He had over a year to work on this. there are no follow up meetings scheduled to work this out. He is going on a publicity campaign?
There are no elections for 2 years, this needs to be worked out in DAYS. Please tell me how this guys is a leader of this country. I feel like Im in a bad dream.

Washington (CNN) -- It helped get him re-elected, so President Barack Obama is again employing campaign-style tactics to increase pressure on congressional Republicans to compromise to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff.

Failure to reach a deal means tax increases and deep spending cuts take effect in five weeks, a scenario analysts fear could push the country back into recession.

While aides on both sides have been talking, no follow-up meeting between Obama and congressional leaders has been scheduled after their initial post-election discussion on November 16.

Instead, Obama met Tuesday with small business owners, the first in a series of events this week intended to highlight his push for raising taxes on the wealthiest 2% of Americans while maintaining current rates for everyone else.

He's trying the Reagan to the people approach.

the people dont matter at this point, a solution does.

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with BS.

It's also been amazing to me, how much energy Obama puts into his notion of increasing the taxes on those making more than $250,000. Obama is obsessed with this. Yet, the CBO says the revenue from those tax hikes will pay for - wait for it - NINE DAYS of federal spending. Nine days. Problem solved??

The GOP should just let him do it, and when absolutely nothing improves as a result, we can say "I told you so. Now let's talk about what will actually address our problems."

Republicans say raising tax rates alone will hardly put dent in budget, deficit | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/27/republicans-say-limiting-tax-cuts-alone-will-hardly-put-dent-in-budget-deficit/)

It's not the do what is best for the country mentality, it's what's best for the party mentality. How else can entitlements and amnesty be explained.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What is the process for negotiating? Are they currently doing that and if so, who?

It's also been amazing to me, how much energy Obama puts into his notion of increasing the taxes on those making more than $250,000. Obama is obsessed with this. Yet, the CBO says the revenue from those tax hikes will pay for - wait for it - NINE DAYS of federal spending. Nine days. Problem solved??

The GOP should just let him do it, and when absolutely nothing improves as a result, we can say "I told you so. Now let's talk about what will actually address our problems."

Republicans say raising tax rates alone will hardly put dent in budget, deficit | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/27/republicans-say-limiting-tax-cuts-alone-will-hardly-put-dent-in-budget-deficit/)

Has Pres. Obama's said that he only will agree to raising taxes and not cutting spending?

It's not the do what is best for the country mentality, it's what's best for the party mentality. How else can entitlements and amnesty be explained.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Imho, it's what's best for HIS mentality and the socialstic agenda he brought with him.

Look at his past history, before he ran, and you will see that a leopard dosen't
change his spots.He still has a lot of sheeple buffaloed.

He insists on taxing the rich, which would bring in an estimated $68 billion, against an expected 16.3 trillion $ debt, and won't entertain entitlement or spending cuts. All points to mediocracy and socialism.

Or he's waiting for the republicans to cave

What is the process for negotiating? Are they currently doing that and if so, who?

While aides on both sides have been talking, no follow-up meeting between Obama and congressional leaders has been scheduled after their initial post-election discussion on November 16.

I'd get fired if I worked like this.

Has Pres. Obama's said that he only will agree to raising taxes and not cutting spending?

He will have to make 12$ in cuts for every dollar confiscated from people and couples making 250k or better just to not increase the deficit
When has giving the government more money ever improved anything ???
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Has Pres. Obama's said that he only will agree to raising taxes and not cutting spending?

A fair and important question...

Obama is spending an incredible amount of time talking about these tax hikes for "rich people". The tax hikes are meaningless, they will have no impact, and Obama knows this. Not nearly enough impact to justify the amount of energy we dedicate to discussing them. And Obama does demonize those who oppose those tax hikes. And that's dishonest. My opposition to those tax hikes doesn't stem from the fact that I hate poor people, it stems from the fact that we need tens of trillions of dollars in relief, not $80 billion.

Second, Obama hasn't proposed any significant, specific, spending cuts - his most specific idea, as we all know, is the tax hikes. OK, so what will Obama cut? We don't know. But yet again, that doesn't stop Obama (and many liberals) from attacking guys like Paul Ryan who have the integrity to propose significant, specific cuts.

Paul, the math clearly shows that we cannot begin to get out of this mess with tax hikes - do you agree or disagree with that? I answered your question, perhaps you could shoe me the same courtesy.

He will have to make 12$ in cuts for every dollar confiscated from people and couples making 250k or better just to not increase the deficit
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Correct. These tax hikes will account for about 1/12th of this year's deficit. They will not provide for one cent to pay down th eexisting debt. If these tax hikes were 12 times higher that what he is proposing, it would still go towards reducing next year's deficit, not one cent would be left over to pay down the existing debt.

It's meaningless. It sounds great, because Obama can tell his base that he's taxing those who can afford it. But it has no meaningful impact. None whatsoever.

Kind of like closing the barn door after the horses have run away and the barn has burned to the ground!

