscal insanity !!
And when did Obama talk about the 1% ? Before the elections, only to change it to the 2% AFTER the elections !! LOL !!! That went right by you libs like a hot knife through butter !
But what you fail to realize is that Obama HAS NO INTENTION OF EXTENDING the "Bush Tax Cuts" for anyone !
and now the rest of the story! obama was an acorn organizer the same ones that want to bankrupt america to start over as a socialist country. If nothing else he's doing a good job of destruction and splitting the US apart.
Jim, massive defeat you say. Yeah so massive the Dems still controlled the senate after 2010 election. Man you are joke.. You right wing conservatives lost 2 presidential elections, 2008 and 2012. Now what does that say about you righties..
okie - you're a liar. President Obama was NEVER and acorn organizer. Try again and at least try to make it believable.
Layton and Thomas - you're talking to a brick wall when you talk to Dottie. She gets her talking point from FOX and frankly, I don't think she has a clue what they mean!
Democrats are great at superficials. They latch on to 'bandaid' solutions derived from clever slogans like a bunch of dumb rabbits mesmerized by flashing lights.
On the surface Democratic ideology sounds good. People buy into it because it feels compassionate and caring, unfortunately it never works because its not grounded in solutions that really work. They don't care about the details. Seriously with comments from Pelosi like "We have to pass the bill to find out whats in it." They know that the only thing they have to do is sell the idea to you dopes with a bunch of clever lines, a flashy dumbed down ad, and some pretty speeches on TV.
What a joke.
The GOP's next Plague, Jeb Bushy - Americas getting sick & tired of being Bushwacked !!!!!!
okie
Completely false. You're one of the people who cause others to make fun of okies
It is evident he was never a community organizer but a communist organizer. Sycophants, all!
Reality Check
Why is it that the most irrational posters choose screen names such as "Reality Check."
You are spreading lies and, in truth, have no interest in "reality" when it does not suit your purpose, which is to insult and denigrate the President regardless of the facts to the contrary. You have no place in a rational, adult conversation.
Couple of things Mandi &#s, first of all the president does not bypass Congress that is why nothing gets done, because it is beyond the power of the president to pass any tax law,budget, or legislate anything.
Secondly it is not me speaking for the country, the country has spoke for itself, I did not by myself give this Congress the lowest approval rating in the history of recording those numbers, and the people of this nation elected Obama president twice, it is not my opinion those were votes counted.
If you really believe the majority of the nation now does not work, and just enjoys "Obama entitlement packages" then please explain why republican voting states such as Texas, South Carolina, Montana, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Alabama, West Virginia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Arkansas, and coming in at dead last Mississippi have the lowest median incomes in the nation. Are the people that live in these states just too lazy to better themselves? Do these people want to work hard to make a good living or do they just rely on welfare? Whats up Mandi? The people in the liberal voting states make a lot more money, tons more, is that because they are lazy and live off "Obama entitlement packages", are you telling me they make more for being lazy and collecting "Obama entitlement packages" , than conservatives make for being hardworking. Take a look at the breakdown of median incomes by state and then explain to me why all the "lazy liberal" states at the top make the money and all the "hardworking" conservative states are at the bottom. BTW the breakdown of median income by state is not my opinion either Mandi those are facts.
Reality Check - you haven't been NEAR reality in a very long time.
I wonder if the president invited Romney to lunch to personally break the news to him that his taxes were going up.
Forrest, you ate your Wheaties this morning! You're cracking me up.
No, he probably asked Gov. Romney on what he should do to be a President for ALL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Are you kidding? Romney discounted 47% of the people by his own admission, Obama wants to be president for 98% of the people, republicans want to be the handmaiden of the other 2%.
Ido - hardly since Romney doesn't recognize anyone who isn't in the top 1%. Get over it - Romney lost because he doesn't have a clue about the country or it's citizens!
ldo
Romney lost. Get over it. If the GOP doesn't change their song and dance, it will cost them more in 2014 and 2016. Get ready to watch Texas, Arizona, and Georgia move to swing states and out of the GOP pocket.
The President let Romney personally file his amended 2011 return so he could expedite the processing of the refund after Mitt claimed those deductions he left behind in the first version.
I find it strange my republican friends are afraid to admit they are republicans. This is how much the Republican brand degenerated.
...to which Mittens replied, "Well, they couldn't get much lower."
The President let Romney eat big bird since he pardon the two turkeys !!!!!!!!!!!
Big Bird still has a job, Romney still does not.
Criminy, I still can't believe Romney wanted to get rid of the one good channel (PBS) on TV... and people still voted for this jerk????
gee talk about taking things out of context. romney said he could not change the 47% of peoples mind that are on gov assistance and the pbs or lets kill big bird as you simpletons say was because they can carry the cost on their own without gov help. There are alot of programs that get our money that are just ridiculous but all you lefties are not thinking about how much that comes to in savings. Its like the free phones its not a necessity, at one time alot of people did not have phones and got along fine.
