Printable View
03:15 PM PDT
What's John Boehner promising to the teabaggers?
byJed Lewison
Here's a question: wouldn't you love to know what John Boehner is promising teabaggers behind closed doors as he scrambles to find those final few votes he needs to get his debt ceiling plan passed?
More proof S&L that it is the Tea Party that has been holding up a compromise. I dont understand for the life of me why you cant seem to acknowledge that. NO one is talking about the left holding up a compromise. Republicans control the House.
Where do you get some of the crap you believe in?
We'll see if the democratically controlled senate will hold up a compromise. The house passed the bill.
The left has indeed held up compromise. Tax increases were compulsory for them. How many times did I hear Reid echo the words "non starter". Don't be a partisan ass. Both sides have an agenda. If you cannot recognize that then you are an extremist.
"Where do you get some of the crap you believe in?" I think you got me mixed up with you. I believe in lower taxes for all. The majority of American's would love lower taxes. The extreme think higher taxes are good for America. Those are the same hypocrites who hire tax accountants to protect their money from taxation. Do you remember the examples I showed you? John Kerry's boat?? Ring a bell? You? Ring a bell. So where are you hiding your inheritance these days? Tax exempt bonds? Off shore accounts? Trusts?
The House passed NOTHING. Where did you hear the Boehner bill was passed? Just because you repeat
it doesnt make it true. You have a habit of doing this in other areas as well.
This is a PERFECT example of how in your desperation to prove yourself correct you
argue your position based on falsehoods. Take a breath.
Wrong once again about who blocked the Obama/boehner "grand plan" The only people stopping this
plan were the tea partiers. i will post the article again so you can read it.
You are for lower taxes? We are all for your lower taxes in general.. No one LIKES to pay taxes. You dont
own the victomhood of tax paying. The problem is figuring out how rates, loopholes and tax
deductions are combined. It has to be figured in together. Not as simple as you want it to be.
You are hardly a master economist, nor is peter schiff.
You do realize however that under Bush lower taxes helped to lead us into recession and not to growth.
At the very least you should be able to acknowledge that lower taxes were
not the panacea that you people always say they are. Just the facts.
Your seeming obsession about accountants and my money is starting to put you into the creepy category.
You really need to get back to a real discussion of the issues.
Read and learn something S&L You seem to invent facts and history with equal aplomb.
"Despite his image as a button-down Republican, House Speaker John Boehner walked to the brink of a dramatic and historic agreement to change the government’s spending habits.
But as he twice approached a $4 trillion deficit-reduction deal with President Obama that would have rocked both parties’ bases, Boehner was reeled back in by his caucus’ conservative wing.
The muscular, tea party-fueled group not only forced him to abandon a “grand bargain” with Obama, it made him scramble Wednesday to secure the votes for a far more modest deficit-ceiling plan, which in turn is all but doomed in the Senate.
The events highlight the limits of power for an experienced and well-liked politician who has struggled to budge his caucus’ staunchest conservatives despite constantly reminding them that their party doesn’t control the Senate or White House.
“The problem with leadership is it has to be conjoined with follower-ship,” Duke University political scientist David Rohde said. “Boehner is not in a position to give orders to his members.”
A grand bargain might have passed, with scores of Democratic votes replacing GOP dissenters, Rohde said. But it also could have put Boehner’s speakership in jeopardy.:("
"Let's not lose sight of that simple, but obvious, point. Boehner is in the process of twisting arms out of their sockets in a way that every MMA champ would envy. All to pass a bill that will piss off the constituents in half of the GOP's districts for being batshit crazy, and piss off the other half for not being batshit crazy enough.
And the bill has absolutely zero chance of becoming law. None. It will be D.O.A. in the Senate before the courier can make his/her way back to the House.
So, Boehner is putting his Speakership on the line, and putting the electoral fortunes of scores of his caucus on the line. For nothing.
Remind me again why anyone thinks this guy has anything less than abysmal political instincts?"
28 Jul 2011 08:56 PM
The Nihilism Of The GOP
Joe Klein tells the truth:
And so, here we are. Our nation’s economy and international reputation as the world’s presiding grownup has already been badly damaged. It is a self-inflicted wound of monumental stupidity. I am usually willing to acknowledge that Democrats can be as silly, and hidebound, as Republicans–but not this time. There is zero equivalence here. The vast majority of Democrats have been more than reasonable, more than willing to accept cuts in some of their most valued programs. Given the chance, there was the likelihood that they would have surrendered their most powerful weapon in next year’s election–a Mediscare campaign–by agreeing to some necessary long-term reforms in that program. The President, remarkably, proposed raising the age of eligibility for Medicare to 67.
