E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAfter a weekend that generated skepticism about a possible deal to avert the 'fiscal cliff,' House Republicans presented a plan that includes $800 billion in new taxes, which is half of what the White House asked for. NBC's Chuck Todd reports.
Updated 4:50 p.m. ET -- Republicans offered up their own proposal to avert the impending “fiscal cliff” on Monday amid Democratic demands that the GOP match the Obama administration’s plan with one of their own.
In a letter to President Barack Obama, House Republican leaders outlined the contours of a deal they said would achieve a net savings of $2.2 trillion. The plan, which is based on fiscal commission Democratic co-chairman Erskine Bowles’s proposal to the super committee, would achieve these savings through revenue from tax reforms, health savings and discretionary spending cuts.
Recommended: Income tax rates just one piece of Obama proposal
"Going over the cliff will hurt our economy and hurt job creation in our country. It’s one of the reasons the day after the election I offered a concession to try and speed this process up. Unfortunately, the White House responded with their ‘La-La-Land’ offer that couldn't pass the House or Senate and was basically the president’s budget from last February," House Speaker John Boehner told reporters on Capitol Hill at a briefing detailing the plan.
Alex Wong / Getty Images
Speaker John Boehner speaks during a news conference, Nov. 30, 2012, on Capitol Hill.
"We could have responded in kind, but we decided not to do that. What we’re putting forth is a credible plan that deserves serious consideration by the White House and I would hope that they would respond in a timely and responsible way," the Ohio Republican added.
Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director, said the plan "does not meet the test of balance."
"Their plan includes nothing new and provides no details on which deductions they would eliminate, which loopholes they will close or which Medicare savings they would achieve," he said. "While the president is willing to compromise to get a significant, balanced deal and believes that compromise is readily available to Congress, he is not willing to compromise on the principles of fairness and balance that include asking the wealthiest to pay higher rates ... Until the Republicans in Congress are willing to get serious about asking the wealthiest to pay slightly higher tax rates, we won't be able to achieve a significant, balanced approach to reduce our deficit our nation needs."
The counter-offer coincides with Democratic demands that Republicans produce their own proposal to match the deal offered last week by the administration. That plan, presented to Republicans by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, called for $1.6 trillion in new revenues, savings from entitlement programs and new spending on unemployment insurance and investment projects. GOP leaders rejected the plan out-of-hand.
Still, the GOP proposal on Monday appears to move no further toward compromise on Obama’s central demand that tax rates be allowed to increase on the wealthiest Americans. While Republicans have agreed in principle that richer Americans can shoulder a greater share of the tax burden, they insist this must be achieved through ending loopholes and deductions, rather than raising rates.
The Republican plan, which is also backed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., achieves its $2.2 trillion in several steps.
rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., talks about the key points in President Barack Obama's fiscal cliff negotiation that are making Republicans wary.
As Republicans put it, they would raise $800 billion in new revenue through tax reform, $600 billion in health savings, $200 billion from changes to the Consumer Price Index, $300 billion in discretionary spending cuts, and another $300 billion in savings in mandatory spending. Many of the health savings track closely with the changes to Medicare first proposed in Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan’s budgets.
Republicans say the plan, using the Obama administration’s math, would achieve $4.6 trillion in savings.
It’s unclear, though, whether the Republican plan would move toward ending the stalemate around the fiscal cliff negotiations, with less than a month remaining until the automatic tax hikes and spending cuts are scheduled to snap into place on Jan. 1.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., pummeled his GOP colleagues earlier Monday afternoon, arguing that their failure to produce a counter-offer would only exacerbate the situation.
The new GOP plan reflects the posturing that has come to characterize these negotiations, separated just a month from an election which awarded Obama a second term and which kept Republicans in control of the House and Democrats in control of the Senate.
Also on Monday, the president continued his messaging offensive on Monday with a glossy campaign-style video highlighting the cost to families if the 2001 Bush-era tax cuts were allowed to expire at the end of this month. (Obama has argued they should be extended for all but the wealthiest 2 percent of U.S. households.)
