E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
For years, Republicans have adhered fiercely to their bedrock conservative principles, resisting Democratic calls for tax hikes, comprehensive immigration reform and gun control. Now, seven weeks after an electoral drubbing, some party leaders and rank-and-file alike are signaling a willingness to bend on all three issues.
What long has been a nonstarter for Republicans — raising tax rates on wealthy Americans — is now backed by GOP House Speaker John Boehner in his negotiations with President Barack Obama to avert a potential fiscal crisis. Party luminaries, including Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, have started calling for a wholesale shift in the GOP's approach to immigration after Hispanic voters shunned Republican candidates. And some Republicans who previously championed gun rights now are opening the door to restrictions following a schoolhouse shooting spree earlier this month.
President Obama and Congress are set to return to Washington to hopefully reach a deal on averting the fiscal cliff before the New Year. Luke Russert and NBC News' Kristen Welker and Mark Murray discuss.
"Put guns on the table. Also, put video games on the table. Put mental health on the table," Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., said last week. Other prominent Republicans echoed him in calling for a sweeping review of how to prevent tragedies like the Newtown, Conn., massacre. Among those who were open to a re-evaluation of the nation's gun policies were Sens. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.
"You've got to take all these things into consideration," Grassley said.
Recommended: Obama, Congress set for one last effort on fiscal cliff
And yet, the head of the National Rifle Association, silent for a week after the Newtown shootings, has proposed staffing schools with armed police, making clear the NRA, which tends to support the GOP, will continue pushing for fewer gun restrictions, not more.
Meanwhile, Boehner's attempt to get his own members on board with a deficit-reduction plan that would raise taxes on incomes of more than $1 million failed last week, exposing the reluctance of many in the Republican caucus to entertain more moderate fiscal positions.
With Republican leaders being pulled at once to the left and to the right, it's too soon to know whether the party that emerges from this identity crisis will be more or less conservative than the one that was once so confident about the 2012 elections. After all, less than two months have passed since the crushing defeat of GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who moved far to the right during the primary season and, some in the party say, lost the general election as a result.
But what's increasingly clear is that the party is now engaged in an uncomfortable and very public fight over whether its tenets, still firmly held within the party's most devout ranks, conflict with the views of Americans as a whole.
Many Republicans recognize that to remain relevant with voters whose views are changing, they too must change.
"We lost the election because we were out of touch with the American people," said John Weaver, a senior adviser to past presidential candidates John McCain, the GOP nominee in 2008, and Jon Huntsman, who ran for the nomination this year.
The polling suggests as much.
While Republican candidates for years have adamantly opposed tax increases on anyone, an Associated Press-GfK poll earlier this month found roughly half of all Americans supported allowing George W. Bush-era tax cuts to expire on those earning more than $250,000 a year.
Most GOP candidates — Romney among them — also long have opposed allowing people in the country illegally to get an eventual path to citizenship. But exit polls from the Nov. 6 election showed most voters favored allowing people working in the U.S. illegally to stay.
And gun control has for decades been anathema to Republicans. But a Washington Post/ABC News poll published last week, following the Connecticut shooting, showed 54 percent of Americans now favor stronger restrictions.
This is the backdrop as Republicans undergo a period of soul-searching after this fall's electoral shellacking. Romney became the fifth GOP nominee in six elections to lose the national popular vote to the Democratic candidate. Republicans also shed seats in their House majority and lost ground to majority Democrats in the Senate.
Of particular concern is the margin of loss among Hispanics, a group Obama won by about 70 percent to 30 percent.
It took only hours after the loss for national GOP leaders to blame Romney for shifting to the right on immigration — and signal that the party must change.
Jindal, a prospective 2016 presidential contender, was among the Republicans calling for a more measured approach by the GOP. And even previously hardline opponents of immigration reform — like conservative talk show host Sean Hannity — said the party needs to get over its immigration stance heavily favoring border security over other measures.
"What you have is agreement that we as a party need to spend a lot of time and effort on the Latino vote," veteran Republican strategist Charlie Black said.
When Congress returned to Washington after the election to start a debate over taxes and spending, a number of prominent Republicans, including Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, signaled they would be willing to abandon their pledges against raising taxes — as long as other conditions were met — as part of a package of proposals to avoid a catastrophic budget meltdown.
Leading the effort was Boehner, who has told Obama he would allow taxes to be increased on the wealthiest Americans, as well as on capital gains, estates and dividends, as part of a deal including spending cuts and provisions to slow the growth of entitlements. Obama, meanwhile, also has made concessions in the talks to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff by agreeing to a higher income threshold for tax rate increases, while insisting that Congress grant him the authority to raise the debt ceiling. Both sides have spent the past several weeks bickering over the terms.
While some Democrats quickly called for more stringent gun laws, most Republicans initially were silent. And their virtual absence from the debate suggested that some Republicans who champion gun rights at least may have been reconsidering their stances against firearms restrictions.
By the Monday after the Connecticut shooting, MSNBC talk show host Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman from Florida, called for reinstating the ban on assault-style weapons, which he had opposed. The ban expired in 2004, despite support for the ban from Republican President George W. Bush. Referring to the shooting, Scarborough said: "I knew that day that the ideologies of my past career were no longer relevant to the future that I want, that I demand, for my children."
The next day, Grassley and Kingston were among the Republicans saying they were at least willing to discuss stronger gun laws.
"The party is at a point where it wants to have those discussions in public, where people feel comfortable differing from what is perceived as the party orthodoxy," Republican consultant Dan Hazelwood said.
If silence is a signal, shifts on other issues could be coming, chief among them gay marriage, which the GOP base long has opposed. Exit polls found half of all Americans say same-sex marriage should be legally recognized.
After three states — Washington, Maryland and Maine — voted to legalize gay marriage last month, the Republican leadership generally has remained quiet on the issue. And there has been no effort in the House or Senate to push major legislation, only narrower proposals, such as a move in the Armed Services Committee to bar gay marriages at military facilities.
But in a sign that the fight over gay marriage also may be waning within the GOP base, Newt Gingrich said it was time for Republicans to accept shifting public opinion.
The former House speaker, who oversaw passage of the Defense of Marriage Act in Congress and helped finance state campaigns to fight gay marriage in 2010, said in a Huffington Post interview that the party should work toward acceptance of rights for gay couples, while still distinguishing them from marriage.
"The momentum is clearly now in the direction in finding some way to . accommodate and deal with reality," Gingrich said.
Leave a Comment:
Well, it is about time that at least a few GOP members see the light and begin to follow it.
We will have to see if it can be done!!
I'm betting that the tea party won't bend and we'll be over the fiscal cliff.
Now, it remains to be seen if those tea party members will be re-elected.
Ignore the rhetoric from the left or the right. Look at results. We have now had the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy for over a decade. How has that worked out? Have they used the money to create jobs or have they just increased their share of the nations assets? In short ask: Have the Bush tax cuts worked? If they led to a robust economy keep them. If the economy and deficit have suffered as a result get rid of them.
Believe it when I see it!!!
