Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Thursday, Nov. 8, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
Regarding Wednesday’s editorial, “One nation indivisible?”:
I wholeheartedly agree that our government needs to get down to work and find the common ground necessary to take care of the business at hand. However, your editorial makes it sound like it’s only the House Republicans who stand in the way.
The House of Representatives is called “the people’s house” for a reason, and we, the people, still gave our House an overwhelming majority. Sure, there is no mandate, but neither is there one for the Senate and the president.
Certainly, the House needs to compromise on some issues, but someone needs to remind President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that they also need to compromise. Negations can’t succeed when the Democrats won’t even sit down without prior GOP acquiescence to raising taxes.
If they don’t, we will have four more years of gridlock, and without compromise, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
So far, Bohner and McConnell haven't said anything that shows they are willing to compromise any of what they have demanded.
More obstructionism through holding up most of the bills sponsored by DEmocrats in committees and filibusters for the last 2 years.
Democrats made some gains in the House and in the Senate. Let's see if Republicans learn anything in 2014, if they continue with more of the same.
The House was working yesterday asking the WH to meet to work on the Compromise to solve the fiscal cliff. The House has proposed increased revenue with closing loophole with tax reform. The House asked Obama to lead on this issue
Still no response from the WH
Writer is right every member of House was elected by the people. They are there to do what we sent them to do. Balance the budget and create a jobs environment
President Obama didn't reach out to the GOP in his first term and won't in his second. President Obama thinks compromise is for the other party not him. Well...Speaker Boehner and Minority Leader McConnell will hold Obama's feet so far in the fire that if Obama doesn't jump to their commands he's going to be toast.
CarmineD
I think the R's and the Tea Party will regret it if they do not move off their position of 'no new taxes'.
There is evidence to suggest that higher taxes don't always generate greater revenue, but there is also evidence to show that a majority of Americans want to see higher taxes on the wealthy and business.
R's should compromise on this issue and then closely monitor what happens. In my opinion, if R's allow some tax increases and the spending continues to increase as I suspect it will, R's will be able to show in 2014, that the economy is still moving along slowly and our debt is nearing 20 trillion dollars.
R's and Conservatives have tried to 'tell' Americans that the Progressive ideas won't work. Yesterday's election said that somewhat more than 1/2 of Americans don't believe what R's and Conservatives told them and want to try the Progressive way. I think it is time for the R's and Conservatives to compromise.
Personally, I don't think we can succeed economically (like we have in the past) using many Progressive ideas, but it's also true that using Conservative ideas led, in part, to an economic collapse.
I'm a moderate, but I think Conservatives need to recognize that they are losing the argument to Progressives and they are going to have to 'take a risk' to have an opportunity to win the argument.
That 'risk' is to give a little and compromise with the other side. I could be wrong but I still happen to believe that if Progressives are allowed to do some of what they want to do, in 2 years our economy is still going to be slow and we are going to have even larger debt.
I think we are going to need increased taxes on all Americans, a totally re-written income tax code and less government spending in many areas to have 'any' chance to recover economically. I don't think Romney and the R party would have done enough of that if he'd been elected. I also don't believe Obama and Progressives will either.
My advice to the R's and Conservatives is to compromise some and let the Progressives do some of what they want.
When it doesn't work, as I suspect it won't, simply point out your cooperation, and your doubt and ask for voters support for a change in 2014.
I'd love to see our economy start working well, but without real cuts to spending and higher taxes on everyone, I just don't think it is going to happen. And sadly, neither Conservatives or Progressives are willing to do 'all' that has become necessary.
Michael
"Negations can't succeed when the Democrats won't even sit down without prior GOP acquiescence to raising taxes."
Negations? I hope that's a typo and not a Freudian slip.
Negotiations can't succeed when the Republicans won't sit down unless there's agreement not to raise taxes.
Everybody needs to look up the dictionary definition of "negotiation".
"I think the R's and the Tea Party will regret it if they do not move off their position of 'no new taxes'."
No they won't. GOP with an increased and revived TEA PARTY contingent in the House will agree to higher tax revenues ONLY....NOT HIGHER TAXES. This can happen in one of two ways and/or both: Reform taxes and/or cut spending. That's it. That's the GOP plan and they are sticking with it.
CarmineD
CD IS CORRECT "GOP..... in the House will agree to higher tax revenues ONLY."
The question is why don't the Democrats want increased revenue off the rich by closing loopholes?
Actual they do. Yesterday Reid was careful to only use the REVENUE word not the TAX RATE words.
So why can the rest of Democrats get there?
Carmine,
The issue to too nuanced for most voters to understand. R's argue that if more revenue is the goal, then you reduce deductions for the wealthy, so they end up paying more, but the rate stays the same.
The D's have the more easily understandable position of 'just raise the tax rates for the wealthy'.
I suspect that D's will stick to their 'simple' position. If R's try to resist and argue their more difficult to understand position, they will lose the argument and be vilified.
We have to live with what is, and what is...is a very unsophisticated American population.
The revenue generated from the wealthy can't possible fix our problems. The R's would be wise to let the D's try and watch them fall flat on their faces... rather than obstruct with an alternative that too many Americans won't understand.
Michael
We should look at Sweden's success in turning its economy around during the last 20 years. Socialist democrats in Sweden moved right. "The Social Democrats haven't only joined the free-market consensus, but seem to attack the current government from the right, pushing for a better business environment. Gone are demands for the restoration of social benefits. Opinion polls have rewarded the Social Democrats for their right turn with sharply improved ratings.....The values are competition, openness and efficiency, while social and environmental values remain -- a social-welfare society without the social-welfare state. The idea is to make it more efficient through competition among private providers."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-06...
This letter is only taking what has happened in the past two years and has turned the blame around and apportioned it to another political party. And the truth of the matter is that the truth of the matter is that the entire Tea/Republican Party made a conscious effort to not participate in Government. This is fact. It's not spin. FACT.
But I do enjoy hearing the ultra-conservative viewpoint is still alive and well after this election.
Because the more the volume is turned up, the faster the Tea/Republican Party is going to self-destruct. Not from outside sources. From within.
The only thing the rest of us can do is to stand back. Stay safe out of the way of flying shrapnel when the Tea/Republican Party shakes itself to pieces and implodes.
But hey, don't listen to me. I got plenty of popcorn. It's gonna be pure entertainment watching this happen.
Compromise:
(1)a settlement of differences by mutual concessions;
(2)an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., (3)by reciprocal modification of demands.
It is becoming very clear the National Republican Party is in serious decline. Lacking any clarity of truth or direction.
The main problem, Big money has hijacked the RNC and using groups like the Tea Party to ravage old-school republicans out of office.
Who is the face and the voices of the Republican Party in America?
Well, lets see...Donald Trump, John Sinunu, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Foxnews, Peter King, Michele Bachman, Paul Ryan.
And who are the obstructionist in the Republican Party?
Well, lets see...Mitch McConnell, John Bohener, Eric Cantor, Renince Priebus, and Grover Norquist.
This group of obstructionist have another agenda, as shown by them voting against serious items they once championed and proposed.
Now, how can this group continue as they are and think they are representing America? If this group remains intact the Republicans will not win another election for the next 20 years.
Carmine is 100% wrong with his statement that "President Obama didn't reach out to the GOP in his first term and won't in his second. President Obama thinks compromise is for the other party not him."
Not sure where my little buddy gets his strange beliefs from?
Obama spent an unbelievable amount of time trying to work out differences between the Democrats & the Republicans with very little success.....
Time and time again, GOP leaders literally walked out of meetings & refused to consider anything that was on the table...
Hey little buddy...
I'm still waiting for you to answer a couple of the questions that I have ask you concerning your predictions for the recent election....
Now, how many electoral votes did you say that Romney was going to get & how many of the battleground states was "mittens" going to carry?
Your refusal to answer my two questions clearly points out to the other posters on this board how "one-sided" and narrow minded you really are... Of course, it's apparent that you live in a bubble!
I would think that "a moderate (such as you..) who leans to the left" would have NO problem standing behind your previous statements......
Why won't you answer the questions? Are you denying that you said what you did?
I'm still waiting....