Benjamin Myers / Reuters
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner arrives at Capitol Building before a meeting with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in Washington, D.C., Nov. 29, 2012.
The president also took to Twitter to make the case for his own plan, answering questioners who used the informal 140-character medium to ask about the fiscal cliff negotiations.
Asked by one participant why he insists on increasing rates on the top 2 percent of earners rather than limiting deductions in order to raise revenues, the president replied that capping deductions alone would not raise adequate revenue.
"Not enough revenue, unless you end charitable deductions, etc. [L]ess revenue=more cuts in education," he wrote.
The president also dismissed the GOP notion that lower taxes for the very wealthy have a trickle-down effect in terms of new hires and a larger tax pool. "High end tax cuts do least for economic growth & cost almost $1T," he wrote. "Extending middle class cuts boosts consumer demand & growth"
Obama also argued that his administration cut spending by $1 trillion last year and that he is open to further "smart cuts" as long as they don't affect education or job growth.
NBC's Frank Thorp contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
The Republican economic policies remind me of the blood letting the medical profession practiced years ago. In fact, doctors then thought if the patient wasn't getting well more bloodletting was needed.
You are right, but the democrats plan of just cutting off the head, is worse.
Your analogy makes no sense. Much like Republican economic policies.
the real dummies are the american people who ALLOW their govt to screw them, they allow the illegals to screw them, they allow other americans to screw them and all they do is blame others just like their govt taught them to do...
it takes FOREVER to get anything done in your country...roflmaooooooooooooooooooooo
no wonder america is so screwed up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The presidents budget plan was a joke. It increases the yearly natioal Debt by nearyl double. Every government department could easly cut it's budget by 5% across the board. We are getting less while the government is spending neary twice what it did 10 years ago. American families have had to cut thier budgets, it is about time the Government started doing the same. I say go off the fiscal cliff, that is what the people voted for, let them wallow in it.
The budget deficit has decreased every year that Obama has been in office. And you're going to "punish" Obama by jacking up the tax rates for everyone, and giving him more money? Ever heard of "Brer Rabbit'?
It is difficult for it not to increase. With massive increases like we had, how could it not. The problem is that it has barely decreased because of his policies.
Michael
Check out the Ryan budget plan, it would have continued deficit spending, wouldn't balance the budget until 2040 and would have required numerous increases to the debt ceiling along the way. Despite all of that republcians supported and voted for it.
So what are republicans against again?
They purpose tax cuts for the top 2% wealthiest of the population. Well... SUEEEE-PRIZE!! Big fat Republican pigs!
They proposed the same thing last time and Romney said he would do virtually the same thing.
Here's an idea.
Obama campaigned on raising taxes on the rich. Obama won the election. Some 60% of Americans agree that taxes should be raised on the rich.
And the Republicans believe in democracy? Republicans believe in listening to the American people?
The Republican Party has become laughable. Soon, they may very well become irrelevant.
Some 85% of Americans say that spending should be cut, yet democrats refuse that. Are democrats listening to the people? Do they believe in democracy? By the way, the republicans agreed to increase taxes on the rich. That was part of their plan.
67% of Americans say taxs on the wealthy should be increased.
I don't know from which orifice you get your statistics, but Americans do want to cut spending. Subsidies for corporations, tax cuts for the rich and military spending are the cuts that top the list most Americans want to cut.
PAF, it's 1:00 AM EST and you are playing a zero sum game on a comment board. Must be one of those hard working right wingers, right? Me, I'm retired and can spend my time foolishly.
PFA, you're beating a dead horse.
PutAmericaFirst
Some 85% of Americans say that spending should be cut, yet democrats refuse that. Are democrats listening to the people? Do they believe in democracy? By the way, the republicans agreed to increase taxes on the rich. That was part of their plan.
You're skirting the issue. The American people voted to raise tax rates on the rich. It was a major campaign issue. Obama was for it. Romney was against it.
Spin it anyway you want, change the subject if you want, heck, use smoke and mirrors if you want. It doesn't change a thing.