A long article to say that the TeaGOP gets elected on social issues by poor gun-loving, gay-hating rednecks then ignores those issues to represent the interests of the greedy rich that bankroll their campaigns instead of the poor ignoramuses whose votes elected them.
procrustes - You apparently forgot that the Bush tax cuts also gave the middle class tax cuts. And, the BUSH tax cuts expired. The Obama tax cuts equal to Bush's and the 2% payroll tax cuts are 100% Obama's.
These were Obama's decisions. When will the Left give Obama credit for what he does? According to the left Obama hasn't done anything except kill OSB. Other than that, Obama doesn't exist.
And for you whiners about the Tea Party, there isn't enough of them in Congress to affect any vote, so your whining is pathetic.
Paws: I have not forgotten that Obama extended the Bush tax cuts and that he has prompted several additional measures. Each of them should be measured by results. I opposed the auto company bailout. However the results have been favorable and I now acknowledge that I was wrong in my opposition. I opposed Bush's TARP bailout but it was successful as well. My point is that when a policy fails we should not just "stay the course". This goes for topics as diverse as abstinence only health classes, to ready access to assault weapons, to head start programs for inner city kids. If the experiment does not work change the law.
Procrustes
Good Question.
The cuts took place in 2002. From 2004 - 2006 over 6 million jobs new jobs were created. The crash and loss of jobs was because of the Federal manipulation of the rules for home buying, just to get more people in a home so they would return politicians to office who passed such policies.
All Obama did in 2010 was continue the cuts i.e. maintain the status quo. You recieve a boost in job when there is a tax cut. Sometime after the cut the increase establishes a new level for a norm. The CBO and other think tanks agree that ending the Bush cuts would COST about 3.5 million jobs. If you take away the cut from the top 1% that estimate of job losses would be about 700,000.
I don't understand why Boehner thinks that by capping the amount deductible on the rich wouldn't have the same effect as not renewing the their current rates.
And Procrustes, when the "rich" got a 10% break, so did everyone else. The only other way to do this is instead of cutting the tax rate by a percentage amount, cutting everyone rate by 1.5 percentage points. Instead of the high Bracket droppingn 3.9 points it would have dropped 1.5 points. I think though the effect would not have been the same, because once you say you are a business, you pay a premium price for everything whereas an individual can afford things at up to 1/4th the cost. The reason business has to pay more, is because they can "pass it on" to the consumers. The problem of our day is passing on additional costs may not be possible because of the world market we live in.
The middle class is a sleeping dragon. Those politicians who think they can can tiptoe past the dragon while being led by Big Money and not awaken that dragon are WRONG.
Hell hath no fury like a pissed off middle class.
Job Growth by administration:
Clinton 1st Term 2.6%
Clinton 2nd Term 1.6%
GW Bush 1st Term 0.51%
GW Bush 2nd Term -0.84%
Obama 1st term 0.95%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms
Again I say look at results.
db
Weren't those the same jobs that were lost in 2003?
Which crash? One in 2003/04 or 2007/09?
I thought this quote from Gingrich said it all:
"The momentum is clearly now in the direction in finding some way to accommodate and deal with reality," Gingrich said.
Those 2.6 million jobs that were created, 2003-06 were then sent overseas in 2006 when loopholes in NAFTA were found. As the regulations were relaxed or eliminated, keeping corporations from moving operations overseas (and lower wage brackets) this was a move to force Labor Unions out of competition.
Many manufacturing entities either forced unions out (much in the same manor as Hostess just did) or moved operations overseas. As we can all see, Labor Unions are still attempting to push their influence when they should look at the big picture and keep their mouths shut until the economy recovers.
It's true that the pressure the unions were forcing on businesses was just as bad as the greed of those who could have afforded dealing with the unions, but chose to move jobs overseas.
Maybe this is an over simplification, but it pretty much covers the sinking ship we are in. And as long as big businesses receive tax breaks, and subsidies, our economy will continue to fail. The oil and gas industries have been making record profits since the gas prices rose above $3.00 a gallon at the pump, yet they continue to receive government subsidies...WHY?!?
Military man
I don't know where you got your statistics, but the NAFTA study saw net change in jobs was barely 100,000 over 10 years. Seems to me that the the statistics you are quoting were jobs lost and did not include jobs we gained. While I disagree with NAFTA as it was negotiated because the terms were so favorable to the other countries, it is not the disaster promoted by the unions.
BTW of the 19 states affected by NAFTA, 17 lost jobs, and 2 gained jobs (Texas & Ohio of all places).
Perot was right, we would lose jobs, but it was more of a light breeze than a huge sucking sound.
Tea baggers won't cave on a tax increase....Der Fuhrer Norquist won't let them. Wait and see. They backed the wrong horse when they signed the tax pledge. They paid the devil to get elected and now they will burn because of it.
Now let's overturn Citizen's United and put some civility back into this culture.
Hah! Hah!
Of course you Republicans and Teabaggers are willing to bend on the Issues.
You all got a good old-fashion Political Thumping, this past November, 2012.
Old male white people are a dying breed that nobody listens to anymore,
and Obama has just again been chosen as Time's "Man of the Year",
You're on the "Dung Heap of History" and that includes all your precious NRA gun-nut members.
I can't wait for Obama the Merciful to "WELL-REGULATE" you clowns, just like the 2nd Amemdment insists.
First we need to "Take Away your Guns and Bibles" which won't be hard,
once we Re-instate the Infamous "Obama Snitch Line" where observant Citizens can call
the #800 "Hot Line", if we see you Republicans and/or Teabaggers "get out of line".
Ain't Life Grand?
ps. Obama really was born in Kenya!
Trump was right on that one!
Too late now!
Four more Long Long years of a "Black Man" living in your once precious "White House".
That should teach you Clowns a "thing or two about a thing or two"
for being so Stupid to have voted in Bush for a 2nd term!
arf. arf.
flnobody
Using total numbers is rather deceitful.
First off there is a natural business cycle of 5 years of prosperity and 2 years of recession. Bush picked up 1 year of the Clinton Recession that was extended 6 months by 911. Then enjoyed 4 years of 4.6% - 6.5% GDP Growth. Obama is getting barely a 2% GDP Growth, and if you take the QE out of the picture (printing money with no real growth backing it) the GDP may even be actually a negative growth.
Total new jobs during Bush was a gross increase of 12 million and a net of 1 million. The problem is that the economy was shedding jobs before he was sworn in. After his polices took effect we moved forward until the collapse of banking. The financial collapsed caused the economy to go into a deep recession and unemployment rising again. The last President to experience two down periods was Reagan who took office on a bad one, and suffered a second in 1987 & 1988. Bush 43 caught the rebound and left an improving economy in Clinton's hands.
Now, with Obama, he received an economy that was shedding jobs too. The job losses had leveled off before his policies actually hit the streets (Peak unemployment was April 2009). The information was on the recovery.gov website. The funds started being approved for release in late March 2009 and were not actually spent until July of 2009. The bulk of the money did not actually get to the Street until September 2009. Some money approved was never spent until 2010.
