ADP reports that 215,000 jobs were added in December.

http://www.adpemploymentreport.com/2012/December/NER/NER-December-2012.aspx

The New Normal:

At approximately 2:00 am Tuesday morning the Senate passed a compromise fiscal cliff bill which would delay sequester by two months and protect the middle class from a tax increase. Technically we did go over the fiscal curb as well into the night on January 1, 2013 the House voted in favor of the Senate compromise.

In a nutshell the new normal is that Republicans will not negotiate until the very last second of the very last minute of the eleventh hour and their positions continue to be punitive toward women, minorities, and the middle class. Republican legislators know that if they even appear cooperative they will be primaried by a Tea Party candidate, and even if an incumbent Republican wins in the primary election, he or she will have spent much of their campaign war chest thus running a higher risk of losing to a Democrat in the general election.

Compromise is a dirty word for Republicans who prefer to stick to their conservative ideology (and a word John Boehner does not use). It is a word that far left liberals do not seem to like as well. I read in the Huffington Post headlines like, "White House caves on tax rates", "Obama bargained incompetently", and liberal economist Paul Krugman: "If Obama says he won't give ground, you can count on him giving way."

Most legislators are more interested in being reelected and not so interested in compromise; but finding common ground is putting the country before party. A test of a good compromise is that both sides lose something and are unhappy. Likewise, in a good compromise both sides get something they value and can demonstrate to their base that they are working on their behalf. In my opinion the Senate did their job and crafted a bill that reasonable people can live with.

But the struggles will continue in February/March when Congress addresses the debt ceiling and spending cuts. I expect the Republicans to again wait until the last second and run the risk of damaging our nation's credit by threatening to not pay our bills for goods and services already provided, and the Democrats will fight to protect our social network of Social Security and Medicare.

It is apparent that the House conservatives have no concept of compromise. Eric Cantor and the Tea Party lack any sense of doing what is best for the country and the by the way the GOP was not willing to provide disaster relief for those harmed by hurricane Sandy. John Boehner, Eric Cantor and the Tea Party conservatives are feckless and have no soul.

I am sure all of you will join in -- as we watch another profile in courage today -- as Senator Mark Kirk takes that long walk up the steps to join the 113th Congress. Suffering a stroke, early indications were that he would never recover to walk again, but his internal fortitude proved the experts wrong.

We also want to wish President George H. W.Bush well on his road to recovery and a Happy New Year.

@Ron -- If you substitute Democrat in every place you have Republican, then you would be correct. The president and democrats have no intention on cutting spending and now they own another $4 trillion in deficit.

The only question I have is, does Washington prefer strawberry or gooseberry jam on it's toast?

PS: Is there anything more pathetic then the Idiot from Albany reduced to posting re-runs? Here is a hint Joey, it SUCKED the first time, adding an asinine "PS" doesn't improve a thing! ;o)

Thank you Mr. Tomasky. Happy New Year to you.

I get it. But here’s what I think proponents of that argument don’t get. Obama isn’t some co-speaker. He’s the effing president. People want the president to lead. They may blame Republicans more than Democrats for obstruction, and that’s a good thing. But they still want the president to Get Things Done, and, however naively, they still think he ought to be able to just assert his will and Get
Things Done.

There is, in other words, a responsibility that comes along with being the president. It may be unfair, but
the leaders of the House and Senate can play all the silly games they want to. Half the country or more doesn’t even know who they are. But the president—he’s supposed to do stuff. Obama really and deeply understands this—perhaps to a fault, but better that than believe he only has to represent the third of the
country that loves him.

Sometimes acting out the jobs of Captain Liberal and Mister President can be done in harmony. But sometimes not; in fact, I’d say most often not, given that this is not an especially liberal country. So Mister President Obama was absolutely right to make every effort to hit the deadline. To your average person, failing to hit it would have been a terrible reflection on him, and an explanation from him about his increased leverage would have just sounded like more game-playing.

Relatedly, I’ve been amazed to read, sometimes from people I’ve considered quite knowledgeable, that Obama held “all the cards” here. He didn’t, by a long shot. This was a negotiation. Negotiations are hard. The other side wants exactly what you don’t want. Like it or not, liberals, the other side legitimately represents 47 percent of the country, so they had every right to get something out of this. And as it
happens the other side also had the ability to block anything from happening. And they would have, too, if Obama had given them half an excuse.

The biggest complaint, given voice by Paul Krugman and Noam Scheiber among others, is that the recent negotiation basically showed that Obama is weak and too anxious to get a deal and will thus be steamrolled by the GOP in March into accepting steep budget cuts because he wants to avoid default.

I have tremendous regard for Krugman and Scheiber, but I don’t agree. Obama has negotiated with the Republicans four times now—the December 2009 extension of the Bush tax cuts, the spring 2011
government-shutdown threat, the summer 2011 debt-ceiling talks, and these recent cliff negotiations. On three—all but the summer 2011 talks, which were a fiasco—he came out looking pretty good. Now, it’s unfortunate that the one on which he didn’t do well involved the debt ceiling, the locus of the upcoming
talks. But he vows that he’ll be tougher this time, and I take him at his word. He’s gotten a lot done, he got himself reelected when lots of people thought he couldn’t, and I say he’s earned a little bit of my trust. We’ll see.

I also think that “Obama is going to sell us out” columns somehow help make that eventuality come true. At the very least, they establish a tone and mindset that rank-and-file liberals imbibe and accept. Liberals should certainly pressure Obama to do as many liberal things as he can, but we should also recognize that he’s not the leader of a movement—he’s the head of a country. And he’s actually helped change the
country pretty dramatically.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/03/dear-liberals-stop-complaining.html

____________

As we have learned, President Obama had to evidently negotiate with his own party, my party, in which legislators wanted tax rates to go up to $1 million, which is also what Speaker Boehner wanted. President Obama compromised with the $400,000 figure.

Again, he compromised. He didn’t cave. BIG difference.

There is no much negativity in this country. Everywhere you turn, negativity. Particularly on cable and the blogs. Self-interests have completely taken over. Incompetent journalists. Back room gossip being mistaken for news. Either the president has to do it their way, with the results they want, or they’re just going to giving up. For about 24 hours. One person states their opinion and before you know it, that becomes the CW.

This is what happens when everybody thinks they have all the answers. They don’t.

There is nothing wrong with pressuring President Obama. But there is seriously something wrong with people whining and whining and whining forever if they didn't get the deal they thought the president should have gotten.

Up next: Inauguration Day. Our president was re-elected.

And that is one BFD.

Happy New Year to you Ron.

Cheers.

The fiscal cliff deal made Bush's tax cut for the 99% permanent, allowing tax increases for the 1%. Maybe that's a win for the Occupy Wall Street Movement and it's slogan about the 99%.

.

But it's a compromise deal, because Democrats wants to increase taxes on the TOP 2%, so Republicans also got something.

.

But still this is the first time in 20 years, Congressional Republicans voted to increase taxes. It's the end of an era for Norquist.

Oh look little Joey from Albany thinks he's funny. In reality he's disgusting.

Will they re-elect Boehner? Probably.

Will they pass the Sandy Relief Bill? Yes, or Boehner is doomed.

Will they act like children during the debt ceiling debate? Yes, what else would you expect.

At every turn, Obama must make the Republicans pay in the court of public opinion with each fight.

That is the road to 2014.

It's difficult to muster any sympathy for Speaker Boehner or the GOPers who now find themselves fighting a verbal-war within their own party. Groups like Club for Growth have "purified" the party so that it is now far right of mainstream American. Who embraced the Tea Party? Who never bothered to denounce the hatred and animosity aimed at President Obama by the far right tea drinkers and their extremist friends? Who instead cheered them on and said "welcome" to our party, we love your enthusiasm? Add the rigid ideological contempt for government begun by Reagan; add the insanity of Norquist and conservative's expressed belief that tax cuts increase revenues so spending cuts aren't needed (backwards math which added trillions to the deficit and debt over the last 30 years). No, the GOP's muddled mess is one they created for themselves--they OWN it. I have no sympathy for Boehner who now stews in his own juice while his back-stabbing majority leader Cantor stirs the pot.

Boehner has been ineffective as speaker; but Boehner is the less of two evils compared to Eric Cant'or and Kevin McCarthy. Keep Boehner - otherwise he will cry - I can't bear to see a man cry.

rick post#1.9 To bad your party didn't want to be a part of history in moving the country forward. Obstruct is all your party can do.

Tweet/TOD:

The average 401K gained about $1900 yesterday because Pres. Obama pushed for a fiscal cliff deal which allowed stocks to soar.

Joe in Albany,

Why are you such a mean bitter person who hates the President of the United States? President Obama has been a darn good President and the argument of high spending on the watch of Obama has been debunked over and over again.

So, why the hate?

Biden gets things done. Yes, He Can.

VP Biden is a true genius and deal maker...he is the key behind 3 major deals - post 2010 election renewal of Bush tax cut, 2011 debt ceiling deal, and this fiscal cliff deal.

Obama is genius...too...in picking Biden.

I would suggest that "Bev", "Betty", and "Anna Molly", bide their time and wait until Joe in Albany has used up his giant sized roll of foil and then invest in ALCOA. His next purchase should cause a nation wide shortage. It is not the size of his pin head but his ego that needs to be sheltered.

At approximately 2:00 am Tuesday morning the Senate passed a compromise fiscal cliff bill which would delay sequester by two months and protect the middle class from a tax increase.

You forgpt to mention the 2% increase in the SS tax that will cost 70% of working Americans making $50,000, $1000 each year. Then add in the ObamaCare taxes and you will be around $2000 less this year. All going into the feds coffers.

The "fiscal cliff" deal was a good deal how?

As far as the speaker, I am hoping that the repubs elect someone else. Someone that will stand up to the dictator in the white house and tell him enough is enough and that he really is not a dictator and he is only an executive in one branch of our government and that position does not handle the countries purse strings.

@Dennis -- You left out that unemployment claims went up by 10,000 to 372,000. Still a net loss. Besides think that might be primarily due to the temporary hiring over the Christmas holidays?

@Pat -- Better sell now while the getting is good. Besides I believe all wanted a fiscal cliff deal and the polls show that the American people would like a better one that includes "real" spending cuts. What was your take on the CBO -- you know that non-partisan group -- that said Obama's plan would add $4 trillion to the deficit? Cat got your tongue?

"HAPPY DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN" (Franklin D. Roosevelt.)

Thank you Democrats and Republicans for voting to move our Country forward. Also good news, today we lose clowns like West and Walsh etc. etc. Going to be a fine day. Course the Repugs will accuse President Obama of going on another vacation. LOL.

Now let's get to work. Pass that bill for aid to Sandy victums. Boy, Cristie ripped Boehner a new one didn't he? Loved it.

Looking forward to a better year. Less coocoo's in Congress.

several rolls of Barry Obama toilet paper.

Interesting that the Albanian Idiot is looking forward, almost lusting after, having a soft and sensually smooth Obama product luxuriating between his butt cheeks. What will he order next with his stellar stock options - an Obama vaginal probe?

Only 85 RepubliCANs are for it... Yes, They Can, too.

The pignorance of 151 House RepubliCONs who voted against the fiscal deal... Time to organize grassroots campaigns to kick out these 151 in November 2014.

Yes We Can.

Boehner...................or Cantor.......... Hmmm...............

I'd almost like to see Cantor get the job. Imagine the fireworks. That would show the American People what T-Party Republicans really are. And help clean the House out in 2014.

@job1 -- laying out lies as facts and then calling them as debunks to Obama being that largest spending president in history is pure chicanery. Whoops now you see it, now you don't.

What's your take on the additional $4 trillion in deficit? Can't speak until the talking points come out? Coward? Cat got your tongue?

NBC declared Obama the winner. They forgot to announce the Loser was America.

Ben,

Possible but it was 55,000 more than expected.

The weekly claims are noisy and only the 4 week moving
average should be used to show a trend … it was up only 250.

I saw one of the other threads was how Congress is so disliked. While much can't be done in the House the arcane and obstinate Senate can be changed for the better.

Will the Majority leader do what is right for the country and change the rules (threshold) for the filibuster? Me I say a better number would be 56 instead of the 60 supermajority number that is required now. I predict he won't.

Pigotry - Boehner has been as effective as Obama. So Obama according to you has been ineffective.

Nice photo from The Obama Diary - President Obama's reaction when he heard Supreme Court upheld Obamacare.

This is a man who cares deeply. He is the one in the trenches day in, day out -

So so happy he was re-elected.

Anyway, an emotional photo.

June 28, 2012
"This was the day that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the Affordable Health Care Act. Before the President came downstairs from the residence that morning, the split-screen television in the Outer Oval Office was flashing bulletins that the Court had overturned the act. Kathy Ruemmler, the White House counsel, came rushing in and told me and the President's secretary just the opposite. Kathy then departed and a few minutes later the President arrived at the Oval and saw the same inaccurate information on the television. Kathy soon reappeared to tell the President that the Court had indeed upheld the Act, and that the TV reports had it wrong. He then gave her a big hug, as Chief of Staff Jack Lew watched at left."

http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/8341864472/in/set-72157632418300447/

Boehner just needs to cry in his drink a little more and retire. And take turtle man with him, I couldn't believe that guy the first time I saw him a few years back.

@job1 where you get your info from ? MSNBC ?

Why are you such a mean bitter person who hates the President of the United States? President Obama has been a darn good President and the argument of high spending being blamed on Obama has been debunked.

Obama spent way more than Bush, I know its Bush's fault.

http://www.tableausoftware.com/public/gallery/spending-president

The New America

From the article above:

As NBC’s Carrie Dann reported last month: A record-breaking 20 women will serve in the Senate, while 78 will be seated in the United States House.

There will be 16 Iraq and Afghanistan vets of the new members.