The American Voter has spoken. The Republicans don't care about what the majority of Americans want.
PAF
You do realize that you can do both, cut spending and raise taxes, at the same time don't you? This isn't an either or proposal when both can be accomplished at the same time.
So why do republicans continue to pretend that it's one or the other?
P.S. republicans increase to increase revenue by closing loopholes and lower rates but that fuzzy math doesn't add up. 1-1=0 or no net change so how will that balance the budget?
Unfortunately John Beaner doesn't have the balls to stand up to those who have sworn their allegiance to Grover Norquist. This band of conspirators love waving the American flag but their record shows their lack of allegiance to it or to the American people. If the Speaker can't get enough GOP politicians to become representatives of the majority of the people,(Dems,Republicans & independents) they are suppose to represent, the GOP will disappear come next election. They'll be this little voice that always screams but no one listens to. They'll have plenty of time after 2014 to spend in chat rooms like this one.
Fokes, we are running a deficit of $1-2 trillion every year. Makes no difference which party controls the White House and/or Congress (check your history if you do not know this). Simple math tells you that, at this rate, our national debt will be between $27-37 trillion. Now BOTH parties are talking about $2 trillion in the next 10 years. We are rapidly approaching the situation that Greece and Spain now find themselves. And in case you have not noticed several countries have started moving off the US dollar as the international currency (Google "China & Russia purchase of gold"). In simple, terms the US government will, in the near future, be FORCED to raise taxes on EVERYONE and cut spending in all major budget (even if Congress does not have one) categories. That means both military AND social programs. Total US government spending, per year, is around $7 trillion/year, so you should be able to see just paying the interest on the current $17 trillion debt is going to be quite a task (looks like our debt rating is going down a notch pretty soon).
It is probably already too late to stop financial disaster for this country, but we might as well try.
Now the only thing that baffles me is why voters are clueless enough to vote in their incumbent representatives in government at around an 80% clip. So those of you that always vote straight Republican, Democrat or for the incumbent might enlighten me.
As unsolicited advice to you "senior citizens" on a fixed income. Be careful with your savings, because inflation is (and has been) running over 10%/year. The government tries to fool you by excluding fuel and food from their inflation figures when they say it is around 4 or 5%. If you do not eat or use fuel, ignore this advice.
The inflation figure is probably more than 10% when you take into account stagnant and decreasing wages.
No one is really talking about capital gains tax, it should be raised to 25-28%, so people like Romney will at least pay a more fair portion of his actual income....taxes should go back to the Clinton levels, the sky DID NOT FALL during those times. In fact there was a surplus, all of the hysteria is caused by the media on both sides, with both parties continually "firing" up their supporters. We as Americans need to tell our congress, either come up with a fair deal and stop making these non-starter outlandish opening deals on BOTH SIDES or we will just start voting you OUT!! There is a reason why this congress has a approval rating below 20%. Dems and Repubs make ridiculous proposals then run out for a photo op, they are doing NOTHING
The capital gains rate was 20% when Clinton balanced the budget. The balanced budget happened after he cut it from 28% to 20%. Clinton also cut spending as well. Republicans are actually suggesting doing what Clinton did before he balanced the budget and democrats are fighting against that. Is that Ironic?
If the House Republicans are for raising taxes on the richest, why hasn't it been done? They're in session, & all I've seen is John Baeoner spitting & going spastic on the tube.
Because democrats want them to compromise even more and refuse to cut spending like the American people want. Last time, republicans agreed to $800 billion in taxes and that wasn't enough for Obama who rejected that. That is why we have this mess today.....Obama's refusal to compromise.
PAF
Now you are merely being a propagandist.
Democrats want to cut spending and have alrady offered up cuts even you admitted earlier that obama had cut spending by $1trillion so why the flip flop?
If you are referring to the current R plan there are no specifics on anything at this point so there is nothing to accept that leaves only rejection for a substanceless claim that parrots the romney plan of closing loopholes while not offering any specifics.
The American people already rejected that idea when they rejected Romney. So why should Obama be wuilling to accept what the American voters have already rejected?