Romney's got plenty of money he can afford it. I guess Romney enjoyed the empty suit tour. Kaybee you're a taker, I've seen plenty of your post and all you and the rest of your ilk care about is what can you get from people working while you do nothing. I'm not in a snit -- the facts are the facts and the more you and the "gumps" pound your little hands on the keyboard is not going to change that. See some of us, dearie, do our own research, were raised to be responsible and accountable for our actions. Too bad your parents were too lazy to do the same for you. Oh and have a great day! As usual haggisbingo you and your ilk spew the talking points and lack the facts. Romney NEVER said he wanted to get rid of PBS he was going to stop government funding -- Big Bird/Sesame Street ALONE gets over $400 MILLION a year so they don't need the taxpayer welfare. Y'all were screaming about Romney's money and Big Bird has more than him but not a peep AND you want them to get taxpayer money on top of it. HYPOCRITES, man you guys need to think for yourselves but I'm afraid it's too late for many of you.
Dottie's Girl, if you were referring to me it's Grump not Gump. If you think I am a taker you very much mistaken, I have been working all my life, I have never taken a dime from the goverment except for three weeks worth of unemplyment in 1991. I have raised a family and supported a stay at home wife and mother for over 30 years, I have always had complete healthcare coverage for my entire family, I have just over a million bucks in my retirment fund (which the financial gurus tell me is just about enough for me and the wife) I still work and I pay twice the tax rate Romney does. I never pound the keys on my laptop, and have always been responsible and accountable for my actions. Lastly maybe Big Bird has more money than Romney because Big Bird works and Romney does not.
I am employed, FYI, and have been since I finished high school and started college. I earned an advanced degree from a fine school. What do you know about me or my life? What assistance do I get from the government?
I work hard for what I have. Nobody has ever handed anything to me.
Feel free to disagree with me all the live long day, but insulting my parents only shows your lack of character.
So let me make sure I've got this straight: Big Bird has more money than Mitt Romney. That's your argument?
Hilarious!
Congress was voted a very large majority by the good people of the United States of America in a fair and accurate election (so I am told by lefties)
The fact is the poor and brown/black population wants Obama but they only want him for his skin color, where the rest of America elected a Republican congress to protect them from tax increases or other intrusions on their civil rights from Obama.
Think of Obama as a powerful virus unleashed on America to destroy it from the inside and Congress like a Firewall protecting America from these attacks.
Well GHX I am not poor, brown, or black and I voted for Obama not for his skin color but because of his sensible approach to protecting me from republican intrusions on my right to keep my religion and government separate, and my ability to make a good living from my own hard work. Think of republicans as a virus that wants to destroy the government from the inside, hell they will be the first to tell you they hate and wish to shrink the government and in the same breath will tell you how to worship and what should or should not go on in the intimate aspects of your private life.
Forest, I agree on the religion part. Unfortunately the Republican party has been seriously infiltrated by the religious right and like you I strongly dislike these intrusions.
I also have been an entrepreneur my whole adult life and work hard for what I have so with even more disdain I cannot abide by Obama's "tax solution" and big spending govt. Socialism is making a big comeback in the world and I suppose is cyclical, but it fails every time where tried and you end up with a gray drab nation full of poor hungry people filled only with despair over how bad things are. Finally after the socialists have picked the bones clean and there is nothing left the new generation rises up and again capitalism takes its course.
GHX I applaud you and your entrepreneurial spirit just as I applaud the gains made by Mr. Warren Buffett and Mr. Bill Gates. Both of those individuals are generous to extreme in setting up charitable foundations and helping those less fortunate. Mr. Buffett has even gone on record as agreeing with increased taxes on the wealthy. Those gentlemen are exemplifying how a society should work. You do your best to take care of those who do the work that makes you and those like you rich.
You suggest that the non-white voters elected President Obama because of his color while the rest of America voted for a Republican Congress as a buffer but if that is so, why then didn't they just go ahead and put Romney in office despite the black/brown vote? Then the capitalists could have simply run rough shod over all of America at will. I just don't see how that conclusion holds up under serious scrutiny. Were it not the will of the majority they would have without question. The reality is that the GOP actually lost some seats in Congress as well as losing their shot at the White House because of a number of reasons. One of the biggest is over spending and misappropriations.