Paul, the math clearly shows that we cannot begin to get out of this mess with tax hikes - do you agree or disagree with that? I answered your question, perhaps you could show me the same courtesy.

I totally agree w/your statement and have stated so before. I thought when they had the "great compromise" months ago, the Dems. agreed to $10 of cuts for every $1 increase in revenue. Buckmans says $12 - either # shows that Pres. Obama doesn't believe tax increases alone will solve anything.

It is going to take many, many changes to our current budget, policies, etc. to get to where we have to be. Tax hikes are a small part. However, you don't not do something b/c it won't get you all the way to where you have to end up.

PS - I changed a typo when I quoted your question so as to not make people on the site call you out for a simple typo.

I However, you don't not do something b/c it won't get you all the way to where you have to end up.

.

it can wind up hurting the economy more.
If I make 300K, pay a mortgage, save for kids college, pay all my bills and my taxes go up 3K per year, will I

1- save less for my kids college
2 - pay less for my mortgage
3 - spend less money on non-essentials?

Obviously its item 3. That hurts the Starbucks on the corner, the car wash place, the corner deli, the dvd rental place and every other non essential place "rich" people spend their cash. Mimimum wage people get laid off, business close, tax revenues go down, government dependance goes up. Our economy is based on consumers, why screw the consumers who spend the most money?
Tell me how this helps our economy?

I totally agree w/your statement and have stated so before. I thought when they had the "great compromise" months ago, the Dems. agreed to $10 of cuts for every $1 increase in revenue. Buckmans says $12 - either # shows that Pres. Obama doesn't believe tax increases alone will solve anything.

It is going to take many, many changes to our current budget, policies, etc. to get to where we have to be. Tax hikes are a small part. However, you don't not do something b/c it won't get you all the way to where you have to end up.

PS - I changed a typo when I quoted your question so as to not make people on the site call you out for a simple typo.

Paul, you agree tax hikes will play a much smaler part than spending cuts. That's a huge thing we agree on.

So why, then, is Obama so fixated on the tax hikes? Everyone who voted in this election knows that Obama wants to hike taxes on those making at least $250k. That was a cornerstone of Obama's message. If you have a bullet wound to the head and also smoke cigarettes, don't you deal with the head wound before you quit smoking?

So, where are the details on the spending cuts? Maybe I'm missing something, but when I hear Obama talking about cuts, it's usually to attack the conservative who is proposing cuts.

g.

It is going to take many, many changes to our current budget, policies, etc. to get to where we have to be.

So I believe you agree with me that "where we have to be" is a leaner, more efficient place than where we are now.

Is Obama moving us towards that? Seems to me we're a lot further away from that "place where we have to be", than we were 4 years ago.

Where would my observation be wrong?

So why, then, is Obama so fixated on the tax hikes?

B/C right now both sides are politicing and haven't gotten down to the negotiations (unless something is happening we don't know about???). He prob. wants to make sure that when the Rs come to the table that they are willing to put hikes/deduc. changes on the table. He has already agreed to either $10 or $12 of cuts to every $1 of tax hikes. The Ds must have some idea what they are willing to agree to and prob. don't want to show their hand yet. Just as some of the Rs have started recently coming out saying they agree to tax hikes (or getting rid of deductions). We don't know what those are either at this point (is the mortgage deduct. going to be taken away??).

B/C right now both sides are politicing and haven't gotten down to the negotiations (unless something is happening we don't know about???). He prob. wants to make sure that when the Rs come to the table that they are willing to put hikes/deduc. changes on the table. He has already agreed to either $10 or $12 of cuts to every $1 of tax hikes. The Ds must have some idea what they are willing to agree to and prob. don't want to show their hand yet. Just as some of the Rs have started recently coming out saying they agree to tax hikes (or getting rid of deductions). We don't know what those are either at this point (is the mortgage deduct. going to be taken away??).

According to Obama this was going to be one of the most transparent administrations. I haven't seen much but I have seen through them, perhaps that is what he meant. Lets keep playing politics while the country goes down the drain. I wonder when repairations will start.

According to Obama this was going to be one of the most transparent administrations. I haven't seen much but I have seen through them, perhaps that is what he meant. Lets keep playing politics while the country goes down the drain. I wonder when repairations will start.

exaclty, were playing politics instead of solving problemS. In the old days they'd all be pulled out of office and tarred and feathered.

this guy sums it up pretty well....


All about Taxes
By Michael Tanner
November 28, 2012

How many times have we heard that the only thing standing in the way of a grand bargain to reduce our growing national debt is Republican intransigence on taxes? If Republicans would only agree to dump Grover Norquist, Democrats will agree to cut spending and reform entitlements. Then, we can all join hands and sing Kumbaya as we usher in a new era of compromise and fiscal responsibility.

Except that now that Republicans have agreed to raise taxes, er, revenue, as part of an agreement to avoid the looming fiscal cliff, liberals appear to have decided that there really isn’t a need to cut spending after all.

