Do you people not realize that both political parties are at fault?

[toxicmedia]

conservatives are creating revolution within the GOP.

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

 

[Salt Jones]

The tea party is everything I called them and more. They helped create this mess, read S&P's statement, and now they feign shock. You and your ilk, on both sides of the aisle are the reason this country is in the mess it's in. Party before Country, that's your way. Disgusting.

Considering the TEA party was created from the ruins of the Bush/Obama failed policies, I'm finding it difficult to fathom how "this mess" could be their fault...

Well then, blow the bilge tanks and surface for some clarity.

 

[Salt Jones]

conservatives are creating revolution within the GOP.

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

The republicans of 2000-2006 were the republicans of 1994, only Washingtonized.

 

[Annie]

bump. Old Salt seems to be a party before country kind of guy.

So, the President and the legislators of his party believed that if they waited long enough, they'd get their way. Got it.

They didn't want to be serious, they didn't want to compromise, they just assumed that the other side would cave. When they didn't? Oh yeah, called 'uncompromising terrorists.'

People aren't buying it. Indeed, Paul Ryan's plan also cut 4T over decade. One or both could have been the base of compromises, but that never was in the cards.

The name is Salt Jones, OldSalt is another poster.

So, the President and the legislators of his party believed that if they waited long enough, they'd get their way. Got it.
They didn't want to be serious, they didn't want to compromise, they just assumed that the other side would cave. When they didn't? Oh yeah, called 'uncompromising terrorists.'
People aren't buying it. Indeed, Paul Ryan's plan also cut 4T over decade. One or both could have been the base of compromises, but that never was in the cards.

Did the republicans support the revenue increases in Bowles-Simpson?

After they voted for it, did republicans in Congress defend Ryan's plan? Did the republican presidential candidates embrace it?

You can revise history but statements by republicans concerning Ryan's budget plan can easily be retrieved. Are you going to be serious or still play the game?

Ryan came up with a plan, what was the Democrats reaction? As for Bowles Simpson, who asked for that report and it was his job to sell it. Problem was, it wasn't what he wanted, it was a 'big picture' plan and included both cuts and revenues taken in. The extremists on the Republican side were 'no taxes'; failed too often to be mentioned was the extreme liberals, including Obama, who ultimately wanted no cuts, just that 'clean ceiling' you mentioned and increased spending.

 

[Patrick2]

conservatives are creating revolution within the GOP.

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

You're just advertising a thorough-going ignorance of the party and its history. Beyond question, the party establishment has been RINO ever since Reagan left office, starting with Bush 1's "kinder and gentler conservatism" - that's 23 years. Bush 2 was pure RINO. Also, implying that Tea Partiers are just social conservatives in disguise is stupid and a standard defamation of the leftwing and liberal media. Does anyone REALLY want to lie in broad daylight with their bald face hanging out and claim the 2010 elections would have turned out the way they did, or anyone would be talking about stopping the ever-growing debt, without the Tea Party?

 

[whitehall]

When lefties start blaming "both" political parties you know the Obama honeymoon is over.

 

[toxicmedia]

conservatives are creating revolution within the GOP.

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

The republicans of 2000-2006 were the republicans of 1994, only Washingtonized.

The fact of the matter is...IMHO....since the president and his admin would be irresponsible if they admitted they have no real power to create economic prosperity...it's really all about social issues in the end.

The media can't admit that American workers are not globally cost effective, because nobody would watch that show. Politicians can't admit it because nobody would vote for them. Americans want somebody to tell them they're exceptional. The DNC and RNC are industries that seize power by best telling Americans what they want to hear. This is as corrosive to our economy today as parents practicing the same philosophy raising children.

The sad part is...even partial power corrupts absolutely.

 

[Salt Jones]

conservatives are creating revolution within the GOP.

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

You're just advertising a thorough-going ignorance of the party and its history. Beyond question, the party establishment has been RINO ever since Reagan left office, starting with Bush 1's "kinder and gentler conservatism" - that's 23 years. Bush 2 was pure RINO. Also, implying that Tea Partiers are just social conservatives in disguise is stupid and a standard defamation of the leftwing and liberal media. Does anyone REALLY want to lie in broad daylight with their bald face hanging out and claim the 2010 elections would have turned out the way they did, or anyone would be talking about stopping the ever-growing debt, without the Tea Party?

You do realize Reagan would be considered a RINO. He passed amnesty, raised taxes, and raised the debt limit.