The GOP wasted most of our national treasury on foreign adventurism and foreign charity and excessive military spending in my opinion. They spent like drunken sailors (sorry Navy but I was after all a sailor for 7 years) and never bothered to pay down their debt in the process. They just went nuts with their credit cards. Now the Democrats and President Barrack Obama have the unenviable task of telling the American public that they are going to have to pony up more cash to pay off the irresponsible debt accrued by the GOP. I might add that it is my opinion that much of that spending wound up in Republican pockets through money making enterprises like Halliburton and company. You see when you control the spending you also control who gets the money to do the job. It is called cronyism. You make absolutely sure that you and your buddies profit handsomely from it. Then later you cry like heck whenever the tab for your fun and folly shows up and try to get the poor people of America to foot the bill for you. How greedy is that? LOL
For what it is worth Obama care as they are calling it is already costing me as a pensioner and my elderly mother more each month than we really can afford to spend. However we are not complaining and will manage to get by because we have dear friends who have lost their jobs, cars, houses, and employer benefits because of irresponsible GOP management and who now have nothing and if we don't pay a little more to help them they could die. I don't accept that as an option. I cannot eat my scrap of bread while my neighbor starves to death so I will share what little I have for the good of the whole. That is what society is supposed to be about. I do not believe in "every man for himself" as my late father and his family and all other Republicans believe. Yes we are our brother's keeper and so it must be if we are to continue to survive as a species.
You also talk about how Socialism fails but so to does Capitalism. Neither can be fully sustainable on their own. Both ultimately become cannibalistic and devour the society in which they reside. The only truly sustainable form of government is one which consist of a balance of Socialism and Capitalism both managed democratically. If you look real close that is what China is trying to accomplish. They have progressed from extreme Marxist Communism to a more balanced combination of capitalism while still remaining mostly Socialistic. As time goes by I think that you will begin to see China looking more like 1945 America than like 1960 Communist China. Their industry will boom and a burgeoning middle class consisting of factory workers will emerge with pockets full of money just like America in our post war years.
As a nation we are on our way down economically, socially, and spiritually. With each passing day we surrender more and more of our individual rights and freedoms in the interest of easing our paranoia over a threat that only exists in our minds. We are becoming spineless jellyfish who simply wait to be manipulated and told which way to jump and how far by an overblown overly authoritative government. Sorry but that is just how I see it. I don't approve of all of the governmental agencies and watchdog groups who are attempting to tell the common man how to live every aspect of his or her life.
In addition we are allowing our national infrastructure such as our electrical grid, sewer systems, national highway system, educational system, health system, and our manufacturing ability go to the dogs while we give billions away to nations who don't even appreciate the gift and then try to kill us in return. That simply makes no sense to me whatsoever. We have destroyed our middle class by shipping our jobs overseas and not replacing them with jobs that can be done by people with an 8th grade education. You see we told everybody to get smart or lose their jobs but then trashed the school system so that they couldn't get smart. Where was the logic in that? LOL In the process our fine leadership forgot that it was those very humble middle class laborers who paid the bulk of the taxes that supported their lavish spending habits and now they are aghast that the money is drying up. You just can't fix stupid. LOL The greedy will always kill the goose that is laying their golden eggs for them.
Ah well I am on a rant here so forgive me. I will shut up here. At almost 70 years of age I am planning to leave America, the place of my birth, as soon as my mother dies. I am a widower with no one left to care for but myself as my two sons have grown up and moved away and are fully self sufficient on their own. I am moving to a Democratic Socialist society where my cost of living is about one third of what it is here in the U.S. and my medical insurance cost for the entire year is the same as one month here and it covers everything. The best part is eternal spring (no snow unless you go into the mountains) and surrounded by beauty everywhere you look. I am tired so I will leave the good fight up to my sons. Adios amigos. :=)
David Brooks extolled the movie Lincoln as an example of the beauty of politics, however, it sickened me to watch President Lincoln have to offer patronage jobs to Representatives, in order to get them to vote to abolish slavery.
Today's House of Representatives seem to be peopled with equally selfish, unthinking lemmings. President Obama learned during the debt ceiling crisis he couldn't count on appealing to their patriotism and common sense to win their votes. He's going to the People, in hopes of putting pressure on Republicans to do what is right.
Amy, I still haven't seen the movie as yet.
Today's House is exactly how you describe them.
So you obviously think it is righteous to raise taxes on those dirty rotten rich people earning over $250K. Would it then also be righteous to solve the deficit problem? This would involve spending cuts that would hurt all classes because you can't tax enough. You should honestly look how the senate and president has also behaved over the last several years. Like Einstein said 'It's a matter of perspective. It's all relative'
Me too, Amy. But it worked. Bribing Republicans to do what is right: the more things change, the more they stay the same.
I don't know Spielberg's politics, but I like to think he was sending a message to Obama to do whatever is necessary to save the country.
And like Lincoln-Obama may have a civil war on his hands before too long-how many states is it up to that want to Secede? People are so naive!
You want to start another civil war, Mandi? Before you do, you might want to read your history book and learn how the last one turned out.
Every state has a few thousand NUT JOBS that want to Secede. However, that will never happen and any attempts to over throw the United States will result in some serious prison time for those NUT JOBS.