A major campaign issue was "Do you want to raise tax rates on the rich?"
Obama was for it. Romney was against it. Americans voted with Obama to raise tax rates on the rich.
Now, the Republicans feel they can ignore the wishes of the majority of Americans.
They can say goodbye to the mid terms of 2014. They can say goodbye to the presidential election of 2016.
More people say we should cut spending than raise taxes......Republicans are for that, but Obama is against that.
There you go again, skirting the issue.
The American people voted for raising tax rates on the rich.
The Republicans are ignoring their vote, their wishes, and their voice.
It's as simple as that.
"More people say we should cut spending than raise taxes." -- Well, surprise, PAF was "technically correct"! 70% voted to reduce deficit (that's PAF's definition of cutting spending since he's an avowed Norquist follower) and ONLY 60% voted to increase taxes for the rich. Of course, PAF, like a true-blooded GOP, probably won't consider cutting spending to include cutting defense spending either.
PAF
You asked previously for someone to point out your lies
Well you keep repeating the false claim that Obama is not in favor of cutting spending even though he has offered cuts. So why do you continue to repeat that LIE?
And again you can do BOTH, cut spending and increase taxes, at the same time
The lack of logic the right wingers display is astounding. I live on the Space Coast of Florida. Kennedy Space Center is the area's largest employer. Yet, I have had many KSC employees tell me the government doesn't create jobs. There is no arguing with logic like that. Or, the retired Medicare tea bagger who protests to keep the government out of his/her medical care. Brilliant!
I can argue that with logic. How do the people at the Kennedy space center get paid? Where does that money come from? IT comes from tax payers. Instead of people using it to buy goods and services (which creates jobs), the government takes it and gives it to the people at Kennedy space center. The problem with government jobs is that they don't support themselves and they need bailouts every year. Jobs in the private sector do support themselves. That is the difference.
PAF, dude have you ever heard of the 'military complex'. If not you don't know much about your American economy, do you? Well, let me remind you as a good Canadian neighbor, you know, that country north of the 49th. What did Dwight D. Eisenhower say about, the 'military complex'? Take a guess. Hell, I'll even fill in the blanks. Republican Ronny spent more on star wars technology and military in peace time then any President in history. That's the Republican mentality to this day. Example, Bohner in Ohio wants to keep his job. How phony.
I can never really understand GOP's cry that governments don't create jobs. They use this "small government" snake oil salesmanship to fill up contractors' coffers with inflated payoffs on services and products by outsourcing work to reduce the number of government workers.
Go tell people in Blackwater and other mercenaries that they don't really have a job, because their pay also comes the government, or any of the contractors buzzing around federal buildings. They should all go to get paid in unemployment offices, since they really don't have jobs.
Public sector workers are taxpayers so in essence they pay into their own salaries through taxation so they are somewhat self supportive.
As for private sector jobs being self supportive, if that is the case then why do farms and corporations get subsidies? Why have the airlines, the trains and the automobile companies been bailed out?
As typical your so-called logic is flawed.
Candy
The real problem with the republican claim that government does create jobs is that they believe that it does.
Look back at the campaign and how Romney and Ryan tried to argue that cutting in government defense spending would eliminate jobs.
They were arguing that government spending doesn't create jobs at the same time they were arguing that it does and they got cheered on despite this duplicity.
The ONLY REAL FIX is to Raise Revenue, by Bringing Back Jobs to US Citizens who Pay Income Tax.
Massive cutting just puts more people on unemployment, which just depresses the economy even further.
Returning private sector jobs to American Citizens will provide income tax revenue to OUR Government versus our government having to pay unemployment benefits to those who would be jobless instead. We need our elected officials to Start Protecting American Jobs and do whatever it takes to bring back the jobs they let go. We need leaders who will actually stand up for the American people.
The bottom line is that “Our Government” has to protect domestic industry and the jobs that those industries provide. If they do that, the rest will take care of itself.
We may have to pay a bit more for products made here in the USA by US citizens, but at least we'll still have jobs and a future for our children.