There will also be four new members who are LGBT, almost doubling the number of openly gay lawmakers. And remember, for the first time in history, white men will NOT make up the majority of the House Democratic caucus.

Get use to it, my friends.

We’re witnessing a change in the nation that will last for generations.

No matter how hard Republicans kick and scream about how they want things to stay the same, they will continue to lose elections because they can’t accept that their ideas and beliefs are a thing of the past.

* * *

“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

George Carlin

Salud

@jake -- There is no room on here for people that wish others dead. You and the three that liked your post should be banned.

IR, well said. Good for Chris Christie and other moderate republicans who have stood up and called out these phony yahoos for what they are--inept, dysfunctional, incapable of governing.

My own view is that the GOP's "values and principles" are empty words they toss around to win elections. They cannot call themselves "fiscally responsible" when they voted yes to cut taxes and then spent money by the trillions they did not have. They cannot call themselves "fiscally responsible" when they start two wars (yes dems voted to help) and tell people to go shopping to pay for those wars. They cannot call themselves compassionate Christians when they preach--and their legislation prove it--to cut aid to the poor, the disabled and the elderly--let them starve. We heard Darryl Issa declare yesterday that tax cuts need to be paid for when for the last 22 years, they have preached that tax cuts do not count, they pay for themselves. So which is it, GOPers? The only FR printable word that comes to my mind for these right-wing, extremist, liars is hypocrites.

RON, PAT Boston, TOMAS, terrific posts.

@ Jake2247 ~ I think the speaker is a first class POS, but wishing a heart attack and death on him? That's a bit much, man.

What's your take on the additional $4 trillion in deficit? Can't speak until the talking points come out? Coward? Cat got your tongue?

Ben, do your research and you will see that I'm right. Also, please stop riding that crazy train, because you are better than that. For example:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/the-reality-behind-obama-and-bushs-spending-binge/2012/05/25/gJQAK8ItpU_blog.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/ezra-klein-doing-the-math-on-obamas-deficits/2012/01/31/gIQAnRs7fQ_story.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

The President and Congress "save" us from a fiscal crisis -- a crisis they created -- by 1) raising taxes, 2) raising spending and 3) adding to the debt.

@Ben. Says the guy with the small penis hiding behind his lame machine gun icon.

@jake2247...ONLY a liberal would post something like that! As much as I despise liberals I could never wish harm come to ANYONE!! And you dumba$$e$ talk about the hateful RIGHT??? ONLY...ONLY on the left do you see this kind of garbage!

SonmanVB, Ben, etc....

So Obama extended a $4T tax cut and you complain. That's a beloved avoidance of a huge tax increase. I thought you hated taxes?

Obama's payroll tax CUT, provided over the last two years expires, causing a dreaded tax increase.

So you hate Obama's tax cut that in now implemented, but love Obama's tax cut that expires.

Can't get enough of you guys :- )

Stand up to the dictator! pfft.

Ben,

Are those your "hunting rifles" in your avatar? Do they make you feel "manly"? What do you hunt with them?Hummingbirds?

Still relevant today:

BY Charley Reese

(Date of publication unknown)-- -- - Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 235 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all but the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislation's responsibility to determine how he votes.

A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY

Don't you see how the con game that is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of Tip O'Neill, who stood up and criticized Ronald Reagan for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating appropriations and taxes.

O'neill is the speaker of the House. He is the leader of the majority party. He and his fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetos it, they can pass it over his veto.

REPLACE SCOUNDRELS

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 235 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in Lebanon, it's because they want them in Lebanon.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people and they alone are responsible. They and they alone have the power. They and they alone should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided they have the gumption to manage their own employees.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18568.htm

Vote J.B. OUT!!! He has lied to many times and is a coward! He AINT no conservative and doesnt belong as speaker.

A real conservative will not work. We the people of the United States have moved away from the conservative views, to more moderate-progressive views of our world.

Pigotry (does your name imply that you are a liberal pig and a bigot? thought so.) The only way you will get 151 republicans out is if your president manages to further kill the economy and make even more than just the 47% of Americans completey dependant on the government. But that will never happen because despite the hopes and dreams of liberals everywhere, there will always people a population of people who, no matter how bad you liberals make living in Amerca, will stand up for what's right and refuse to bend over and become dependant on a corrupt government who makes false promises to American people in exchange for their freedoms and liberties.

@job1 -- Please. You site example coming from left-wing hacks. Would you believe anything that let's say Hannity wrote as facts? Of course not. Go back and find some non-partisan researchers before spreading debunking bs.

As to answering my question on the CBO report? No guts?

@Fuzzy -- I am so happy my avatar interests so many people. It is my 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. My weapons are for defense and protection only and I won't bring a knife into a gun fight. The zombie apocalypse of democrats is coming. P.S. -- I have a crossbow as well.

True texan,

unfortunately, Jake isn't a liberal, he's one of you guys. He wanted Boehnor dead because he compromised.

He deserves it for what he's done.

Fuzzy44, yes those are hunting rifels; you know, the kind you hunt tyrants down with. Idiot. Do you have ANY clue as to the intent of the 2nd amendment? Here, I'll give you a clue...it's NOT to protect my right to hunt!! Go back to the second grade and this time please pay attention in history class!!?

Tweet/TOD:

Good News* Chrysler reports best sales year since 2007

Ben,

Washington Post, and Forbes are left wing hacks?

SmBusOwnerinNY

So Obama extended a $4T tax cut and you complain.

Exactly, NY.

Heard last night that the House purposely waited until after midnight just so they would have the talking point that "Obama raised taxes".

Then they passed a bill that lowers taxes for the majority of Americans.

Pathetic.

Salud

Pat,

I'm looking forward to a Clinton-esque boom due to FOUR YEARS of pent up demand that will make so much of this doom and gloom just go away.

Republicans can't prevent American success forever.

Do you hear it? "It's the sound of inevitability"

When I saw those Huff Post headlines, the comments from Krugman who still resents President Obama for not picking him, and the others, I could not help wondering why their headline wasn't the obvious truth: The GOP Caved, Republicans Voted to Increase taxes! Seriously, the first time in 22 years that republicans voted to increase taxes; Grover Norquist was thrown under the bus. Yet the never-satisfied left, who can be as rigidly and ideologically pure as their far right counterparts, declared President Obama "caved".

@Small business - Not the publications -- the authors of these left leaning opinion pieces. You should know that.

Ebeneser,

What Tyrants? which ones? Of whom do you speak?

Maybe you should put on some Cat Scratch Fever and pray to your Terrible Ted poster collection!

Ben,

What's your take on the additional $4 trillion in deficit? Can't speak until the talking points come out? Coward? Cat got your tongue?

So, you were all for letting all of the Bush Tax cuts expire, and paying that $4T tax increase?

What? Coward? Cat got your tongue?

Get use to it, my friends.

We’re witnessing a change in the nation that will last for generations.

No matter how hard Republicans kick and scream about how they want things to stay the same, they will continue to lose elections because they can’t accept that their ideas and beliefs are a thing of the past.

Have fun with the $20T in debt.

Here's what the debt really means to regular people. I have received $200 a month for the last 12 years more in my paycheck. Not a lot a month in that it gets spent on monthly expenses. After 12 years, my government has now created $25,000 of debt in my name. This is a significant amount of money. Now, if we really want to start paying that back it will cost $400 a month over the next 12 years. If we spread it out over 25 years it's still $300 a month out of my paycheck.

And this is before the money we need to pay for the additional demographics hitting the SS and Medicare systems.

So, big win for the President as we continue on our fiscally irresponsible path.

Ben,

Not the publications -- the authors of these left leaning opinion pieces.

Oh, so it's the messenger.

@smallbus...He's NOT one of us. He may claim to be but he isnt. WE dont claim people like that. ONLY the left does. America IS doomed with liberal idiots at the wheel.

Would you believe anything that let's say Hannity wrote as facts?

Not from Hannity. He is a proven far right wing nut job hack. However, I prefer to read the Washington Post, and Forbes. You known the respectable publications, read around the World.

So, you were for letting all of the Bush Tax cuts expire, and paying that $4T tax increase?

All I can say is that you guys are pretzels. For 10 years you have claimed that these tax cuts were the major driver of the deficit and they must expire. You had that chance in 2010 but claimed that it was the only way to save UI. Now two years later you are out claiming a great middle class tax cut victory. So, who is going to pay for the Obama tax cuts? Or, just like Bush you'll borrow the money.

Pathetic.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss!

Obama = Bush v2.0

Alan,

But then, you did get that $200/month. You got it then, you'll have to pay for it later...or maybe not.

Are you advocating that we should have let all of those tax cuts expire?

You guys are so hypocritical. B!tch all the time about Obama's taxes, "class warfare" when he doesn't give them to the 1%, yet as soon as he extends any taxes, he's fiscally irresponsible. ($4Trillion!!!)

Then, on the other side, you guys complain about the Payroll FICA tax reverting to the normal 6.2%, even though that's responsible to fund Social Security.

You guys don't know which way is up, do you?

@Smallbusiness -- Actually several prominent Democrats -- Howard Dean for one -- said all the tax cuts should expire. You know it is impolite to answer questions with questions, so what is your take on the CBO report. Also, what are you a myna bird parroting my words?

And yes, these messengers are not unbiased. I ask the question again -- would you believe an article written by Sean Hannity even though it was published let's say on DailyKos?

@Job1 -- the two authors you quote are left wing hack jobs. Then you would believe a story from Hannity if it was in Forbes and/or the WP? Also, what's your take on the CBO report? Still waiting. (crickets).

The Republican "Magical Formula" of reducing the fiscal deficit and national debt. Cut spending all across the board (Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, Unemployment Insurance, College Student Loans, and Medicaid), except for Defense and Tax Subsidies for Oil Companies. And cut taxes all across the board. Because after all, Republicans has had a good history of balancing budgets and reducing the debt by using this recipe of 100% taxcuts and spending cuts. And leave it up to Boehner and the Teapublicans to play politics w/ Hurricane Relief Disaster Aid. Boehner The Douche Bag.

TrueT,

You may not like it, but he's one of yours.

he said:

He deserves it for what he's done.

A liberal wouldn't have said that.

Pat Boston MA.

The average 401K gained about $1900 yesterday because Pres. Obama pushed for a fiscal cliff deal which allowed stocks to soar.

Maybe so, but 401Ks will probably lose a lot more than that during the next debt ceiling debacle the Republicans are going to perpetrate. That's what happened during the GOP's last debt ceiling debacle in August 2011. They whine about the national debt, but they just make it worse when they weaken the economy with the chaos they create with these endless bogus crises.

But then, you did get that $200/month. You got it then, you'll have to pay for it later...or maybe not.

Are you advocating that we should have let all of those tax cuts expire?

You guys are so hypocritical. B!tch all the time about Obama's taxes, "class warfare" when he doesn't give them to the 1%, yet as soon as he extends any taxes, he's fiscally irresponsible. ($4Trillion!!!)

Then, on the other side, you guys complain about the Payroll FICA tax reverting to the normal 6.2%, even thoughthat's responsible to fund Social Security.

You guys don't know which way is up, do you?

If you go back and read my posts I have always been for letting the Bush tax cuts expire. I have always advocated that there should have been a surtax to pay for the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. I disagreed with Greenspan when he said we couldn't pay the debt down at the end of the Clinton years.

But that's in the past and I don't have a time machine.

You tell me from a fiscal standpoint what's the difference between Obama and Bush? You tell me how the Senate from 2003 - 2006 stood up to the President? You tell me how the Senate from 2009 - 2012 stood up to the President?

They are all shameless. Even the hurricane spending (and I live in NJ). What's another $60B? If a family has to pay for a roof they don't go on vacation that year (and maybe for the next 5 years). As a country we just have the attitude that the money will always be there.

We have leaders from both parties who will not tell us that the party is over and the next few years are going to hurt because we have spent recklessly. Obama's main objective now is to get out before the bill comes due.

Democrats = The new Cheney's (deficits don't matter)

Pathetic.

Howard Dean = Leadership.....why couldn't he have beaten Kerry?

Besides think that might be primarily due to the temporary hiring over the Christmas holidays?

no Dennis is a firm believer in Squealer i mean Axlerod. Four legs good, two legs bad.

Joe in Albany

Problem with your scenario is the aforementioned 'people' have no skin in the game. They want all gain without the risk. See its the 250k people like me (ive been told i make 250k) that have our '401k's' that invest even slightly in the stock market. If I lose im irritated but it was a risk because the payout is intended to be higher but it's ultimately my fault. unlike say 'Betty' and 'Bev' who want the dictatorship of the proletariat to take care of them for life. No risk, all reward.

Alan,

I did complain that the Bush tax cuts wrecked the fiscal situation, but I also argued for letting all of them expire. I just said they should phase out over 5 years so we don't take the economic hit all at once. Yes, I'd prefer we have the Clinton tax rates eventually.

So I'm not a pretzel, but you are. You now claim they are a $4T problem, when you were arguing that Obama wasn't allowed to blame Bush. So what is it? Problem now, but not before?

OK, now reading your later posts it looks like you were for letting them all expire. OK, so now we can kumaya that there are 3 people (you, me and Ben) from both the left and right that think taxes are part of fiscal responsibility. Too late. Our leaders prefer can kicking (both sides).

An economic problem larger than the national debt is stagnant wages and joblessness. Americans haven't seen a real increase on their incomes in 30 years. And as people continue to struggle in keeping up with the Jones. In my estimation, people would be more reluctant to pay taxes. Because they have to keep up with the rising cost of living and rising health care costs. But yes, at some point. Taxes are going to have to go up and major spending cuts to our ridiculous defense budget has to be enacted in order to reduce the debt. BTW, Social Security has not contribute one penny to the fiscal debt.

Well he finally did something I can respect him for, putting the country ahead of a chosen few!

(including two independents who will caucus with the Democrats)

Um. Why not just call yourselves Democrats then?