DB,
It is existing legislation that was NOT a problem until regulations were eliminated in the early 2000s. It was originally proposed to allow Canada and Mexico ways of drawing on the US economic stimulus. The thought was if Mexico had a stronger economy, we would have less immigration issues. To some extent, it worked. That was only one of the benifits Clinton sold it on.
The problem we ran into was; many businesses used it to export their operations, costing the US valuable jobs. It was also seen as a way for businesses to get out from under "Union Shops".
During the first 10 years, as you stated above, there wasn't a significant effect (1993-2003). It was the second ten years. Bush backed a large number of regalutory changes, mostly consumer protection based, when the GOP was in control of the House and Senate. These regulations took the teeth out of the SEC, and many of the government oversight organizations, post ENRON.
By the way, we didn't enter a recession until 2001, six months after Bush was elected he went behind closed doors with Alan Greenspan and a number of finance commitee members to "attempt to curb" imaginary inflation. Within the next six months the FED raised interest rates to "curb inflation" that didn't exist, and THAT combined with the weak economy created by the failing .COMs pushed us into a recession.
If Republicans and Teagaggers are willing to bend, it's only because they have no choice.
Apparently someone in the GOP decided to listen to the voices of the American majority and they heard us threaten to vote them out come the next mid-term elections.
My guess it was more than likely John Boehner who did the listening, because Boehner has been getting it from all sides, but most particularly distasteful has been Republican Eric Cantor who has slapped Boehner down more than once, AND is trying to take over Boehner's seat as Speaker.
DB,
Caviat; The Clinton administration was the longest time the US economy spent without a recession. We were in one in 1992 when he took office, but it petered out in early 1993. We didn't have another recession until after Bush entered the White House (2000) in early 2001. At that time we had just over 3% unemployment. Down from 10.5% mid-way through Reagan's second term (that, by the way, was the highest unemployment period since the Depression; yes, that included 2008-10's highpoint of 10.2%).
Oh please.... the only reason Obama AGREED to renewing those tax cuts for 2 more yrs was because the TP was holding vital legislation hostage until he did. I hardly think that qualifies as OBAMA tax cuts.
WTF? They may not be able to get votes passed on their votes alone, but they have done nothing but block votes for the past 2+ years. I call that affecting a vote.
No, the new jobs pay less and give fewer benefits.
I wouldn't trust the Know-Nothing, Party of No to "bend" enough to watch my luggage, while I went to the bathroom in a Greyhound Station, let alone "bend" on any pro-American economic or social issue.
Heck of a job, Party of No.
Do not bend. Right is right and wrong is wrong. If you bend to the wrong side it will not help anything. Do not bend or even lean. Stay true to honest beliefs and principles even though the left has no clue as to what morals or the correct thing to do is. Do not even wiggle to the wrong side even if they are in charge. It is a very slippery slope when you compromise your principles so stay strong.
You mean like the promises the left made to twice to "visit" spending cuts and then reniged -- google it before you start saying you don't trust the right. THE LEFT BROKE THAT PROMISE TWICE. Nice convenient memories you people have.
More citizens i.e. voters are voicing their concerns and anger at our employees not advancing our rights and welfare. They are too obvious in their interest in their own welfare and gifts/bribes from the rich and so called power structure and it is only in the present time that We the people, have made our anger known that they reluctantly are starting to realise that , We the people ,are aware that we are their employers and that although we can not fire them in mid term we certainly can fire them at the following elections. Our employees should be examined at all times to see that they advance our interests and the bul*** that they continue to manufacture is recognised and that they will be amongst the unemployed unless they start to do the job for which we employ them.
Apparently some republicans have decided to join the "fact based community". I guess the "fantasy based" community wasn't working out too well. Now if we could get the "if I just wish hard enough it will all go away" community, and the "I enjoy voting against my best interest because I'm a tool of the 2%" community to join us we might just get something accomplished.
Some of the GOP may be talking about "bending" and "compromising," but I seriously doubt when push comes to shove that they will put their money or their votes where their mouths are. There is no honor in the Grand Old Party anymore. Big Corporate Business and the NRA pull the individual strings, the fanatic Tea Party plays the pipes, and we all watch the GOP dance.
The Republican Party seems determined to commit suicide and intent on taking the American citizens down with it.
Republicans can bend all the way down and grab their ankles. They're going to get what they deserve after the last 12 years of mismanagement and then stubborn idiocy to prevent any progress to be made on anything. Smile while you take it, boys.
Dottie's girl
I believe the word you were looking for is reneged. Could republicans at least try to not sound racist?
I personally believe Obama has made about as much concessions as he could without angering his base anymore with regards to entitlement reform. I honestly believe that some Republicans are starting to see the writing on the wall and those that do survive in 2014 will either survive thanks to redistricting this past year or because the did what was right for the country and NOT for party.
I also believe that Democrats that initially ran from the President need to start embracing his efforts to try and put this country back on the right track. After all, it's very uncommon for a incumbent to run a campaign advocating for tax increases and win. That usually doesn't happen and to me, this is where the disconnect is with the Republicans. They feel since they "retained" the house, that they have the right to "claim" that the American people do not want their taxes to go up. That is a valid claim for the middle and lower class but not for the wealthiest of Americans as every poll taken as shown.
I believe that the tax cuts for income below $400,000 is a fair number being that it will not hurt the average small business owner. Besides if the deal Obama has presented goes through then Democrats will have a lot to run on in 2014. On the other side of the coin if they fail, then the Republicans can basked in their "I told you so" rhetoric and have a strong case to retake the Senate in 2014.
Yea Right, The Tea Party is just going to Roll Over Next Year..... I Think Not, these Idiots are really Domestic Terrorists..... They will not bew happy until they bring the Country Down.....
From the bailout, through the interest rate hike, to the fiscal cliff, bankers are using the GOP and TEA Parties to milk Americans for everything they can get. No new taxes means higher interest payments on the national debt.
I hope the democrats are willing to bend as well, but this being msnbc they will not print that.
We are GOING OFF THE CLIFF courtesy of BOTH the Democrats and the GOP because the cliff was put in place because neither the GOP or the Dems in congress could do their job over a year ago and both sides played politics to see who they would get in office instead of voting what was best for the country they stuck with party lines, or as Fiesty Redhead said in her own words: It is the job of a congressman to vote according to their constituencies' wishes that elected them in in the first place. Not to vote freely with their own intelligence or free though what is best for the country.
That is exactly what the GOP is doing, and exactly what the Dems are doing, and is exactly why we are in this mess in the first place.
We need a MODERATE THIRD PARTY BADLY that bends to the practical needs of the country.
Military Man-1740371....
The Clinton years were the best because he deregulated internet commerce and the banking/loan industry and businesses that are now considered "evil" and "the rich" invested heavily in the US, and the baby boomers money flooded the market at the same time. It was good timing, good calls on his part, and also a once in 75 year event before the "giant sucking sound" that Ross Perot warned of, though it happened to China instead of Mexico. It was also was the calm before the storm before the market popped (should we Blame Clinton for this? Why not? It built up and occurred on his watch (sarcasm)) and all the effects of the long term deregulation kicked in and damaged the US economy when Greenspan was sleeping through the damage.