What's that sound I keep hearing?
Sounds like crickets, doesn't it?
Colin and LongTimeVegan,
If the House and Senate happen to settle upon a proposal that would not raise the tax 'rates' of the wealthy, but instead eliminate some and limit other exemptions and deductions used by the wealthy to reduce their taxes, will you be supportive?
Michael
El_lobo,
The fact is that both the House and the Senate, during the last 2 years of Obama's first term were unwilling to bend enough to reach a compromise. The efforts made by President Obama during those two years were clearly not successful.
True compromise revolves around being willing to settle for less than one wants. Clearly, neither side was willing to do that over the past two years.
Hopefully, that will change now that the election is over.
Michael
Longtimevegan....
Great post! Says it as it really is....
Of course, you're not going to get any of the right-wingers on this board to agree with you...
The extreme right-wing nut jobs are leading the GOP over the cliff to their destruction....
Very few moderates and NO progressives are in the present day Republican Party...
Former Republicans such as Abe Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt & Dwight Eisenhower would not recognize the present day Republican Party...
Matter of fact, if all three of them were around today, they would belong to the Democrat Party..
The current group of Republicans remind me of the Iowa farmer who was willing to go to any extreme to get rid of the rats in his barn.....he finally got rid of the rats by burning his barn to the ground....
That's the way the GOP looks at the world.. That's how extreme they are...
Can any democratic supporter here in this forum articulate the current tax policy positions of either Obama, the republicans or both? And what are the goals of the tax plans?
The republican House majority is built sand. Let those far-right ideologues step outside their gerrymandered districts and they'd be slaughtered like so many GOP Senate candidates were in this election.
Why should the GOP "compromise". They've been Rope-A-Doped twice before.
Reagan agreed to let taxes rise when the Dems agreed to lower spending. Taxes rose, spending increased.
George "No New taxes" Bush caved to tax increases when again the Dems again promised to lower spending. Again, taxes rose, spending increased.
Compromise to the Democrat party is the other party must totally concede their position.Kind of a "bend over and grab your ankles" proposition.
Until a way can be found to force the Dems to live up to their agreements to cut spending don't waiver on one issue. Period !!
"If the House and Senate happen to settle upon a proposal that would not raise the tax 'rates' of the wealthy, but instead eliminate some and limit other exemptions and deductions used by the wealthy to reduce their taxes, will you be supportive? (Michael Casler)
In a nutshell, this sounds simple. This sounds reasonable. The question, would this action simulate economic growth? I think not!
My preference would be to eliminate unproductive deductions, unproductive exemptions, and lower the taxrate for all Americans proportional and balanced.
Here is the folly of the raise the taxes rates vs eliminating loopholes and deductions for the rich
Raising the rates will only bring in $40 to 60 billion per year
While there is $1.1 trillion per year available for deduction and loophole
Do Democrats want revenue or don't they. Make up your Mind
Heller took a lot a credit for voting against the bailouts as if it really mattered. You know he wouldn't have let his rich buddies go broke if his vote really mattered. To the contrary, I say the Democrats have did all the compromising , and the poor keep getting threatened. I say lets floor it and drive off the fiscal cliff. A good reason to take money from the wealthy is to keep them from lobbying for things that are bad for the rest of us.
I posted this on 2/2/09
One spender replaces another in Oval Office
I don't think the new President had any choice but to try and spend our way out of the economic mess. The other choice would most likely have crippled our country for a generation, thereby allowing China and Russia to leap past us in world stature. Our economy is already at China's mercy. At least the spending will hopefully be directed towards making America strong again instead of year end bonuses to corporate lackeys.
I think the pork was put in expressly for the purpose of being taken out so that the spirit of a bipartisan bill can evolve. God knows the Republican party needs to be a part of something constructive as the republican backlash will probably last for another two election cycles.
One cycle down, and at least one to go.
CLINTON - PATRICK 2016
Greedy
Old
Party
RIP
If the administration does not lead AND compromise, we will have another four years of stagnation (at best) and perhaps more recession, endless recession. Do the math: 100 million potential workers to support 250 million dependents? What kind of life style are we going to have? Federal spending is 35-45% of GDP, local government spending (state, city, county, sd) is another 20-30%. We just cannot have more than 50% of our GDP being spent by government--most of it given away here and abroad.
Above Mr. Freeman mentions Sweden. I agree, Sweden would be a wonderful model to adopt. The problem is Sweden has a population substantially smaller than Los Angeles County and more importantly they have the lowest "Gini coefficient" in the world. Very low income inequality.
In this country you have a handful of affluent people and millions that can't pay their bills. Our income inequality is roughly equal to Turkey and Chile.
Because of massive special interest lobbying it is nearly impossible to put together a cohesive tax policy, policy for restraining medical inflation, or even getting education costs under control.
Special interest influence is murdering this country.
Longtimevegan writes "My preference would be to eliminate unproductive deductions, unproductive exemptions, and lower the taxrate for all Americans proportional and balanced."
I agree. We need to create a favorable business environment for business investment and consumer spending. We need government to rein in spending and we need tax reform to remove fiscal uncertainty which is causing businesses to not invest long-term and consumers with means to spend less. Tax reform will let everyone know what their tax liability will be long-term. Top wage earners are earning 34% less than pre-recession. We have 17% fewer tax filers compared to pre-recession. Tax revenue collected is 14% compared to 18% pre-recession. We need the President/congress to create an environment for businesses to invest and consumers with means to spend. Right now that's not happening like it has in previous economic recoveries. GDP needs to grow 3.2% per annum just to keep pace with new entrants into the workforce versus the 1.3% GDP growth rate we have now. We need to create jobs and lower the *growth rate* of government spending in order to get businesses to invest and consumers with means to spend again. Both the Simpson-Bowles plan and the Republican plan prescribes to lower tax rates by eliminating tax deductions that benefit mainly the wealthy and larger companies.
@EL_Lobo,
"The current group of Republicans remind me of the Iowa farmer who was willing to go to any extreme to get rid of the rats in his barn.....he finally got rid of the rats by burning his barn to the ground....(Posted by El-Lobo)
Sad description. A description factually correct based on the past actions of the House of Representative controlled by the Republicans since the 2010 elections.
This group is wasting America!
Rosalinda... You need to calm down! We haven't had years of recession. The recession ended years ago and we have had economic growth ever since. The growth has been muted by historical standards due to the $20 trillion that Americans lost during the financial crisis. They've only got a small fraction of that back so far. Our economy is driven by consumption and consumption is weak because Americans don't have any money.
You can have more than 50% spent by government. Government spending as a percent of the economy goes up as populations age, growth slows and the private sector contracts. It's less than ideal but there is still another 30,000,000+ baby boomers waiting to retire.
I predict that growth will be below trend and unemployment will be above trend for decades to come. This will reverse when baby boomers start dying off in large numbers and the population starts becoming younger. You could also reverse the trend by cramming millions of more young immigrants into the country. Immigrants create jobs and tax revenues. People born in this country create almost no jobs. They tend to work for others.
Gerry writes "In this country you have a handful of affluent people and millions that can't pay their bills."
Gerry, what is the relative consumer purchasing power of the United States versus other countries? Income is only one variable, cost is the other. At one time, you suggested each US household needs $200,000 a year just to make ends meet but I noticed you didn't note the cost of living differences for different areas of the country. Would your $200,000 be required in Mississippi and New York or would the purchasing power be different due to cost of living differences?
Ref... You no longer need 3.2% growth to keep up with new entrants into the workforce. This metric applied when we had strong population growth and a robust birthrate. We now have the lowest birthrate in recorded history and an anti-immigration policy. Keep in mind our population nearly doubled from World War II to the current time frame. I doubt that we will have over 600 million people in the next 60 years. Our population will likely be much smaller and you will be able to keep people working with a much slower growth rate.
In many European countries where there has been almost no population growth since World War II they have been able to keep people working and keep their economies at very close to full employment level of output with growth rates in the 1% to 2% range.
I have told you over the last year or two that you will never see sustained 3% growth in the United States again. It's not possible in a mature economy with an aging population. It's not possible without massive immigration. In addition the strong competition from developing nations will reduce our potential.