Any time I buy an American made product I feel good. Finding no American product to buy is disgusting. Choosing to buy a Chinese made product over an American made similar product is downright unpatriotic.
OK....So how do we bring jobs back? Romney had a viable plan to do that. Republicans have been doing it in the states they control. Democrats don't have any plans to create that.
You are also wrong about the spending. Yes it will cause some problems, but we either cut spending on our own, or we face what Greece is facing and others force us to cut spending. Our deficits are too large to fix just by growing the economy.
JCC.....I completely agree with you about buying American made products.
"...but we either cut spending on our own, or we face what Greece is facing..."
-- The dire situation in Greece was caused by exactly what is facing the US right now - excessive wealth being in the hands of an elite groups of people. US will see the same social unrest being experienced by the Greeks right now if the wealth distribution trend is not reversed. The spending cuts - austerity measures - actually exacerbated the situation.
PAF
Romney had no viable plans for anything but it's funny that you were duped into believing that he did.
Furthermore, stealing jobs from other states by offering companies encentives to move from one state to another doesn't help bring jobs back to the US.
Wouldn't it be More Productive if Our Elected Leaders Started Working Together as AMERICANS for AMERICANS and AMERICA, instead of just bickering, stalling and posturing for the next election as democrats and republicans! The American People have had it with this unproductive BS! The way that both parties having been operating for years just stinks! Neither party has really been looking out for the best interests of the US Citizens who elect them and who they're supposed to represent.
Both parties have sold out the bulk of the American citizens, who they're supposed to represent, by allowing the "out-sourcing" floodgates to open wider and wider without taking any sensible measures to stem the tide.
It shouldn't be all about Democrats or Republicans! It should be about Americans, especially our elected officials, doing the right thing for our country and its citizens. All the single-minded, left versus right, ideological one dimensional bull has got to go!
Both parties need to start working together and actually start doing something to fix the real problems in our country like "out-sourcing", illegal immigration, the out of control costs of health care insurance and our reliance on foreign fuel. If they don't start working together and start making progress by the next election, American citizens should run a nation-wide campaign to vote out all incumbents regardless of party to send the message.
I'll bet if they all got voted out they'd have no trouble finding a good paying job. And they'll all have health care the rest of their lives. Talk about entitlements!
There are plenty of areas where sensible minds can come together and reduce govt. waste & welfare fraud. But no.... as soon as the election was over what do we get? The SOS. Irrational minds that attack anything they see before they think. They come to their conclusion before they listen to the facts. That's how these same kind of thinkers got us into two wars!
Do you blame the democrats who completely changed their thoughts after the election? If demcorats would have been bargaining in good faith, we wouldn't be facing this mess. Republicans were willing to compromise, but Obama is preventing that.
PAF, you are completely FOS.
JCC......As soon as Obama won the election, he nearly doubled his requirements for a deal and added a few extra things that republicans wouldn't like. Does that sound like someone who wants to make a deal? Republicans are very close to what the president wanted last time. Who is refusing to compromise?
PAF, where do you get your information from? They need to televise what goes on in the Senate & House of Reps. and hope the misinformed will watch & be able to comprehend what is truth & what is not. You evidently are unaware of what has gone on in the House of Reps. these past 2yrs. Now Obama is doing what the people have voiced now. They blew it!
"As soon as Obama won the election, he nearly doubled his requirements for a deal and added a few extra things that republicans wouldn't like.."
-- Let's make it clear. Obama was elected with his promise NOT to repeat his first three years' of servitude to the GOPs. He now has a mandate to break the GOP's refusal to compromise! On the other hand, Boehner came back with a "compromise" that's not even as good as the one he offered Obama during the failed negotiation with Obama last time.
PAF
The problem was that in the past Obama would start in the middle expecting republicans to be accepting of that position. However, they took advantage and argued that was his starting position, not a compromise and that he needed to offer something more.
He learned from his past mistakes and has started with what he wants but is willing to give some up for a compromise.
Republicans got to used to getting most of what they wanted and are now throwing a childish fit because Obama finally took a stand. Deal with it.
