Fiscal Cliff?

[Rob Iola]

Thanks to the Democraps, Republicant's and Obummer we are avoiding this problem. I guess in a few weeks the GOP can flex some muscle when they "debate" the ceiling.


Btw, I'm betting Boehner is out as Speaker.

Gee, ya think?

Conks must be seeing red at the spectacle of the House Speaker getting pimp slapped all around DC by a muslim extremist.

Time to hunker down for the next four years...

They pimp slapped themselves out of pure hatred of giving any ground to Obama. Boehner tried to get them to limit the damage to those making over a million in order to have some basis for negotiations with Obama and they pulled the rug out from under him. That effectively ceded control of the negotiations to McConnell and left them in an untenable take it or leave it position with the New (Years) Deal. About the only good thing that could possibly come of this if you're a Conk is the House Republicans completely rethinking and reorganizing their approach to implementing their legislative agenda.

Thought it was interesting too reading that Norquist calls this a "tax cut"...

[ASUMountaineer]

I didn't vote for him but I disagree. You are upset your Mormon lost. You will s we that he isn't going to destroy the country.

Congress has a greater chance of doing that.

Don't be fooled, Mark. He's TRYING. Of course, your last sentence is DEFINITELY true. Idiots like Frank, Reid, Feinstein, and Pelosi are doing MUCH more than Obama on THAT score....

I noticed you left out McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, etc. I'm sure it was an oversight.

[BDKJMU]

Don't be fooled, Mark. He's TRYING. Of course, your last sentence is DEFINITELY true. Idiots like Frank, Reid, Feinstein, and Pelosi are doing MUCH more than Obama on THAT score....

I noticed you left out McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, etc. I'm sure it was an oversight.

McConnell voted for it in the Senate, and Boehner was one of 85 Republican House members to vote for this garbage.

Cantor was one of 151 republican house members to vote against it, and tried in vain to stop it. Don't lump him in with the other 2.

No one could have voted for this bill and still be called a fiscal conservative...

[Wedgebuster]

I noticed you left out McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, etc. I'm sure it was an oversight.

McConnell voted for it in the Senate, and Boehner was one of 85 Republican House members to vote for this garbage.

Cantor was one of 151 republican house members to vote against it, and tried in vain to stop it. Don't lump him in with the other 2.

No one could have voted for this bill and still be called a fiscal conservative...

So...you throw out these scoundrels and put in more teabaggers? Check!

[danefan]

Anyone know why Ron Paul abstained from voting?

[Ibanez]

McConnell voted for it in the Senate, and Boehner was one of 85 Republican House members to vote for this garbage.

Cantor was one of 151 republican house members to vote against it, and tried in vain to stop it. Don't lump him in with the other 2.

No one could have voted for this bill and still be called a fiscal conservative...

So...you throw out these scoundrels and put in more teabaggers? Check!

Wouldn't it be nice of the real conservatives left the GOP and solidified their base as a third party?

[HI54UNI]

Anyone know why Ron Paul abstained from voting?

i heard that he wanted all Republicans to abstain so it would pass solely with Democrat votes and then when it doesn't do anything to fix the problems they could point fingers at the Democrats.


And because he's a hypocritical douchebag.

[danefan]

Anyone know why Ron Paul abstained from voting?

i heard that he wanted all Republicans to abstain so it would pass solely with Democrat votes and then when it doesn't do anything to fix the problems they could point fingers at the Democrats.


And because he's a hypocritical douchebag.

I never understood absention outside of cases of conflict or unavoidable absence. Vote no if you don't agree.

[ASUMountaineer]

I noticed you left out McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, etc. I'm sure it was an oversight.

McConnell voted for it in the Senate, and Boehner was one of 85 Republican House members to vote for this garbage.

Cantor was one of 151 republican house members to vote against it, and tried in vain to stop it. Don't lump him in with the other 2.

No one could have voted for this bill and still be called a fiscal conservative...

One good decision does not make a fiscal conservative.

[HI54UNI]

i heard that he wanted all Republicans to abstain so it would pass solely with Democrat votes and then when it doesn't do anything to fix the problems they could point fingers at the Democrats.


And because he's a hypocritical douchebag.

I never understood absention outside of cases of conflict or unavoidable absence. Vote no if you don't agree.

I agree. Be a man and take a stand.

[CAA Flagship]

So...you throw out these scoundrels and put in more teabaggers? Check!