The is a bust after every boom that size, and many people saw it coming. Then we did all the wrong things, including going to war, to dig our hole deeper.
In Clinton's years the deficit did not grow because there was taxable commerce happening EVERYWHERE at a staggering rate. Now those taxable streams are gone...for' see ably' for a very very very very long time. That's why after that event the government had to tighten it's belt on spending and be mean and lean regardless of any agendas or events, which is something it was never capable of.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!
More propaganda from the complicit lamestream Liberal lap-dog media. Of course it’s all the mean nasty rich Republican’s fault. How dare they try to bring fiscal sanity into our criminal corrupt government? The government shouldn’t be responsible with our money, they need to just keep spending more and more of our hard earned tax dollars. If they run out of money just force us all to pay more. No need to worry about future debt or unfunded liabilities, hell most of the current politicians will be long gone when the economy really begins to collapse.
We have burned through the $2.4 trillion dollars we increased the debt ceiling by last August. In a mere 16 months we have added over $2 trillion to our debt. So where are all these savings from the cuts Barrack Hussein claims we he has implemented? They don’t exist. Cuts in spending in our government are just smoke and mirrors to keep the unwashed masses thinking they’re doing all they can to fix our economy. The Treasury has warned us that we will hit the debt limit on December 31st.
WOOOHOOO, let’s just borrow more from China and other growing economies, that’ll fix everything.
Barrack Hussein implemented his “hate campaign” during his whole campaign. He convinced the useful idiots that being rich is evil, it’s bad to want to be self sufficient. We need to just keep giving the government more and more of our money. He has indoctrinated the lemmings that the real American Dream is to simply be middle-class. Don’t even think of becoming rich, only the statists running our government are allowed that privilege.
Don’t even think of addressing those sacrosanct entitlements, they don’t contribute to the debt, right? In 2007 Social Security was running an $81 billion annual cash surplus. Since then we have created a $58 billion dollar S. S. deficit. Despite that $139 billion swing into red ink the limp-wristed Liberals insist that S. S. hasn’t added a penny to the deficit and should never even be discussed in the fiscal cliff discussions.
The reality is that Social Security’s deteriorating finances are responsible for 15% of the $900 billion increase in overall budget deficit over the past 5 years. The CBO projects that the S. S. cash deficit will balloon to $155 billion by 2022. An Investors Business Daily (IBD) analysis based on the 2012 Social Security’s Trustee report shows the cash shortfall will raise public debt by 18% of GDP through 2032. The bottom line is simple, Social Security alone will increase the deficit by 2.4% of GDP in 20 years. But why worry about that now” It only adds to the cumulative Unfunded Liabilities that is in excess of $124 trillion already.
So, how does this impact adults at the halfway point of their careers who will be retiring after the Social Security Trust Fund is depleted? The IBD analysis finds that an average earner, about $43,000 a year, with 20 years left until retirement would have to set aside more than 5% of wages each year to make up for a nearly 25% automatic benefit cut under current law. Has anyone in the government told you to save more of your money to retire on? Of course not, it’s not their job to do that, they just spend more of your money, you get to worry about your “entitlement”.
This doesn’t even address the looming disaster in the Social Security disability portion of the trust fund. It’s expected to run dry in 2016 triggering an unsustainable 19% cut in benefits. Of course our illustrious Treasury Secretary, Timmy “Turbo Tax” Geithner, said the White House would seek a “broad” Social Security fix rather than trying to shift resources from the better funded regular S. S. Trust Fund. Just more fuzzy math by our incompetent government. Pay for one unsustainable entitlement program by taking funds from another unsustainable entitlement program. See how easy that is?
Back in 1990, 43 Senate Democrats voted to cut worker payroll taxes to eliminate the S. S. surplus. This was an admission that the government couldn’t be trusted to save trillions of dollars for the retirement of the Baby Boomers. Back then, Hairy Reed suggested, "Rather than having it called the Social Security Trust Fund, why do we not change it and call it the Social Security Slush Fund?” A much more appropriate title isn’t it? In 2006, before Nanny Piglosi became Speaker of the House, she said Democrats were determined to pay the Trust Fund back. Well, not only did that psychobabble go out the window, but now the S. S. Trust Fund is a source of emergency economic stimulus, with the government crediting the Trust Fund with more than $200 billion in lost revenue over the past 2 years due to the 2 percentage point payroll tax cut.
Yep, let’s just tax those mean nasty rich fat-cats, which will fix everything, for now. Barrack Hussein and the Liberal/Progressive cabal will have won their “hate campaign” over those wealthy people they despise so much. Statists demand that only the Ivy League faculty lounge elitists should be wealthy because they know how to
spendwaste your money better than you do.Once again, symbolism over substance from the “Party of No”.
No budget for 1,338 days, no real spending cuts just more decreases in already increased spending, no true tax reform, no regulation reform and no leadership. Just more class-warfare and envy of the real Americans who strive to be successful.
The predicted holiday spending boom just went down in a crumbled heap as consumers only spent 0.9% more than last year versus the anticipated 5%-6% the “economists’ were predicting. Can it be the American people are finally seeing through the lies and deceptions of the Barrack Hussein propaganda?
We real Americans can only hope.
Talk is cheap and the GOP actions often betray their words.
"Willing to bend", my Azz! If thay don't cooperate the voting public will CONTINUE to relegate the GOP to the trash bin of history and they will become as extinct as the dinosaures. Oh, did I mention, it will be easily earned and well deserved!
Hey Jim, So who are these "Real Americans" you are referring to???? Inquiring minds would like to know.
Of course the GOP is willing to bend. The question remains, is Mr. Obama willing to bend or is he going to bankrupt the country with the massive debt we have incurred?
Obama has bent, the few tea party members are not bending....that is the problem.
Boehner walked away from the 4 trillion dollar deal last time, now he's walking away from another similar deal because he can't get the votes of a few tea party members.
Hey Republican, most of our massive debt results from the unneeded war started by YOUR president George W. "Wrong Way" Bush, coupled with his ill advised tax cuts back in 2001, all of which resulted in the ruination of our economy in 2008.
Eric is absolutely right. There are about 35 Tea Party members in the House that will not budge off their position of "No, hell, no", and that includes the out-going Representative (not) Allen West from Florida. It doesn't matter to him that he lost his re-election bid, he has publically stated that he will vote "No" to ANY compromise with President Obama.
The Tea Party needs to be relegated to the trash heap of history, and the remaining Tea Party representatives voted out in 2014, if not sooner. If people can start a petition to deport the CNN announcer for his gun views, why can't we start a petition to remove the Tea Party representatives from Congress for creating a clear and present danger to our economy and the american way of life?
No, too many of the GOP are not willing to bend, especially the radical teaper component that hold their Norquist pledge above their pledge to the US Constitution. Obama has bent over backward to accommodate these pawns of the wealthy republican oligarchy: $400000 threshold to disallow future tax-cut on the wealthy and a revised method to reduce future COLAs for social security recipients. So, to answer your question, yes Obama is willing to bend, and in doing so is trying to prevent the country from "going bankrupt." It's the damned radical conservative republicans that have run up the debt and nearly bankrupted the country with their tax cuts and unnecessary wars.