Joe in Al;bany and Caesar: your basic premise that liberals want government to take care of them is not only wrong, the fact that you repeat it shows that you have been fooled by the conservative entertainment industry.

I'll bet you think the world is 6000 years old, global warming is a liberal myth, evolution is a "lie from the pit of hell," we are in Biblical endtimes, and so on. But the biggest laugh is that you think you are smart for having these beliefs.

Listen - if you have to believe that liberals want the government to "take care of them for life" in order to make you feel better about your support for proven failures like the GOP, perhaps your support is misplaced. Liberals are right. Obama is doing a great job. The economy is improving. Deal with it.

Ben-636050

@job1 -- laying out lies as facts and then calling them as debunks to Obama being that largest spending president in history is pure chicanery. Whoops now you see it, now you don't.

Just because you don't like a fact doesn't mean it's a lie. Unfortunately, I've seen too often that denying inconvenient facts is the way that ultracons seal themselves off from consensus reality.

Boehner=Failure

Face it, he had about 1 1/2 years to prepare for the fiscal cliff pressure point and he came up with- ok, whatever you want Mr. President?!?!? No strength, no convictions, no more time for you. Exit stage left.

Republicans and conservative posters come full circle--now they whine about getting what they whined they wanted! Worse, they whine about the debt their party created ala' Reagan, Bush and Bush. Where were they in the 80's and from 2001 through 2008? Oh, wait, during those years, tax cuts and unfunded spending were acceptable because it was republicans doing the tax cutting and the spending; you know, that makes it okie dokie.

Ben

You can keep trying but these low intelligent liberals will never take fact or common sense over their talking points. You can't expect much from them. They voted for the worst ever TWICE. Only a fool would admit that so you can keep trying but they really are a wasted cause.

OK, now reading your later posts it looks like you were for letting them all expire. OK, so now we can kumaya that there are 3 people (you, me and Ben) from both the left and right that think taxes are part of fiscal responsibility. Too late. Our leaders prefer can kicking (both sides).

As I said Washington is bereft of fiscal leadership. To go back to my example of $200 now to pay back $400 later. I have a 401(k). How will that look when I need if we follow the advice of such geniuses as Krugman? He simply wants to inflate our way out of debt. It's freakin scary the future these politicians have set up for us.

As to some of the other comments

BTW, Social Security has not contribute one penny to the fiscal debt.

This is true but that does not mean we have the money to meet the financial obligations of SS in the future. As the President indicateded in the last debt ceiling fight, if we cannot borrow more then SS checks may not go out. (No money in the trust fund).

Well he finally did something I can respect him for, putting the country ahead of a chosen few!

And when the debt crunch comes it will be the country that suffers not the chosen few.

Republicans and conservative posters come full circle--now they whine about getting what they whined they wanted! Worse, they whine about the debt their party created ala' Reagan, Bush and Bush. Where were they in the 80's and from 2001 through 2008? Oh, wait, during those years, tax cuts and unfunded spending were acceptable because it was republicans doing the tax cutting and the spending; you know, that makes it okie dokie.

Just like you Jody. Now tax cuts and unfunded spending are acceptable because there is Democrat in the White House. I guess you like Cheney now?

@noncoms...MAN, did you just show your stupidity or WHAT!!! PLEASE keep it up, you are proving our point every time you open that idiotic pie hole!!

You libs on here, dont get me wrong. I cant stand the rino's either. They ALL, ALL (both parties) SPEND TO MUCH!!! Its NOT their money they are spending. ITS OURS!!!!

the fact that you repeat it shows that you have been fooled by the conservative entertainment industry

right and of course the information you get from say NBC that paints republicans skewering babies and drinking their blood is 100% truthful? of course it is...FR and NBC say so..

Nope I dont need 'conservative entertainment' to tell me how to think, the liberal (not to confused with the democrat) platform to see the mirror image of take from the dos and give to the do nots. its been done before with the same results. Plutocracy.

Smitty

The Obama Tax cuts. Thats music to my ears. The bush cuts expired. The Obama tax cuts begin another great era in American history. Thanks Mr President!!!!

Sorry Smitty nice try. The fact is Congress reinstated the Bush tax cuts as they were for most Americans, Unfortunately Obama decided that it was more important to punish a minority group with the OBAMA PUNITIVE TAX INCREASE.

We are also going to get the Obama massive tax increase with OBAMACARE. We will have to wait and see what effect this tax has on the economy. I wonder if the media whores at NBC will inform us as to how many people have lost their health care and full time position when the companies that employ them cut their hours worked.

I thank my lucky stars that I sold my business 3 years ago. I had 103 full time employees with a full benefit package including fully paid company health care, disability long term and short term, life insurance and a 401K with a 5% matching fund. I recently talked to a former employee and discovered that the employees are now paying 30% of the health care. They have lost the matching funds on the 401K, the disability insurance and life insurance. There are now 15 less employees and 23 others have had their hours cut to less than 30 hours.

Wow, after looking at some of the posts here, I feel like I haven't even begun being rude.

Wishing a congressman would die from a heart attack. I can understand that level of hate, but not for Boehner. Really, let's take a reality check here. Was he the person who told the CIA to torture prisoners of war? Nope. So there should be at least one person on that list ahead of him.

But besides that, you have to have your brain and your ass mixed up to seriously hate Boehner that much. He's not even the Nancy Pelosi of his party. If you wanted to go on and tell me that Allen West has that much hatred levelled at him...sure. But people here need to do a reality check.

Again, it is a problem of the one party voters. They aren't thinking with a full brain and it shows. They show even the most basic lack of knowledge of the opponents of their cause. Which, in turn, shows a disregard for wanting to accomplish anything in the causes they profess to care about.

Joe in Albany - you prove what most of us already know - to be Republican you have to be crude and classless.

Ebeneser - the 2nd Amendment was for a time we had no militia - which we do today. Ben's need to have assault weapons as his avitar proves he needs it to feel like a man - and he still can't convince anyone but himself.

Although I don't like his politics, I wish Senator Kirk a good walk up the steps of Congress and continued recovery from his debilitating stroke. He has worked hard and it appears has suddenly gained some new insight into what thousands of others go through who are not as fortunate as those in Congress. His votes on issues should be interesting. Welcome back Senator Kirk.

@Derek

But besides that, you have to have your brain and your ass mixed up to seriously hate Boehner that much. He's not even the Nancy Pelosi of his party. If you wanted to go on and tell me that Allen West has that much hatred levelled at him...sure. But people here need to do a reality check.

Did you just land from planet common sense?

"The one true achievement by Boehner and the House Republicans is that they have turned every spending bill into a debate..."

========

Think this was a typo and meant to say 'debacle'. Debate, is the last thing I categorize the House GOP as doing.

After viewing the pic above of Agent Orange, I have come to the conclusion, it's orange marmalade... hands down! lol

Although I don't like his politics, I wish Senator Kirk a good walk up the steps of Congress and continued recovery from his debilitating stroke

Ditto that Seeking! ;o)

the 2nd Amendment was for a time we had no militia

what time was that? The Continental Army used militia throughout the revolution. the 2nd Amendment was created for such occassions such as the Minute Men. Google it

Jake-numbers, bad form amigo, wishing someone were dead won't solve our problems, they are bigger than a single person.

Ben-numbers, your avatar offends me. Assault weapons should be BANNED and confiscated and your "in your face" avatar is tasteless and disrespectful to the memory of the children of Sandy Hook.

Ok, now that we've got the house-keeping out of the way, I'd like to say that it is totally irrelevant who becomes the speaking of the house. Boehner is ineffective. I remember when the criticism of the President was that he was not a LEADER. Well, I'd say that description fits Speaker Boehner better than it does President Obama.

But who could lead the GOP? The answer is NO ONE. They are divided and dysfunctional and what a tragedy that is as we celebrate the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation and the life of perhaps our greatest President, Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican President.

What a sad, sad, shadow of it's former greatness the GOP has become in the 21st Century. Idealogues, not statesmen. Near-sighted and petty obstructionists with just a hint of racism and yes, fascism.

Barack Obama is the Lincoln Legacy. He is more like Lincoln in every way and just as Lincoln paved the way, 150 years ago, for Barack Obama to be President of these United States so does Obama build a legacy that will enable millions of Americans to realize the "American Dream".

But the poor GOP is too near-sighted and petty to appreciate the significance of this Presidency and this time in history. They can't understand or appreciate the role their party played to make this presidency possible. And ultimately, with John Boehner or without him, they will continue their march towards irrelevancy and extinction.

I wish, somehow, I could make them see what they have become. After reading Doris Kerns Goodwins book, Team of Rivals, I feel confident that Abraham Lincoln would be ashamed to call himself a Republican, as would Teddy Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower, and maybe even Ronald Reagan.

I'd say Chris Christie is about two steps away from changing party's wouldn't you? He's a smart man. He can read the hand-writing on the wall. Too bad there aren't more like him in the GOP.

Happy New Year everybody.

Noncom, the economy isn't improving for me. I haven't had a raise in four years and while I am thankful to have a job, my past raises have been invested in our country and by spending more, not giving more to the government. So during those times, the economy grew and jobs were plentiful. Not now. A blanket statement that the economy is improving is purely speculation. Until true unemployment is below 5% can we honestly say our economy has improved.

A couple things I can say positive about Boehner is (1) he gets along well with President Obama which keeps the doors to communications open; and (2) Boehner doesn't seem to be a RWNJ (at least not in public).

@Houston -- These are biased lies from the neocoms. Nothing more, nothing less. I hope you had a good New Year.

@Skippy -- Your offense is noted. My avatar has nothing to do with any tragic event. It is my 2nd amendment right to bear (and show) arms. Taking offense of a constitutional right is unAmerican.

Commonsense,

I think the bigger part of your old employee's problem is the new management. Whoever you sold to is taking from the employees what you used to give them. That's a business choice. You were good to your employees where the new people aren't. And maybe that's the reason they aren't doing as well and have fewer employees now.

I think punitive policies are counterproductive. But it's a matter of implementation. The Alternative Minimum tax pisses people off because you figure one tax, then you get zinged for more. Same thing with special burdens of Obamacare. If we just had a tax that everybody paid, there would be no bitching.

For business, I think a single payer system would be awesome, and I don't know why businesses aren't behind that. I know I'd prefer to have nothing to do with healthcare.

Dennis In Columbus Ohio

Does your 215,000 December figure include layoffs, job losses from Sandy, and count how many were temp/seasonal jobs due to the holiday?

TO: Think about it-3099387 who wrote:

"... the economy isn't improving for me. I haven't had a raise in four years and while I am thankful to have a job, my past raises have been invested in our country and by spending more, not giving more to the government. So during those times, the economy grew and jobs were plentiful. Not now. A blanket statement that the economy is improving is purely speculation. Until true unemployment is below 5% can we honestly say our economy has improved."

Just a question or 2: It seems that your own personal complaint is you not getting a raise. Therefore, I gotta ask:

If Romney had won, Republicans planned on repealing the minimum wage. Do you actully believe that repealing the minimum wage would have helped your chances of getting a raise?

Since you do have a job, how does unemployment statistics affect you?

Jody:

Blessings upon your house. The ideologically-pure left can no more be satisfied than the ideologically-pure right. If there is a silver lining, it's that the pure left is not as vocal as the pure right, and the numbers of the pure left are smaller than the pure right. Therein lies the salvation of this country.

Sure, I wanted President Obama and his Democratic Party to simply beat the snot out of the Republicans, but that can't happen. There is a longer game here. Republicans are going to continue to take a fiscally insane path thanks to the know-nothing's of the Tea Party. Each and every time, they are going to take a hit. They will likely play their vile games with the debt ceiling, they are going to continue to call for spending cuts. They are going to continue their fight to protect the wealthy, at the expense of our air, water, and soil. Which, as a matter of indisputable fact, means means they don't give a damn about the children and grandchildren over whom they shed copious amounts of alligator tears.

The Democratic Party has an opportunity to dismiss their left-wing "purists" and make it clear to moderate and centrist Republicans, that they can find a happy, secure, safe, and sane home with Democrats.

President Obama just took another small step down the road to fiscal responsibility. Take back the House in 2014, and the obstructionists had better move out of the way. Their clown car is no match for an All-American bulldozer.

@Alan, NJ:

Did you just land from planet common sense?

Haha, no! You know me. I'll be back to my regular hyperbole to fight the extremists who vote for only one party and don't think quicker than you can say, "Nancy Pelosi and Allen West for Presidents!"

Until true unemployment is below 5% can we honestly say our economy has improved.

yes if you believe the animal farm style repetition coming from the WH. and the FR lefty liberals aka sheep shout it. and if you believe or say otherwise they get louder and more hostile.

Ben pay no Mind to Skip, he also believes you should be jailed for speaking too harshly of Imperator Obama.

Like I said the other day, the Libs in here love them their DPKR style leadership. They come out and act apalled by it but in the same turn encourage and want said dictatorship. Watch as the scream about the Republicans needing to be removed so 'Obama' can get things done...

They have the nerve to say the Repubs are Nazi's..

"But is it just a short-term win?"

So the Republicans allowed tax increases, so now does Obama allow spending cuts in the next round?

If not, then who will be seen as 'obstructionist' in the looming Debt crisis?

John,

Yes, yes and yes … did you even bother to read the report ?

Small parts Ben - it is OUR constitutional right to express displeasure when we want to and your need to show yourself a real man by having an avitar that is so offensive says so much about you - none of it good. You clearly are a very small man who feels his masculinity is threatened so you need to show the big mean guns to make yourself feel more manly. If it's convincing you - great. What you're showing everyone else is the total opposite!

Caesar Augustus- "Until true unemployment is below 5% can we honestly say our economy has improved."

Interestingly, here are the Average Unemployment Rates for the last 3 Presidents;

Bill Clinton = 5.20% Unemployment over 8 years.

G W Bush = 5.33% Unemployment over 8 years.