No all I want is someone in this country who cannot be bought-and will actually work for the people! I am well aware of history. I like many other AMERICANS are sick of the entitlement, big business ruling the world and my freedoms being threatened. I AM A WORKING middle class AMERICAN-and I am tired of being stepped on. And this civil war will not be premised on the same issues as the previous was-not entirely-slavery to a degree-but it is the middle class who are now the slaves to big business and this government. Call names if you like Job1-overthrow the US government! I don't have enough $$ for that!
Mandi - oh so much better to overthrow the government than to work to make it better, right? What an imbecile!!!!
Yea if all parties are willing to "work", but you tell me who that is. If our elected officials cannot work together to get this issue solved-why then does it fall on my or even our shoulders? I vote-I have done my part-now let the true IMBECILES do their jobs that not only are they elected to do, but they GET PAID too!
All it seems that you people can do is call each other names-not all of your "opinions" are great either. I love this country and I don't want to overthrow this government-I want this government to work for ALL OF US, not just the few who can line their pockets or for those who refuse to work for themselves and want a hand out!
Buying Louisiana for health care is not patronage?
Mandi
You are talking nonsense. Where do you get your information that President Obama has been bought? You say you are aware of history ..... nothing you say suggests anything of the sort. You have a President who is standing up against big business and the wealthy class and you fail to see it. Do you actually believe that a President Romney would have been the one to prevent big business from "ruling the world."
You are totally irrational, which makes you the perfect dupe for the morons circulating the secession petitions. Good luck with that!
If it happens I will say I was wrong-but I am not holding my breath! It is my opinion he is "banking" on the Republicans to shoot it down. I mean how many of the 1% contributed to his campaign-honestly! And by increasing the tax on the wealthiest Americans, does not necessarily mean he is doing anything w/big business. He needs to cut the tax loopholes, incentives etc. for big business AND increase their taxes-show them he means BUSINESS! THIS IS RECENT HISTORY-big business almost destroyed this country w/its GREED. Or have you conveniently forgotten because Obama is going to tax the rich? That's going to save us all.
"It is my opinion he is "banking" on the Republicans to shoot it down."
Mandi that does not make sense because if they shoot it down then the taxes automatically go up.
I agree that our elected officials in Congress deserve a failing grade but, as a citizen, doing your part means more than just casting a vote. Informing yourself about the issues and contacting your representatives so they know where you stand on every issue and holding them accountable is also your responsibility. Join with your friends and neighbors to work toward a future for this country.
Then count your blessings that an honest, hard-working man won re-election. Obama works for the middle class, not for the rich as Romney would have.
Be realistic about what government can do, especially in the face of an obstructionist GOP, paid lobbyists writing legislation, multi-national corporations with more money and power than many countries, and a population that has been brainwashed by the Rupert Murdoch-controlled media.
If you have ideas about welfare reform, don't be afraid to voice them to your representatives. Do your research so you will know what you're talking about if you want to be taken seriously.
This country is far from perfect. It always has been and it always will be. At least part of the citizenry seems to be waking up to what has happened to the middle class, how we've been used. Open your eyes, pay attention, and you'll see how much work there is to be done and how you can play your part.
Every one of the Republicans in the House promised to take care of the Middle Class during their campaigns. The Senate has already passed continuing the Bush tax cuts for those making under $250k per year and Obama's signature is guaranteed. If they pass it they can continue the Bush tax cuts for 90% of Americans and the middle class wouldn't get hit with a $2,200 tax increase. What about their campaign promises of only a month ago? What about their sacred oath to Grover Norquist? Speaking of which, where the hell is Norquist? Why isn't he lobbying the GOP House members to pass this extension or does his pledge only count for the top 1%?
Main street America doesn't know if they'll be hit with a $2,200 tax bill in April so they're not spending as much this Christmas. This affects Wall Street and the country's economy as a whole. Just pass it already.
obama is an ass.....he doesn't have a clue........taxes should be cut for those americans already paying taxes, the freeloaders need to pay something, and spending needs to be slashed dramatically......did i say obama is an ass???
Yeah, let's get those freeloaders living on $20K/year to pony up some taxes. And Grandma, too. That will fix everything.
well taxing the rich more will not solve anything either...
Sure and the freeloaders start with the wealthy who don't pay any taxes, the corporations that don't pay any taxes by sending their profits overseas, and by closing the free tax loopholes the corporations use. After they pay up, then if your conscience can handle it, go after the grandmoms on medicare, and the wounded Military using government money. From now on we should tax heavily any company that sends jobs and profits overseas, and any investor like Romney that puts money in foreign banks. Then lets go after the 'free loaders' like ROmney who don't work ,but pay a lower tax rate then you or I who actually work every day.
Hey Tom--you forgot about the disabled freeloaders---let's get some money out of them, too. And the military---they aren't doing enough for the country, they should be paying more taxes, too.