Hopefully, we will rid the Congress of these folks in 2014.
Which is why I want to see everyone taxes increased. Lets see the real cost of what the Democrats want to do and lets see it sooner than later! I want to see the full results of the ACA and all of the tax increases before mid terms 2014. Bring it on bad boys of the freebie! People in Detroit are screaming for Quid Pro Quo......
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/detroit-pol-bacon-brought-home-obama-article-1.1214033
SteveR
The wars cost an additional $100 Billion per year and have pretty much gone away. When you do tax cuts, you get jobs. Those jobs now start paying taxes and stop living off government checks. Because money in private citizens hands turns over several times faster than in federal hands, you actually end up with an increase in Revenue. Here is just one example
Using the Federal On-Budget Revenues (where taxes increase and decrease)
1999 Revenue + $77 Bln or +5.9%
2000 Revenue +$161 Bln or +11.69% - Highest increase in Revenue to date, Welfare roles were purged of those able to work.
2001 Revenue -$61 Bln or -3.95% - Dot Com Bubble Burst June 2000 triggering unemployment to rise by Jan 1 2001. Less people working means less Revenues.
2002 Revenue -$146 Bln or -9.8% - 911 effects, and Tax cut starting Jan 1, 2002
2003 Revenue -$79 Bln or -5.9% - Unemployment Peaks June 2003 and begins to decline.
2004 Revenue +$86 Bln or +6.9% (Clinton averaged an $89 Bln per year increase, mostly thanks to the 1999 legistlation that cleared the welfare rolls of those who could work.
2005 Revenue +$231 Bln or +17.2%. The largest revenue increase in history
2006 Revenue +$222 Bln or +14.1% The second largest revenue increase in history
2007 Revenue +$134 Bln or +7.4% Banks began cutting off lending to the least worthy applicants as Real estate prices begin to fall, lowering Bank asset value decreasing how much Banks can loan. Unemployment begins to rise.
2008 Revenue -67Bln or -3.5%. Banks "Freeze" making loans and unemployment accelerates.
Now compare this to the Obama Recovery. The only reason unemployment is dropping is because the number of people leaving the workforce is now 350,000 per month making the rate drop.
TCH,
You guys on the conservative side have made a monster out of the Obama Healthcare bill, yet it more strongly represents the same proposal Mitt Romney presented to Congress before "Obamacare" was adopted. Obama bent over backward on nearly every issue the GOP proposed so he could at least make SOMETHING happen.
He has done the same thing with the last four budget proposals, with the exception of the top 1% tax hike. That is the only item he held his ground on, this is something that would NOT effect you or me. Truth is, if the wealthy had sacrificed HALF of the tax break they've been hanging on to, which would still have kept them at a lower precentage than the rest of us, we would have had a much better chance of stemming the bleeding debt we've been experiencing since 2005.
AND, I will say it again for those in the BOX seats, OBAMA DID NOT EARMARK THE $800 BILLION STIMULOUS, he just AIMED it. I just love the fact that Bush initiated the stimulous and released the first $350 Billion (With NO controls), but Obama gets the credit for the entire $1 Trillion spent on it. NOTE: Nearly half the corporations who received the bailout under Obama have paid a large amount of it back. Shouldn't someone detail HOW MUCH has been paid back, since it cannot be legally considered as an existing debt?
Obama offered to move fromm 250K to 400K.
Obama offered to raise the medicare eligilibity age.
Obama offered to put SS on the table with chained CPI.
Obama has offered over $1T in spending cuts.
Obama already gave another $1T in spending cuts earlier.
Obama "not bending" is another one of those right wing echo chamber delusions.
TO: TruthComesHere who wrote:
When are Republicans going to decide to start paying down the debt so that the interest on that debt stops accruing?
It doesn't seem as though Republicans are able to wrap their heads around the fact that bills and loans have to be paid or the debt will continue to go up all by itself because INTEREST is accruing!!!
I don't hear Republicans crying "bankruptcy" whenever foreign countries want billions of dollars from us, or when Republicans are beating the war drums!
A.G.72--/I agree with you one hundred percent.The Rep.T.P. and their yes persons seem to be unable to realise that the old adage, charity begins at home, is old because it has been proven to be right so many times. No country including ours can continue in this ridiculous way of giving/bribing to the detrement of its citizens without paying the price eventually. This eventually has now come. We must now stop the economic corruption of Bribing the rest of the planet and our own so called leaders of industry and get out of debt,make everyone pay their fair share of our tax burden, end these gifts to successful businesses, disallow the shipping of our peoples jobs overseas,and improve the welfare of our citizens to ,at least equal most of the other developed countries. Until we make these objectives the no. 1 priority for our employee/Representatives we will continue down this slippery slope to third world status.
People seem to forget that the term "jobless recovery" was first invented to describe coming out of the recession in the early part of the Bush II presidency. The percentage of months under Bush when job growth kept up with population expansion was very small. And by the end of his administration the country was losing jobs at historic levels.
So, no, tax cuts for the wealthy do not create jobs. Even Reagan knew that, as evidenced by the fact that when he realized his tax cuts weren't helping the economy, he started rasing the rates back up.
The Tea Baggers only bend over for their corporate masters. Supporting their corruption at any cost to the American people.
You know I find it interesting that the same person that the so called "conservative and Tea Party base" are supporting is a rich and powerful lobbyist that doesn't give two cents about them.....I mean think about it conservatives, You don't want tax hikes to go up on anyone but those that you elect in office that are suppose to "have your interest" at heart are willing to RAISE your taxes in order for the wealthy to keep theirs. How do they do it? Simple, they want to take away the very same programs you will have to depend on when you get to the ripe young age of 55 and 62. They want to eliminate the very "entitlements" that you use every year on your taxes in order to get a decent return. They want to close the "loopholes" that benefit the middle and lower class (most of you are in this category) BUT YET, you STILL vote for these people and their principles.
But this is what get me, you have the GAUL and AUDACITY to complain when nothing gets done in Congress knowing full well it's the people that YOU elected that are roadblocking everything even when you know it's the right thing to do for the country. Then you want to complain that we have a "spending" problem and not a "revenue" problem BUT when the President presented a budget to Congress 2 years ago that outlines for every 1 dollar of revenue received there will be 4 dollars in cuts, The conservative base blocks it. HELLO!!!!! Doesn't that sound like a conservative idea? Then Obama and Boehner come up with an agreement that will cut $4 trillion into the deficit in 10 years, and you block that. HELLO!!!!!! that's what you want to do, control spending BUT because it raises taxes on the top 1 percent they say no because "it raises taxes".
So lets be frank shall we.......Two simple questions: 1) How many of you on this site that calls yourself a conservative are in the top 1 or 2 percent? I'm guessing none because if you are you wouldn't be posting on this site. 2) If you are not in the top 1 or 2 percent, why would you DENY yourself a tax cut? Inquirying minds would like to know.