If John Boehner can't muster enought Republican votes to raise tax rates on the rich and we actually hit the so called "fiscal cliff" fine with me, and evidently, fine with Obama.
It all can be fixed retroactively anyway. But what's important is the Bush tax cuts will expire. When congress reconvenes the Dems will introduce a bill to return the Bush tax cuts to the middle class only.
It's going to be hilarious watching the Republicans vote against a middle class tax cut. That will be the day the Republican Party becomes irrelevant.
And they'll be able to thank the Tea Party contingent for their demise.
It is more than just the tax increases. Republicans were put into office to stop the insane spending. Right now they are fighting over cuts as well. Any reasonable person can see that we cannot continue this record level of spending forever without serious harm to our economy.
PAF, and I suppose you believe that Republicans keep America safe. Oops 911 and they tried to kill my daddy, mushroom clouds, yellow cake, shock and awe, water boarding, deficits don't matter and mission accomplished. Do I need to go on.
"...Right now they are fighting over cuts as well..." -- If that's the case, why are they worried about going over the cliff? Because, they're only interesting in cuts in those specific "entitlement programs" that don't affect their 1% or 2% base. They talk about closing loopholes but never specify what loopholes, because they know they'll be clobbered by voters, be they be the rich or the poor.
You obviously have no real understanding of our country and its presidential elections.
When you win, whether Republican or Democrat, the opposition party admits defeat and then listens to what the American people voted for and then try and implemnet those wishes.
When Ronald Reagan won Tip O'Neill was the Majority Leader with a larger majority than what John Boehner enjoys today. O'Neill did not obstruct. He tried to understand what the American people were asking for by electing Ronald Reagan.
Today's Republicans have no respect for election results nor for the wishes of the American people who elected Barack Obama.
And your post above proves this point. Fine. Your party will be irrelevant in less than six years.
Do you really see Obama's proposal as being anything more than a joke? ...it does absolutely nothing.
"Republicans were put into office to stop the insane spending."_________________
Do you mean the two unfunded wars the neocons started? Do you mean the unfunded tax cut the Repubs insisted upon? Do you mean the counter productive "War on Drugs" the Republicans initiated ? Do you mean the increases in unfunded Medicare spending Bush signed into law.? Do you mean the cabinet level Department of Homeland Security Bush created? What spending are you talking about?
You forgot this:
In 1998 there were 470 bases in 63 countries with 1.3 million staff and an operating budget of 470 billion
In 2008 there are over 900 bases in over 130 countries with over 2.5 million in staff at a budget of 800 billion per year.
How can anyone say the Republicans can control spending.....It's nothing but a lie to say otherwise.
Republicans are by far...The worst.
It gets worst;
These bases are the leading cause for us to lend "Foreign Aid" - because without the payoff to the host country they would not allow it. Foreign aid is not foreign aid - it's rent due.
That's another 190 billion wasted.
Umm...don't think I can take anymore Republican "Savings"
As our current President Obama & his administration moves forward, educates & reveals to 'We The People' what is fair & ethical in taxes & waste, the Republicans will have to give up more or lose more seats in congress two years from now. Based on how greedy & foolish they've been in the past, they will lose again if they don't have a change of heart.
I found a great picture of a typical Fox viewer!