“Suddenly the clear and present danger to the American economy isn’t that we’ll fail to reduce the deficit enough; it is, instead, that we’ll reduce the deficit too much,” warns Paul Krugman. All this worry about debt and deficits is “an entirely contrived crisis,” writes Robert Kuttner in the Huffington Post. After all, as the New York Times explains, “deficits are actually a good thing when the economy is deeply depressed, so deficit reduction should wait until the economy is stronger.” “So,” sums up Robert Reich, “can we please stop obsessing about future budget deficits? They’re distracting our attention from what we should be obsessing about — jobs and growth.”

Congressional Democrats already appear to have successfully taken Social Security reform off the table. This, despite the fact that Social Security faces $22 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Democrats may be willing to trim Medicare, but both Harry Reid and #^&#^&#^&#^& Durbin are opposed to structural changes, such as raising the eligibility age. Of course, anything resembling Paul Ryan’s premium-support plan is beyond even discussing. Democrats are more inclined to rely on the type of reforms contained in the Affordable Care Act. Yet the administration’s own actuaries project that, even if all of the ACA’s reforms work exactly as hoped, Medicare will remain $42 trillion in the red. And that’s the best-case scenario.

Yet the media still seem obsessed with Republicans and taxes: Will they stick to the Taxpayer Protection Pledge or not? Will tax rates go up or will loopholes be closed? How much new revenue will Republicans agree to?

But there is a profound lack of curiosity when it comes to the other half of this supposed bargain. Remember that hypothetical deal of $1 in tax increases to $10 in spending cuts? Republicans are still being asked about it and criticized for rejecting it. But balancing the budget under that formula would require $9 trillion in spending cuts over the next ten years. When was the last time the president or a Democratic congressman was asked whether or not they would agree to such a deal?

For that matter, it’s worth noting that more than half of Democratic congressmen and eleven senators have signed a pledge to oppose any changes to Social Security or Medicare. If pledges are the root of all evil, couldn’t we pause for just a moment in our attempts to run Grover Norquist out of town to work up the tiniest bit of outrage about this one?

In fact, many Democrats actually want to spend more, at least in the short term. The president’s most recent budget calls for $2.6 in increased spending between now and 2022. That’s $1 trillion more than the $1.6 trillion that the president has called for in new taxes. Therefore, the tax hikes would not be used to reduce the deficit, but to finance new spending. And, according to news reports, the president has already floated the idea of still more stimulus spending as part of the fiscal-cliff talks.

That’s not a “balanced approach.” That’s simply old-fashioned tax-and-spend politics.

The time may someday come to parse the exact meaning of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. But for now, Republicans are simply negotiating with themselves and with the news media. Democrats haven’t even come to the table.


probably don't want to show their empty hand...:uhuh:

lets be clear as I know the media will confuse this as will 99% of Americans. The fiscal cliff is a reality, The one and only item on the table right now is the senate proposal to reinstate the Bush tax cuts for people less than 200/250k. that is the only thing the house republicans are being pressured to pass. This does not avoid the fiscal cliff, does not solve the budget or defecit. Its on item. period. please obama supporters, tell me what your leader is doing in this time of national crisis?

Predictable - and sad.

Talking to children

Some people shouldn't have children as they'll grow up as petty as them:uhuh:

lets be clear as I know the media will confuse this as will 99% of Americans. The fiscal cliff is a reality, The one and only item on the table right now is the senate proposal to reinstate the Bush tax cuts for people less than 200/250k. that is the only thing the house republicans are being pressured to pass. This does not avoid the fiscal cliff, does not solve the budget or defecit. Its on item. period. please obama supporters, tell me what your leader is doing in this time of national crisis?

please see below. Im not nuts.

Senate Passes Tax Measure With Election in Mind - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/us/politics/senate-passes-tax-measure-with-election-in-mind.html?_r=0)

B/C right now both sides are politicing and haven't gotten down to the negotiations (unless something is happening we don't know about???). He prob. wants to make sure that when the Rs come to the table that they are willing to put hikes/deduc. changes on the table. He has already agreed to either $10 or $12 of cuts to every $1 of tax hikes. The Ds must have some idea what they are willing to agree to and prob. don't want to show their hand yet. Just as some of the Rs have started recently coming out saying they agree to tax hikes (or getting rid of deductions). We don't know what those are either at this point (is the mortgage deduct. going to be taken away??).

When Paul Ryan makes a proposalto cut Medicare (which we all know is necessary), and Obama demonized Ryan by saying that "he wants to end Medicare as we know it", I'd say that Ryan is trying to solve the problem, and Obama is politicking.

I hope the mortgage deduction isn't taken away, as that's something that a lot of middle class folks benefit from. If that goes away, it sure won't help home prices.

Has Obama personally agreed to $12 in cuts for every $1 in tax hikes?