The only time the teanuts bend over is when they see the Kochs coming.
This is baloney. The only reason the Republicans want to run out the clock is that retiring members of the House and ones that lost their seats could vote with the Democrats and pass legislation unless a filibuster is enacted. The voters, who already feel like Congress and especially the GOP are dragging their feet, would have little tolerance for a filibuster and it could end up losing them even more seats in the upcoming elections. Their just trying to drag it out until January and then block everything that comes out of the Senate or White House.
I can't see how the majority of voters will not get tired of this obstructionist tactic and vote out the Republican majority just to enable Congress to do its job and represent the people in their districts instead of special interest groups that only benefit the very wealthy and very powerful.
Unfortunately, the way that the Senate is set up a few in the minority can block everything. I'm betting we go over the fiscal cliff on the wings of a very few tea party members.
The republican party , moderates, understand that they are facing a midterm election massacre. If they cannot get there far right nut bag tea party cultists to fall in line they will lose the house and the senate. If I was boener I would paint them a mental picture of the democrates completely in charge in the last two years of a democratic presidents term......It behoves them to take action or watch their worst dreams come true. They have a chance to save themselves or become irrelavent very shortly
Unfortunately, I think that they're thinking of 2010 when the dems stayed home which means they don't think there will be a price to pay. My friends, get off your duffs, get to the polling place and VOTE in every election (it's the state legislators who get to draw up district maps and gerrymander)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Democrats won't be sitting out 2014. There are too many corrupt State Office GOPs to vote out of office.
Does it really matter??? It is going to take both sides in order to compromise. There is the word right there. COMPROMISE! Tax the 2%... the 4% I don't give a damn, but make sure there is MASSIVE reform when it comes to those that simply sit at home (faking an illness, disability, or are too obese to work). It is absolutely appalling that they even HAVE a choice like that. WTF!
I find it very strange, that you fail to mention the upper class takers? They are not producing the jobs for the money they get, should they be allowed to sit on their asses, and do nothing for their free tax money?
Its true, some do take advantage of the system, but you CANNOT suffer the many, for the few! Find those fakers, and make them work, and pay all of it back. Its gonna be a tough job finding them tho!
Please explain yourself a little better. What fakers are you talking about? Who do you want to make them work? Pay what back? And back to who? What are you talking about?
The gop gangsters are willing to bend?
Hell, hate-mongers, you keep breaking the system. We need your organized crime gang broken, arrested and prosecuted for your crimes against the American people.
The Republicans better be willing to bend a lot, seeing how their agenda was defeated thoroughly in the recent election.
GOP doesn't seem to realize that the tax rate for the rich IS going up January 1. They keep pretending that someone is going to raise the rate on the wealthy.
Steve
The are NOT seeing their agenda as defeated, they believe that 47% of the USA are receiving perks and a few wanted to be part of that 47% so they elected Obama. When the GOP opens its eyes, solutions will be at hand (and the first solution will be kicking out the TEA Partiers out of the caucus)
It seems the best hope for America is for the tea party to NOT bend, not a bit.
The Republicans should continue following the tea party wherever that leads them.
Right now they are being led into the wilderness, maybe they get lost out there, for another forty years.
Not a sound from me. (...crickets...)
The Repubs need to follow the Democrats lead when it comes to embracing the African American and Latino communities as they have clearly lost this voting block. Follow the POTUS lead and promise them everything and deliver them nothing.
When one looks at the umemployment numbers in the African American community (especially among young men) and the lack of a comprehensive immigration policy that was promised from Obama in his first term, it is clear that these voting blocks do not care about results (or accountability). Do what the Dems do: Lie to them and then blame it on some made up issue. It works everytime.
Truth Conveyor / You may be conveying the truth but it passes you by on its way without stopping.You are continuing the old Rep./T.P. line that all others of us do not agree with ,so end your hate messages and accept the fact that most of us are able to ignore your hate messages.
Listoire,
As a legal immigrant, I was looking for Obama to provide comprehensive immigration reform in his last term. That is what he committed to do and he walked away from it the minute he was inaugurated. Given that, I could not in good consious vote for him again. Clearly he lied. If you do not think he lied, explain to me what he did do then to address comprehensive illegal immigration? Face it. He hoodwinked you and these voting blocks. Have you seen the unemployment rate for young African American men lately? It is criminal that it is so high.
You can call me names all you like but the facts are the facts. Obama takes our votes for granted and you know it. Face it; he told you what you wanted to hear and you went for it. Sorry, Listoir, but those that look under the covers clearly see his modus operendi. He is a good politician, a bad POTUS, and a worse person. Liars are the worse.
Truth Conveyor, you are right on!!! Liberalism in general is deceitful. All one has to do is look at the ghetto and see how well liberalism works. I fear that if we continue on this path, this country is going to be one big ghetto. You cannot continue to give and give to people and expect them to motivate themselves and strive for something better that involves hard work and reaping of benefits later and not sooner. It is all about how much one has invested in the game. If all you depend on is a check or money put in your ebt account, why should you care about the shape of the country; why should you care about if the Constitution is violated? The mind set of many Americans is scary, because there is no vested interest in the country, but it is all about "I'm going to get 'minez' and that is all that matters." This ain't nothing but a ghetto mentality. If ya'll folks don't understand the detrimental affects of this mentality, I invite you to drive through your nearest big urban city. Oh wait, it's winter. Wait until the summer and do a drive by. God bless America!!!!
The GOP will either bend or it will break. The GOP has serious problems and have shown that they have a hard time getting things done. Obstructionism is not a virtue. It's time to get serious about righting the ship. The American people are watching and we'll see if they like what they see in 2014 during the mid term election.
I think Gandhi would disagree, Johnny. When you see people deliberately making poor choices that effect an entire nation, I think you have an obligation to obstruct as much as possible.
Even if the liberals have the best intentions... your policies will lead to a destitute nation of debt and unemployment.
There was a time when people were put to death if they said the world was spherical and not flat. 99% of the planet were all positive the world was flat and you could fall right off. If they took a unamimous vote, every time the Earth would be flat. It doesn't make them right... just the majority.
The US was built on slavery. The majority, at the time, wanted slavery and believed in slavery. Does it make them right?
You are like the kid that thinks Mom and Dad don't know squat. They tell you not to touch the stove top, but you know better. You tell them they are WRONG. And you believe it whole-heartedly. And then one day, you touch the stove top and the world around you changes. You finally realize that Mom and Dad know way more than you can ever hope to.
When it comes to taxes and the economy, the Democratic party is that little boy and the fiscal conservatives are Mom and Dad.
The faster you vote Republicans out... the more you get your way... the faster this nation goes down the drain.
Sorry DJ -
Mom and Dad were 'right' for their time and place. The world has changed in ways they would have never guessed. I doubt much they ever believed that Corps were people or that uncontrolled and unfathomable amounts of corporate money could be dumped into campaigns for buying political offices. But, something tells me they did believe in We the People.
As for that slavery issue - again, I doubt Mom and Dad fully understood life and death on a plantation in shackles. The Cleavers are dead, as so is that particular naiveness.