Barack Obama = 9.1% Unemployment over 4 years.

First Thoughts: Boehner boxed in

Now it's time to ship his drunken azz to Iran.

Roy Wilson - stupid post. We are coming out of the worst recession since the Great Depression so your post is ridiculous as you can't compare figures when the economy doesn't compare. But, you knew that you just hoped everyone was as stupid as most far righters. Not even a good try there and now you look ridiculous! Oh and you didn't mention that Bush was bleeding 700,000 jobs a month at the end of his term!

Caesar Augustus-

yes if you believe the animal farm style repetition coming from the WH. and the FR lefty liberals aka sheep shout it. and if you believe or say otherwise they get louder and more hostile.

Ben pay no Mind to Skip, he also believes you should be jailed for speaking too harshly of Imperator Obama.

Like I said the other day, the Libs in here love them their DPKR style leadership. They come out and act apalled by it but in the same turn encourage and want said dictatorship. Watch as the scream about the Republicans needing to be removed so 'Obama' can get things done...

They have the nerve to say the Repubs are Nazi's..

Nothing like powering up the rhetoric machine to "ridiculous hyperbole" to get the day going. Democrats love North Korea, hate Jesus and all want to emulate Judas Iscariot and will do it for free for the adulation of their dear leader - no silver required. Republicans love guns, freedom, babies and are the true saviors of America from the idiot left and their self destructive policies.

Did I miss anything?

uh oh seeking said it was a stupid post without evidence to the contrary. must be true then. who are we to argue with Duke alumini LOL

Caesar Augustus keeps vomiting his Aristocracy Jingo, grouping all that think differently from him with names like "limp wristed liberal", "takers".

In the real world everyone is different... some have abilities, others have motivation, yet some were born in different surroundings, with limitations that they do not understand, which cause them to not excel as high as others.

By Caesar Augustus' game plan these people should be flushed, because they are "lazy", "unfit", the "great unwashed. Yes some are lazy and could work. These should be encouraged, trained, and supported in finding work, by gradually cutting financial aid.

We should be a society of altruistic individuals, not gestapo-inspired deviants.

Republican politicians pledged to King Norquist never to raise taxes on him and the rich, and they pledged to vote against America on anything that would make America better. Four years ago they pledged against America just to make president Obama look like he failed. The next four years with those republicons that pledged will be the same...anti America...just to appease the rich.

These traitors to America need to publicly denounce their pledges and then start acting in the best interests of ALL the people or be treated like the traitors they have become to our nation. Send them out of the country, they are not worthy of living in this great nation.

ROY WILSON-336103

"But is it just a short-term win?"

So the Republicans allowed tax increases, so now does Obama allow spending cuts in the next round?

If not, then who will be seen as 'obstructionist' in the looming Debt crisis?

In our next round of political theatre? Who even knows. I don't think either party is taking this situation seriously. Turning routine votes into grandstanding, setting up a system of cuts to balance our budget only to make sure at the last minute we don't have to do any of it.

None of these jokers are serious about fixing the problem. Oh, it makes a good "LOOK AT ME! DON'T YOU SEE THE MADNESS?" talking point. Once you put that many people together and they all have different ideas and priorities, suddenly "gettin' mines" becomes much higher priority.

The Sandy bill was chock full of junk unrelated to the actual storm, and then we demonize people for not voting over it - what a surprise. I don't know if they chose not to vote on it out of laziness, out of spite, or out of "forget it, we've worked today" or any other reason. What we definitely did see what backstabbing of the same party going on rather than an honest discussion about "how much of this relates to the actual bill? We're still negotiating about a supposed "debt crisis" but let's go ahead and allocate money for storm recovery from areas not hit by a storm." Seriously? We can attach that much garbage to a bill and then go on to talk about who wastes more money when we can't even get an honest bill to the floor? I guess not, but what we certainly could get was a quick "oopsie" from Cantor to dig at the Speaker right before the vote

We the people approve 12% of the job Congress is doing and keep sending them back. If you keep getting told "man, you suck at your job" and your employer never does anything about it except continue to pay you and let you run the shop straight into the ground at what point do you stop even pretending to listen to them?

Roy,

2008
5.0
4.9
5.1
5.0
5.4
5.6
5.8
6.1
6.1
6.5
6.8
7.3

2009
7.8
8.3
8.7
8.9
9.4

You gonna blames the first 3 months after Obama was sworn in on him? I don't think so!

Look at how at the end of Bushes term it rose very quickly, that is very telling... and don't retort with the Dem Congress excuse.. the R's had the majority of everything from 2001-2007, That's where the downturn was born.

Once again Republican forced perspective...

These should be encouraged, trained, and supported in finding work, by gradually cutting financial aid.

which im for, not the flushing as you so eloquently put it...show one instance where i stated i wanted that.

Yeah i didnt think so skidoo

This is off topic but isn't it great when a stereotype and reality come together like 'truetexan'? YEE HAA!!

Secede already!

For 10 years you have claimed that these tax cuts were the major driver of the deficit and they must expire. You had that chance in 2010 but claimed that it was the only way to save UI. Now two years later you are out claiming a great middle class tax cut victory. So, who is going to pay for the Obama tax cuts?

Alan, NJ - Hard to argue with you or to answer your question. Instead of a mere extension, the tax cuts are made permanent. I was looking for balance... Well like you said the past is over.

As one who I can trust to engage in a discussion, what are your thoughts on the fiscal cliff and sequester? It seems as if both parties have been saying that they will stop the sequester cuts at all costs. I am not one to become gleeful about cuts, drowning government or anything like that but they need to go forward with those cuts. However, I don't think they will or they will only cut when pressured by a nuclear option of GOP defying the spending limit vote. My biggest fear is that the GOP spares the defense department.

Regarding the article saying that this was a short victory, I concur. Wanted tax cuts to expire but we are beyond that. I think the Dems played a bad hand, they could have let all things expire. Then push limited tax relief for the poor and middle class (real middle class not people making $400K). Now they are stuck with this huge deficit tax giveaway. In addition the leverage is all in the hand of the GOP, there is nothing to stop them from waving the debt ceiling over their heads and refusing to raise the debt ceiling.

"Ben-numbers, your avatar offends me. Assault weapons should be BANNED and confiscated and your "in your face" avatar is tasteless and disrespectful to the memory of the children of Sandy Hook."

And since Skip is offended we should take others rights away. What a concept.

Hey maybe if somebody is offended by the car you drive, we could confiscate that also.

Skip why stop at the 2nd amendment, lets get rid of them all!

class warfare seems to be working pretty good considering bozo promised to be the great uniter (not) promised to get rid of half our debt his first term (not) promised to have no lobbiest in his administration (not) promised to have the most transparent admistration in history (not) promised taxes on the middle income would not go up one dime (not)!! NOT!! The ONLY PROMISE, ONLY PROMISE he has kept was to fundamentally CHANGE AMERICA!! OH he has and the change is killing america. Are you liberals THAT blind??? REALLLLLY??? Dont forget about tax cheat Timmy boy in charge! I could go on but You libs just suck.

@non-par...I WOULD LOVE TO SECEDE!!! Leave you liberal loooooneys to a failed nation thanks to idiots like you! OH, BTW...Its YEEEEHAWWWW Dumb a$$!!

Joe you will NEVER understand it. No one wants to punish those better off.

Let me add to your example. A makes 1million a year and B makes 200k a year. They both want to invest 150k. Who in the end is actually taking a larger risk if they took on those investments all considering? Also, if anywhere you are saying it is not smart for B not to make the investment, think why is that?

The answer to those questions are the reason behind our MARGINAL (each dollar earned is taxed the same as anyone else ignoring deductions and credits) tax rate. Which if it punished the rich so much, how do any of them still exist? And can you believe it they are getting richer! Impossible.

This debt argument has been beaten to death.

It's ridiculous.

What is the most insane aspect of this debate, is Tea party Bloggers are STILL trying to control the perception war.

It's all for naught.

Salud

Akeem, if somebody makes 200K a year and wants to gamble 150K, I hope they already have that money saved someplace, because gambling 75% of your yearly income is never a good choice, either is 15%. but hey you weren't really trying to make a valid point were you?

And yes there are many people that want to punish those better off then themselves, now you may not be one of them, but to deny is just ignorant.

Not now. A blanket statement that the economy is improving is purely speculation. Until true unemployment is below 5% can we honestly say our economy has improved.

So if unemployment goes from 9% to 7%, the economy cannot be said to improve. Ah! I get it now.

Tomas, are you saying there isn't any debt? are you saying there isn't any problem?

You don't think that the first 400 billion of taxes collected only go to servicing the debt?

You don't think that could be used for helping those in need?

"So if unemployment goes from 9% to 7%, the economy cannot be said to improve."

are we close to this?

You forgpt to mention the 2% increase in the SS tax that will cost 70% of working Americans making $50,000, $1000 each year. Then add in the ObamaCare taxes and you will be around $2000 less this year. All going into the feds coffers.

We are already paying the "ObamaCare taxes" when the government reimburses hospitals for unpaid care. As far as Obamacare is concerned, everyone carefully ignores the best part of Obamacare: a healthier population makes more money and therefore pays more taxes.

Smitty @ 1.15: "To bad your party didn't want to be a part of history in moving the country forward. Obstruct is all your party can do."

Oh, like Harry Reid. You know, your guy that never let's anything come to the floor of the Senate for a vote and certainly does not want to pass a budget.

"So if unemployment goes from 9% to 7%, the economy cannot be said to improve."

are we close to this?

Enjoy:

https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=country:US&fdim_y=seasonality:S&dl=en&hl=en&q=current%20unemployment%20rate

Notice the sharp increase in the unemployment? That is the gift of Republican policies. Notice the constant decrease? That is caused by what happened when Obama's policies went into effect.

Pigotry said:

Boehner has been ineffective as speaker; but Boehner is the less of two evils compared to Eric Cant'or and Kevin McCarthy.

I will respectfully disagree, as I see Boehner as the worst candidate for the position.

Remember, if something happens to the President and the Vice President, the Speaker of the House becomes the next president. That would be John Boehner.

John Boehner is also the head of the Homeland Security Oversight Committee--and Homeland Security has an annual budget of $98 billion. It has also quietly been absorbing a great deal of governmental power like the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and the Office of Legislative Policy, just to name a few. Janet Napolitano, head of Homeland Security and Forbes' 9th most powerful woman in the world, reports directly to him.

And one other thing to keep in mind; Boehner recently asked the President if his 33 member committee (mostly Republican) could have sole oversight of Homeland Security, including budgets and accountability.

Harry Reid (reportedly)accused him of running a 'dictatorship' in the House over the disaster relief bill, and Boehner (reportedly) told Reid to "Go f*** yourself".

Is this really the person we want third-in-line-for the presidency? If Boehner gets mad at the Queen of England, is he going to lose his temper and drop the f-bomb on her?

Well, still here. The world didn't end on Dec. 21st, and we here in Az. didn't fall off that cliff into the Grand Canyon. All and all, things are back to normal it seems, though normal is a very scary place now a days. Between now and March, it will be interesting to see what world ending, country destroying, drama the GOP will try to stuff down our throats.

Oh Well, Happy New Year All. May this new year see fear replaced with reason, Love, replacing hate, Peace as the new mantra instead of war. Blessed Be!

Much Love n Peace,

Da Pup

>:o): Waves n PurrrRrrs for Feisty

Tomas, are you saying there isn't any debt? are you saying there isn't any problem?

You don't think that the first 400 billion of taxes collected only go to servicing the debt?

You don't think that could be used for helping those in need?

It's interesting how people crawl out of the woodwork to complain about debt. Where were you when President Bush started two unnecessary wars on a credit card? Where were you when he gave away money through unneeded tax decreases instead of paying down the national debt? Liberals pointed out the problem in both cases and we were told "deficits don't matter."

NOW, when immediately paying off the debt would ruin the economy and cause great hardship on everyone, people like you are suddenly here, telling us about how we are losers and moochers and how Obama is a tax-and-spend Communist.

Bottom line is - it is Obama's and his "liberal" policies which saved the country from another Great Depression and turned it merely into a slow, painful recovery.

so as the victory lap is being run by those on the left regarding the magnificent tax saving obama has delivered i went back to see what the left was saying about the bush tax cuts and the negative impact they had. this from mother jones about 18 months ago:

Big debt: Between 2001 and 2010, the Bush tax cuts added $2.6 trillion to the public debt, 50 percent of the total debt accrued during that time. Over the past 10 years, the country has spent more than $400 billion just servicing the debt created by the cuts.

now if we look at this obama victory we see that cbo advises that the debt will increase by $3.9T (about 1.5 times the bush debt) in a similar length of time and that in the last 3 years we have spent around $1.2T (about 3 times more than in the bush ten year measure jones reports) servicing the debt.

and we raise $620B on the rich tax -- enough to pay about half of the interest that will be incurred.

and this is a victory why?

Do Sandy victims need help? Of course. But, $60 Billion, come on. What are they going to do with all that money? Build Twin Towers in every major city on the east coast? Or are we just paying down all those east coast states bad debt?

#FireBoehner #ReplaceJohnBoehner

Vote in Ron Paul for Speaker!!!!!

multiple sources are reporting that al gore made a $100,000,000 on the sale of his tv channel to al jazerra.

as one of the evil rich guys how much should he pay in tax? what is that fair-share? 30%? 40%? 90%?

or will he do everything he can to avoid paying taxes even though that is unpatriotic.

atlas -- ron paul is no longer a member of the house once the swearing in ceremonies are complete. he has retired.

"It's interesting how people crawl out of the woodwork to complain about debt. Where were you when President Bush started two unnecessary wars on a credit card? Where were you when he gave away money through unneeded tax decreases instead of paying down he debt? Liberals pointed out the problem in both cases and we were told "deficits don't matter."