Good points. Personally, I hope th emortgage deduction isn't taken away, as that's something that a lot of middle class folks benefit from. If that goes away, it sure won't help home prices.

Has Obama personally agreed to $12 in cuts for every $1 in tax hikes?

the one and only thing being discussed right now is for the house to pass the senate bill eliminating the Bush cuts for those over 200/250k. That it, period. That is what O is pushing for.

the one and only thing being discussed right now is for the house to pass the senate bill eliminating the Bush cuts for those over 200/250k. That it, period. That is what O is pushing for.

Correct, and worse, Obama i strying to convince people (at least during the campaign he was) that the tax hikes are all we need to get our fiscal house in order. It's a great way to attack Republicans, but it's demonstrably false.

The most significant, specific proposal I've seen for cuts, is what Ryan proposed for Medicare. The liberal response was the commercial showing Ryan pushng an old lady off a cliff. The Democrats don't seem inclined to have an honest conversation about this...

Correct, and worse, Obama i strying to convince people (at least during the campaign he was) that the tax hikes are all we need to get our fiscal house in order. It's a great way to attack Republicans, but it's demonstrably false.

The most significant, specific proposal I've seen for cuts, is what Ryan proposed for Medicare. The liberal response was the commercial showing Ryan pushng an old lady off a cliff. The Democrats don't seem inclined to have an honest conversation about this...

I agree and if they are successful in getting the senate bill passed, they will pat themselves on the back and say disaster averted. The disaster was a posion pill inserted into the legislation the last time they deferred solving the problem. all of the initial issues remain. You cant make this up. Its like a 3 stooges routine. I GUARANTEE 99% of Americans wont have a clue

I agree and if they are successful in getting the senate bill passed, they will pat themselves on the back and say disaster averted. The disaster was a posion pill inserted into the legislation the last time they deferred solving the problem. all of the initial issues remain. You cant make this up. Its like a 3 stooges routine. I GUARANTEE 99% of Americans wont have a clue

dems control the Whitehouse and Senate and Reid appears ready to change Senate rules to eliminate challenges there..dems have no intention of reducing current levels of spending, in fact, they are eyeing even more spending, want to raise the debt ceiling, increase regulation and expand of the bureaucratic state, 64% of the current spending is entitlements and interest on the debt and that is steadily growing....Republicans are easily marginalized as Grinches who want to take away everyone's goodies and anyone other than those being pandered to are easily characterized as greedy and having too much and need to cough it up, it's an enviable position to be in politically, I don't know how you mess it up until the collapse occurs and the government checks and services really stop coming...

and there you have it ....

Obama's opening "fiscal cliff" bid seeks debt limit hike, stimulus

WASHINGTON | Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:21pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration's opening bid on Thursday in negotiations to avert a year-end fiscal crunch included a demand for new stimulus spending and authority to unilaterally raise the U.S. borrowing ceiling, a Republican congressional aide said.

The proposal, made by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to congressional Republican leaders on Capitol Hill, was seen as offering little the Republicans could agree to and was greeted with laughter, the aide said.

"We can't move any closer to them because they're not even on our planet," the aide said. "It was not a serious proposal."

and there you have it ....

Obama's opening "fiscal cliff" bid seeks debt limit hike, stimulus

WASHINGTON | Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:21pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration's opening bid on Thursday in negotiations to avert a year-end fiscal crunch included a demand for new stimulus spending and authority to unilaterally raise the U.S. borrowing ceiling, a Republican congressional aide said.

The proposal, made by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to congressional Republican leaders on Capitol Hill, was seen as offering little the Republicans could agree to and was greeted with laughter, the aide said.

"We can't move any closer to them because they're not even on our planet," the aide said. "It was not a serious proposal."

That's really something if that's true. So Obama's response to our crisis is to throw gasoline on the fire, by spending more, following the previlus stimulus that by Obama's own metrics (about what it would do to unemployment) was an abject failure.

CT just came out with a study that is projecting annual deficits of more that $1 billion for the next several years, and THAT is assuming that tax revenues increase by 7% a year during that time, which is absurd. Maybe the state should start buying Powerball tickets.

Scott, in another post, you said the liberals won't learn until the crisis hits. I have been saying that for several years. That crisis will occur when a sufficient number of baby boomers are devastating entitlement funding, maybe another 15 years.