The Republicans have been willing to concede nothing. Their stand means higher interest rates, fewer jobs created and more destroyed, a general weakening of this country’s standing in the world.
Still trying to figure out if S&L was in favor of the "grand plan" between Obama and Boehner or if was with the fringe tea party members who helped to kill it?
"Despite his image as a button-down Republican, House Speaker John Boehner walked to the brink of a dramatic and historic agreement to change the government's spending habits.
But as he twice approached a $4 trillion deficit-reduction deal with President Barack Obama that would have rocked both parties' bases, Boehner was reeled back in by his caucus' conservative wing. The muscular, Tea Party-fueled group not only forced him to abandon a "grand bargain" with Obama, it made him scramble Wednesday to secure the votes for a far more modest deficit-ceiling plan, which in turn is all but doomed in the Senate.
The events highlight the limits of power for an experienced and well-liked politician who has struggled to budge his caucus' staunchest conservatives despite constantly reminding them that their party doesn't control the Senate or White House."
Any plan is fine as long as it doesn't include taxes.
So now we finally know. Just like i thought. He sides with the extreme right wing of the Republican Party. Im shocked. LMFAO.
"Despite his image as a button-down Republican, House Speaker John Boehner walked to the brink of a dramatic and historic agreement to change the government's spending habits.
But as he twice approached a $4 trillion deficit-reduction deal with President Barack Obama that would have rocked both parties' bases, Boehner was reeled back in by his caucus' conservative wing. The muscular, Tea Party-fueled group not only forced him to abandon a "grand bargain" with Obama, it made him scramble Wednesday to secure the votes for a far more modest deficit-ceiling plan, which in turn is all but doomed in the Senate."
The events highlight the limits of power for an experienced and well-liked politician who has struggled to budge his caucus' staunchest conservatives despite constantly reminding them that their party doesn't control the Senate or White House.
How does it feel to join me in wanting to pay less tax? You are a Teapublican yourself.
I From Politifact.com. I think you mean this is CHECKMATE. lol. As i said all along. This is what i want along with most of the American people. You rejected the "grand plan". I quess your not as serious about deficits as you suggested. A secret tea party
member? looking increasingly like a fact.
"Eighty percent of the American people support an approach (to federal budget problems) that includes revenues and includes cuts."
Barack Obama on Friday, July 15th, 2011 in a press conference
Barack Obama said 80 percent of Americans favor both spending cuts and tax increases to address budget problems,
As President Barack Obama and Republicans in Congress continued their high-stakes stand-off over raising the debt ceiling and other budget issues, Obama held a press conference to press his case that he's a reasonable guy.
One of the main points of contention is whether an agreement should include tax increases of any kind, such as closing tax loopholes or tax increases on the wealthy. Republicans oppose raising taxes.
During a press conference on July 15, 2011, Obama was asked if the negotiations would be going better if he had started making his case to the public months ago, pushing a proposal that included tax increases and spending cuts. Obama rejected the premise.
"You have 80 percent of the American people who support a balanced approach. Eighty percent of the American people support an approach that includes revenues and includes cuts. So the notion that somehow the American people aren't sold is not the problem," he said. "The problem is members of Congress are dug in ideologically into various positions because they boxed themselves in with previous statements."
We won't weigh in on Obama's diagnosis of being dug in, but we were interested in the poll numbers on whether the public supports a balanced approach or not.
The most recent poll we found largely supported Obama's statement. A Gallup poll conducted July 7-10, 2011 posed the question this way:
"As you may know, Congress can reduce the federal budget deficit by cutting spending, raising taxes, or a combination of the two. Ideally, how would you prefer to see Congress attempt to reduce the federal budget deficit: only with spending cuts, mostly with spending cuts, equally with spending cuts and tax increases, mostly with tax increases, or only with tax increases?"
The answer "only spending cuts" got 20 percent. The other answers were "mostly spending cuts," 30 percent; "equal spending cuts and tax increases," 32 percent; "mostly tax increases," 7 percent; "only tax increases," 4 percent; unsure/other, 6 percent.
We'll note that Obama counted in his favor people who favored only tax increases or who weren't sure, so he wasn't completely accurate. If you deduct those groups, only 70 percent support the balanced approach. But the poll did support his overall point.