Let me ask you a question if liberals are so lazy and just want entitlements, then how come the solidly conservative, republican voting states such as Texas, South Carolina, Montana, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Alabama, West Virginia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Arkansas, and coming in at dead last Mississippi have the lowest median incomes in the nation. Are the people that live in these states just too lazy to better themselves? Do these people want to work hard to make a good living or do they want rely on welfare? Whats up mcpaddywack? The people in the liberal voting states make a lot more money, tons more, is that because they are lazy and live off entitlements, are you telling me they make more for being lazy, than conservatives make for being hardworking. Take a look at the breakdown of median incomes by state and then explain to me why all the "lazy liberal" states at the top make the money and all the "hardworking" conservative states are at the bottom. Then explain to me why the people in these states at the bottom cry so much about high income taxes and welfare when they don't make enough money to even owe federal taxes, and use the biggest proportions of federal welfare as compared to the little bit of money those states pay in federal taxes. The truth is if republicans get their wish on welfare programs nobody will be hurt worse than the poor and arguably lazy and entitlement minded fools that live in the states that republicans and conservatives count on to consistently vote for them. I am a liberal, I make many times more in wages and benefits than the median income of the state with the highest median income of the states I mentioned above, do you really think it is because I have lived a lazy entitlement minded life. I also pay twice the percentage in income tax as someone such as Mitt Romney does.
You might pay twice the % in income tax as someone like Mitt, but you don't make the majority of your income off of investments which is taxed at 15% in this country, correct? Please learn the tax rules. I don't think you send in more than you legally owe do you?
I pay what I owe, why should unearned income be taxed at half the rate as earned income. When I start withdrawing my money from my pension investments it will be still be taxed as income not as capital gains. Can you address why the states that pay the least in taxes, and collect the most welfare complain the most about high taxes and welfare.
mcpaddywack,
You and us must be connected at the ass, my brother. We thinks alike, you and us
ok it's not like mittens is the only wealthy politician so how much do the other dems and repubs have off shore. Or I remember a guy rangel or something over the ways and means i think who was a tax cheat and said he made a mistake after a few years of not paying all his taxes lets see his party affilitation was dem. so its not a repub or dem thing its we are the elite thing and untill we all hold politicians accountable we will never matter in their world other than them the suckers
Certain folks will continue to mock this as "campaigning" instead of President Obama "doing his job." What they are fialing to realize is that he IS doing his job and being transparent about it. Whereas the Republicans are still not showing what it is they want.
Honest negotiations require openess. They also require a starting point. President Obama has provided both, yet the Republicans have only mocked and laughed. Time for the Republicans to stand up and demonstrate that they are willing to participate in the governance process.
If they do not, then the sequestration is on them. Same as the downgrade of the USA's credit rating was a direct reflection of the failure of Congress to come to a decision on the debt ceiling.
The reason the republicans are not showing what they want is because whoever broaches the topic of entitltement cuts is going to catch $h!t for it. The dems think that if they can get the repubs to say cut this or cut that then they can pander to their constituents about those damn repubs. Then they can try to tell them about how they had to give in to the repubs to prevent further financial calamities.
obama has his head so far up his ass that he thinks everybody is as ignorant as he. He keeps touting how nobody earning less than $250K taxes should go up. Then in the same breath he says that individuals under 200K and couples under 250K. obama is trying to re-institute the "marriage penalty tax". The combined income of people earning nearly 200K WILL go up under obama's plan.
thinker - the 'who offered first' has already been done. President Obama offered cuts. Among others, one is to Medicare Part D, another to Medicare 'post-critical care facilities' (think nursing homes and physical rehab). Got another excuse to offer?
Certain Folk will mock this as campaigning? LIKE NBCNEWS.COM? Where YOU are reading this?
He certainly IS the Facebook President, can't and WON'T make a decision on his own, needs to take a'vote' on FB or form some bs 'blue ribbon' panel to anaylyze it, then DISREGARD the results because it was all a DOG & PONY show anyway, done just to distract the STUPID Liberal voters. Compare what he has SAID the last 4 years to WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.
You are welcome to provide facts about where things did and did not happen, Frankie. But also remember to post about the deliberate and pre-planned obstructionism by the House and the Senate Republicans. Also remember that not ALL information (such as the depth of the recession) was known four years ago when some promises were made.
As for the mocking of President Obama's efforts to outreach to the American people as "campaigning"? You know as well as I do that multiple conservative pundits are calling for President Obama to "stop campaigning and get back to the White House" when referring to this situation.
Go ahead and raise their taxes it will only pay for 8 or 9 days of your liberal @ss spending habits. Then what? Who's next?
According to who? Or did you just make up those numbers?
Jersey, You do the math the tax hikes will raise 1.6 trillion in 10 years total (their number not mine) what is our expenditures every year.
Easy, then we close every single tax loophole the corporations use to get away with not paying their fair share in this Country. Increase the tax on dividends. Then the really big stuff, reduce dramatically our foolish Defense spending. This would close the gap in record time. Gee, that was easy.