That's really something if that's true. is there any reason to doubt it? they've been calling for bothSo Obama's response to our crisis is to throw gasoline on the fire, by spending more, following the previlus stimulus that by Obama's own metrics (about what it would do to unemployment) was an abject failure. that would be the MO for a long time now

CT just came out with a study that is projecting annual deficits of more that $1 billion for the next several years, and THAT is assuming that tax revenues increase by 7% a year during that time, which is absurd. Maybe the state should start buying Powerball tickets. these Federal negotiations are not even factoring the deep problems that states are in

Scott, in another post, you said the liberals let's just say...those whose faith resides in governmentwon't learn until the crisis hits. I have been saying that for several years. That crisis will occur when a sufficient number of baby boomers are devastating entitlement funding, maybe another 15 years.

most likely Geitner knows nothing about any of this and was just sent to the negotiation to read talking points written by some unknown source that may or may not be accurate or factual and might or might not reflect the beliefs or postitions of the Whitehouse:uhuh:

also ironic is that the President will spend the next few weeks flying around the country in luxury, pandering to the wallowing masses and bashing the rich before heading off on a 20 day, 4 million dollar vacation in Hawaii as the country goes over the fiscal cliff, you just can't make this stuff up...

also ironic is that the President will spend the next few weeks flying around the country in luxury, pandering to the wallowing masses and bashing the rich before heading off on a 20 day, 4 million dollar vacation in Hawaii as the country goes over the fiscal cliff, you just can't make this stuff up...

I usually don't bash presidents for taking vacations, as you can pretty much get that job done anywhere, with modern technology. But you are right on 2 points...first, there are certain crisis which seem to be serious enough where he needs to be in DC, and this rises to that lever (since they are saying we slide back into recession if a deal is not reached). Second, we once again see that it's OK for liberals to live like czars, but when conservatives do it, they are unethical crooks.

lets see how the negotiatons are going.....from today's news:

President Barack Obama on Friday toured a Pennsylvania toy factory that's churning out would-be holiday gifts, warning of a "Scrooge" Christmas if Congress does not pass legislation extending tax cuts for 98% of Americans.

In Washington, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, warned of an impasse a month before the "fiscal cliff" package of automatic tax increases and spending cuts is set to take effect -- to the detriment of the nation's fragile economic recovery, many economists warn.

Not on that list are House Republicans, whom Obama accused of holding "hostage" legislation that would keep tax rates lower for most Americans because insistence that taxes not go up for anyone.

"That doesn't make sense," he said.

The president urged Americans to flood House Republicans with calls, letters and social networking messages, demanding that they pass the Senate bill.

Obama's remarks came a day after the administration unveiled details of a comprehensive package, widely rejected by Republicans, to avert the looming "fiscal cliff"

Obama's proposal calls for $1.6 trillion in new taxes, including higher tax rates on families making more than $250,000.

Obama also wants to close loopholes, limit deductions, raise the estate tax rate to 2009 levels and increase taxes on capital gains and dividend taxes.

The proposal also calls for additional spending, including a new $50 billion stimulus package, a home mortgage refinancing plan, and an extension of unemployment insurance benefits. It would also extend the payroll tax cut passed early in Obama's administration to give taxpayers more money to spend.

In return, multiple sources told CNN that Obama is offering $400 billion in new cuts to Medicare and other entitlement programs. Specifics would be decided next year, the sources said.Boehner characterized Obama's proposal for spending cuts as a trifle, calling for "a little, not even $400 billion" in cuts to the $3.8 trillion federal budget.

so the Obama plan - we'll raise taxes and cut some stuff but we wont tell you what we'll cut until next year.

You cant make this up!

Jesus!!! How many times are we going to count the same 400 billion in Medicare cuts that will never happen!!!!
We aready cut that for Obama Care.
It's like claiming we will save a trillion from the war .
Go on vacation you fraud and take your sideshow with you
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I love it. Obama is putting the screws to the House GOP and you guys can't even understand what's happening.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I love it. Obama is putting the screws to the House GOP and you guys can't even understand what's happening.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

oh, I get it Spence and I'm glad you love it.. The only outcome will be raising taxes and nothing else. He is further dividing the country and using the fiscal cliff to pursue a tax and spend liberal agenda and avoiding any serious cuts or solving our nations problems. What a hoot! Playing politics while our country spends out of control. That Obama, the worlds most interesting man!

Enjoy your America! Its coming and Obama is leading the way!

meanwhile, back in reality world, the only people serious about compromising and making beneficial policy are the wacky party of No

In an interview in his Capitol Hill office, Mr. McConnell (R., Ky.) said if the White House agrees to changes such as higher Medicare premiums for the wealthy, an increase in the Medicare eligibility age and a slowing of cost-of-living increases for programs like Social Security, Republicans would agree to include more tax revenue in the deal, though not from higher tax rates.

"Those are the kinds of things that would get Republicans interested in new revenue," Mr. McConnell said.

Mr. McConnell's comments represent some of the clearest statements of principle from Republicans on the thorny issue of reining in the ballooning cost of the U.S.'s entitlement programs. They also offer a potential path forward in what have become a heated series of talks.

right on queue....

WASHINGTON—House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi will try to force a vote on the House floor to extend current tax rates for the middle class next week if Republicans do not act, the California Democrat announced on Friday.

During a press conference on Capitol Hill, Pelosi called on House Republicans, who control the chamber, to hold another floor vote on whether to extend current tax rates for individuals who earn $200,000 or less and families making $250,000 or less. If they don't, Pelosi vowed to file a "discharge petition" that would force a vote if 218 House members sign it, which is unlikely.