I was complaining back then also, you know what I haven't done? I haven't given one party a free pass for spending and then railing on the other party. PBO has done the same exact thing but where are you complaining about Afghan & Syria?

We don't and can't start paying off the debt now, but we could slow down the spiral of deficit spending. In a few short years we will be paying close to a trillion on servicing our debt, but unable to fund medicare and decade later be unable to fund SS to what was promised, you don't see that as a problem?

I ask you this question, I was super pissed about the patriot act, as was the left, and guess what PBO has added more to it and the left went quit and some of us are still pissed.

Bottom line is - it is Obama's and his "liberal" policies which saved the country from another Great Depression and turned it merely into a slow, painful recovery.

WAY TOO FUNNY.... and someone said i spew hyperbole... thanks for proving my point Byron

lunar -- remember when senator obama called bush a failure and unpatriotic for wanting to increase the debt ceiling? now obama says it does not matter so we should just give him the authority to spend whatever he deems appropriate. are you ok with obama's evolution from being bad because bush wanted it to it being good because obama wanted it?

Billy,

It's going to be a capital gain, so 15%..... or maybe now it's 23.6%.

The higher the better as far as I'm concerned.

It's never going to be at my marginal rate, which last year was 33%.

$240K: 33%.

$100Million: 23.6%

You defend that?

Byron, I asked if we were close to 7%?

Care to explain how we have a smaller work force today and 3 years ago, but less UN-employment?

CA,

Bottom line is - it is Obama's and his "liberal" policies which saved the country from another Great Depression and turned it merely into a slow, painful recovery.

What's hyperbolic about that?

"Saved" from another Great Depression? Lots of economists said that.

"Slow, painful?" that's pretty accurate too.

If it's true and it's Obama, it's hyperbole.

Obama promised that he would not use signing statements, he said that signing statements are a presidential power grab, and he believes that it is a violation of the Constitution.

Last night he released one to accompany his signing of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013.

So which is it?

I'm not opposed to reasonable relief for Sandy, provided it is (i) targeted to immediate humanitarian relief the states cannot provide and (ii) to repair essential federal infrastructure damaged by the storm. How much of the $60 billion would go to private losses for which insurance could have been purchased, and how much would go to non-Sandy purposes?

Tom I made a valid point you missed it... Joe seemed to imply that the last person in his scenario deserved the money which I don't technically disagree with. I just think The marginal tax rate is a good thing because it slows (doesnt stop) the idea of people making money just because they have money.

Look at any chart that captures the entire market over any long period of time (10 years or more) it goes in an upward direction.My scenario is that both A and B understand it is a good investment and that they will make money on it. Of course, due to means A is able to make more. The problem with conservative few on taxes is they see it as the rich being taxed more, where in most cases it should be seen as a subsidy to those who make less.

The point of all that above, and why I told Joe to think when answering the question is the idea of means. I feel conservatives often take it out of the equation. A and B want to invest the same amount but only A has the means to make the investment. Although I used an example with two people who are doing okay for themselves if we went further down in income eventually you come to people who don't have any money to invest at all. Joe claims A has taken the same risk, but honestly did A have as much to lose?

I am not going to go in to whether it is right or wrong, but I personally do not see an issue with taxing someone because they have the means to invest a large amount of money. Only profits are taxed at the amount can be offset by losses.

sm -- so you believe everyone needs to be penalized for making a profit on an investment which in some cases the money used to invest has already been taxed? why exactly should the federal government be entitled to any portion of our investment profits? seems nothing more than penalizing success

As one who I can trust to engage in a discussion, what are your thoughts on the fiscal cliff and sequester? It seems as if both parties have been saying that they will stop the sequester cuts at all costs. I am not one to become gleeful about cuts, drowning government or anything like that but they need to go forward with those cuts. However, I don't think they will or they will only cut when pressured by a nuclear option of GOP defying the spending limit vote. My biggest fear is that the GOP spares the defense department.

The most discouraging trend since the election is the hardening of Democrats to any cuts in entitlement programs. The untenable Republican position of no new taxes was already set out. It seems they have now been joined by the Democrats in their no cuts rhetoric.

If the Republicans want to show any movement to saving themselves they should start a complete overhaul of the tax system. I personally would use the idea of a cap on total deductions instead of trying to remove individual exemptions. I would also look to ending corporation tax in favor of increasing taxes on dividends and cap gains.

On spending we have to raise the eligibility age of SS. On Medicare I'm not so sure. The arguments that it would not save money are pretty strong although it depends on how effective Obamacare is. I would look to end Obamacare in favor of a public option based on the HMO model. Same with Medicaid and Medicare. The biggest saving will come from the end of pay for service. If the government is going to pay for health care then it should be a fixed cost per patient.

Tom - Plymouth - that pitiful and ignorant whine about those on the left wanting to punish the successful is just that - a pitiful, ignorant whine. Many on the left are part of the 1%ers - in fact more than on the right. Many of us make good money and are not jealous of anyone. Those on the right bring out that ignorance so much it makes me think YOU are the jealous ones, since you keep harping on it! Pitiful group the far right!

Billy Bob... under your logic why should there be any tax at all? What money is the government entitled to?

Yes, Seeking I am jealous, so jealous in fact I believe everybody should be able to keep more of their labor.

and seeking I didn't say ALL I say there are some/many so if you don't believe that you are ignorant. But hey like a good sales person you turned that on me.

It was the president that said he didn't care if raising taxes didn't bring in more Revenue. (Why the hell else would you raise taxes other than to punish if it doesn't bring in more revenue? To be fair?)

"Saved" from another Great Depression? Lots of economists said that.

as many have said that wasnt the case..you have a point...

What money is the government entitled to?

the current train of thought would be all of it....since we as a nation won't cut spending yet feel the need to tax.

Akeem, the Government isn't entitled to any money.

Now if the citizens want things, they need to be paid for. (you know like defense of our country)

You know we haven't always had an income tax, it started at 2% and was promised not to go higher.

Tom - Plymouth - I say there are some/many so

Only in your small mind. There are no more liberals who are jealous of those who are successful than there are conservatives. Stop that ignorant whine - it shows you to have no argument but stupidity! If you ever come up with a VALID argument instead of that stupid whine - post it. Otherwise you just look ignorant!

In cases of legitimate budgeting the government has a way of shutting that whole thing down.

Seeking - liar! and because somebody doesn't agree with you they have a small mind? you have to love tolerance!

and thanks for call names, it is always wonderful to talk to people like that.

remember this famous debate quote

GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.

But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

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 actually start making progress by the next election, then American citizens should run a nation-wide campaign to vote out all incumbents regardless of party to send the message.

Corporations dont pay income tax. Yes on paper they do but like everything else they raise their prices to cover them and if you raise them so much they cant compete they either move overseas OR go out if business. Now, if you continue to raise taxes on the rich (job creators) they either stop hireing or cut benefits. I know you dont have to be "rich" per say but you have to have SOME money or you wont hire anyone. Guess which direction we are headed. Its reallllly not that difficult to understand. Bozo KNOWS what hes doing. SCREWING the U.S.!

Still seeking sanity rings in the new year with the same old insults. It would probably amaze even ardent liberals as to how many times still seeking sanity has used the words, ignorant and stupid. Seems incredible that after all this time still seeking sanity has yet to expand upon a worn out few insults. Here are some of the top still seeking sanity insults of 2012.

You are stupid.

You are ignorant.

You are ridiculous and stupid.

You are ridiculous, stupid, and ignorant.

You are obviously ignorant and ridiculously stupid.

Your stupidity is only outdone by your ignorance.

You are ignorant, stupid, and unworthy of a response. Except to call you ignorant and stupid.

Come back when you have something to say that is neither ignorant or stupid.

That is so ridiculously stupid it only worthy of a response to point out your ignorance.

Stupid, ignorant, stupid, ignorant, stupid, ignorant....

Sort of make me wonder what still seeking sanity's mom was like. Did she teach that if someone disagrees with you just call them stupid, or ignorant? Or did they have a lifetime supply of word of day toilet paper that just alternated two words, stupid and ignorant. To think liberals still wonder why just screaming louder or an endless barrage of insults isn't working.

well Tom in Plymouth, defense is something that falls on the shoulders of the united states per the Constitution. however welfare is something if that needs to be provided, it needs to be paid for which we do..Unfortunately our Liberal lefties believe Promoting such a thing is the same as Providing it.

Tom - Plymouth - your post does NOT prove your point in any way. You've indicated many liberals are jealous of those who are successful - never mind that many of us are successful. I said and will again, there are just as many conservatives that are jealous of successful people than there are liberals. And, more liberals are in the top 1% than conservatives.

Again, your post says NOTHING - just the typical right wing lie! Nothing but the usual whine based on nothing at all!

billybob-6210632

atlas -- ron paul is no longer a member of the house once the swearing in ceremonies are complete. he has retired

SOH doesn't have to be a member of congress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives

The Constitution does not require that the speaker be an elected Member of Congress

never mind that many of us are successful.

sure like a lot hollywood who also advocate stealing from another just not themselves.

And, more liberals are in the top 1% than conservatives.

what a contradiction since your side seems to label the 1% (2% or 5% or insert arbitrary number) as evil and white (conservative by your accounts). Now the majority of the 1% which are liberal wouldnt be fighting taxes then whats the big deal? Are you saying that conservatives in the House are trying to protect the rich Liberals? How say ye? I'll wait for your non ignorant and stupid response

Who told you corporations do not pay taxes that is a joke and impossible, in a basic economics class all that was ever said on that topic was that a corporation transfer a portion of it's tax burden to consumers. Yes some company's move overseas but not all of them. To imply they pay none is foolish.

Let's take a look at this logically. Income taxes are a tax on profits correct? If a company or business decided to as you say "transfer the cost of taxes on to the consumer" Couldn't a rival company come in, offer the exact same service as the previous company for a lower price and pay its tax obligation? Moving overseas to lower a tax obligation is a different argument, but the whole "transfer cost to the consumer" argument is exaggerated.

Way to follow along Seeking, YOU said i was jealous and i said.

"And yes there are many people that want to punish those better off then themselves, now you may not be one of them, but to deny is just ignorant."

Then I posted the Head Liberal/DEM say it out load in front of the nation.

But of course my post completely backs up what I wrote, and you still deny it.

Now if I was you, I would call you small minded, but I won't.

Rick - it appears you're posting a list of your comments over the past few months. Anyone who doesn't agree with your warped sense of facts is just totally wrong.

I don't even want to know what your family life was like. It is apparent with every intolerant post you make. Luckily I had wonderful parents who taught all of us to always look for the truth and facts and not just take the easy way out. You could have used those lessons!

billybob-6210632

atlas -- ron paul is no longer a member of the house once the swearing in ceremonies are complete. he has retired.

Nowhere does the Constitution require the Speaker to be a sitting member.

Too late now, of course, only 15 reps had the guts to go against the establishment of Boehner/Pelosi. And you all wonder why we're a mess?

Billbob,

Sorry I was out for a bit

you said:

sm -- so you believe everyone needs to be penalized for making a profit on an investment which in some cases the money used to invest has already been taxed? why exactly should the federal government be entitled to any portion of our investment profits? seems nothing more than penalizing success

No, capital gain is not "money that's already been taxed". The investment itself may have already been taxed, but the GAIN has not. Invest $10 million of post-tax money, gain $1M. You get taxed on $1M, not $11M.

I say taxing that whole $1M at 23.6% is an unfair and unwarranted gift, if I'm getting taxed 33% on the next dollar I earn over $217,650.

Isn't taxing the person just starting to be successful more than someone who is already very successful penalizing success? That's penalizing success.

Taxation should be progressive throughout the range of income. The existing approach isn't even flat, it's regressive. Higher earners pay a lower rate.

akeem, did you NOT understand? I think not. Cost of doing business is ALWAYS passed on to the consumer to fit into a profit margin already decided on. Companies will if at all possible make that profit. Yes another company can and often do come in at a cheaper rate (lower margin). BUT everything is figured into that. I wouldnt put a price on something NOT knowing what the end result (taxes & operating expenses) was going to be. That would just be stupid.

Akeem, that is crazy talk.

Stock holders and owners expect a certain return on investment.

Lets say just for this example it is 10%.

If the owner invests 100K and the company profits 10K, then has to pay 25% in taxes, thus returning 7.5K, which isn't 10% any longer.

They raise their prices so they profit 13,340, pay the .25% in taxes thus returning the 10% they expect.

Guess what when health care, energy or tax go up they raise prices, cut benefits or reduce labor costs and that is it, well the ones that want to actually stay in business do.

Have any of you ever felt it necessary to tell your child no? You know, those times when they want to do what is absolutely wrong and harmful to themselves? Kind of like when they want to eat all of their halloween candy in one sitting, but you know it will make them sick?

Yeah?

Well, that is what the government needs to tell EVERYONE! Businesses, Home owners, Welfare recipients, and all the rest of the beggars. This is not a course that this country can sustain forever, and when the time comes for payup, That little chinese loan shark is going to bend this F-cking country over, and we are all going to be screwed. But hey, let's all just not think about that right now, let us just throw it all away on todays hedonistic selfish bastard bullsh-t. I have been forced to take food stamps because of the state of this nation, and it makes me want to puke, and it should you too. NO you should not get free cell phones. NO, you should not be able to buy $12 steaks and $4 mocha's, or $9 packs of cigarettes. These programs were started as safety net programs to keep the severely poor from starving, not to keep eveyone in a Ghetto fabulous slum-pimp lifestyle.

Next is the military, If we kept our God Damned imperialistic nose out of the rest of the worlds Ass, we wouldn't have this horrendous bill for those endeavors. Not mention it costing several hundreds of dollars just to get a toilet seat under a soldiers ass.

Next we OUTLAW any and all crony payouts! PERIOD! ALL violators go to prison for a minimum of 20 yrs. That of course would have to include that crack dealer president as well.