Gerry,
We agree to disagree. We have 58.7% of our population working for the last three years but during the previous 20 years we averaged 62%-64% of the population working. Based on your assessment, those 15 million unemployed Americans don't have much of a chance to gain employment. Your assessment and the current economic conditions would give any high school grad pause to seeking higher education as 50% of current grads can't find a job in their chosen field. If the current government tax & spend policies are in place long term then I would agree with you as it would suppress private investment and consumers with means from purchasing.
The $200,000 number comes from the healthcare industry as a result of dragging vast numbers of Americans to court over unpaid medical bills. It is just an average. Your correct, the cost of living in Mississippi is a lot less than Manhattan. But working people in Mississippi aren't any better shape than people in Manhattan. Medical costs, education costs are expensive all over. They might be less in Mississippi but not by much.
Comparing the United States to other countries is difficult because they handle pensions, healthcare and housing differently. My son pays $442 a month for his Singulair and Asmanex to control his asthma. In Europe he would pay a few bucks for his drugs but much more for gasoline. In Europe after working 40 years he would get a pension that would replace a portion of his income. Here he will get $1000 month Social Security check in 2012 dollars. I paid for his college. In many countries college costs are determined by family wealth. Poor kids get a break in rich kids pay through the nose. Here there is currently close to $900 billion in outstanding school loans that kids are trying to pay off. No small chunk of change. That doesn't exist in many other countries.
Every country has its problems. Here its wealth distribution, debt and special interest driven hyperinflation in medical care.
I studied economics and mathematics when I went to UCLA in the 1970s. When I graduated I couldn't get a job in my chosen field because of the recession that was going on in those days. I went to work for the Santa Monica Police Department because it was the only job I could find and crime in this country was exploding.
It's not unusual for college graduates to not go to work in their chosen field. I'll bet you there are millions of psychology majors, sociology majors and others that are not working in those fields. This is nothing new. From an economic perspective this is a very difficult time in world history and it's going to take a very long time to square it all away. The cost of taking care of countless millions of aging people around the world is nothing less than staggering.
I'll endorse compromise when the Femocraps endorses photo ID requirements for voting. They won't do that because then they could no longer be able to cheat to win by the old Communist slogan "by any means necessary."
wtplv asks me: "If the House and Senate happen to settle upon a proposal that would not raise the tax 'rates' of the wealthy, but instead eliminate some and limit other exemptions and deductions used by the wealthy to reduce their taxes, will you be supportive?"
That question is moot.
You're trying to draw some linkage between tax cuts for the rich with something else.
And that's fine.
But here is one thing that WILL happen on January 1, 2013.
The Former President George W. Bush Jr. Tax Cuts For The Rich, The Filthy Rich, And The Obscenely Filthy Rich WILL END. Period.
Then we go after the tax exemptions.
I know. I know. You're thinking if they end for the rich, they end for everyone.
So be it. I can sacrifice. I already have. A little bit more is no problem.
But those tax cuts for the wealthy ARE GOING to end.
Fiscal cliff. You know the Tea/Republicans are all clamoring to build the diving board over the edge. Buying new bathing suits to get ready for the plunge. Even practicing to do it with style by executing perfect one and a half gainers.
Now, they are hedging and saying no, we shouldn't do it.
Too late. I'm going off the fiscal cliff.
But I'm shoving every single Tea/Republican politician over the cliff FIRST.
THEY took us here. THEY need to carry through. They choose the Tea Party low road? Good. Let's do it. That's what the Republican Party gets for listening to a protest movement that is more based on rhetoric than solving problems (Tea Party).
After that's over with, then we start chipping away at tax exemptions and subsidies for the rich and their corporations. But only after January 1, 2013.
Class warfare, baby. We didn't start it, but we're damn sure gonna finish it.
My point is that this stuff was all set in motion. It's coming to a result that the Tea/Republicans don't like and all of a sudden they want the rules changed because it ain't to their liking? NO. HELL NO. Tea/Republicans will go off that cliff first. I'll be down on the bottom with number signs: "Okay, I give that one a nine. Had to take a point off because he/she didn't nail the landing..."
"Carmine,
The issue to too nuanced for most voters to understand.... R's"
Mr. Casler et al:
Forget nuances and winning arguments. It's moot. Think barroom brawl, no holes barred, knock down drag out fight. This is the starting point of the GOP. On not just taxes but all issues with President Obama.
CarmineD
Gerry,
I appreciate your responses and enjoy our friendly debates. Now that the election is over, I think you'll see Obama pivot from higher taxes on top wage earners, a political strategy, to tax reform. Some reigning in on government spending will occur but the main drivers of our deficit/debt ,entitlements, will likely not be addressed.
By the way, the BLS algorithms supposedly adjust for expected birth/death rates so the civilian population numbers should be good estimates.
I don't see how anyone can compare income between countries, states and cities without also comparing purchasing power. Purchasing power parity attempts to determine the relative value of currencies, estimating the amount of adjustment needed on the exchange rate between countries in order for the exchange to be equivalent to (or on par with) each currency's purchasing power but is not an accurate gauge of relative purchasing power between countries because of the difficulty of selecting common goods across all countries.
http://bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_...
WRT El Lobo:
I answered your questions when you asked and happy to do again if you can't read or want to make a point.
What I said is this: You win some, and lose some and some you reach a draw.
Winning, as President Obama did, is just the start. Now he has to finish the job. That's going to be a rough road to hoe with a GOP controlled House, JUST AS I SAID IT WOULD BE.
CarmineD
Carmine,
The attitude you and many Conservatives take is one that might be appropriate in an economy not as broken as this one is and also not with the train wreck that was the bush 2nd term not so recent in Americans minds.
If Conservatives won't budge, Progressives will do what they just did successfully yesterday: they will portray Conservatives as obstructionists, who, if given power will just be Bush II. .... Carmine... take a look... it just worked to re-elect President Obama. And they will use it again.
I am sure that you agree with me that a Progressive agenda will not be very successful in fixing the economy and reducing deficits and the debt...mostly because it will consist of too much government spending and expansion and not enough reductions in spending and other things that could promote growth in the 'private' sector.
If you really believe in your philosophy, you should be willing to give the Progressives enough leeway so it can be demonstrated that the Progressive approach will not be successful economically.
Michael
Here's some facts:
President Obama has no mandate. NONE.
He was elected with fewer pop and electoral votes than in 2008. There was a 2 million vote difference between Romney and Obama. 2 million! In a country of 309 Million.
He waged the nastiest, dirtiest, most villifying campaign of any incumbent president in American history against a decent Christian man who did not reciprocate in kind.
GOP kept control of the House and added several new TEA PARTY candidates on top of the ones already there.
By all accounts, the president is a lameduck poised to undergo the political battle of his life to leave a legacy.
CarmineD
"I know. I know. You're thinking if they [Bush era tax cuts] end for the rich, they end for everyone.
So be it. I can sacrifice. I already have. A little bit more is no problem.
But those tax cuts for the wealthy ARE GOING to end." - ColinFromLasVegas
Maybe you don't mind the "sacrifice" of your tax rates going back up, but I sure as hell do! I'm in the bracket that gets hit the worst in terms of real money out of my pocket, at somewhat under 6 figures (barely even middle class anymore.) I am in the group that has the least deductions and credits to use. Itemizing for me rarely, if ever has been better than the standard deduction even when mortgage interest is figured in.
People making less than about $50k not only benefit greatly from the standard deduction, but also from several credits that in some cases allow them to get back more than was withheld. You want to throw them under the bus, too, which is akin to cutting your nose off to spite your face. Seems like a strange position for a progressive Democrat to take.
No, keep the lower rates, but as others are saying close the damn loopholes. Do that first, then see where the rates have to go.
Carmine,
President Obama had a terrible economy to run on. This should not have been close. He won anyway. If you want that to be the last time, the GOP is going to have to let Progressives enact some of what they want.
Then Americans will be able to see that it didn't work to fix the economy. If the GOP blocks everything, like they did in the last 2 years, they give the Progressives an excuse for a poor economy. That strategy just proved successful yesterday... for the Progressives. And you want to try it again?