Lastly, if the Repubs had stuck to the tentacles of their platform during Mom and Dad's reign supreme - maybe they would be more capable of governing. As it is, they have fallen on their own sword of extremism.
You missed the point of my post entirely.
There is corporate greed. There is individual greed. But that has nothing to do with the majority being wrong?
Outnumbering another group of people doesn't make what you think or do right!!! So you feel that if you simply outnumber people that disagree with you that they shouldn't try to convince you that you are wrong? They shouldn't try to reason with you. They should enable you to make a huge mistake. Great logic.
The world has changed in ways I could never guess. Forty years ago, my parents came to this country... a black man and a hispanic woman. They worked 5 jobs between the two of them. They dealt with racism and discrimination, but laughed, because no matter how bad it was, it was nothing compared to what they had to deal with in their home lands.
They had ambition, honor, and believed in the American Dream. They didn't take handouts or any government assistance. They gave me opportunity. Not money, or Obama phones, or nonsense. They paid taxes, learned the language, gave me an education. This enabled me to get a scholarship, serve my country, and start my own business after 15 years of working my tail off.
This is the America I want for all immigrants. For all blacks and hispanics and Jews and whites and asians. This is the America I want for my child.
I don't want your idea of laziness and sense of entitlement. The government has to provide for me. The wealthy have to provide for me. I'm a victim. Whine, cry, whine, cry.
That is a pitiful vision of this nation. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.
DJO, you have covered the mentality of Detroit on the nose. And its on course to be meted out country wide. The problem is there are areas where those people dont want to go and wont go. Other wise those areas would be the target of the liberals for population.
Mark,
One thing that has not changed is that you can't spend more money than you have. Math does not change.
Djo34/To attempt to push the Rep/T.P. line whilst claiming to belong to a former victim of those antiquated policies may make you think that it gives credence to your post. It doesn't,it just makes most of us recognise that you are trying to push the line of the discredited right wing of a right wing party. You may in your defense write that this is the view of a Liberal Democrat,which is true but I still will move that your viewpoint comes one hundred percent from the far right of the far political right.
The biggest threat to the United States is the republican party.
If we go over the cliff due to obstinate positions from the TP - you can bet the rest of the GOP will wash their hands of anything to do with the TP - just to save their butts come the next round of elections. The GOP has backed itself into a hole with no exit - and even if they come out with gnashing teeth and fist swinging, the fight is already over. It's not about loosing - it's about getting off the dime when there is no dime to stand on.
But the Dems better tread carefully. If they pull the big rubber cord too far - the snapback is gonna hurt like hell.
In other words - why don't these freaks get in the middle instead of these silly extreme left and right nodes of exemption and/or priviledge???
Because the middle holds no answers. If you agree to raise taxes and not cut spending, our debt will increase due to interest alone. The money generated by raising taxes doesn't cover the interest on the national debt.
If China and/or Japan call in their loans... this country is sunk.
If the Republicans give in, by 2016, it will be impossible to ever pay the debt off. We will not be able to tax or generate enough revenue via the economy to support the nation and pay off the debt. Unsustainable.
Sometimes, compromise doesn't work. If you have to get to California and I have to go to New York, so we compromise and go to Kansas... how does that help?
I'm actually over on the left; but, your post is well stated. Both sides need to do what's right for the American people!
Unless you're picking grapes, or visiting Times Square - there's little reason that Kansas wouldn't be a good compromise. It all depends on what needs to be done.
PS - I was born in Kansas - and I am still trying to get it OFF my birth certificate! LOL!
All the crap going on in this world and you want to divorce Kansas! Part of the issue we are facing. How would you like to be from Detroit?
God Mark440, I'm worse off than you. My birth certificate says Texas. There just ain't no way to remove that stain. I'd rather it be Alabama or South Carolina than that. I want it gone and just say United States of America. That should be on all birth certificates with no mention of the various states.
Mine says California--WOE IS ME!!! I'm in worse shape than either of you!
GOP will to bend on issues after election
My only question is---which election? This one? Sure doesn't seem like it. I think the republicans were counting on the Mayan prophecy to come true so that they wouldn't have to compromise....and now where are they? Plan B.....hmmm, that didn't work out so good.....until I see otherwise, I have to believe that the only time the GOP will bend on anything is when they bend over to tell the American people to kiss their....you know whats!
Newsflash... Obama has already raised taxes on EVERYONE.
Feel free to read the Obamacare bill. Your taxes will go up in 2013 no matter how much you make.
Obama will tax you a little more. Fight to tax the wealthy a lot more. And then just waste it by spending more.
And the only people that will benefit are the people not paying taxes like illegal aliens.
Go Democrats. Next year, rich people will have to move out of their homes so illegal aliens can move in.
...and then DJ slid over the mental cliff......
Obamacare is the warning shot over the bow of the health care industry. They are out of control in every way imaginable. Drastically raising premiums, reducing co-pays and coverage, and denying more and more procedures.
You pretend that Americans aren't already paying the highest health insurance rates in the entire world. You pretend that savings from the crooked insurance companies won't more than offset the rates from Obamacare.
1) You won't receive any health care from Obamacare until 2014... if ever.
2) You will start paying for it in 2013.
3) It has hidden taxes that will crush the economy further.
4) Obamacare discriminates. It doesn't cover all Americans. All Americans pay for it, but I can't get it. Will the public school system be off-limits to my children too? Love your liberal definition of EQUALITY. I have to buy insurance from your "crooked" companies or I get fined. But I am not eligible for Obamacare. I love how you look out for all Americans.
5) The insurance companies are crooked. Fix it. Don't tax people on the sale of their houses. What does one thing have to do with another?
6) Obamacare isn't about helping anyone. It's about raising taxes. Your hearts are too big for you to see what is happening. I hate the concept of insurance. The cost of an MRI is $150. But after insurance companies get involved it is 10-20 times that. But raising taxes and giving healthcare to some tax payers and not the others is not the solution.
Obama care is helping already. Seniors receive benefits from reduced copays in the donut hole. Thank you President Obama.
If you say so woodbutcher. Though that would only mean that IF they are getting reduced copays, the system is getting the Seniors ready for what Medicare WILL NOT pay any longer. That too is happening right now.
dj... That is because no one has read the Obamacare facts yet, hence they are still going off of the word that "Obamacare isn't going to cost We The People anything. "
All one needs to be is in medicare to know this.
The middle class is going to get crushed by the very administration that supposedly represents them. Four years of Obama policies was not enough for them to say "uncle" so they will need to learn the hard way. These next four years will completely obliterate the middle class courtesy of going over the fiscal cliff and Obamacare taxes. I wish it was otherwise, but if you are in the middle class you are screwed. Elections have consequences; good luck.
I sincerely hope that WE are ready to make some changes. November's election clearly demonstrated how flawed most of our strategies were. Continuing to bury our heads in the sand, while ranting about how correct our philosophies are, will only produce more defeats at the polls. We have to find more voter friendly ways to move the rational, and important conservative issues forward. To do that we must remove our support for the most unpopular, hot button, voter alienating, mockery inducing, embarrassing, archaic and mostly stupid positions we have supported in the past and leave them locked firmly away in the closet, where they belong!