The computations show that the annual taxes raised from the proposed increase would not have covered the last 70 DAYS of capital hill spending. Until spending is cut, there is no way in hell that the increase is going to matter.
ozzie
Why is it that the very same conservatives who think that taxes should always be reduced no matter how large our debt are the same people who favor starting expensive wars and maintaining a military budget larger than the total of the next TEN national military budgets in the world?
How much is the rich peoples fair share 50% of the total tax burden? 60%, 70% what? It's all good when it's not your money isn't it? Now get off the coach and help pitch in and quit complaining about everybody else not paying enough.
Jersey - The raising of tax rates on those making over $200/250K will only raise about $680 billion over 10 yrs ($68 billion per yr). Obama says he wants $1.6 Trillion over 10 yrs in increased taxes, so where is the extra $920 billion coming from? Obama has admitted that the raise on the so called "wealthy" is not about increase revenues but more about "FAIRNESS" (class warfare). Where is Obama willing to cut spending, it appears he wants to increase spending, ($50 billion), in new stimulus which would virtually wipe out the $68 billion he would get from his tax increase on the "wealthy".
According to Obama and his followers we know that taxing the "wealthy" will only raise about $68 billion per year, so how much would be raised if we just let all of Bush's tax cuts expire, which I believe Obama wants anyway?
Joe, Briliant idea!! You do understand we live in a global economy right? So when one of the already highest corp tax rates go up what do you think is going to happen to their businesses? You think they are going to bend over and take it or leave and take their jobs with them??
Don, I'm pretty sure i heard that revenues are on the table from the republicans. Were you born in 2001 and if so why would you say "favor" i would call Afghanistan a necessity and who gives a rats @ss on what other governments spend on their military? Why do libs always give repubs crap about defense spending because it is the one thing that the federal government is responsible for not all this other crap.
ozzie
The Republicans, however, specifically oppose a tax rate increase for those with incomes exceeding $250,000 and that is the discussion point.
I was alive in 2001 and agree that we needed to have military action in Afghanistan, although it seemed to me at the time (and still does) that conventional military action against a relatively small band of terrorists was foolish. The Iraq War was a stupid choice and a waste of resources. Perhaps if our country had a smaller military at its disposal we would not have made such a rash and ignorant choice to enter that conflict.
No one disputes the need for a military and its role in national defense. The argument is whether we need a military a large as we have. I think it's excessive. Furthermore, defense is not "the one thing" for which the federal government is responsible. There is the whole "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" thing that determines the quality of life for the citizens of this country. Being able to own a gun and point proudly to a bloated military is just not enough for me.
don #s - The Republicans are opposed to an increase in TAX RATES. They are not opposed to increasing revenue by closing loop holes, reductions, credits, subsidies, etc., which would raise as much, if not more, than increasing tax rates on the so called "wealthy". Obama and the Democrats have admitted that the increase in the tax rates on the "wealthy" will not have an effect on the deficit or national debt, and is only based on the premises that the rich need to pay their "fair share". The increase Obama and the left wants would only raise $68 billion in one year, which is a drop in the bucket.
sfcret
Why would Republicans oppose an increase in tax rates? Is it because it is so easy to re-instate the tax breaks by attaching legislation to other bills? Their strategy in the past has been to attach tax breaks for the rich and other conservative legislation to the transportation bill or some other legislation that has bipartisan support.
What is wrong with reinstating the tax rates of the Clinton or Reagan administrations? Is it because the economy was so bad back then? The tax cuts passed during the Bush administration FAILED.
Why do conservatives want to perpetuate a failure?
don - I have no problem reinstating the tax rates of the Clinton or Reagan administrations, but reinstating them for all taxpayers. Also since you and the left think things were so good lets also cut spending back to the Clinton Administration levels.
sfcret
I think that is a good starting point for the negotiations. Do you think that Boehner and McConnell will agree? I am willing to pay more taxes and I am certainly not over $250K. I also think that military spending should be cut before we start slashing social safety net programs.
sfcret - I think you raise a great point. Lets go back to the Clinton era tax rates for everyone. That will bring in $4 trillion over 10 years - only $800 billion from "the rich" $3.2 trillion from everyone below $250K. While we are at it - lets go back to the Clinton spending rates by department. We would start paying down the debt quickly and the economy would recover from us not printing and spending money we don't have.
Gotta lovemthis one
Time for the old gop tards to make their move
Lets go off the cliff short term pain long term gain
more campaign videos? *sigh*
so now it's the 2%, not the 1% talked about during the campaign. Be careful, the floor definition of 'rich' also keeps getting lower.
It's been the same for the last 5 years, "the end of the Bush tax for those making more than $250k a year, no tax increase for those earning less than 250k a year". That was his promise in 2008 and 2012. Where on earth have you been?
allan is right and you are wrong ... before the election, Obama campaigned on raising the taxes on the top 1%. Now, after he has met with his union buddies, it is magically at 2%.