Michael
Mr. Casler et al:
I omitted from the above that President Obama AND HIS MINNOWS will be facing House and Senate Committees on Benghazi, Libya. Do you think that will fortify the president's standing with the voters?
CarmineD
Carmine,
Once again, even if President Obama is made to appear to have handled Benghazi badly, he has already been re-elected. He will push for his agenda and if the R's refuse to cooperate at all, it just lends credence to the Progressive argument that the other side is out to make Obama fail and places party over country. Why is that so hard for Conservatives to understand?
Michael
RefNV Asks:
"Can any democratic supporter here in this forum articulate the current tax policy positions of either Obama, the republicans or both? And what are the goals of the tax plans?"
I say:
Hey there little feller, glad to see that you are still around. I know you have been a bit confuzzled about ANY KIND of monetary policy, so maybe these links can help:
http://2012.candidate-comparison.org/?co...
http://www.bartcop.com/Obama_Words.jpg
http://www.bartcop.com/ocean-humor-n.jpg...
http://www.bartcop.com/mitt-buh-bye.jpg
Jefffromvegas,
I stated articulate and state the goals of both Obama's and the Republican's tax plans. Your links aren't statements. I could be wrong but, unlike Jim Weber, Gerry, and Bchap among others, I don't expect debate with you, just partisan rhetoric.
Re Freeman,
There never has been a plan, with specifics, from either Romney or Obama. Still isn't. What Jeff provided was a list of what Obama did and tried to do in the past, and it lacks any specifics about what he will try to do going forward. Jeff knows this but doesn't care.
The most specific thing President Obama ever articulated regarding taxes is that he wanted to raise tax rates on the wealthy. Other than that, he has been as vague as Romney was.
Jeff seems just happy to hear about more taxes on the rich and seems unconcerned about anything else.... a truly dangerous position to take.
Michael
peacelily - "So far, Bohner and McConnell haven't said anything that shows they are willing to compromise any of what they have demanded."
Bingo! I don't trust the GOP. Last time after Boehner agreed he got 90% of what they wanted the House tanked the deal. They are not willing to trade $10 of cuts for $1 of revenue.
Carmine......Carmine.....Please, don't do
what you just did.
Shame on you.....shame on you...
You tried an end run but was caught for a 10 yard loss......
2nd down and 20 yds to go my little buddy.....
Give me some numbers....how many electoral votes did you say that Romney was going to get?
How many of the battle ground states did you say he was going to carry?
Show a little class & stand-up and be counted for at least once in your life....
You're fooling NO ONE on this board. Even your fellow right-wingers know what you said & they know that you listed numbers in your prediction...
I'm still waiting and while I wait, I keep hearing the sound of crickets coming from the right...
The conservatives on this post are very graceful losers. Well let's scratch the graceful part.
Let's face it.....Doing away with the tax breaks for the rich needs to be done...
Romney's "fat cat buddies" won't miss the money and since they rufuse to use (that's invest in jobs) any of the money that the Bush tax cuts gave them way back in 2002-2003, it's time for them to stand-up and be counted.
Of course, many of those "fat cats" are very up set at this point in time. They literally tried to buy the election and they failed....
The American people prevailed.... Isn't it great how a democracy works?
All those who voted for Obama took the opportunity to vote for retaining the middle class in this country, and they voted to give Obama another 4 years to clean up the Republican mess that he inherited....
At least 60% of those who voted for Romney (for some very strange reasons) decided to vote against their own best interests........they voted for "mittens" despite the fact that "mittens" had nothing in his bag of tricks that would actually help them.
A few moderate Republican out there (and there's very few of those left...) are saying what has been known for a long, long time.......the GOP is on the road to self destruction.
If the GOP continues down the same road, look for the party to literally dry up & blow away in the wind..
I get a real belly laugh when I hear many of the right-wingers try to justify why they got their butt kick this past Tuesday.
Many of then are saying that they lost the election because Romney was too moderate...he should have been more over on the right, the extreme right!
Is that funny, or what?
Carmine said "the House will agree to higher tax revenues ONLY....NOT HIGHER TAXES. This can happen in one of two ways and/or both: Reform taxes and/or cut spending. That's it."
With all due respect, he couldn't be more wrong. Revenue and spending are two totally distinct, unrelated issues. They have nothing to do with each other. If revenues are $1 and spending is $1, the net is zero (which, without the debt, is the ideal governmental result). When revenues change, spending does not. When spending changes, revenue does not.
Both issues matter and both must be addressed (probably simultaneously). But, simply put, one has nothing to do with the other.
Democrats don't mind higher taxes. All but 5 percent are in the 47 percent that Mitt Romney described.
Oh my, all us unsophisticated voters out here don't have a clue at the economic realities and strategies, or capitalism.
What a crock!
Thanks for that bit of elitism, Michael!
Peacelily,
I don't understand why the truth bothers you so much. Each person will have to decide whether they belong to the group that really has no clue and if they do, whether they want to remain without a clue.
I'm sorry but the reality is that in a country where huge numbers of people can't name the VP, can't name the two parties, can't explain why they vote as they do, can't explain how their own government works, can't define capitalism, etc, we have millions of clueless Americans.
I could lie and say it isn't so, but I won't. The clueless are not members of one party, one ideology, one anything. They are spread out widely among us. I am sorry if the truth offends you. The cluelessness offends me.
Michael
Colin,
That's an interesting response. It wasn't a response to the question asked... but so be it.
I have mixed feelings about the fiscal cliff that has zero to do with the Tea Party.
For me, as terrible as the consequences of going over the fiscal cliff might be, going over would do many things that I suspect Americans are going to be forced to do in the future anyway. I have zero faith the the R's, the D's or President Obama will make the tough choices that need to be made.
That's just the reality, unfortunately. I am sorry you labor under the false belief that the Tea Party and the wealthy are the reasons things are like they are.
Michael
Hey Carmine....
Have you seen the latest concerning Florida? The Romney camp has conceded Florida. They, after two days, have finally figured out that President Obama is the winner in Florida....
Hmmmmm....allow me ponder a bit! Yep, that's it!
President Obama has 332 electoral votes to Mitt Romney's 206.
And to think that Carmine actually believes that Obama does not have a mandate....now that's funny!
What other strange things doe my little buddy believe???
Probably such things as:
The Sun comes up in the West!
Water runs up hill!
Black is white!
"trickle-down" economics works!
George W Bush was a great president!
Carmine and El_Lobo,
President Obama won the popular vote by about 2 %. From what I read, the contests in the battleground states were also mostly won or lost within single digits. This was a close race and I think it would be hard to claim a mandate for either man no matter who won the election.
The country is divided roughly 50/50 and it has been for some time. Mandates really do not exist in such an environment, despite what both sides might like to claim.
Michael
All you republicans got smoked. You threw the kitchen sink at Obama and you came up snake eyes. Of the 48% who voted for Romney roughly half are good Americans who expect the losing side to work with the winning side. You know, get with the program!
The other 24% are like the pouters posting here.
That Mr. Casler, in spite of your slick willie posturing IS A MANDATE to get things MOVING!!!
'He waged the nastiest, dirtiest, most villifying campaign of any incumbent president in American history against a decent Christian man who did not reciprocate in kind.' Carmine D.
And just what exactly did Obama say that was false?
I don't recall any liberal voices referring to Romney as a Socialist Muslim that wasn't even American. Maybe they were doing it on FOX, I don't watch FOX.
Michael...
Obama has a clear mandate this time around (as he did in 2008) compared to what George W Bush had in 2000...
You may remember, Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000, but yet many Republicans said that George junior had a clear mandate...
When it comes to the electoral vote, Obama won more than 60% of the electoral vote......I would call that a clear mandate, wouldn't you?
Obama......332 electoral votes
Romney 206.....electoral votes
JeffFromVegas....
Have you seen the latest on how much money the GOP super Pacs spent on Senate & House races?
Karl Rove & his group failed miserably to get the candidates that they backed elected...
As we all know, the GOP tried to simply buy the election but they weren't successful in doing that...
Isn't it great when democracy works the way it should?
The voters decided to support the middle class & give President Obama additional time to clean-up the mess left by the Republicans....