http://s285.beta.photobucket.com/user/owencoffin/media/sheeple22.jpg.html?evt=email_share
http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=kZ8&sa=X&tbo=d&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=np&biw=1525&bih=662&tbm=isch&tbnid=opGJ34E-zYlm-M:&imgrefurl=http://neptunefountain.blogspot.com/2012/05/lynx-xx.html&docid=tGh03eYwL94IWM&imgurl=http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yqxNN4x7Mgs/T6TgcW7lS2I/AAAAAAAAAjs/g6x96K202b0/s1600/Forward-obama-socialism-cliff-lemmings.jpg&w=650&h=582&ei=76C9UJHyJdK_0QGxqYDgCw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=842&vpy=198&dur=785&hovh=212&hovw=237&tx=137&ty=85&sig=109071336594834325326&page=1&tbnh=144&tbnw=166&start=0&ndsp=32&ved=1t:429,r:28,s:0,i:177
PAF...you are only parroting what the neo-con blowhards on the air say, "Repub sent to congress to stop insane spending" PAF I really want to give you the benefit of the doubt, you cannot be that naive to believe that. Most of the hard right conservatives congress members have been propped up by Koch/Adelson Super Pacs some very good moderate Repubs who could make good deals have been pushed out the tea-party members are told to tow the party line and NOT think outside of the box for real solutions...and of course PROTECT the top 2% at all costs even if it means taking the country to the brink of a made-up fiscal cliff
you do realize that we could tax the top 2% at 100% and it wouldn't eliminate the deficit, right? O-bah-ma is feeding his little libsheeps a bunch of BS and they are buying it like little, star-crazed schoolgirls.....
"...we could tax the top 2% at 100% and it wouldn't eliminate the deficit..." -- Yeah, we shouldn't do anything, because no one thing we do can eliminate the deficit entirely. That's probably the argument used by the GOPs not to have done anything in the last few years other than saying NO.
hopeisgone
That lame argument has already been presented and shown to be ridiculous because no one, not even republicans have a plan that intends to pay off the deficit in one payment.
Even the ryan budget plan would have continued to deficit spending until 2040 and would have required many increases to the debt ceiling along the way.
So is that lame strawman all you have to offer?
The Republican agenda is to keep the voter dumbed down. Or use their Republican media to flood them with lies or deception. Obama has now had 4yrs. experience seeing how they operate. This time around they will not be so successful at their game without the voters knowledge. Twitter & the internet will be the GOP's demise if they choose to play the same politics.
sure, that makes sense...the top % of income earners are the morons and the welfare-class are the intellects? ...sure thing.......................
HopeisGone, What is it that makes you think everyone in the middle class is welfare? Is it the theology of Romney? Maybe some scarey dream you had? And did you follow the GOP debates? Talk about morons & dysfunctional rich people! Maybe the wealthy aren't as smart as you may think. And if I may ask, why is your hope all gone ? If we work together for good that may bring some hope to you. I gotta go, it's late. Peace to you, take care.
Gee seems that is Obama's agenda...go on the view....where dumb people watch...go on Letterman...where drunk people watch...go on late night comedy...IDK who watches that......and that is how he governs.......dissing world leaders to be "eye candy" on the view...wow we have a real intelligent piece of work in the white house...four more years of this an America will no longer be standing.
54% of our budget is military spending. Now, that's what I call insane spending. If that were cut that in half we'd still be just as safe. If the savings were spent on restoring our infrastructure we'd have full employment, soon a balanced budget and a much more productive country. The nations that aren't squandering their wealth on a bloated military are eating our lunch. The neocons keep selling fear and if we keep buying it we'll go the way of the Soviet Union.
I specifically remember Obama saying during the debates that he "wasn't cutting the military budget at all".........so, your point is?
Bingo, time to slash the DOD
Shrink it to the size it can be drown in a bath tub, says Grover Norquist.
..
Hey hopeisgone I never said tax the top 2% at 100% you dipwad, but it may not be a bad idea, the only giggling schoolgirls are you right wing hacks who lick the bottom of the shoes of leaders that could care less if your low level job went to China
keep getting on your knees for your Union master, you fool! ...maybe you can get a raise to $10/hr. to turn that wrench?
It doesn't look like you are turning anything. 2:20 AM EST. What productive, paying job will you be doing today?
JCC...we don't all sleep late.......some people work........
HopeisGone, What is it that makes you think everyone in the middle class is welfare? Is it the theology of Romney? Maybe some scarey dream you had? And did you follow the GOP debates? Talk about morons & dysfunctional rich people! Maybe the wealthy aren't as smart as you may think. And if I may ask, why is your hope all gone ? If we work together for good that may bring some hope to you. I gotta go, it's late. Peace to you, take care.
Funny thing is Romney thought $200K was middleclass.