Other polls also showed support for Obama's statement, but not quite at an 80-percent level.
A poll from Quinnipiac University conducted July 5-11, 2011, asked: "Do you think any agreement to raise the national debt ceiling should include only spending cuts, or should it also include an increase in taxes for the wealthy and corporations?"
In this case, 67 percent favored including tax increases, while 25 percent favored spending cuts only. Another 8 percent were unsure.
In June, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found that most people, 46 percent, favored a combination of cuts and tax increases, compared with 26 percent who said cuts alone and 13 percent who said raise taxes. An ABC/Washington Post poll from April found the number was higher, at 59 percent.
We reviewed polls and consulted experts a few weeks ago for a fact-check on whether people support tax increases or not. Karlyn Bowman, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute who studies polls on taxation, told us polls usually show support for balanced approaches, particularly if people don't have to pay the higher taxes themselves.
"Generally, combinations of tax hikes and spending cuts are most popular. It seems fair to most people. Spending cuts are favored in the abstract. Tax hikes are favored as long as they don't affect me. Generally, people don't think anybody should have to pay more than a quarter of their income in total taxes," she said.
Finally, a few other cautions on poll numbers.
Pollsters have long noted that when you ask questions with different wording, you get different results. All the polls we looked at phrased the question slightly differently.
A few recent polls also suggested that people find the whole debt ceiling debate confusing, or they aren't following it very closely. A Pew Research Center/Washington Post poll from May asked people how well they felt they understood what would happen if the government does not raise the federal debt limit; 47 percent said "not too well" or "not at all well." And the July Gallup poll found that 42 percent of respondents were following the issue "not too closely" or "not at all."
Getting back to Obama's statement, he said, "You have 80 percent of the American people who support a balanced approach. Eighty percent of the American people support an approach that includes revenues and includes cuts." Even the best poll doesn't show support quite that high -- he would more accurately have accounted for the small numbers that support only tax increases or were unsure, putting the number at 70 percent. But his overall point is correct that polls show most Americans support a balanced approach when given a choice between cutting spending or raising taxes. So we rate his statement Mostly True.
But, but, but you just noted that no one wants increased taxes including yourself so how would 80% favor that approach. Your position here Lloyd is very confusing. Dr. Hava and Mr. Kasha.
How do you think American would poll if the question were, "are you comfortable paying more taxes to cover the cost of the bailout of Wall Street banks?" It's really the same question, just asked a little differently. Do you thnk 80% of Americans would say, "sure"?
I hardly believe you would endorse that as part of a balanced "grand plan"?
I From Politifact.com. I think you mean this is CHECKMATE. lol. As i said all along. This is what i want along with most of the American people. You rejected the "grand plan". I quess your not as serious about deficits as you suggested. A secret tea party member? looking increasingly like a fact.
"Eighty percent of the American people support an approach (to federal budget problems) that includes revenues and includes cuts."
Barack Obama on Friday, July 15th, 2011 in a press conference
Barack Obama said 80 percent of Americans favor both spending cuts and tax increases to address budget problems,
As President Barack Obama and Republicans in Congress continued their high-stakes stand-off over raising the debt ceiling and other budget issues, Obama held a press conference to press his case that he's a reasonable guy.
One of the main points of contention is whether an agreement should include tax increases of any kind, such as closing tax loopholes or tax increases on the wealthy. Republicans oppose raising taxes.
During a press conference on July 15, 2011, Obama was asked if the negotiations would be going better if he had started making his case to the public months ago, pushing a proposal that included tax increases and spending cuts. Obama rejected the premise.
"You have 80 percent of the American people who support a balanced approach. Eighty percent of the American people support an approach that includes revenues and includes cuts. So the notion that somehow the American people aren't sold is not the problem," he said. "The problem is members of Congress are dug in ideologically into various positions because they boxed themselves in with previous statements."
We won't weigh in on Obama's diagnosis of being dug in, but we were interested in the poll numbers on whether the public supports a balanced approach or not.
The most recent poll we found largely supported Obama's statement. A Gallup poll conducted July 7-10, 2011 posed the question this way:
"As you may know, Congress can reduce the federal budget deficit by cutting spending, raising taxes, or a combination of the two. Ideally, how would you prefer to see Congress attempt to reduce the federal budget deficit: only with spending cuts, mostly with spending cuts, equally with spending cuts and tax increases, mostly with tax increases, or only with tax increases?"