Of course, according to Michael, most voters out there are very stupid. Maybe he was talking about Republican voters only?
El Lobo, the electoral vote doesn't mandate.
We'll see how this plays out but I can tell my lib friends that beating your chest in victory doesn't help your cause.
Pinky set the unfortunate tone when he called Romney out with his ignorant statement about not working with him. The dems can only do damage control.
My prediction is that the next two years will be very painful for our Nation.
El_Lobo:
It looks like the Rove portion was $325 MILLION
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/08...
And it looks like someone was pocketing some of that 325 large: The following was written by a Romney volunteer:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/334783.php
Heretic said:
"El Lobo, the electoral vote doesn't mandate."
Hmmmmm....apparently one does not become president by simply carrying the electoral college....
Do I have that right Heretic?
Even if a president-elect carries 60% of the electoral vote, right? No mandate?
Wonder where George junior and his supporters got the idea that George in 2000 had a mandate?
Of course, in 2000, junior did not have a majority of the popular vote did he?
Fuzzy Republican math????
Maybe FIXED NEWS said that or Rush Limbaugh said that?
That would make it true, right?
JeffFromVegas....
Thanks for the links....
My faith in democracy was restored with the results of Tuesday's election. The GOP spent all that money & yet they got their butt kicked....
Reading all the comments these last few days. It appears that some of our republican friends are walking around with their chins draging on the ground.
Back in 2008 when Pres.Obama won the first election over Sen. John McCain. Rush Limbaugh stated that he hoped the president elect (Obama) fails. Without coming right out and saying so. I believe if we read between the lines some of our own commenters today also hope Pres.Obama fails after winning his second term on Nov.6th.Some people will never change,but the voter's have spoken 332 electoral votes says it all.
Part 1
Michael,
I acknowledge reality, however, I find it arrogant and offensive to express the fact in a demeaning way. It demonstrates a lack of consideration of people who may be reading this topic, but not expressing their opinions.
Even more of an issue to me is how so many can talk about economic and financial issues and not once relate it to human experience & suffering, except to the extent they might be deprived of their wealth, or to label others as takers, etc.
The immorality of these discussions is egregious.
Bohner and McConnell are holding firm with their same old lines, except now they are even telling Obama that he must accept Romney's plan. This is the height of fantasy.
Obama won the election. If he caves into Bohner and McConnell, the people who voted for him will cave in on him. He will be going back on all he said. I don't believe he will do that.
So, we are left with the Fiscal Cliff.
If I were advising Obama, I would encourage him to start campaigning on that with explanations. Include in that the reassurance that we pulled together to help each other in past crises and if those making over $250,000 don't want to support America, the rest of us will, even if a recession results.
In two years, we will elect Democrats to replace the Republicans in Congress. Then we can make sure our President can act in the best interests of the nation.
Many sacrifices were made in WWII, and Americans have the stuff to make more sacrifices in order to get out of the Republican extortion plots.
It may have global effects as well, but Mrs. Merkel will have to accept some austerity for Germany for a change, instead of telling everyone else they must do so, and without any provisions for growth, and we recommended. Don't think she isn't nervous! Her own election coming up.
I'm for the Fiscal Cliff, which the Congress caused, and will do what I can to help the campaign for people to come together, show our metal, sacrifice and share.
The Bohner-McConnell-Tea Party can stand their ground until it opens up under them and sucks them in.
It is time the "unsophisticated and clueless" as you put it, started showing that people are not going to take this treatment any longer.
Let's not forget what started this ball rolling...
Unfunded war in Iraq as a result of lying to the public.
Unfunded war in Afghanistan.
Banks, investment firms, ah heck, let's just simplify it and lump it all into Wall St, collapsed, and bankrupting several, throwing our whole economy into near total collapse.
Reverberations around the world with a global economic crisis, resulting in the Great Recession, or in some cases, depression.
So, I don't have much sympathy in protecting the wealthy, especially those who had not one ounce of concern for the people that lost their homes, went bankrupt, lost jobs from their greed.
Part 2
Bohner-McConnell want to make a deal closing some loopholes, but just like Romney, they don't say which ones. Do you hear the echo?
And I bet they want everyone to feel the pain so they will close some deductions, which one's they don't say. Maybe the $25,000 basket. Do you hear the echo again?
Sorry, but the voters who elected Obama, are not going to accept Romney's plan now.
I am really angry that Bohner-McConnell would even think that would be a reasonable compromise. It is no compromise.
The wealthy have plenty of ways of not paying taxes. And so do corporations. Time to get them on board.
I guarantee you that I would be much more harsh on both, if I were President.
However, all we have now is the Fiscal Cliff, since the Congress will not agree to tax increases, other than closing some unknown loopholes. I suspect those will only be those which cause the least tax increase.
A short term fix only delays the ultimate Fiscal Cliff. So let it begin January 1, 2013.
If the Republicans were so certain the people would elect Romney, and didn't have a real compromise ready, they lost and they were irresponsible.
Obama is President and the ball is in the court of the Congressional Republicans to come up with much more compromise than they are willing to agree to.
Off the cliff!
We, the people, will come together to support each other in whatever comes. And we will remember what the Republicans have done, from the beginning during the Bush Administration forward.
We will also remember all that the Obama Administration has done to pull us out of the catastrophic mess he inherited.
In 2014 we will help him to complete what he started by helping to give him a majority again.
As far as I am concerned, after all that I witnessed and heard from Republicans in the campaign, if Republicans want war, they have it!
I am expressing my own opinion and don't speak for anyone else. But I will make my support of such actions known to the Administration, the Democratic party, and anyone else who wants to be committed to such an action.
Peacelily,
Your making the points clear and the points are factual. However, your words will fall on deaf ear because Republicans are in a bubble. They only see and hear themselves. They are in denial. They must be replaced and rejected.
Your absolutely correct in saying in two years the others Republicans who are hurting America will be replaced by voters who will say, "We have had enough of the dumb stuff." I said the same thing is an earlier post on another subject.
The Republican Party is wasting America with their obstruction and division.
The American People overwhelmingly rejected Mitt Romney. The American People overwhelmingly rejected the Republican Platform. The American People overwhelmingly rejected a huge portion of the Republican Party.
We see many of the commentators who opposed the Presidents still arguing points that are not relevant. For that matter, their talking points were never relevant. Sources like Foxnews and the Drudge Report convinced weak minded people of an alternate reality, a fantasy. This is called being spoon-fed.
We saw first hand election night on Foxnews as Karl Rove was frantic on live TV, in extreme desperation, in denial about the true reality of what the American believed about his candidate Mitt Romney, and President Barack Obama.
The American People rejected Mitt Romney. The American People approved and affirmed Barack Obama as our President for a second term. This election was not even close! Not by 3000 miles!
The Republican Party is wasting America!
Longtimevega,
Thank you! I realize I am writing to a bubble, as far as a response goes.
My real purpose is to encourage and support Democrats efforts to carry on the work. It is clear it hasn't ended with President Obama's re-election.
The more difficult road may be ahead and it is time to transform the campaign into even more than a campaign.
I am tired of the majority of people being held hostage by wealth and power in the hands of a few and their control of the Republican Party for their benefit alone.
If there was only one reason, it should be the stagnant wage growth for 30+ years while profits soared, wealth and power accumulated and concentrated in the hands of a few, but there are many reasons.
This nation is now the ultimate pyramid scheme. It must change drastically. The people must sacrifice and share, and wage a fight to have a just share of the results of their labor, and their full rights.
If not, we are willingly giving ourselves over to serfdom or slavery. I refuse!
I will do whatever I can to help people see the reality and work together, in spirit of caring and sharing, to end the injustice closing in on us.
The people require a new emancipation! This is the leadership we need from President Obama.
The campaign for the Presidency was dominated by the economy, with a sprinkling of social issues. President Obama, in the midst of the worst economy since the Great D, and up against newly enacted unlimited spending by the superpacs, wins 300+ Electoral votes. If you have trouble characterizing that as a mandate, let's simply call it a strong statement of intent from the American people.
