The real party of NO, the GOP, steps it up

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

LOL

oh ok. Now it was all Obama's idea?

Holding like a brick wall on tax cuts for the wealthy is the GOP idea. The estate tax at 5 million (rather than 3) and at 35% (rather than 55%) was GOP. Yeah - the rest of the stuff for business was Obama.

Do you literally simply never pay attention to the news at all?

[SOREHOOF]

It's not the Govt.'s money. The $25,000 they say they are losing isn't theirs in the first place!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

It's not the Govt.'s money. The $25,000 they say they are losing isn't theirs in the first place!

People need to get a grip. Bush gave a temporary decrease in the tax rate. It had a sunset date. Anything anybody gets beyond that is a brand new deal. The difference between 2001 and 2003 (when this unfunded change occurred) is that now we've spent those years borrowing from China and the Saudis to pay for it, and we are trillions in debt.

This whole thing isn't a done deal by any means. Tax bills come out of the House. John Boehner has already publicly admitted he's not even whipping his caucus to vote for this (the GOP is still completely obstructing anything Obama wants - un effing believable). The Dem progressive caucus is still furious at Obama and threatening no.

Right now the votes are not there. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_793540.html

It could go that nothing happens, all the tax cuts, unemployment, etc. just expire. 218 is the magic number.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

People need to get a grip. Bush gave a temporary decrease in the tax rate. It had a sunset date. Anything anybody gets beyond that is a brand new deal. The difference between 2001 and 2003 (when this unfunded change occurred) is that now we've spent those years borrowing from China and the Saudis to pay for it, and we are trillions in debt.

This whole thing isn't a done deal by any means. Tax bills come out of the House. John Boehner has already publicly admitted he's not even whipping his caucus to vote for this (the GOP is still completely obstructing anything Obama wants - un effing believable). The Dem progressive caucus is still furious at Obama and threatening no.

Right now the votes are not there. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_793540.html

It could go that nothing happens, all the tax cuts, unemployment, etc. just expire. 218 is the magic number.

There you go again connecting things that arent really related. The US deficit is primarily from spending too much, not from not collecting enough. Bush spent like a Democrat which was his primary downfall.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

There you go again connecting things that arent really related. The US deficit is primarily from spending too much, not from not collecting enough. Bush spent like a Democrat which was his primary downfall.

There you go again, misstating what I said. Giving massive tax cuts isn't spending. It's income reduction. Two wars and the largest Medicare entitlement program ever is spending.

BTW, the Dems of the past 60 years are not the party of spending. You might do a reality check on some of your assumptions.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

There you go again, misstating what I said. Giving massive tax cuts isn't spending. It's income reduction. Two wars and the largest Medicare entitlement program ever is spending.

BTW, the Dems of the past 60 years are not the party of spending. You might do a reality check on some of your assumptions.

I didnt misstate anything. As I said the tax cuts arent the reason there is a deficit, it was spending. Did you miss the part where i said Bush spent a lot?

The Democrats of the last 2 years have spent at a record smashing pace.

What happened 60 years ago is hardly relevant

[SOREHOOF]

Congress does the spending, not the Prez. For the last 2 years it has gotten completely out of control. The Dem led Congress has spent like drunken shopaholics with a stolen credit card on Black Friday.

[Riot]

I didnt misstate anything. As I said the tax cuts arent the reason there is a deficit, it was spending. Did you miss the part where i said Bush spent a lot?

The majority of our deficit is clearly due to the tax cuts. It's money we had to borrow, with interest, to pay for the routine things we were paying for before the tax cuts. With no additional spending, Bush put us in the hole with the tax cuts.

Reagan created a deficit. Bush I created a deficit. Bush II put us in the poorhouse. My eyes have been opened regarding the GOP and their false "economic responsibility" rep.

That was before the additional spending of the two unfunded wars, before the largest Medicare entitlement. Yeah, the Republicans are spendy buggars, and the worse thing is they used the credit card and ran it up to limit.

You are the one getting specific and detailed about semantics, so let's be specific.

The Democrats of the last 2 years have spent at a record smashing pace. What happened 60 years ago is hardly relevant

It would be so helpful if you would not casually change my words and meaning. I am not referring to what happened 60 years ago, I said look at the entire past 60 years, and yes, the GOP is the party of deficits and spending, and the Democrats are clearly not.

Yes, it matters, when people such as yourself continue to misstate the factual truth about who is the party of spending. And then worry about semantics.

Yes, the end of the Bush presidency and the beginning of Obamas was a huge spend - kind of necessary due to this little looming depression, don't you think?

I wouldn't blame Obama for continuing what Bush initiated regarding stimulus spending. Most of what has been "spent" by the "Democrats" (in reality both Bush and Obama) is being repaid, and a great majority of the stimulus funds remain unspent. The true cost is only about 1/3 of budgeted initially, with most of the loans to business anticipated to be repaid with interest to 85 or 90%

I realize that you boil everything down to "Democrats Suck, It's Always Their Fault" but that gets really tiresome when it's not remotely reality-based.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Holding like a brick wall on tax cuts for the wealthy is the GOP idea. The estate tax at 5 million (rather than 3) and at 35% (rather than 55%) was GOP. Yeah - the rest of the stuff for business was Obama.

Yes the new business friendly President.

Your "twist" on the news is always interesting.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Yes the new business friendly President.

Your "twist" on the news is always interesting.

The President has always been for business and job stimulus. You miss that?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Riot

The President has always been for business and job stimulus. You miss that?

http://is.gd/iiw3u

list of waivers.....many of Zero's buddies on here.....gravy train!

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

The President has always been for business and job stimulus. You miss that?

Yeah everybody is "for" business and jobs (not sure what job stimulus is?) but he hasnt done much until "forced" by the GOP especially considering the state of the economy

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Yeah everybody is "for" business and jobs (not sure what job stimulus is?) but he hasnt done much until "forced" by the GOP especially considering the state of the economy

Do tell how the GOP has "forced" Obama to address jobs, the recovery, the recession.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Do tell how the GOP has "forced" Obama to address jobs, the recovery, the recession.

Do you really think that anything would have been done except an extention of the cuts for under 250k and extending unemployent benefits without the GOP standing firm?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Do you really think that anything would have been done except an extention of the cuts for under 250k and extending unemployent benefits without the GOP standing firm?

The GOP has been "standing firm" and blocking much of that with filibuster all year.

Yes, acting like 3-year-olds in serious need of Supernanny and a time-out for their temper tantrums has worked very successfully for them.

With the last two House votes, the GOP clearly declared that the hill they die on are the financial interests of those making over 1 million dollars a year. Duly noted.

[Cannon Shell]

Riot acts like "every economist" agrees with her version of the world, remember this article

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...MoreIn_Opinion

[Cannon Shell]

More anti-Riot opinion

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...416429402.html

[Cannon Shell]

Surely Riot will find fault with this

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...n_AboveLEFTTop

An opinion piece that doesnt "favor" Wall Street in the WSJ

She will still disagree i'm sure

[Cannon Shell]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...wsreel_opinion

Another WSJ piece that finds fault with a republican!

Too bad you dont find such even handed, fair analysis in Riot's typically leftist links

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Surely Riot will find fault with this

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...n_AboveLEFTTop

An opinion piece that doesnt "favor" Wall Street in the WSJ

She will still disagree i'm sure

No, actually I agree with alot of that. I even read the WSJ regularly all by myself