Wouldn't it be nice of the real conservatives left the GOP and solidified their base as a third party?

Divide and conquer is exactly what the Donks want.

[SDHornet]

Lol at this "deal". Obama continues to run circles around the clueless conks. But hey, the repubs will sure show them in the debt ceiling debate.

[JohnStOnge]

Lol at this "deal". Obama continues to run circles around the clueless conks. But hey, the repubs will sure show them in the debt ceiling debate.

Obama has an advantage because the majority of Americans have an irrational resentment towards "the rich." Though it should not be the case, the strategy of saying, "They want to raise all your taxes in order to protect the rich" works. Never mind that one could just as easily say Obama would rather raise everybody's taxes than give up his Jones to increase taxes on "the rich" even though it has virtually no impact on the problem.

I don't think there was any good solution for the Republicans this time. The Republican majority in the House is the only thing that stands between Obama's effort to inflict complete disaster and the future. So they have to try to think in strategic terms. They have to know when to pick their fights. It may not be possible to do what is right at some point and maintain a majority in the House. But they have to at least try.

When it comes right down to it there was substantial risk that standing on pure principle at this point would have meant 1) raising taxes on everybody and 2) losing the House majority in two years. Not that they still aren't at risk of losing the House majority in two years. But I think it would've been greater if they'd stood on principle at this point.

There are times when a strategic retreat are called for. The American people would not have been right in blaming Republicans if all of their income taxes had increased by the projected levels. But that's what they would have done. That is the reality and that's what the Republicans had to deal with.

One thing has become abundantly clear. Obama has no interest in dealing with the basis of the problem. One can only hope that a sufficiently large proportion of the American people will realize that. But I wouldn't hold my breath. If a sufficient proportion had any sense the guy would never have been President once; much less twice.

[SDHornet]

I get what you’re saying but the sickening thing is so many republicans went along with this train wreck idea that it just goes to show all those clowns in DC are all one in the same. And I’m not buying the “republicans will get blamed for it” line. They will get blamed for anything so why should that concern them now?

Fuck, the supposedly most fiscally conservative/knowledgeable repub (Ryan) even voted for this thing. They simply just gave up. Think Obama and the libs aren’t going to stick it to them in the next fiscal debate? The repubs are a train wreck and Obama will take full advantage of it. If I were a repub I'd be completely embarrassed right now. All those weeks of grandstanding and posturing about righting the fiscal ship was all hot air. They could have landed this deal long ago if all they were going to do was give into Obama's demands.

[danefan]

CBO estimates the cost of the deal at $3.9 trillion over 10 years.

So much for not accepting anything that isn't revenue neutral.

[kalm]

Lol at this "deal". Obama continues to run circles around the clueless conks. But hey, the repubs will sure show them in the debt ceiling debate.

Obama has an advantage because the majority of Americans have an irrational resentment towards "the rich." Though it should not be the case, the strategy of saying, "They want to raise all your taxes in order to protect the rich" works. Never mind that one could just as easily say Obama would rather raise everybody's taxes than give up his Jones to increase taxes on "the rich" even though it has virtually no impact on the problem.

I don't think there was any good solution for the Republicans this time. The Republican majority in the House is the only thing that stands between Obama's effort to inflict complete disaster and the future. So they have to try to think in strategic terms. They have to know when to pick their fights. It may not be possible to do what is right at some point and maintain a majority in the House. But they have to at least try.

When it comes right down to it there was substantial risk that standing on pure principle at this point would have meant 1) raising taxes on everybody and 2) losing the House majority in two years. Not that they still aren't at risk of losing the House majority in two years. But I think it would've been greater if they'd stood on principle at this point.

There are times when a strategic retreat are called for. The American people would not have been right in blaming Republicans if all of their income taxes had increased by the projected levels. But that's what they would have done. That is the reality and that's what the Republicans had to deal with.

One thing has become abundantly clear. Obama has no interest in dealing with the basis of the problem. One can only hope that a sufficiently large proportion of the American people will realize that. But I wouldn't hold my breath. If a sufficient proportion had any sense the guy would never have been President once; much less twice.

So we still go back to the same argument of deifying the rich. You and I have gone around the bend many times on how bad the the middle class and working poor have it. I totally get the point about families spending beyond their means and how the US is the absolutely best place in the world to be poor.