The President won the young vote, women, African Americans, and Latinos. Each demographic is growing or replenishing. Repubs won the white male and aged, both declining, and no longer broad enough to guarantee victory.
I am delighted to hear people such as Carmine doubling down on rejected policy. it will only hasten their good-riddance.
To all you socialists that point at Sweden as a "socialism works" success story (lie), here are the facts:
Better off than the US: The Swedish Institute of Trade reported in 2002 that "the median household income in Sweden at the end of the 1990s was the equivalent of $26,800, compared with a median of $39,400 for U.S. households". If Sweden were introduced to the U.S. as a new state, it would rank as the poorest according to these standards. This is in light of the fact that these numbers are gross values - before taxes - and Sweden has the highest taxes in the world. The same report also shows that Swedes fare lower than the lowest American socio-economic class, working-class black males.
No homeless:
The unfortunate in Sweden often don't roam the streets aimlessly, in fact, few are often found. That's because the state subsidizes them to live in optimal conditions and to provide little work - and if they are put into labor, it's in a public enterprise run by the government, to help reduce the official share of unemployed people. Workers can earn up to 570 paid days off a year (that's no typo - we know there are only 365 days a year - Swedes can earn more paid days off than days they actually work). So where are the poor, crazy, reckless people of Sweden? Living off Swedish tax money and taking up their inequitable residence in Swedish neighborhoods, and growing in numbers since the financial prosperity of the cradle-to-grave system doesn't discourage their lacklazy habits. They are often joined by productive Swedish citizens who simply take time off, after "earning" years of unemployment benefits. These categories, since they are subsidized, are not officially considered "unemployed" in most Swedish statistics, even though both demographics do no actual work. After making the observation that loons don't wander the streets of Sweden, P.J. O'Rourke commented in his book "Eat the Rich" - "The last time I walked through Gamla Stan, I didn't wonder where the crazy people were. In Sweden the craziness is redistributed fairly. They're all a little crazy."
continues post on Sweden ...I think this is important:
55% tax rate: This income tax, 55% of the Gross National Product, the highest income tax in the world, is also coupled with sales taxes, property taxes, and other excise taxes and tariffs. The Swedish sales tax, a "value added tax", ranges to 22.5% of items sold, on various goods including most foods. The total ownership of public goods by the Swedish government is roughly 64%, closing in on 70%, once you include all these other forms of taxation. That is not including government-owned means of production, which control about a full quarter of Swedish productivity.
Free education: Education is universally free in Sweden, and like other free government-sponsored systems, it's on the verge of financial collapse and decay. Per student Sweden pays an average of $7,000 a year, while the 9 years of elementary schooling is required, high school and further education is not. Students receive financial benefits for continuing to high school, in the form of about $100 a month, although by college most people have got weaned on the Swedish unemployment system. Some High School students teach Elementary school, while Colleges teach what Swedish High Schools did 15 years ago, showing the recent decline in the quality of Swedish education. To solve unemployment figures, many unemployed people are forced into menial courses to change their status from "unemployed" to "student", illustrating the general sense of misuse of the Swedish education system.
low unemployment: Sweden, like other Socialist nations, use methods to "hide" unemployment figures from staticians, reflecting a "strong economy". Most people on the government dole are changed in status to not be considered "unemployed", for instance, out of work citizens are often considered "on paid leave", or given a menial class and considered "students", or simply conscripted into public works programs funded by the government and given menial labor there. The government's ability to fund the unemployed hides unemployment numbers, giving Sweden years of having unemployment numbers like 2%. This, like other Socialist nations of it's ilk, does not reflect the real life numbers of regularly working people.
continue:
Sweden has a strong economy: The real story of Sweden is the exact opposite of a "socialist success story." The real story is that big government stifles growth and that what works is austerity. The real story of Sweden comes in two parts: pre-1993 and post-1993, or the quasi-socialist years and the austerity years.
From 1980 through 1997, Sweden's government spent more than all other advanced economies as a fraction of GDP. It peaked at 68% of GDP in 1993, an all-time record for advanced economies.
And how did that "socialism" work for Sweden? Its economy grew only 1.4% per year from 1980 to 1993, when the U.S. was growing 3.0% per year. And over those last five years, 1988-1993, it stopped growing altogether -- 0% growth. It fell farther behind the U.S: from 81% as rich to 72% as rich. Its debt grew to 70% of GDP.
In short, government spending in Sweden had the effect that free-market types always predict: slow growth and high debt. Government spending does not stimulate; it stifles, and it sticks our kids with the bill.
This country just resoundingly supported women's reproductive rights, granted same sex marriage by popular vote, and legalized the recreational use of marijuana. It then threw out multiple "legitimate rape" candidates. I turned to Fox, and after watching Rove insist he'd win Ohio on his white board, there was a comment that this is a still a center-right country. WOW. I guess the pinheads and feminazis Fox eagerly disrespects - and who just handed them a spanking - didn't get the memo.
Around 1993, Sweden's government changed its behavior: it started spending less. By 2011 it was spending "only" 49% of GDP. While that is still pretty high, that represents a cut of 19% of GDP, or about what the entire federal government of the U.S. spent each year in most of the Clinton and Bush years.
By 1998, Sweden was no longer Europe's biggest spender. By 2011, it had dropped to 9th place of 34 advanced economies. Sweden's government is still big, but not near the biggest, and it lost a lot of weight -- the equivalent of shedding the weight of the entire federal government of the U.S.
That is what I call "austerity": the government simply spending less. And how did that work out for Sweden? Since 1993, its economy grew 2.8% per year, or double its previous rate, while ours grew only 2.5% per year. Its debt was cut from a high of 73% of GDP to 37%.
Yes, we can learn from Sweden. Not that socialism works, but that austerity works. Learn. Then act accordingly, Mr Reid, Obama, et al.
MikeyA, Austerity doesn't work, look at Europe. We, on the other hand, are recovering. We are recovering slower than usual because of the efforts of the 'keep Obama one term' Republicans who thwart any attempts at progress in the hope of bettering their election chances. Non-austerity does not equate to socialism.
Victor.......
We're going over the cliff in Janurary.
And the GOP can cry until the cows come home.
We're going back to the President Clinton tax
structure.
Put on your big boy pants and man up.
MickeyA,
Why don't you credit your the source of your information?
http://www.paoracle.com/SocialismWORKS!/...
I lived in Europe for four years and moved two businesses to Sweden. You need to visit there and see for yourself how Sweden now embraces free markets and pro-growth business policies.
"Some people will never change,but the voter's have spoken 332 electoral votes says it all."
No it doesn't. Compare the popular vote: 50 percent to 49 percent. That says it all. It's almost a split even peoples' vote. No mandate.
And look at the House win. More GOP members than before the election and every single seat was up for grabs. That says it all. There's the peoples' mandate.
CarmineD
"Carmine,
Once again, even if President Obama is made to appear to have handled Benghazi badly, he has already been re-elected. He will push for his agenda and if the R's refuse to cooperate at all, it just lends credence to the Progressive argument that the other side is out to make Obama fail and places party over country. Why is that so hard for Conservatives to understand?
Michael"
Mr. Casler et al:
You get a notion in your head and that's it. NO changing it. You actually believe that the House of Representatives went GOP again in 2012 after doing so in 2010 because the voters want compromise. No, wrong. House went GOP again, adding more republicans than 2010 because American voters want to put the reigns on the president AND make sure his actions and policies get close scrutinization.
CarmineD
peacelily...
Wonderful, as usual.
I have ZERO FAITH in Boehner/McConnell and that smarmy, evil little man, Eric Cantor.
As long as these kinds of folks are ruling the roost of the TeaPublican party, there will be NO MEANINGFUL COMPROMISE COMING from the right.
I'm sure you've seen/read these, but for those that haven't...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/l...
http://www.npr.org/2012/11/07/164609577/...
Off the cliff we go.
"With all due respect, he [Carmine] couldn't be more wrong."
With all due respect, you are wrong. Let me say it again so you Obama fans with the stars in your eyes might understand better. Here's the next 2 years with the White House and GOP Peoples' House: Barroom brawl, knock down, drag out fight every step of the way. GOP is giving up nothing. Not an inch. President Obama is in for the political fight of his life.