Things change over time, and it's now the gop time to see that change. Throughout history parties rise and fall and the it's the Repubs cycle that's all, maybe by 2014 they gain their MOJO back!
VIVA REPBLICANO"S!
They will NEVER get their MOJO back with leaders like Boehner, McConnell, Cantor and the rest of the GOPS.
VIVA LA DEMOCRACIA !!!!
The former House speaker, who oversaw passage of the Defense of Marriage Act in Congress and helped finance state campaigns to fight gay marriage in 2010, said in a Huffington Post interview that the party should work toward acceptance of rights for gay couples, while still distinguishing them from marriage.
"The momentum is clearly now in the direction in finding some way to . accommodate and deal with reality," Gingrich said.
The stated fact that they want to accept reality, yet still differentiate between "gay rights" and marriage for gays shows that they will NEVER accept reality.
The GOP has no choice,now let's end the welfare tax cuts for all,,lmao
Temporary is not forever,end all the ax cuts aka welfare for all and corps.
End unemployment forever,,,
G.O.P. Bend? What a laugh !! They don't care about anybody but their owners --BIG $$$$$$$$$$$$$$. They don't give a crap about the middle class. I'll believe it when I see it. Boehner, hope you had a BIGG hangover from your Christmas drunk back in Ohio.
Do you really think that all Republicans are Rich? Believe me, the vast majority of Conservatives are right in the middle of the "Middle Class"!
You demean your Avitar!
Just worry about your own fatone...
It doesn't matter to me how this goes, I'm not a Republican nor a Democrat, but the whole point of the Republican campaign seemed to be if President Obama were re-elected there would be consequences in returning him to office. If one party or the other makes statements pertaining to the "Party's Platform" and presents it to the voters as the core values on which they are running on, then they reverse course or fail to fulfill on those values aren't they just lying to us?
Both parties do this, there's a long litany of promises made and broken by every President (except maybe Lincoln and Washington, who both only promised to do their best). I know the crazed Democrats drool over President Bush (and rightly so) and the equally crazed Republicans slather over President Obama (and deservedly so) mistakes, lies and failures to stick to thier promises.
The part that intrigues me is how vehemently both sides swear that the other side are devils incarnate and deserve to be religated to the seventh circle of Hell. Then later on, they collapse of the very same "Platforms", and core values to strike a deal. I understand the importance of bargaining and negotiating to obtain a desired result, but I also value my ideals and my word. I don't promise to fight to the death, oppose my enemy at every turn or promise I will do this or won't do that unless I really mean it. If there's "wiggle room" in my opinion I don't state my opposition in absolute terms, but say rather that I oppose that thing strongly and allow myself the integrity to be convinced otherwise.
There's nothing wrong with being wrong and admitting it, being able to recognize your first thoughts were wrong, seeing the error in it and then changing your mind is the hallmark of an intelligent, mature person. Changing one's mind on a core value should require some serious evidence and thoughtful deep introspection, not some "slap happy" giggly argument.
Unfortunately we've lost the moral fiber and integrity to be those kind of people, so we're left to calling each other names and declaring the opposition as evil.
The point of this too long post is that if the Republicans give in to the demands of the Democrats then they deserve to be relegated to the position of insignificance in the next four years and possibly the next eight years (after Senator Clinton runs in 2016, and wins).
Me personally, I watch all of this bemused and unfettered. Enjoy...and have a Happy New Year everyone!
Watch out for Rubio - he'll turn rabid for power and personal gain if his numbers go higher........ If people want congress to get something done for the people instead of for the corporate and congressional racketeers, they will need to get rid of Boehner, McConnell, Cantor, McCain, Kyle and their lap dogs. Once that happens the rest of the pack on both sides will scatter.
Don't make me laugh!!! . . . the GOOPs "sweeping review of how to prevent tragedies" would amount to a expensive lunch with a few martinis thrown in . . . end of the "review". That's how these clowns operate . . . can't believe one word that comes out of their pie holes.
Which alternative universes are people living in who blame the deficit on Obama for being a big spender? History, people! Besides the fact that the big spending was two unpaid for wars, tax cuts for the Horse Set etc, The Great Depression of the 1930's was finally ended by massive spending on World War !!, not austerity. Check what happened after the 1936 election when FDR buckled to Republicans and went austere: the faltering recovery stalled. If this is to be a Capitalistic Country, cash must be spent. Things must be bought. Money must be spent to buy things. Keep cutting jobs and who the hell is going to buy things? How does laying off workers in America create jobs? (of course it can, if you happento live in China or Vietnam or Indonesia or India...). More history: cutting taxes high income earners has not created jobs, except maybe for bank vice presidents in Caribbean Islands. But, I digress. The original discussion at hand was about Republicans and Democrats coming together to do something about the looming Fiscal Chasm of Chaos. How? Compromise is now a four letter word. The new Dictionary definition: "Compromise: 1). To do it my way. (there are no other meanings). Boehner is bemoaning the fact that the President won't work with the Republicans. What he really means is that the President has not bent to the Tea Party who is standing behind Boehner with an assault rifle jabbing him in the back. Compromise? In the Halls of this Congress, how?
Until the GOP accepts the fact that the American people WANT compromise and for the House to do as the people voted. John Boehner is probably the worst Speaker of the House, ever, because he doesn't know how to control those 50 or so Tea Partiers who want to destroy the United States. As for the NRA, I think they have been watching too many John Wayne movies and retelling of the Wyatt Earp stories. When the gunman comes thru the door with a gun aimed and at the ready, the teacher or guard will be dead before they ever get halfway to their weapon. And what is Mr. LaPierre going to do about the "good guy" who suddenly snaps and goes bad. Honestly, I cannot believe that any rational human being believes any of that garbage that was spouted by the NRA last Friday and Sunday.
Okay here is a compromise.
$1 of tax revenue increase for every $1 in spending cuts.
What do you want Mr. LaPierre to do about a "good" guy that snaps? I really dont think that anything can be done in this situation. Dont throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I was really disappointed with the interview on Meet the Press because David Gregory couldn't get LaPierre to explain why he thinks it's good for anyone to have a gun that shoots hundred of bullets in less than a minute.
This argument has never been about handguns or single shot rifles or thinking we can every completely stop these crazy shooters. It's more about how many people the shooters can kill before they are stopped.
I don't understand how media interviewers are not able to pin down the people they are interviewing and force them to answer the question about whether or not they believe we should ban assault weapons that use magazine clips. Even clips with 10 rounds is too many.
The media interviewers who are so afraid of offending their "guests" because those "guests" may refuse to appear on TV/radio again are JUST as cowardly as our politicians who won't answer questions directly.
Since it's always been about money, the only things the public can do are 1) don't contribute money to these cowardly politicians' campaigns; 2) don't vote for these cowardly politicians; and 3) don't watch TV shows who let the interviewees not answer the questions directly or completely.