The answer "only spending cuts" got 20 percent. The other answers were "mostly spending cuts," 30 percent; "equal spending cuts and tax increases," 32 percent; "mostly tax increases," 7 percent; "only tax increases," 4 percent; unsure/other, 6 percent.
We'll note that Obama counted in his favor people who favored only tax increases or who weren't sure, so he wasn't completely accurate. If you deduct those groups, only 70 percent support the balanced approach. But the poll did support his overall point.
Other polls also showed support for Obama's statement, but not quite at an 80-percent level.
A poll from Quinnipiac University conducted July 5-11, 2011, asked: "Do you think any agreement to raise the national debt ceiling should include only spending cuts, or should it also include an increase in taxes for the wealthy and corporations?"
In this case, 67 percent favored including tax increases, while 25 percent favored spending cuts only. Another 8 percent were unsure.
In June, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found that most people, 46 percent, favored a combination of cuts and tax increases, compared with 26 percent who said cuts alone and 13 percent who said raise taxes. An ABC/Washington Post poll from April found the number was higher, at 59 percent.
We reviewed polls and consulted experts a few weeks ago for a fact-check on whether people support tax increases or not. Karlyn Bowman, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute who studies polls on taxation, told us polls usually show support for balanced approaches, particularly if people don't have to pay the higher taxes themselves.
"Generally, combinations of tax hikes and spending cuts are most popular. It seems fair to most people. Spending cuts are favored in the abstract. Tax hikes are favored as long as they don't affect me. Generally, people don't think anybody should have to pay more than a quarter of their income in total taxes," she said.
Finally, a few other cautions on poll numbers.
Pollsters have long noted that when you ask questions with different wording, you get different results. All the polls we looked at phrased the question slightly differently.
A few recent polls also suggested that people find the whole debt ceiling debate confusing, or they aren't following it very closely. A Pew Research Center/Washington Post poll from May asked people how well they felt they understood what would happen if the government does not raise the federal debt limit; 47 percent said "not too well" or "not at all well." And the July Gallup poll found that 42 percent of respondents were following the issue "not too closely" or "not at all."
Getting back to Obama's statement, he said, "You have 80 percent of the American people who support a balanced approach. Eighty percent of the American people support an approach that includes revenues and includes cuts." Even the best poll doesn't show support quite that high -- he would more accurately have accounted for the small numbers that support only tax increases or were unsure, putting the number at 70 percent. But his overall point is correct that polls show most Americans support a balanced approach when given a choice between cutting spending or raisi
S&L opposed this plan even though he claims to be for cutting the deficit.
He also tried to claim Obama wasnt for cutting the deficits.
"Despite his image as a button-down Republican, House Speaker John Boehner walked to the brink of a dramatic and historic agreement to change the government's spending habits.
But as he twice approached a $4 trillion deficit-reduction deal with President Barack Obama that would have rocked both parties'
This was the bill that S&L opposed even though he claims that deficits are t
" Boehner was reeled back in by his caucus' conservative wing. The muscular, Tea Party-fueled group not only forced him to abandon a "grand bargain" with Obama, it made him scramble Wednesday to secure the votes for a far more modest deficit-ceiling plan, which in turn is all but doomed in the Senate.
The events highlight the limits of power for an experienced and well-liked politician who has struggled to budge his caucus' staunchest conservatives despite constantly reminding them that their party doesn't control the Senate or White House."
Too busy throwing a tantrum, Hava-gafa-kasha may have missed this question that certainly deserves further consideration.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong
I think the Obama/Boehner plan was probably the best plan out there even though i disagree with parts of it.
Seems like most Americans thought so as well.
Why It's Hard for Boehner to Compromise
Amy Walter looks at the latest ABC/Washington Post poll to show why it's so tough for House Speaker John Boehner to get his Tea Party troops in line.
Key findings: When asked if a government default would "cause serious harm to your own financial situation," 60% of Americans said it would, including 58% of independents. But, among those who identify themselves as "strong" Tea Party supporters just 44% think it would harm them financially.
Furthermore, 62% of Americans said they think that the best way to reduce the deficit is through a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. But, among strong Tea Party supporters, just 34% want to see compromise.
I kind of knew Moderate Republicans were going to move closer to supporting Reid compromise.
My quess is that S&L opposes this even though he says he is a moderate.
Sen. Scott Brown May Support Reid's Debt Plan
Top News Fri. 2:56 PM — Sen. Scott Brown suggested he may support Majority Leader Harry Reid's debt limit plan, in an interview with WBUR radio, Politico reports. Read more »