Next we put tarriffs on ALL imported products. After all, they are mostly owned by those same people who grew up as U. S. rich kids, and only export our jobs becasue our dumb ass consumer driven economy has bought into the whole keeping up the lifestyles of the rich and famous bullsh-t, and they make bank since we buy their cheaply made crap at the expense of our own manufacturing efforts. How the hell are we supposed to maintain our economy when we export our earning potential, and buy crap we can't afford?

There are of course those of you who won't ever be able to understand any of this, and you of course are the biggest part of the problem. You all just need to STFU and let the adults run things.

Ben-636050

@Pat -- Better sell now while the getting is good. Besides I believe all wanted a fiscal cliff deal and the polls show that the American people would like a better one that includes "real" spending cuts. What was your take on the CBO -- you know that non-partisan group -- that said Obama's plan would add $4 trillion to the deficit? Cat got your tongue?

Oh, that old CBO thing. I'm surprised you actually said that; for the past few months, you and your right-wing zombies have been arguing AGAINST tax increases (and more revenue in general) and FOR extending the Bush tax cuts IN THEIR ENTIRETY. Well then, you got what you wanted. The Bush tax cuts got extended for 98.5% of Americans, and it cost the government well over $3.2 trillion in revenue. Add in the AMT patch, the doc fix, the unemployment insurance increase, and some other business extenders, the cost totaled $4 trillion. Had we done what I have proposed now for the last few months and gone off the fiscal cliff (and stayed off) those $4 trillion in "tax hikes" would have cut the deficit in half, and the spending cuts would further reduce the deficit. But you right-wing bastards had to push those goddamn tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 to grease the pockets of the wealthy (and add some "bread and circuses" for the masses), and now most Democrats have to support them or else get castigated as tax hikers.

ROY WILSON-336103

"But is it just a short-term win?"

So the Republicans allowed tax increases, so now does Obama allow spending cuts in the next round?

Sure, you can have your spending cuts, as long as you increase the debt ceiling without any funny business and match those spending cuts with revenue increases via tax reform. Don't like it; go sit on a porcupine. We liberals have swallowed our bitter pill; you conservatives are going to do it for the next twelve months.

If not, then who will be seen as 'obstructionist' in the looming Debt crisis?

The GOP, considering that Obama compromised on the revenue threshold and that we need more revenues to have a reasonable deficit plan. You really think that we are only going to raise taxes by $600 billion and leave the tax question forever??? Then you've got another thing coming toward you.

TrueTexan

Corporations dont pay income tax. Yes on paper they do but like everything else they raise their prices to cover them.....

That's like saying you don't pay income tax, your employer pays it. Technically, they do withhold and send the money to Uncle Sam, but it's still your money to start with.

Corporations pay tax on earnings. That's the money left over after all of their expenses have been accounted.

Want to avoid tax? Hire someone! ALL of that payroll, plus a little more is a TAX DEDUCTIBLE EXPENSE. A Corporation can make it's tax bill go to zero--just invest in new hiring!

Obama could have gotten the $250,000 taxes threshold he ran on.
Republicans didn't win anything when the President compromised it up to only $450,000 and here's why.
The lobbyists the run the Republican Party aren't in the $250,000 to $450,000 income bracket. That's really all they care about.
Now the difference is we are missing the extra tax revenue from people who can afford it in that bracket. Instead of increasing taxes by $1.6 Trillion we are only taking in $0.6 Trillion. It's not a good compromise.

@Pat Boston, Ma. #1.7: I am certainly a supporter of the President, yet, I too share the concerns of Krugman and Scheiber. While we are in fact living in an unprecedented goofy political climate, someone has to finally make the people and legislators understand the basic fundamentals of our economic system. It's a system, when working properly, balanced properly, and able to gain and maintain "full employment" will support costs, profits, taxes, debt reduction, and generally promote the better and greater welfare of all the people. Until the Country again attains this level, nothing else is actually worth much for any of us. Toward that, spending on things and programs that have not, and do not, produce redeeming value should be stopped, but, at the same time, spending on things and programs that induce a higher level of Employment and general wealth among all the people should be dramatically increased. This business of wishing to legislate punishment onto "hardtime people" only serves to weaken the system, and the Country as a whole, and in fact, reinforces a system of imbalance, and undeserved harshness, which actually always costs more than the efforts expended, let alone ever realizing any redemption. Who really gives a damn if the country again suffers a credit rating downgrade? What happened after the 2011 rating downgrade? Nothing! Not one damn thing! I, like the 2 aforementioned, fervently hope President Obama stands firm, and gives nary an iota during these debt ceiling negotiations. Republicans, and yes, some democrats have little to no sense, and/or care, relative to this greater issue. We must have a firm and knowledgeable leader committed to the insurance of the re-institution of these fundamental actuals of American Capitalism. Regards

CA

what a contradiction since your side seems to label the 1% (2% or 5% or insert arbitrary number) as evil and white (conservative by your accounts). Now the majority of the 1% which are liberal wouldnt be fighting taxes then whats the big deal? Are you saying that conservatives in the House are trying to protect the rich Liberals? How say ye? I'll wait for your non ignorant and stupid response

Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are saying the rich should pay more. It's the conservative (stingy and selfish) rich that are driving it, along with all the middle class and lower shills working on their behalf.

I think you both missed my point... Ultimately a portion of the tax burden (if not most of it)hits the owner. If none of the burden was hitting the owner(s) another company can do exactly what the other company changing NOTHING but price and still make a profit. This example doesn't even need numbers inserted to make its point.

Cost of doing business are different from Icome taxes. Income taxes are a %of profits not an absolute amount.

Tom to clarify against your point. A business wants a 10% return on investment, taxes are what 40% of income? That means someone who only wants a 6% return can come in to any business where someone wants a 10% return and run them out by doing nothing but changing prices so that they are absorbing the tax hit. Companies achieve margins by means other than transfering tax to consumerss... Their tax avoidance schemes are usually a lot more clever than that.

Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are saying the rich should pay more. It's the conservative (stingy and selfish) rich that are driving it, along with all the middle class and lower shills working on their behalf.

Warren Buffet has no credibility on this issue. If he paid himself a reasonable salary then his secretary would be paying less than him percentage wise. He uses every trick in the book to avoid paying taxes. All credit to him for using the tax code as written. But don't come along and claim you are paying too little. If that is truly how he feels he can fill out a 1040 and take the standard deduction. This preaching is blatantly hypocritical.

ah, true texan

Cost of doing business is ALWAYS passed on to the consumer to fit into a profit margin already decided on.

....sounds like you understand capitalism....like a communist.

Have you heard of such a thing as an "earnings report"? The thing the stock market reacts to? Earnings are largely a surprise at the end of all the accounting.

Good luck with the secession thing. You think the USA is in trouble. Just imagine what the Republic of Texas would be like with guys like you in charge!

Akeem, a company would come in and take a 6% margin, unless of course you could earn more money somewhere else.

If you invested 500k into a business and returned only 6%, would you stay in that business?

That is only 30K, and you can make that working at Walmart and not risk 500k. in a company that makes 10 of millions, you can do that, but then again, you still would probably need investors that would want more that than.

Well by all accounts liberals dont take into account what the tax burden is when doing business. Why do you think lower taxed states and even countries are favorable to companies? Its ALL figured in to a LARGE, LARGE degree. If you cant understand that i'm sorry. But you make the tax burden less and see what happens. The consumer ends up paying the higher taxes at the pump, grocery store, hardware store or anywhere else the spend THEIR money. Good God it's not that difficult to understand is it? Never mind, I guess it is for some.

Alan, the math has been done, unless he pays his secretary 100K plus, there is no chance he pays less than her. (and i mean the rate)

Number 1 is because he does take a salary. (it is small) but he pays the same exact as her on that, then pays 15% capital gains tax. Which in the current taxes it takes a big income to actually pay 15% in federal income taxes.

That's ridiculous Alan,

Buffett argues the LAW needs to change. Of course individuals will minimize their taxes, as they should. Only when there is a law will EVERYBODY pay. Government isn't a charity.

Preaching that YOUR OWN taxes should go up as a MATTER OF LAW isn't remotely hypocritical.

They raise their prices so they profit 13,340, pay the .25% in taxes thus returning the 10% they expect.

Gee, if it's that simple why don't they just decide to profit, 25, 35, or 50%?

Simple...because Akeem is right. Profit margin is elastic and constrained by prices set in the free market. You don't just get to decide your profit margin and set a price without taking that into account. Given that profit margins are at an all time high and demand is still low most of that additional tax is clearly going to come out of profit.

Akeem, "achieve margins by means other than transfering tax to consumerss."

They achieve margins by transferring EVERYTHING to the consumers.

Buffett argues the LAW needs to change. Of course individuals will minimize their taxes, as they should. Only when there is a law will EVERYBODY pay. Government isn't a charity.

nope Alan is right. Buffett advocates for changing the law yet has done nothing to lead by example. Talk is cheap.

Texan,

American companies are still American companies. They pay US taxes when they have earnings. Going overseas for manufacturing is NOT to save on taxes, is to cut the EXPENSE of production. The cut in EXPENSE actually boosts profits, which is what the owners of companies want. that' why the stock market keeps going up even though so many people are out of work. Companies are highly profitable.

Tom, plenty of people are quite happy with 6%. That's a good return for a retired person. You get 0.5% on Bank CD's and like. Company profit paid as dividends, 6% is a good dividend.

Warren Buffet has no credibility on this issue. If he paid himself a reasonable salary then his secretary would be paying less than him percentage wise. He uses every trick in the book to avoid paying taxes.

EXACTLY Buffet's point. He's doing EXACTLY what everyone else in his position does. You're blaming him for following the law?

Buffett argues the LAW needs to change. Of course individuals will minimize their taxes, as they should. Only when there is a law will EVERYBODY pay. Government isn't a charity.

What is more ridiculous was that Romney was attacked for paying more than he had to. I accept he paid more for the wrong motives but there is nothing to stop Buffet from putting his money where his mouth is.

John, it was a simple example. But margins for the most part are determined in advance. Watch the shark tank.

Profits are not and in some cases set by the market (in others it is set by regulations and what not)

If it costs me $3 to make a widget (including taxes) and I want to make a 5% margin, do the math and figure out what I must sell my widget for. Well I be able to actually charge that? maybe maybe not, then I will figure out if I actually have a business.

But there are quite a few on this board that think if I should sell my widget for $3.01.

CA,

Buffett advocates for changing the law yet has done nothing to lead by example. Talk is cheap.

Uh, what?

What part of "advocates for changing the law" is "done nothing" or "talk is cheap"?

What else is someone like him supposed to do? Pay 30% while no one else does? That would just be idiotic.

He is a rich person advocating higher taxes on himself for the better of the country. That's the epitome of selfless patriotism. Y'all should learn something from him.

Never mind, I didnt think you would or could understand. Done!

Alan,

What is more ridiculous was that Romney was attacked for paying more than he had to. I accept he paid more for the wrong motives

I'm sure Mitt's first task after losing the election was to file an amended return to get that overpayment back. He should never have done that, but if he didn't, he would have paid something like 9%

Small, of course 6% is great for a return on a retirement investment.

But an investment for an income it is not. I would never sink my own money in a company with a million dollars in sales for 6%. I can go work for somebody else and make more than that.

Tom I do understand the concept and on larger companies 6% is a lot of money.

I am saying that with real competition it is impossible for a company/business to pass all of the tax burden to consumers. A person would tolerate a 6% return if all they have to do is mimic another business and there is no other risk involved. If a company was able to "transfer cost of taxes to consumer" it is due to something else. Either their product is hard to imitate or they have some other advantage that allows them to do so. If that is the case it is still not necessarily them transferring a cost, it is them being rewarded for an advantage held by their business.

TrueTexan you actually proved your point wrong, in the sense that if taxes were passed to consumers, it would not matter if states had lower tax rates or not, wouldn't companies be indifferent? If they would not be indifferent explain why? I cannot make sense of what you are trying to say.

SM - "He is a rich person advocating higher taxes on himself for the better of the country. That's the epitome of selfless patriotism. Y'all should learn something from him."

He is absolutely not doing that, you don't need to advocate for higher taxes on yourself. What you do need to do is advocate higher taxes on OTHERS. What he is saying is that others need to pay a higher tax.

Tom,

margins for the most part are determined in advance....Profits are not and in some cases set by the market (in others it is set by regulations

Now you sound like Texan with his advanced communist understanding of how business works. You can't predetermine profits!

You may have a goal, but nothing is predetermined! Why do you think businesses sometimes go out of business!?

BTW, margins are profits, guy. Not even the phone company has profit set by regulation anymore.

If he was serious he would just donate HIS money to the fed. But no, he, along with other libs wants OUR money. He has all of it he needs but he wants OURS to be TAKEN from us, the little guys. all you libs, if you dont think your giving enough donate it to the fed. Libs arent alone either. To many repubs want our money also. If they didnt they would STOP spending it on B.S.!

BTW sm, the only people that sounds like commies on here ARE the libs. Take, take, take. NO understanding whatsoever.

Tom,

Where you work and where you put your money is apples and oranges.

You don't decide to work or invest your money.

Regarding Buffett, NO, he absolutely IS arguing for higher taxes on HIMSELF, and people who make a lit of money like him.

He SAYS it's not right that he pays a LOWER tax than his secretary, he WANTS the LAW to say he should pay more than her.

That's the epitome of selfless patriotism. Y'all should learn something from him.

In case you didn't understand True Texan. If the company transfer all tax burden to consumers moving in the end will not make them any more money, at least not for long. I really don't want to write more paragraphs on this, but any response would lead to the company making the same amount of profit, and the consumers paying less (due to competition). I am not saying taxes do not factor in to things, I am saying that taxes in the end effect both the consumer and producers/sellers and cannot be simply transferred over. In most cases they are split.

Tex,

Do you know how to read?