CarmineD
"The campaign for the Presidency was dominated by the economy, with a sprinkling of social issues."
"The President won the young vote, women, African Americans, and Latinos."
Sorry CreatedEql these two statements don't go together.
Carmine:
You were so smug and proven wrong.
You are still smug and will be proven wrong again.
Unsophisticated and clueless? Moochers? Ignorant? Slut? Legitimate Rape. God wanted it to be?
Arrogance. That is what defeated you and your party. Accept it and learn.
Mr. Pizzo et al:
What says it all is the markets tanking over 440 points since Obama was reelected. Why do you think? Exuberance and joy for the win?
CarmineD
Sad Sad Teacher:
What you say about others says more about you than it does about them.
CarmineD
Like I said, arrogance.
I rest my case.
Thanks for helping me prove it.
People are not as ignorant as you seem to think.
"People are not as ignorant as you seem to think."
I don't think they are. In fact quite the opposite. They proved how smart they are by returning all the Republicans to the GOPeoples' House. Pretty smart to me.
CarmineD
Carmine, Carmine, Carmine:
You forgot to acknowledge how wrong, wrong, wrong your pre-election analysis and predictions were.
We knew, we told you, and you didn't want to hear us.
Listen again now.
You are, once again, wrong, wrong, wrong.
The stock market is ticked off at people like you, not the president, you know, the people who say they are going to give him the "fight of his life".
Your only pre-election prediction that rang true was about the debates. The first one showed me Romney was not as stupid as I first thought, the next two though showed Romney as an unprincipled charlatan, a bottom feeder if you will.
The country stopped the folks like you dead in your tracks from converting America into its piggy bank.
Welcome to OUR world.
Enjoy your time you have left on the planet.
From Garland Jeffries:
Welcome to the world of black, white, and Hispanic
Welcome to the world of love and hate
Welcome to the birth of a new nation
Of segregate, there's still a separation
Blacker than a 100 midnights
Whiter than white on white
Livin' in a virtual behind the color curtain
Now that ain't right, that ain't right
Welcome to the world
Welcome to the world
Welcome to the world
Welcome to the world
It's gonna be a great ride Carmine, get aboard!
Carmen lives on Planet Republican. She predicts that since the Dems didn't get a clean sweep of ALL races and houses, that means the people want complete gridlock. And she is cheer leading the fight.
She has been proven completely wrong on all her predictions, predictions founded on her understanding of people's desires. She seems to have learned nothing, therefore all her current predictions are also wrong. She is nothing more than having tantrums now.
I read your Part 1 and Part 2 posts, peacelily.
Couldn't agree more.
And I couldn't have said it better.
Well....
As a retired U.S. Navy Veteran, I would have probably said it with flowery adjectives and adverbs that are totally outside the realm of societal discourse.
And would have got my post removed.
Anyways, enjoyed it.
Carmine said:
"Mr. Casler et al:
You get a notion in your head and that's it. NO changing it. You actually believe that the House of Representatives went GOP again in 2012 after doing so in 2010 because the voters want compromise. No, wrong."
I say:
What a delicious pot calling the kettle black moment. The number one and two intransigent (one overt, one covert) posters calling one another stuck in cement shoes.
Sweet!
I have tears from laughing so hard!
Carmine,
"No it dosen't.Compare the popular vote: 50% to 49% that says it all.It's almost a split even peoples vote.No mandate".
Yes it does. The outcome of the election shows that the President has won a second term. No matter how you look at things we have Pres.Obama for 4 more years. The voter's have spoken 332 electoral votes. You had predicted 300 electoral votes for Romney.Would those 300 electoral votes have counted if Romney had won the election?
How many republicans, now that the country has been thoroughly shown to have a roughly 50/50 split with the Democrat Chosen to be the guy who signs the budget or vetoes it agree that the new paradigm for debt reduction as sanctioned by the voters of America BEGINS anew with the STARTING position on the national budget with one part cuts and one part revenue?
Anything other than this is not respecting the American People. I feel it should be five parts revenue to one part cuts, but that is not how my country voted.
What the house and senate are there for is to negotiate who and what gets cut, and who and what gets the old Clinton era tax rates.
It'll be interesting if any republicans here can agree with this premise.
Mr. Pizzo:
Electoral votes select the president regardless of party. Popular vote TELLS US BY HOW MUCH the Americans did.
This incumbent's poppular margin of win was the smallest, lowest, narrowist in American history for an incumbent president. Why?
Market down 440 points since Obama was reelected. Why?
GOPeoples' House STILL Republican. Obama can't do a thing without the GOPeoples' House.
CarmineD
Carmine:
Get a grip:
While not all ballots have been counted, Democrats hold an edge over Republicans in overall votes. According to ThinkProgress, 53,952,240 votes were cast for Democratic candidates, while Republican candidates received 53,402,643. However, thanks in part to redistricting, Republicans will hold more than half the seats in the House while receiving less than half of overall votes.
This means that America needs to compromise with EVERYTHING on the table.
Take your medicine.
One part cut, one part revenue. We can dicker on whose ox gets gored (no pun intended) but we have to start in the middle. That is where the country is, with Obama being entrusted to veto anything not being fair to everyone.
Hate it or love it, either lead, follow, or get back to your doritos and diet cokes.
Jeffery:
Keep dreaming. Boehner and GOPeoples' House will give up NOTHING. NOTHING. They got the mandate behind them.
CarmineD
Carmine,"Keep dreaming.Boehner and GOPeoples house will give up NOTHING.NOTHING. They got the mandate
behind them".
Are you one of the republicans who wish for Pres.Obama to fail? You can't change the outcome Gov. Romney lost.
Carmine:
I am glad to see you have chosen this attitude; with your accuracy in predicting things it means Boehner will cry uncle VERY SOON.
Thanks for the heads up!
Carmine is right. Republicans are not stupid. They know that they are in the right, and they will hold their ground. What is the right thing to do in your own household, in business, and in government when you have a huge unsustainable debt looming over your head? Well for most people and businesses, that means 1) Cut spending down to the bare essentials, sell assets to raise capital, get more income, or 2) go BK. BK is not an option for the gov since they can just print more money and raise the debt, but that weakens the value of the dollar and causes inflation. The DEM plan is wrong. Raise taxes and cut a little spending. Why is this the wrong approach? Just look at Sweden as an example. (figures listed above) Until they began to CUT services, their economy was stagnant as ours has been under Obama. With less money in the private sector to spend, what do you think will happen? That outcome is not acceptable. Taxes must be cut to put more money into the private sector and to spur the growth of new business, that's the right thing to do, and that's what the House will demand.
Carmine:
You are, once again, so wrong and narrow minded. And you're a sore loser, too. You are shouting from the top of b.s. mountain and nobody is listening. Stop deluding yourself and eating yourself up with such negativity. Stop making empty threats. You are still fighting a battle that was lost on election day. Go on a nice vacation, get away from it all for awhile and enjoy your retirement.
Let me bottom line this for all you Libs. You value your freedom and all that goes with living in a free market system, but you also believe you are ENTITLED to a free ride if you can't make it and feel it's okay to take from the "haves" to make life easier for the "have not's" (socialism). What you don't seem to understand is that Socialism does not result in an elevated standard of living for the masses! On the contrary, it results in a lowering of the standard of living vs a free enterprise marketplace! The rich in a Socialist regime become the government elites. They become owners of everything and dole out a pittance to the general public while they, the elites, live in the lap of luxury. Do any of you deny this?
In other words, you can't have it both ways. You are either free to swim or sink, fail or succeed in our free marketplace (while taking care of the young, elderly, and handicapped) or you redistribute wealth and take away the incentive to become wealthy. How many of you would play megabucks or the lottery if you knew that the gov would take 90% of the winnings off the top as some here have suggested was the norm way back when? How many of you would strive to make it big if that was the scenario?
Here's an example of what I mean "lowered standards" taken straight from everyone's favorite Socialist country Sweden: http://www.thelocal.se/43656/20121006/ Annica Eriksson, a lunch lady at school in Falun, was told that her cooking is just too good.