All of this is irrelevant, Obama wants to let the "Bush Tax Cuts" expire for eveybody ..... then try to blame Republicans. Tax and spend ! Tax and redistribute the wealth !! Print more dollars !!! Spend more money !!!!
Jersey Michael - you are absolutely right - Alan, as usual, is posting nonsense.
Give the Republicans an inch = ten years of free money, not paying their fair share
They take a yard = Forever of not paying their fair share
Give the democrats an inch = decades of entitlements, not paying for anything
They take a yard = Forever feeling deserving of free entitlements
One of the reasons so many people were confused about ACA was that President Obama failed to use the "bully pulpit" to explain things to the general public. As a result, the hate mongers had a field day. Now he, having learned from that experience, is using the "bully pulpit" to get the people's work done despite the opposition from the party of hell no.
The reason everyone was confused was because no one read it before they rammed it down our throats.
and everyone is still confused.....obamacare is a horrible job killing piece of shiat......
Just say "HELL NO" to the ongoing, fiscal stupidity of $16 trillion+ in National Debt and Barack Obama never having a budget as required by law ... a major failure of leadership !
I to am waiting to see whats in it since its been passed. all I have read is that alot more irs agents need to be hired and will be armed with alot of hollow point ammo, the taxes on the middle class will be raised and thats about it and thats not from fox its from here. maybe we should make people like peelosi explain it to us.
That's right, douche bag of a POTUS, tax the rich til there ain't no rich no mo. It's obviously worked so well in France, Greece, Spain, and the UK to name a few.
Oh, and keep spending $440,000,000 per phucking hour. That has nothing to do with our $16.5 trillion problem does it azzhole?
,'-D
obama is an ass...
Like the one Joseph and Mary rode into Bethlehem on?
The one Joseph and Mary rode into Bethlehem had some redeeming value - transportation. the ass in the white house has yet to demonstrate any redeeming value.
The Republican Party has become the Anti-Obama Party. They can gather an easy majority of their members to be against an Obama proposal, but lack the leadership to propose unified alternative proposals, which can pass the Democratic Senate.
98% of American people held hostage by the tea baggers
2014 vote the Republicans out!!!!!
Who needs this gridlock all the time, they can sit in the Cayman islands and twist their stories around to each other.
Obama fully INTENDS to let the "Bush Tax Cuts" expire ... why do you think his previously-passed extension would only be good until JUST AFTER THE ELECTIONS ? It's all part of his plan to tax and spend, tax and redistribute the wealth. The middle class fools who voted for him are in for a rude awakening .... only Obama will blame it on Republicans !
Elections have consequenses, President Obama has all the leverage and the useless house has zero leverage. If the House doesn't put an honest effort forward then we should go over the fiscal cliff, which would result in deep cuts and all tax rates going up to the levels they were under Bill Clinton. That would be a huge tax increase and Republican's would have nobody to blame but themselves, and more importantly the majority of American's would blame Republican's.
Funny.........I didn't see any mention of huge entitlement cuts in the President's re-election stump speeches.........Oh, no wait.........they were in the stump speeches of the guy who lost!!!
You're, right there RSE1 and it just goes to show where this country is headed. Buckle up it is going to get ugly when the money runs out!
I think it is disgusting how the repugnants totally disregard what the people want. They lost the election and still they are indignant to the American people! More blattan contempt for the American people! What is this cra!!!!! We will vote them all all of them! MARK my words you fools have many more butt kicking's to go!
sorry dude....half the people despise obama and the reps control the house.....no mandate there moron...
48,000,000 voters don't want it.
So does this mean you all will take ownership of the looming disaster resulting from the tax, borrow, print, spend, over-promise cycle?
Or will it still be someone else's fault?
mcpaddywack - only in your demented mind do half the people despise President Obama. It is a fact that more than 70% of the people in this country like him - even if they didn't vote for him. No go on with your stupid lies - it's all you've got!
I suppose you meant crap but it's called Representative government. You see almost half of the country did not vote for the President nor his democratic minions. Matter of fact more than half of the country if you look at the HOR.
Super Bon - My problem with the "what the people want" stance (this election) is that it was not a very typical election platform, in that there were VERY PARTICULAR items presented by Obama helping specific groups, and that AS A WHOLE, they voted for Obama, but it's not like Obama wanted to "take the country in a certain direction" or that he had a certain stance on some fundamental political theory and Romney had a different stance and the majority voted for Obama's fundamental stance.
If anything, I think in regards to the economy, people actually like Romney a lot more than the voting showed. (look at the first debate) but that's not all they were running on (obviously).
Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire, states with the best rates of high school graduation, supported President Obama's re-election. The voters who didn't support Obama were mostly ignorant Southerners.
Amy - haha. I think you're "ignorant" comments shows your ignorance.
askabouet, there's nothing ignorant about Amy.