When someone argues for Uncle Sam to tax HIMSELF more, that's not "he wants OURS to be TAKEN."

I said your understanding of business rivals a communist, not that you are a communist.

I'd argue it's you that has "no understanding whatsoever"

Anybody with me on this? Just say: "I'm with SB, tex"

Obama has already announced there will be no spending cuts without more revenue increases. So much for the pass this fiscal cliff bill today and we will cut spending tomorrow. Obama is once again recycling the now infamous liberal adage that the wealthy need to pay their fair share, and now with additional revenue increases to offset any spending cuts. It worked once, no reason it won't work again. After all Obama got re-elected claiming he would do the same things he promised to do in his first term. I wonder how long it will take before Obama starts backpedaling on the no middle class tax increase? Let us welcome in the new year, with a big government, higher taxes president Obama, who no longer has to worry about another election. Now he has the flexibility and the freedom to be himself.

Akeem, you've got to go simpler with these guys.

What am I doing here again?....arguing with these guys?

Well Rick,

He started at $1.6T in taxes, and the Cliff tax cut raised $0.6T. Long way to go. Didn't you realize that's where he was going?

Romney seemed to think he could get $5T in loopholes. Maybe Obama can find $1T.

I know SmallBusiness, something just really bothers me when I see economic or tax principles taken out of context and then explained to me as fact. I know most people do not understand them and honestly have no need to, but I just try to offer an explanation in case people are interested.

What happens is some people read things like "ALL taxes on businesses transferred to consumers" and think it is true. Tom and TrueTexan at least had reasoning behind what they were saying, you will find many others who will make a similar argument who would come nowhere close to defending as much as they did.

Actually SmBusOwnerinNY there were a ton of tax breaks in the fiscal cliff deal, as those that supported Obama's re-election received huge tax deals. Or should we call them what they really are, tax loopholes for the wealthy. Hollywood was a major recipient, and we all remember how they swooned over Obama and still do. But since this time it is liberals that are handing out tax breaks for the rich, there probably will be very little mention of it in the mainstream media, and certainly no outrage. This is what you get from backroom deals written and passed before anyone reads them. Every bill now coming from the Democrats seems to need to be passed, before anyone can find out whats in them.

MI Northerner. Yupper?

All your link showed was Clinton spent just over 10% more his 4th yr over his first, Obama spent just a bit over 12% 4th over 1st, and GWB spent over 23% more his 4th over 1st.

News flash, I paid more for my house than my parents paid for theirs. The Revolutionary War cost less than the Civil War. Ford field cost more than the Silverdome. The first gallon of gas I bought was less than $.72 this afternoon I'll by another one for $2.89.

TO: Alan, NJ who wrote:

"... For 10 years you have claimed that these tax cuts were the major driver of the deficit and they must expire..."

I guess that's why Boehner said in his acceptance speech that he was going to "listen" to the American People instead of his wacko Republican supporters, because it's obvious that Republicans are just not good at hearing what the American People have been saying.

WE SAID that the Bush Tax Cuts used up the $450 billion dollar surplus that Democrat President Bill Clinton left in the U.S. Treasury when he left office.

What cost us all the money was that unfunded Lie Called the War in Iraq PLUS the unfunded War in Afghanistan, PLUS the fact that while Bush was spending like money grew on trees he had taken revenues off the table with the Bush Tax Cuts so that there was NOT enough money to pay all of the bills Bush created.

Democrats opined that, if Bush hadn't cut taxes and spent that $450 billion dollars that Clinton left behind, the country would have been better prepared to pay the bills that Bush created.

TO: Job1 who wrote:

"A real conservative will not work. We the people of the United States have moved away from the conservative views, to more moderate-progressive views of our world."

Probably because the last Republican who called himself a "conservative" lied us into war, presided over the worst terrorist attack on American soil in history (9/11), drained our entire economy (including millions of Americans losing our jobs, all of our money, AND our homes), and left the entire United States Economy in a complete and total shambles that could only be described as the "2nd Great Depresseion".

Tom - Plymouth-3672298

Yes, Seeking I am jealous, so jealous in fact I believe everybody should be able to keep more of their labor.

This doesn't make any sense in reality, mainly because capitalism in it's current form (supply-side, neoliberal capitalism) shifts wealth and income to the top of the economic pyramid. We are almost in the same conceptual environment that led to the creation of Communism and socialism due to Karl Marx, who sought to eliminate the enormous discrepancy between rich and poor. While we don't have sweatshops or child labor (at least not the in industrialized world), we still have an economic system that is shifting the gains of production to the top beyond the normal amount attributed to the transition to a more capital-based economy. Just a few years ago we had banks and bank-like institutions that conducted high-risk credit default swaps and operations in the complex derivatives market, both of which contributed to the depression-like downturn from which we are struggling to get out of. Many of those swaps added no real value to the economy but created "paper profits" for investors, a scandal rivaled only by the corporate scandals at the turn of the century. Those investments were not based on labor or even productive capital (the means of production), yet they are still considered 'labor.' How do you explain this????

It was the president that said he didn't care if raising taxes didn't bring in more Revenue. (Why the hell else would you raise taxes other than to punish if it doesn't bring in more revenue? To be fair?)

First of all, the tax code is more than just a means to raise revenue and fund government operations. The tax code in itself is a hybrid between "corporate welfare" (subsidies, grants, etc) and the regulatory code; it provides incentives for certain actions (buying homes, having children, donating to charity, etc) that are good for the economy and discourages things that are considered bad (hoarding wealth, etc). Secondly, the capital gains tax is a way to tap into the vast hoard of income produced in the financial market, yet can also be used to discourage over-speculation or incentivize investment. The main reason why tax cuts for the capital gains rate produces more revenue is simple; investors make more money while investing their money, and this increases the tax base. Unfortunately, it also increases income inequality because more wealth and income shifts to the investor class, i.e the wealthiest Americans. Third, raising taxes (primarily on higher-income taxpayers) is a tool to combat economic inequality, which is a growing concern nowadays. President Obama argued for an increase in the capital gains tax primarily to reduce the growing gap between wealth and income. And before you say that the government has no right to redistribute wealth and that income inequality (and wealth inequality) have no major impact on economics, consider this: numerous studies have shown that income inequality depresses long-term economic growth by skewing wealth and income away from the REAL job creators (consumers) and forcing them to finance themselves via debt, leading to periodic financial crises and leading to political and social tensions and instability. Take a look at the austerity protests in Europe, the Arab Spring in the Middle East, and the Occupy Wall Street protests right here at home. And finally, I ought to point out the fact that ALL tax codes, whether purposely designed or not, redistribute wealth and income whether you like it or not. A flat tax would transfer income to the wealthy, just like a regressive tax would. A consumption tax transfers wealth from consumers to savers. Sin (or Pigovian) taxes redistribute wealth away from people who use things like cigarettes or gasoline. Redistribution is a fact of life, whether you like it or not.

Good article, many good comments (usual writers)...and a few more put on 'ignore'.

I've no doubt he'll be re-elected. So what? In a tenuous position calling for deft maneuvering and diplomacy, Boehner's a mediocrity - on a good day.

Will they re-elect Boehner? Probably.

Will they pass the Sandy Relief Bill? Yes, or Boehner is doomed.

Will they act like children during the debt ceiling debate? Yes, what else would you expect.

At every turn, Obama must make the Republicans pay in the court of public opinion with each fight.

That is the road to 2014.

What are the prospects for a Democratic house in 2014?

What are the prospects for Hillary in 2016?

Christie vs Boehner in a cage match. Who wins?

Ok -- Time to stop the spam -- especially when it is not coherent.

Boehner is bad, but Can'tor and McCarthy are worse -

... according to my cliffnotes: both Can'tor and McCarthy voted against the cliff deal

.

Miss Piggy: Boehner is bad, but Can'tor and McCarthy are worse -

That is very sad. I am hoping Boner holds on. That is so so sad.

Exito..

Don't be sad, be glad.

172 House Democrats and 85 Republicans voted for the deal, with Obama in White House, the country is going in the right direction.

2014, people have a chance to kick more RepubliCONs out. At least kick out those pignorant 151 House RepubliCONs who voted against the cliff deal.

Uggghh... Cantor = weasel

PIG You better hope they vote the 151 back in, if not you will have beg for your food stamps. Adding 4 trillion to the debt over 9 years is a good thing right. The sad thing is the 4 trillion was paid to Obama's supporters in your eye's that's a good thing. This was done on the backs of the 1 %. But even better you PIG have to pay 2% more for your SSI to me that's a good thing, that means you'll have to work longer hours, which means you would be hare less NOW THAT'S A REAL GOOD THING. I guess PIGS are part of the uninformed voter group. Reading some of your post, your so far off at times its sad.

have a great day

Boner is a complete waste of time and breath just like his GOP campfire/tanning bed buddies.

I think little Bennie lotsanumbers avatar of his neices AirSoft rifles with the red tips cut off is Un-American. She's in the background crying while he struts his faux manhood. Cruel and unusual to say the least. Take them down little Bennie!! Before Mama catches you, you quivering hump. I hope your niece nuts you for what you've done to her toys. What a hoot!

Will they re-elect Boehner? Probably.

Will they pass the Sandy Relief Bill? Yes, or Boehner is doomed.

Will they act like children during the debt ceiling debate? Yes, what else would you expect.

At every turn, Obama must make the Republicans pay in the court of public opinion with each fight.

That is the road to 2014.

Amy--I think the answer to your question is that the GOP only cares about how each Representative looks to his or her district. Thanks to gerrymandering, they are assured of re-election and only fear a primary fight from someone to their right. Seems to me that if the GOP wants to help its national image, it has to throw a lot of money to those representative to let them fight off the primary challenges. The GOP is pretty good at throwing money at issues so I'm not sure why they haven't figured this out.

Amy,

Nancy Pelosi is for Nancy Pelosi. What's good for Nancy is good for the country.

I guess Obama care is good for Pelosi but I don't see her giving up her insurance from congress to go on Obama care. Your post is the winner of the most uninformed voter.

Amy your thoughts are likeminded. I just don't understand why the Pubs think they can get away without helping their constituents? It just baffles me. Don't they understand that their attitude towards the American Citizens will catch up with them. They are dwindling in number (Thank goodness). I don't understand where their reality is. The President grew up with a working Mom and Grandparents who helped him along the way-he understands. That is probably the problem-The President from experience-the Pubs are Greedy MF who do not nor ever will "HELP" their country. I feel they are traitors by the actions they are taking. Why would you let your own country suffer with anxiety. Pompous asses.

Sandy relief bill, more like the Democrats serve pork. Including Chuck Schummer who loaded up the pork and then complained Republicans didn't pass it. Republicans need to pass a bill that only directs what money is needed toward the Sandy victims, and then send it to reconciliation where it belongs. If Democrats had not decided to take advantage of another crisis by loading up the pork, this bill would already have passed.

Well said John B........And no (hell no) Mr La Pierre I'm not going to issue my Stoeger to the RH-ex-St when she goes out the door of a morning to substitute in the local school system.........Hopes and Prayers today for Sandy Hook in thier first full day at school.

JohnB....well said. What the NRA espouses as a cure for crazy and irresponsible gunslingers, is just as you say, pure BS.

The Stand Your Ground law is one of the most stupid pieces of legislation ever introduced in any state. It is nothing more than a license for some people to act irresponsibly, it adds to their seeming inability to act rationally. Here in Fl we have had two cases of this law being invoked, resulting in the killing of two unarmed teenagers, merely because the adults with the weapons FELT threatened. In both instances it was their over active imaginations that led to these unnecessary deaths and now they hide behind this law as the investigations continue.

If both these cases are any indication for the need to have better mental health, then that is where we need to focus a lot of our attention. It isn't enough, that the guns are obtained legally and that the user has a license, not any more. If we are to do anything to prevent more Sandy Hooks, more Auroras, more Columbines and more killings of unarmed kids, this is where we can start. We owe it to these innocent victims and their grieving families.

As a woman who grew up in the military and the wife of a hunter (and niece and granddaughter and daughter and cousin ... well, you get the idea) I don't think that arming everyone is the answer, either. My husband who used to work as a prison guard also thinks the NRA is an extremist organization who has no clue.

I echo the hopes, prayers and good thoughts for Sandy Hook as they head back to school today. I reflected last night on this very topic since my son also headed back today after the Winter Break. I can not imagine the anguish in the hearts of parents in that community as they put their children on the bus or drop them off at school. I can not imagine the ache in the hearts of those parents whose children never came home from school on Dec 14th. I hope that everybody has a great day at school and that some normalcy can return to the lives of our sisters and brothers in Newtown.

This past weekend, our local television station ran an infomercial sponsored by the NRA explaining to us the delights in owning your own guns. Reenactments abounded showing us how armed citizens held some banditos (they were always Hispanic) captive until local law enforcement arrived. The police were always so appreciative, thanking the gun toting citizenry for nabbing the thieves. Oddly, these criminals worst offense was simply walking down the sidewalk, looking suspicious. Oddly, they were never armed (well, in all fairness, one had a wicked looking finger).

What we now have, after the horrible presser held by the NRA last week, is the public airwaves being flooded with NRA sponsored infomercials on vigilantism. Is this what society is reduced to? Do I now have to pack a loaded gun just to leave my home and pick up the dry cleaning? My next letters will be to Miss Manners - asking which hand do you use to hold your loaded gun when shaking hands with acquaintances - the right, the left, or do you hold it between your knees?

Thank you, John B.

Another voice of reason in this time of hysteria. And you have the arguments to back up your points!

If you pay any attention you will see that crime in areas that have no tough gun control laws have less crime. Insane people will go to gun free zones to take out a lot of people. In Israel 78 or 79 they had a school shooting, they trained and armed teachers with your so called assault weapons. They haven't had any problem since. Good people with guns do stop bad people with guns. In the news every day, probably not here thou, not their agenda...