Pupils at the school have become accustomed to feasting on newly baked bread and an assortment of 15 vegetables at lunchtime, but now the good times are over.
The municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch since other schools do not receive the same calibre of food - and that is "unfair".
CRY ME A FRIGGEN RIVER! Your food is too good so make it taste like crap or we'll tell Obama! Is that what you loons want?
Compare to to the Republican mentality. A school is making healthy tasty food everyone is raving over, please make a list of what you're feeding your kids so that we can email it to all schools and make their kids happy as well! Republicans want to bring people up to the promised land, Democrats want to kick you in the face while you climb the ladder and send you back to the land of tasteless food, mediocrity, suffering, and heartbreak. What a choice, eh?
MickeyA:
Looks like you should ask yourself your questions and do your soul-searching for the answers in the privacy of your own mirror. Suggested readings to enlarge your worldview: anything that was not written by Ayn Rand or her adolescent idolators.
Here is a lot of the problem with compromise for republicans. They don't know where the ball is, it has been hidden on them by the Conservative Entertainment Complex. Watch here, especially at the 12:30 mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...
Here is a partial list of things I am willing to cut in the true spirit of compromise: 1) Gov salaries. 33% across the board to bring private sector salaries down in line with private sector salaries. Elected official salaries could be cut 50%, and no more private INS, they can go on Medicare or pay for their own INS just like we do. 2) Dept of EDU eliminated. Let states decide how they want to teach, what they want to teach, if they want to pray, etc. Have Washington mind their own business and respect state rights. That right there will save a ton of money! 3) No more wars unless we're attacked. Bring the troops home Obama! We don't need bases around the world to police everyone. If someone somewhere starts some chit, we'll pounce on them so quick their heads will spin. Have our military spend that money in US towns to help our economy, not some foreign economy. 4) End all foreign aid until we are debt free. Sorry, take care of your own first. 5) Review all programs and cut out all non essential personnel. On top of cutting their pay by 1/3, still a lot of belt tightening that can be done.
If Obama does this, then I'll allow him to raise taxes on people who make less than $34,000 from 10% to 15% and cut the child credit from $1000 to $500 as well as go along with the rest of the tax increases that will go along with the end of the Bush tax cuts. (that will happen Jan 1st unless those tax cuts are made permanent or re-enacted) What? You thought Obama was only going to raise taxes on the rich? WRONG AGAIN!
Mickey A: "Here is a partial list of things I am willing to cut in the true spirit of compromise...." etc.
Earth to the planet where Mickey A. was elected president: S.O.S! Close the wormhole! Your leader is disintegrating!
MickeyA:
After I saw your proposal, I called up the White House and left a message for Barack.
Imagine my surprise when he called back. He told me to relay a message to you. He said "Tell Mickey thanks for "allowing me" permission to enact the cuts you have outlined". He was genuinely shocked that you were so charitable to your fellow Americans. He wanted to know how this was going to affect your personal budget. He didn't see any sacrifice by you or your family that was easy to discern.
Help a brother out here: How much will you lose a week?
There is no future for the Republican party (and ditto for the tea party):
http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentar...
>Michael Casler: "The issue to too nuanced for most voters to understand .... The R's would be wise to let the D's try and watch them fall flat on their faces... rather than obstruct with an alternative that too many Americans won't understand."<
>>> The R's underestimated the "unsophisticated" American voters and were buried in the slide from the b.s. mountain they built. From that position, the R's are going to "let the D's try and..."? Well, fire it up and get going R's. Re-build that b.s. mountain, Fox News is providing the bulldozers.
Didn't Romney attack Obama for his "lack of skills in crossing the aisle" as he suposedly did in MA as governor?
(Obama actually did, but the GOP wouldn't even give him the time of day!)
Carmine just confirmed it: GOPs will NEVER, NEVER compromise.
Now, what does anyone think about that? Oy vay!
"Carmine:
You are, once again, so wrong and narrow minded. And you're a sore loser, too. You are shouting from the top of b.s. mountain and nobody is listening. Stop deluding yourself and eating yourself up with such negativity. Stop making empty threats. You are still fighting a battle that was lost on election day. Go on a nice vacation, get away from it all for awhile and enjoy your retirement."
I have one thing to say to you and Sad Sad Teacher: GOPeoples' House, Republican controlled AGAIN! KIt will fight Obama every step of the way and make sure he leaves a putrid legacy, just like he deserves.
CarmineD
"Carmine:
I am glad to see you have chosen this attitude; with your accuracy in predicting things it means Boehner will cry uncle VERY SOON.
Thanks for the heads up!"
Long live the GOPeoples' House.Second victory in a row.
CarmineD
Carmine,
"Republican controlled AGAIN! KIT will fight Obama every step of the way and make sure he leaves a putrid legacy,just like he deserves".
Wow, you are a sore and bitter person.Why can't you except the fact that Gov.Romney lost the election and move on.I can see that you would like to see Pres.Obama fail,even if it meant bringing down the country.
You are why people like myself and others who have switched from voting for a republican president to a democratic president.
Even Gov.Romney in his concession speech called on republicans and democrats to put the people before politics.Gov.Romney also said I pray that the president will be successful in guiding our nation.
Now that's a real man who excepts the results of loosing the election (Romney) and wishes the best for our country and Pres.Obama.
Carmine, listen to Gov,Romney's words and try and learn something from them,your hate is worn on your sleeve.
Mr. Pizzo:
You're right. I'm a bitter old man. I'm disappointed that Obama and his minnows ran a nasty smear campaign against a decent Christian honest man who put country before politics. And won, even by a negligible amount. It shows that negative campaigning still wins in the USA.
And I'm delighted that a majority of those who think like me voted for the GOPeoples' House republicans. We will make the peoples' stand for this country and keep her great and tried and true.
CarmineD
Again Mr. Pizzo:
Stock markets tank since election. Not because American investors and stakeholders are rejoicing with joy for the Obama win.
CarmineD
Carmine,
What does this have to do with comments I made in my last post? Stop the hate,you can't change things, the election is over.
CarmineD:
"I'm disappointed that Obama and his minnows ran a nasty smear campaign against a decent Christian honest man who put country before politics. And won, even by a negligible amount. It shows that negative campaigning still wins in the USA."
Sorry you are so disillusioned. Decent Christian honest men do not lie, nor demonize a truly decent Christian honest President, who has so bravely and graciously withstood every insult from his enemies. Nor do decent Christian honest men amass huge fortunes by causing so many to lose jobs, health care and pensions, and then call them "moochers" and "parasites" for needing help for their families. Then he lied about the auto bailout after profiting from it. Then he told the most egregious lie about Chrysler-Jeep and caused great anxiety to the workers. Do you have any idea where the money came from to capitalize Bain Capital? Why would he not disclose more tax returns? He said sick people can use the emergency rooms if they don't have health insurance. Who pays for that? Romney "put country before politics?" The facts are out there to prove you wrong. The whole country saw him as the phony scoundrel he is, even those who supported, promoted and voted for him. As a result of Romney's egregious lies, the Republican party is now shackled with the huge credibility problem they deserve. Romney sold his soul for power and money and I thank God that he and the cabal funding him lost. He and his wife can console themselves with their ill-gained fortune and play with their car elevators in La Jolla. I hope they never forget Seamus and Rafalca, we won't. By the way, if the House Republicans (weakened by their loss of some seats, contrary to your assertions), continue their conspiracy of obstructionism, they will be routed by the People in 2014, or sooner.
"Carmine,
What does this have to do with comments I made in my last post? Stop the hate,you can't change things, the election is over."
First, Sam, anger [not hate] is a useful emotion. One of the better for forging positive change.
Second, the stock markets are tanking since Obama was elected because Americans believe this president can't manage and lead.
CarmineD
"Sorry you are so disillusioned."
No, you. You fell hook line and sinker for all the lies that the Obama campaign circulated about Governor Romney.
Recall it was the White House in August 2011 that said the only way to beat Romney is to "kill" him personally. White House said it! And then proceeded to do just that.
CarmineD
Carmine,
"What says it all is the markets tanking over 440 points since Obama was reelected."
Gee, Carmine, I must be a good stock picker. All my went up! Lucky me! ;-)