People didn't like Romney. He was voted the most non-influential person in 2012. How does that happen? He was the nominee for the GOP for goodness sakes.
You want to bet Pat?
Well, seriously, he was NOT the least influential person in 2012. I'm pretty sure, for example, that YOU or I were much less influential than Romney. Any publication that seriously states that the LEAST influential person in the world was a party's candidate for president (whether from the democratic or republican party) obviously has an agenda.
She didn't say "people don't like Romney." She said the people who voted for him were mostly ignorant southerners. I am curious as to what she thinks about the people in the south who voted for Obama, or the people in the north east that voted for Romney.
If she litterally thinks that the people who vote for Republicans are ignorant, and the people who vote for Democrats are not, I would say that makes her ignorant.
askaboutet, just what do you think the southern strategy was all about?
The Dems control the house?????
ozzieyo1-7277359 said half the country voted for Romney, which isn't true. Obama won more than half of the electoral votes - 302 to Romney's 206.
Romney won 47.8% of the popular vote, but the South accounted for a disproportionate share of those votes. It's not like Romney won half the votes across the country. More votes for Romney were concentrated in the Southern states. (AS USUAL.)
You've got to wonder why the same states vote Republican over and over again, and by such high margins. New Hampshire isn't reliably Democratic and neither is Maine, or Colorado, for that matter. But the Red States are always Red, no matter who the candidate is. That's why I would say voters in Southern states seem kind of ignorant. How could the vote in Arkansas, Kentucky, and Alabma, for example, not even be close, when the Democratic candidate was a like-able incumbent? It's disturbing how we always now those states will vote for the Republican, even a northeastern weathervane like Romney.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012
Amy, what i said was "almost half the people did not vote for the President." Get it right there is a deference.
Amy - do you wonder the same thing about black people voting for the same party all the time?
Amy,
I agree with you 100%. You know that I live in Utah and it is a Red for LIFE state. I was watching the news last night and our state is slipping towards the bottom of high school graduate percentages. While unemployment is lower here than the national average, Utah is a right-to-work state and abounds with low-paying jobs for their increasingly uneducated population.
The republicans count on the American people to forget in two years.
They think by not signing the economy will tank, making things look bad, they think the American people will forget.
I don't think so............
I don't think so either animal-farm.
Check out the video on federal taxing and spending which was posted on YouTube a few weeks ago This video calls for new courageous leaders on both sides of the aisle--"economic citizens"--true public spirited stewards who will rise to the occasion during our nation's time of need. Rather than running to the respective corners to attack the other guy and the other party--on either taxing or spending-- in order to aggravate and elevate the public vitriol--we need elected officials who will promote the public interest, fairness, and justice in trying to resolve the difficult financial issues that beset our country. This message may address some of the public angst as we move closer to December 31--and the so-called fiscal cliff.
The link to YouTube is shown below.
On average, a household approximately in the top 1 percent, earning $350,000 in 2010, paid $24,000 less in total taxes than it would have in 1980 (using inflation-adjusted dollars), saving nearly 7 percent of its income from the tax man. A household making $52,000 in 2010 — about the median income — saved an average of $1,500, or 2.8 percent. The average for a household making $22,000, about the federal poverty line for a family of four in 2010, was a savings of 0.8 percent, or $200.
What's your point?
Gimmee Free Stuff!!!!!!
Yeah, I want free stuff too! Maybe Redhead has some extra? No wait, I doubt it. I don't think she works because most of her life is spent singing praises for a complete failure on here!
BTW Red - I'm from IL and I know exactly how ineffective Barry is. So, in 2016 are you all still going to be blaming all Barry's spending debt on an administration 8 years removed from the problem? All of the "majority", as you put it, just voted for him because you were all afraid that someone was going to get in there, slam the open wallet shut, cut spending, and take away your freebies. I've been at the same company for 27+ years now, and for the first time EVER, I had to worry about being able to continue my health insurance, all thanks to Obamacare. That is one turd they'll never be able to polish. It is not healthcare reform. It is simply big government getting their piece of the action, and the taxpayer will be paying the price.
To those comparing him to Lincoln ... I suppose if you steal enough of a former president's quotes, people who are too stupid to know better will start comparing you to them. When the history books of the future teach about this current president, the kids will all see what a phony manipulator he was. I will give him one thing. He knows how to work a crowd; or is that a flock?
And you voted for Sarah Palin in 2008.
Interesting comment Joe.
What do you do when you earn 47% of the popular vote; about 40% of the electoral vote; lose the Senate; lose numbers in the house and have about 60% of the electorate in opposition to your position on taxes?
Seems to me that President Obama is dealing with the overwhelming losses of the Republican Party very well.
The GOP lost 1 seat in the House. They still have an overwhelming majority in that chamber.
As Democrats keep saying about the presidential election, you lost the House.
Get over it!!!!
So, the Democrats picked up 8 seats in the house. So what?