Pelosi said she wanted the bill passed so Congress will have more time to negotiate broader tax reform in 2013.

raise taxes, but we'll do it in the guise of lowering taxes for middle class and the we'll kick the can down the road and never solve the problem! And get this, the people we benefit own the largest % of votes and arent smart enough or care what we did and the small % we are screwing dont have the votes to impact us! its brilliant!

you guys can't even understand what's happening.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe the arrogant elitist could explain it to us neanderthals?

I love it. Obama is putting the screws to the House GOP and you guys can't even understand what's happening.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You love it?

Great post Spence, keep up the good work.....................glad your guy is working accross party lines like he promised and "putting the screws" to the GOP. You're proud of that? Really shows some true colors.......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You love it?

Great post Spence, keep up the good work.....................glad your guy is working accross party lines like he promised and "putting the screws" to the GOP. You're proud of that? Really shows some true colors.......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Because the GOP is out for the best interests of the Country? You're not that naive are you?

Because the GOP is out for the best interests of the Country? You're not that naive are you?

Which party is proposing to address the actual problem that we are facing?

The GOP says they want to cut spending, and they are willing to talk about tax hikes as part of a compromise.

Obama's proposal calls for higher taxes, more spending, no significant cuts, and gives him unilateral authority to increase the debt ceiling, suggesting he plans on increasing the debt more and more.

Spence, you tell us, who is looking out for the best interests of the country?

Oh, and PS...Obama goes on a $4 million vacation at our expense? Four million dollars on a vacation? At this time, in this economy?

Spence, please don't hoard all of your genius to yourself. Share it with us, enlighten us, tell us how that proposal is in the best interests of the country?

I'm all ears...

Because the GOP is out for the best interests of the Country? You're not that naive are you?

If being against increased government spending, higher taxation and contiued borrowing for a country that is broke, than I guess I'm naive.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

don't know if you caught Howard Dean's comments on the issue but he insists that the best possible scenario for Progressives is that we have no deal resulting in higher taxes on everyone, massive cuts to the military and slide into another recession....he seems to think that in the end this will result in deficit reduction and the economy will come "roaring back"...the dems with the help of the media will of course blame the repubs. for any pain during the course of events and enjoy the benefits politically.....I agree with him on the first part, it would be the best "for them", but I'm pretty confident that the minor recession that he believes will occur will be far worse than he anticipates and the "roaring back" part will be difficult as the dems take yet another opportunity of yet another crisis to expand the nanny state, spending and debt....

Going Off Fiscal Cliff The "Best Deal Progressive Democrats Are Going To Get"

HOWARD DEAN: "I make the argument that going off the -- as you call it the curb, I call it the slope, the press calls it the cliff, is actually the best deal progressive Democrats are going to get. And here's why. One, we get the Clinton tax rates on everybody. Will it cause a problem? Yes. There will be a short recession, and it will be painful. But two, we get defense cuts. Republicans are never going to agree to that. And three, there are some human services cuts, which we're not going to like. But it's the least possible damage.

Now what do we get in exchange? A serious down payment of the deficit. The Wall Street people, who wringing their hands of this, are really full of it because what they're going to see is a big drop on Wall Street while all the hype comes and then it's going to be roaring back because finally somebody has done something serious about the deficit.

So, I think the fiscal curb, as you call it, is the best deal that progressive Democrats are going to get. And I think it's the best deal in the long run, not the short run."




Republicans should just walk away, the majority of Americans voted this course and as someone once said, "the voters have spoken, and now they must suffer"....

this guy wrote a lengthy article that's worth the read if you want to consider what is going on in a broader sense...not encouraging however...

http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/facing_up_to_the_enormity_of_our_problem.html

"As for the socialist authoritarians themselves, we must not fall into the trap of judging radical leftists as if they think like decent or reasonable people. (The "well-creased-pant-leg-means-he'll-make-a-good-president" fallacy.) What you and I judge as societal failure is, to them, of little consequence in and of itself. For general prosperity is not their goal. In short, the intellectual leaders of the left know as well as you do that their regulatory state with its confiscatory taxation, propagandistic education, and morally subversive cultural elite will not produce prosperity and individual happiness, i.e., that their regime will "fail" the true test of good government."

"In the case of America and the rest of the West, the leftist superstructure (to borrow the appropriately Marxist terminology) is not generally perceived as having been imposed from without. Rather, it has grown from seed within the modern West itself, carefully cultivated by successive generations of an anti-individualist educational elite, an anti-liberal governing class, and an anti-virtue, anti-rational intellectual establishment. As a result, the citizenry has gradually given way to a new entity, "the masses" (once again using the suitable Marxist language), a collectivist majority without any of the reflexes of self-reliance, self-restraint and shame that a virtuous citizenry would have; without any of the respect or capacity for rational deliberation, forethought, and common sense that a properly educated citizenry would have; and without the universalizable notion of freedom -- freedom as an equal, natural right, rather than a childish wish-fulfillment fantasy -- that a citizenry not enmeshed in the mass manipulations of class envy would have."