But both sides of the aisle have encouraged this behavior over the years and consumer spending has benefited everyone at times. And you can't deny the fact that the uber wealthy have never had it so good from a perspective of tax rates and share of the wealth. The US is also absolutely the best place in the world to be rich.

You need to come down from your Republican high horse. If Republicans were really concerned about deficits they wouldn't have cut taxes in a time of war or passed Medicare Part D. Ironic that the cost of those two wars is going to be about equal to the cost of this of this budget and that's without the $1 trillion we'll spend on Medicare Part D. But I love how Republicans have found the fiscal responsibility Jesus...again.

Everyone in the system is greedy and no one wants to pay for it themselves.

[kalm]

CBO estimates the cost of the deal at $3.9 trillion over 10 years.

So much for not accepting anything that isn't revenue neutral.

Is that cost based on current growth levels?

[danefan]

CBO estimates the cost of the deal at $3.9 trillion over 10 years.

So much for not accepting anything that isn't revenue neutral.

Is that cost based on current growth levels?

I haven't dug into it. The report is here: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/ ... %20Act.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ASUMountaineer]

Wouldn't it be nice of the real conservatives left the GOP and solidified their base as a third party?

Divide and conquer is exactly what the Donks want.

I don't know about that. These so-called "fiscal conservatives" voted for two unfunded wars, a Rx drug benefit plan, and just passed a tax increase without getting any spending cuts in return. Oh, and let's not forget when the Conks controlled all three branches, how did they do with enacting "fiscal conservatism?" Today's GOP = a bunch of socially conservative Democrats. WAFJ.

[Ibanez]

The Tea Party Express is already firing up the base to unseat all the Republicans that voted for this. The woman ( I forget her name) was on CNN last night and was asked what the GOP should've comprimised on. She was asked twice and never answered. That's the problem, Tea Party, Repub or Dem, nobody wants to compromise.

[BDKJMU]

The Tea Party Express is already firing up the base to unseat all the Republicans that voted for this. The woman ( I forget her name) was on CNN last night and was asked what the GOP should've comprimised on. She was asked twice and never answered. That's the problem, Tea Party, Repub or Dem, nobody wants to compromise.

Well, look what the "compromise" got us here. I think in this case, no compromise would have been better. The so called fiscal cliff was peanuts compared to the 87 TRILLION in unfunded libailities we have staring at us.

[CAA Flagship]

Divide and conquer is exactly what the Donks want.

I don't know about that. These so-called "fiscal conservatives" voted for two unfunded wars, a Rx drug benefit plan, and just passed a tax increase without getting any spending cuts in return. Oh, and let's not forget when the Conks controlled all three branches, how did they do with enacting "fiscal conservatism?" Today's GOP = a bunch of socially conservative Democrats. WAFJ.

Meh. When times were good (strong economy), spending increased. But when times turn bad, it's time to eat hot dogs. The Donks are ordering filet mignon by the ton.

[kalm]

The Tea Party Express is already firing up the base to unseat all the Republicans that voted for this. The woman ( I forget her name) was on CNN last night and was asked what the GOP should've comprimised on. She was asked twice and never answered. That's the problem, Tea Party, Repub or Dem, nobody wants to compromise.

Well, look what the "compromise" got us here. I think in this case, no compromise would have been better. The so called fiscal cliff was peanuts compared to the 87 TRILLION in unfunded libailities we have staring at us.

I've heard it's much closer to a hundred gazillion.

[Ibanez]

I don't know about that. These so-called "fiscal conservatives" voted for two unfunded wars, a Rx drug benefit plan, and just passed a tax increase without getting any spending cuts in return. Oh, and let's not forget when the Conks controlled all three branches, how did they do with enacting "fiscal conservatism?" Today's GOP = a bunch of socially conservative Democrats. WAFJ.

Meh. When times were good (strong economy), spending increased. But when times turn bad, it's time to eat hot dogs. The Donks are ordering filet mignon by the ton.

And the Republicans keep up with the joneses.

[Wedgebuster]

Well, look what the "compromise" got us here. I think in this case, no compromise would have been better. The so called fiscal cliff was peanuts compared to the 87 TRILLION in unfunded libailities we have staring at us.

I've heard it's much closer to a hundred gazillion.

Closing in on the holy grail of big number talk, the here to fore never mentioned Batscatzillion.

Hard to grasp that, but then again, it was hard to grasp my first home mortgage at that time as well...