And one story you won't see in the MSM. Off duty cop in a theater stopping carnage. Proof that one good guy (in this case woman) with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Breakup-sparked-theater-shootout-4123414.php

Rocki. First of all how about some citations for what you say as my friend John B has so generously supplied us. Secondly I think that when you go to come up with those citations you are going to find ones that don't support Fact (such as in the case of Israel) you are going to find that the only things that are availible support Mythology. Time for Mythology is long gone.

Try again rocki.

On Sunday morning, Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the National Rifle Association, told the world that armed guards stopped school shootings in Israel. Israel begs to differ. "Israel had a whole lot of school shootings until they did one thing," LaPierre said sitting calmly on Meet the Press. "They said, 'We're going to stop it,' and they put armed security in every school, and they have not had a problem since then."

Well Mr. Pierre, that would awesome if it were true. But according to Yigal Palmor, spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, it's not. More specifically, the two situations are "fundamentally different," and Israel's actually tightened its gun control laws in recent years. "We didn't have a series of school shootings, and they had nothing to do with the issue at hand in the United States. We had to deal with terrorism," Palmor told the New York Daily News. "What removed the danger was not the armed guards but an overall anti-terror policy and anti-terror operations which brought street terrorism down to nearly zero over a number of years."

Israels problem is nothing like ours. Even Israel stated that just placing armed guards in schools wasn't enough.

By touting Israels approach, which you clearly have done no research on, you support much tighter gun control laws. You also seem to think that their problems are the same as ours. Well, they aren't. You are comparing apples to shoes.

Guess that happens when you have an agenda, right?

And Talk for your one case that things worked out well I'll give you two that it didn't. Va. Tech and Columbine. Like I said time for Myhology has long past.

Proof that one good guy (in this case woman) with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun.

Get real - this is proof that law enforcement, trained in handling fire arms, can stop a man in the middle of a shooting rampage. No one on the left has ever said we should remove fire arms from law enforcement.

IR and who had guns to fight back at Columbine and VA Tech? Nice try.

And Red, off duty law enforcement working security.

Excellent post, John B---thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I think the NRA is doing what the right always does----stall, delay, obfuscate and use scare tactics to wait until the horror of Sandy Hook has passed and then do nothing. And they fool a lot of supporters into thinking they are standing up for them when they really are the lobby of the gun industry.

Talk There were Armed Guards at both Columbine and Va. Tech. Do your research.

John in Des Moines- well said and documented. But, you know you're talking to people who don't comprehend facts - just their insatiable love of guns - to hell with the consequences. Talk has no facts and no knowledge but he sure loves his guns. The stupidity of people who put their love of assault weapons above the lives of 20 little children and 6 wonderful, quality adults, is baffling but nothing new.

My hope is the children of Sandy Hook can - somehow - find a way to live normal lives and not let the horrors of an idiot with a gun define their lives. My hopes and prayers are with them today - and their parents, teachers - the entire town.

John B, terrific post. The idiotic notion that more guns will make us safer has been proved incorrect many times. The more guns we have, the more violence we have; more guns, more accidental shootings; more guns added with Stand Your Ground laws, means more disputes escalate into shootings and more death. More guns do not make us safer.

To quote a recent editorial in our local paper; the author comes from a family of hunters and NRA members. "Why is it the same people who refuse to consider sane gun laws don't seem to have a problem with other government limits? After all, a lots of states outlaw all but the safest fireworks. Why is it I can't purchase a firecracker in Iowa but I can purchase a semi-automatic assault weapon? It is OK to protect people against blowing their fingers off, but we're not allowed to make it harder for someone to gun down dozens of people in a few seconds. Where is the common sense in that?

Don't bother throwing the Second Amendment at me. That argument doesn't fly. Seriously. You're not defending yourself from impending government tyranny. You second amendment folks put up with not being able to carry a bottle of soda through airport security but you get up in arms if someone suggests scaling back these weapons of war in our country.

And that is what they are. They are weapons of war. They are made to kill people, to kill them by the dozens and to do it quickly. They are just as bad, if not worse than a hand grenade or a stick of dynamite--neither of which the public is allowed to own or carry......."

Jody - kudos to the author you've quoted. However common sense isn't so common among gun nuts. It's a sad time when people are so hell bent on killing and just can't wait to do it!

In Tucson, an armed attendee at the Giffords town hall said he could not use his weapon against the shooter because he could not get a clear shot; that he would more likely have hit innocent people and caused even more injury and possibly more deaths.

Talk - you are trying to spin and hype a story about law enforcement stopping a shooting in progress to the ability of Mary the Homemaker being able to reach the same conclusion in a like confrontation. No one is a buying your cheap wares.

John B, John B here,

To add to your post and thoughts, guns don't kill hatred does, the antithesis to love! I wish people would wake up and get that. I saw a piece last night on the news and It is amazing to me that the extreme leftist advocates for gun control, like the president, hollywood actors who get paid BIG bucks to play out their roles in some of the most violent carnage imaginable, and some of the folks not playing with a full deck you have mentioned are pushing for less guns on the street when they have armed body guards. Then they say it has no effect on young impressionable minds and won't take responsibility for the culture and society they are helping to create in a huge way. The ultimate in hypocrisy.

IR -

Columbine - 1 outside at his car while the shooting was going on inside. Shot at him from 60 yards and missed and the shooter went back in the school. The other was a motorcycle officer writing a ticket in the neighborhood and heard the call. And responded

Va Tech - Campus police. I'll give you this one although.......ah never mind.

Jody - the same was said by a member of SWAT about the theatre shootings. He said that, had he been at the theatre with his weapons, the way the shooter was armed and dressed he would most likely NOT have been able to bring him down with all the people around. Said he would have probably hurt others instead. Oh but, these are just TRAINED people. Surely your everyday gun owner could have brought them down with one shot. Oh yeah!

John-162..... Funny how you place all the blame on the left when without the guns the righties HAVE TO HAVE we would not have problems! What's the matter? Maybe you should take off your blinders and quit posting your lies. Hollywood is NOT the problem, idiot. The movies we see are the same ones seen thoughout the world but WE are the place of the most mass shootings. Sorta makes your argument pretty stupid, right????

I am glad to know that at least you are seeking sanity.

You know in this paradox what is even stranger and more Mad, in all of their bloodlust the hollywood actors, etc. in going after a ban on automatic weapons is that is what they mostly use in their roles to act out scenes of violence on their fellow man, or neighbor.

Seeking .. what I think is funny about blaming violence on liberal Hollywood is that most leading actors in the most violent shoot 'em films are staunch conservatives. Arnie as the Terminator shoots and kills how many people in his films. Sylvester Stalone? Why, even Clint Eastwood - how many shoot outs has that guy filmed? Yes, both sides play that coin, I'm just pointing out this isn't a liberal Hollywood issue.

That being said, I do like that we have rating systems for parents to use as a guide as to the degree of violence in movies. It doesn't really make sense to send a two year old to watch the carnage of a Rambo movie.

Alright Talk now we are getting somewhere. I didn't point this out to you to make any other point than you depending on the NRA Mythology is not a complete answer just as I don't think that totally banning guns is an answer. It's going to take a holistic approach to the problem including many aspects so just looking at one won't get us where we need to be. That is not an excuse for not having the discussion because doing nothing ain't going to feed the bulldog this time either. Just so you know it I am a Licensed Firearms Instructor and have a Concealed Carry Permit for several states so I may have some perspective on the problem. In the end we are not going to be able to make the Problem totally go away but that should not be an excuse for not doing what we can within reason to cut down on things as much as possible

John - 162.... Yep, seeking sanity in the Republican party but as you and others prove daily, there is absolutely NONE to be found. Again, explain how the same movies are seen in other countries but there aren't the mass shootings. Oh, that's right - you can't because you have NO argument - just the usual far right stupidity!

John(numb.), guns don't make people violent but they make violent people very effective. Almost to the day of the Sandy Hook attack 20 were attacked with a knife in a Chinese school...and no one died.

As far as bodyguards are concerned it's another NRA/Conservative talking point with no merit whatsoever. Some people by the nature of their positions just require a bodyguard. The Governor of Iowa travels with a bodyguard and there's one stationed outside his office as well. I'm not particularly fond of him but I don't begrudge him that because he's in a much higher profile position than I, one that's far more likely to require a trained peace officer in his immediate vicinity.

Which is another good point..."trained peace officer." The Governor doesn't just walk around packing heat on the assumption he'll win a quickdraw contest against someone who already has a gun on him.

What Stand Your Ground does do is provide everyone involved in an argument with a ready means to escalate the severity of that event. Just as importantly people on BOTH sides of most every altercation think they're the good guy, the other the bad guy. Voila, perfect recipe for the escalation in homicide rates documented in the research.

Actually he did not get the job done. He bailed out before Xmas and did his Plan B.

Did your taxes go up? If not, STFU.

Speaker Boehner failed in his leadership during these negotiations. In 2010, one of the talking points we heard was that we needed "Fiscal Conservatives" to regain control of the purse strings in Washington and that was why we needed to elect a Republican majority in the House.

We got it...the "Fiscal Conservatives" got it...and what did they do with it?

They gave that control to the Senate and told them to negotiate a deal.

That's not leadership.

Temper temper. Everybody saw him bail. My taxes did go up from the expiration of the tax holiday, not from the Bush taxes.

I'm in favor of keeping John Boehner as Speaker, he is better than what we might get, he is not good at his job, but his caucus stinks.

People on the right vilify Nancy Pelosi, but that's only because she was and still is very good at her job, she get things done and most of all she and her leadership work together to make sure they have the votes.

People on the far right vilify all liberals. Stick and stones will break...........Who cares.

GM - people on the far right vilify everyone who isn't demented like them so of course they hated Nancy Pelosi. They have nothing but their hatred of any woman with brains.

The men in the little white coats are coming to take you away Ha Ha Ho Ho.

Nevermind it's not worth the time. Oh and Ben, that's white coats, carrying the really stylish jacket with all of the shiny buckles.

Ben, you have the song wrong.

It was sung from a first person perspective. IE; "They're coming to take me away", so when you sing it, it is stating that you should be taken away.

No that I am stating that about you, but it is a classic for me. Much like Fish Heads and Dead Puppies.

Boner has not done his job. He NEVER should have cancelled the vote from the Sandy relief fund!!!! Those people need help NOW. He has a disgusting attitude and turns around and blames the President for not cooperating. Of course those addicted to Faux news hears that and believes everything those idiots say! I'm so tired of the tea party and their way too conservative attitude, they need to disappear and ride off into the sunset, I believe in 2014 they will for the most part be gone (that could be just wishful thinking!).

LH, did you read the bill, it is 90% pork for govt agencies and employees. very little actually for the victims of Sandy. you should learn the facts before runnung off at the mouth.

Just remember moral....the congress has approved the spending!!!!!!!!!! Can't blame it all on the President!!! Bush spent and spent did you want that spending train to stop? Bush tax cuts cost of alot of money, the two wars cost alot of money. I know you hate to hear it....but it was BUSH that put us there.

Only partially LH. If Dodd-Frank had not created the conditions that caused the housing crisis we would not be where we are today. Yes, there would still be deficits but not nearly as massive as we face now. No matter who is in charge, it does not make sense other than in a major recession to create massive federal deficits.

Tad, they're SO FULL OF $HIT, you couldn't "THROW" them out on their azzes, they'd be too heavy! YOU WOULD NEED A D9 FRONT-BLADED BULLDOZER to get them out of there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

John Bonehead should have been IMPEACHED a long while ago for NOT LIVING UP TO HIS OATH to the 99% American People!!

And Harry Reid for his part in the Senate hasn't had any blame for Congress's problems?

Harry and Obama have been leading this rebel for years, and it shows.

In 2008, then - Liar in Cheif Wanna-be - Barack Obama promised that he would not use signing statements, but last night he released another one to accompany his signing of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-promised-not-use-signing-statements-released-one-last-night_693582.html

hiap,

Your mistake is that this is an Op-Ed piece and therefor not under the rules of strict journalism.

but the same level of professionalism should be expected!

It's called writing for effect. An acceptable vehicle in opinion pieces along with satire and parody.

This is MSNBC, forget about it.

Common Man: Yeah, why not Cantor. Cantor's actions would have the people at the doors of Congress wanting to hang him! Are you living under a rock?

Because Christie would have wooped the ugly and tan of his face!!!!

Yes he did. Christie Cream Puff is a loser.

Leroy - I believe they will accomplish that very shortly. I see single digit approval ratings for Congress by March!

SNJ: Actually, Congress is working exactly as it was designed to work. Read the Federalist Papers and you'll see it clearly spelled out. We may not agree with the decisions they made, particularly the Congressional perks they've given themselves, but nevertheless, Congress is working exactly as it was designed to work. The "factions" are acting exactly as James Madison, Jr., father of the Constitution, said they would.

Then leave!

SNJ, it looks like most people don't agree with you. We just had an election remember. They all just got voted in by the majority that cared. Did you forget to vote?

Harry Reid knows that know one but minorities and illegals that HE bussed from mexico voted his sorry ass back in.

How do you vote as an illegal immigrant? Did not think that was possible......

Peter - it's not except in Dude's delusional mind.

That would be Hillary, I've seen the pictures, it's true.

ASignOfTheTimes - you need glasses - clearly you can't distinguish between our Secretary of State and the tan man Boehner. Get those eyes checked!

SeekingSanity, I'll provide a site to back up what I say. It is from a liberal web site "Bing.com " so it has to be true, right? It might answer a few concussion questions.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=photos+of+hillary+clinton+drinking&qpvt=photos+of+hillary+clinton+drinking&FORM=IGRE

ASignOfTheTimes - all you've proved is that Hillary Clinton -as many of us do - enjoys a drink from time to time. Proves nothing except the fact that you are apparently disturbed by strong, intelligent women!

However, looking at the tan man one can see he appears to drink continually!