No progress made, same crap as last week and the year before. All politics and no progress. And as I said earlier 90% of Americans dont get it. we're screwed.

No progress made, same crap as last week and the year before. All politics and no progress. And as I said earlier 90% of Americans dont get it. we're screwed.

yup...same crap...."hostage taking"...again...look on the bright side Jim, after a short period of pain, according to Dean...everything will be bliss....I heard Obama state the other day that this is not about him being stubborn,,,it's about "math"....I'm not too sure about this Obama math :uhuh:

Jake Tapper qestioning Jay Carney recently...

Q: Jay, speaking of the debt ceiling, does an agreement to raise the debt ceiling have to be part of an agreement to avert the fiscal cliff?

CARNEY: We’re not going to negotiate over what is a fundamental responsibility of Congress, which is to pay the bills that Congress incurred. It should be part of the deal. It should be done and it should be done without drama.

We cannot allow our economy to be held hostage again to the whims of an ideological agenda. We are the United States of America. We are the greatest economy on Earth. We pay our bills. We always have. If Congress wants to reduce spending, that should be part of the negotiations that go into making decisions about how we spend — the programs we spend money on.

Q: Just a second ago, you referred to, when talking about the debt ceiling, taking it off the table needs to be part of the deal. You referred to the economy being held hostage by an ideological view. You’re aware that when he was a senator, President Obama voted against raising it.

CARNEY: We addressed that and there was no threat of default at the time. What happened in 2011 — as we all know, because we all lived it, most of us in this room — was the threat of default, a willingness expressed on the record and publicly by numerous members of Congress to see the American economy under default and with all the consequent impacts on the global economy and on the American middle class in order to achieve some sort of political victory that was driven by ideology and partisanship.

Q: So it’s okay for people to engage in that kind of nonsense if it’s –

CARNEY: Jake, I appreciate the question, and we engaged in this a lot at the time and I refer you to my comments about it back then. But the fact that –

Q — people voting the way that Senator Obama did and except you’re using derisive terms –

CARNEY: What happened in 2011 is that Republicans in Congress demanded — said they would let America default for the first time in its history if they did not get the items on their agenda. That was consequential and it was unprecedented, and the result was bad for everyone.

....................

Obama said, "I have said before that the middle class tax cuts were being held hostage to the high end tax cuts. I think it is tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers unless the hostage gets harmed." Barack Obama 2010


“At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do,” he said, “it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” “Let’s make sure it’s not on the usual plane of politics and point scoring and pettiness that drifts away with the next news cycle.” Barack Obama 2011

this is great...

Nov 15 2012

"Mr. Obama again forgot his past sops to civility by accusing Republicans of holding his tax hike agenda "hostage." His subordinates routinely refer to Republicans as "hostage takers" for having principled policy disagreements. In the interest of "coming together," there is a solution.

What Mr. Obama considers hostage taking is what the Founding Fathers called democracy and separation of powers. Sadly, Mr. Obama's ego is held hostage by itself."

"We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."

- Winston Churchill

"We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."

- Winston Churchill


Yeah well what did Winston Churchill know??
All these guys in power now couldn't drum up a peanut brain amongst all of
them combined.

Yeah well what did Winston Churchill know??
All these guys in power now couldn't drum up a peanut brain amongst all of
them combined.

How true. Imagine having to filibuster against a bill you had just pushed for a vote.

:rotf2:

this is why the republicans should just walk away...allow higher taxes, military cuts- both progressive goals....negotiating with these people is futile

"Howard Dean delivers a bracing blast of leftist honesty on MSNBC: “The only problem is… and this is initially going to seem like heresy from a progressive is… the truth is everybody needs to pay more taxes, not just the rich. And it’s a good start. But we’re not going to get out of this deficit problem unless we raise taxes across the board, to go back to what Bill Clinton had and his taxes. And if we don’t do that, the problem is the pressure is going to be on spending even more.”"


allow the prez to assume the power to raise the debt limit as high as he sees fit....it will all work out...you'll see :uhuh:

this is the age of Obama...we just hit the lowest unemployment % number in years...

of course, we hit that low because... "The jobless rate dropped in large part because the labor force fell by 350,000, suggesting that people gave up looking for work. The number of people saying they had a job actually fell by 122,000. And the Labor Department revised downward its estimates of job creation in September and October by a combined 49,000 jobs."

Obama math....I wonder where all of these people that are giving up looking for work month after month are going?

CNBC-The Labor Department statistics had some puzzling contradictions, particularly in the assertion that Sandy "did not substantively impact" the jobs count for November, and in considerable downward revisions from previous months.

Also, the drop in the unemployment rate appeared to reflect little more than a continued exodus of workers from the labor force.

The labor force participation rate, already around 30-year lows, fell further in the month to 63.6 percent. That represented 350,000 fewer workers.

In all, there were a net 122,000 fewer people with jobs.

An alternative measure of unemployment, which counts those who have given up looking for jobs as well as those working part-time for economic reasons, also edged lower to 14.4 percent.

"Same old, same old. The government managed to get the unemployment rate down by shrinking the labor force and convincing a lot of people they're better off collecting unemployment benefits or living off welfare than working," said Peter Schiff, CEO and chief global strategist at Euro Pacific Capital. "It's more bogus government numbers."



more Fed Pump...more stimulus....higher debt limit...higher taxes....more regulation...that's the ticket :uhuh:

That chart is meaningless.

The report they cite was based on bad data and the Administration was quick to admit this. If you're trying to demonstrate the real impact of the Stimulus on unemployment (good or bad) you would need to recalculate the projection based on the actual measured economic impact of the recession...and then compare to the unemployment rate.

-spence

That chart is meaningless.

The report they cite was based on bad data and the Administration was quick to admit this. -spence

oh really?? then surely they must have corrected the projections using "good" data as soon as they realized this and after they quickly admitted this...you probably have those revised numbers/projections handy right???

the fact is that either projection has us at what would be a reasonable expectation for a recovery, the administration was trying to sell massive spending as a way to get there more quickly and the only reason that they can claim the current unemployment rate is the direct result of millions and millions of Americans leaving the workforce and climbing on to the government dole....at this rate a 5% unemployment rate will be the result of an even larger proportion of the population on permanent government assistance :)

oh really?? then surely they must have corrected the projections using "good" data as soon as they realized this and after they quickly admitted this...you probably have those revised numbers/projections handy right???

the fact is that either projection has us at what would be a reasonable expectation for a recovery, the administration was trying to sell massive spending as a way to get there more quickly and the only reason that they can claim the current unemployment rate is the direct result of millions and millions of Americans leaving the workforce and climbing on to the government dole....at this rate a 5% unemployment rate will be the result of a large proportion of the population on permanent government assistance :)

Didn't the CBO calculate recently that extending unemployment compensation another year for those whose benefits are about to expire will create or save 300,000 jobs? Exactly like you say--we can get to 5% unemployment by laying off enough people to collect unemployment. Wow, if enough lose their jobs, we can reach 0% unemployment. I wonder if that calculates to everyone losing their jobs creates 100% employment?

Didn't the CBO calculate recently that extending unemployment compensation another year for those whose benefits are about to expire will create or save 300,000 jobs? Exactly like you say--we can get to 5% unemployment by laying off enough people to collect unemployment. Wow, if enough lose their jobs, we can reach 0% unemployment. I wonder if that calculates to everyone losing their jobs creates 100% employment?

With that line of reasoning you could eliminate all taxes and generate infinite revenues.

-spence

they also should not remove, those who stopped looking for work. What 350,000 stopped looking last month?

With that line of reasoning you could eliminate all taxes and generate infinite revenues.

-spence

Actually, the line of reasoning would eliminate all taxes except those on the rich and create infinite debt.

Minutes earlier, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California argued that Obama and Congress already cut spending in budget battles of the past two years. Now, she said, Republicans want further spending cuts to address most or all of needed deficit reduction.

"At some point you are cutting the seed corn of our future," Pelosi told reporters, adding, "You're not going to reduce the deficit by ... only cutting your way to it because you will cut the prospects for job creation, which produce revenue."

and there you have it. Why are the greedy, evil, rich loving republicans holding out? Because if they agree to raise taxes on UPPER MIDDLE CLASS people, the Dems will never come back to the table to negotiate fixing this mess. they will celebrate that they avoided the fiscal cliff and raised tax on the rich and kick the can down the road. and spence will think its cute and 90% of Americans wont have a clue.

and there you have it. Why are the greedy, evil, rich loving republicans holding out? Because if they agree to raise taxes on UPPER MIDDLE CLASS people, the Dems will never come back to the table to negotiate fixing this mess. they will celebrate that they avoided the fiscal cliff and raised tax on the rich and kick the can down the road. and spence will think its cute and 90% of Americans wont have a clue.
:rotf2: You sir owe me a new shirt that doesn't have a fresh coffee stain on it.

water out the nose

"At some point you are cutting the seed corn of our future," Pelosi told reporters, adding, "You're not going to reduce the deficit by ... only cutting your way to it because you will cut the prospects for job creation, which produce revenue."



Ya revenue, revenue revenue. For the first 2 months of this fiscal year the Govt
took in $60 Billion more than last year, but spent $62 Billion more
in the same 2 months. There's your revenue.
The Repubs already offered $800 Billion in closing tax deductions.That was Obama's first request, then he upped it to 1.6 Billion. That's compromise???

I would like to see the Rebubs re-offer the deductions and add a %5 cut
across the board, except military, period. Very reasonable. If they don't take it, let the Dems drive us off the cliff, then let them take the blame for the conseqences.