 

[Salt Jones]

When lefties start blaming "both" political parties you know the Obama honeymoon is over.

Why? I would vote for Obama over any republican running for president, except Palin. It would be fun to see what she would do.

 

[toxicmedia]

conservatives are creating revolution within the GOP.

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

You're just advertising a thorough-going ignorance of the party and its history. Beyond question, the party establishment has been RINO ever since Reagan left office, starting with Bush 1's "kinder and gentler conservatism" - that's 23 years. Bush 2 was pure RINO. Also, implying that Tea Partiers are just social conservatives in disguise is stupid and a standard defamation of the leftwing and liberal media. Does anyone REALLY want to lie in broad daylight with their bald face hanging out and claim the 2010 elections would have turned out the way they did, or anyone would be talking about stopping the ever-growing debt, without the Tea Party?

I prefer Eisenhower and Goldwater conservatism.

Reagan ruined the GOP by inviting the Christian right into politics. There is nothing wrong wih voting based on your morals, but there is everything wrong with invoking God in legislation.

Tea Partiers are nothing but Christian social conservatives. 95% of Tea Partiers voted for McCain.

Barry Goldwater said it best.

There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism

 

[toxicmedia]

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

You're just advertising a thorough-going ignorance of the party and its history. Beyond question, the party establishment has been RINO ever since Reagan left office, starting with Bush 1's "kinder and gentler conservatism" - that's 23 years. Bush 2 was pure RINO. Also, implying that Tea Partiers are just social conservatives in disguise is stupid and a standard defamation of the leftwing and liberal media. Does anyone REALLY want to lie in broad daylight with their bald face hanging out and claim the 2010 elections would have turned out the way they did, or anyone would be talking about stopping the ever-growing debt, without the Tea Party?

You do realize Reagan would be considered a RINO. He passed amnesty, raised taxes, and raised the debt limit.

He raised the debt limit 17 times...and you may have forgotten he had a stimulus of his own, all that defense spending that exploded the deficit.

 

[Patrick2]

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

You're just advertising a thorough-going ignorance of the party and its history. Beyond question, the party establishment has been RINO ever since Reagan left office, starting with Bush 1's "kinder and gentler conservatism" - that's 23 years. Bush 2 was pure RINO. Also, implying that Tea Partiers are just social conservatives in disguise is stupid and a standard defamation of the leftwing and liberal media. Does anyone REALLY want to lie in broad daylight with their bald face hanging out and claim the 2010 elections would have turned out the way they did, or anyone would be talking about stopping the ever-growing debt, without the Tea Party?

You do realize Reagan would be considered a RINO. He passed amnesty, raised taxes, and raised the debt limit.

Oh thank you for treating me to the standard leftwing anti-Reagan narrative. Reagan made BIG cuts in tax rates in 1981, which together with his deregulation efforts, set off a 17 year economic boom. The taxes were raised by the democrats, which controlled the House for all eight of Reagan's years, where all tax bills must start. Reagan agreed to a democrat-passed tax increase in 1982, with a promise by the dems to cut spending $2 for each $1 in raised taxes - of course they never kept their end of the bargain. Reagan's amnesty of about 1 million aliens was agreed by all to be a one-time only humanitarian gesture. Of course, leftwingers have forgotten the "one time only", and the welcoming by the leftwing of up to 20 million illegals for strictly political purposes, which would expand to scores of millions more with chain immigration bears little resemblance to Reagan's action. As for debt, Reagan was saddled with the wreckage of Carter's appeasement policy, and had to spend immensely on the military to meet the challenge of the newly-aggressive soviet union.

 

[hortysir]

<snip> Of course, leftwingers have forgotten the "one time only", and the welcoming by the leftwing of up to 20 million illegals for strictly political purposes, which would expand to scores of millions more with chain immigration bears little resemblance to Reagan's action.<snip>

Which is exactly why we can't trust this most recent "compromise"
Any future congress will not be beholding to this deal and would have zero reason to stick to it

 

[Neotrotsky]

IRS: Not enough rich to cover the deficit

Soak the rich, eh?

They do not have the money.
A report from the Internal Revenue Service found that the rich &#8212; 8,274 people with incomes of $10 million per year or more &#8212; earned a total of $240 billion in 2009.

Even of you confiscated every dime they earned, you would barely have enough money to cover government spending for 24 days.

Of course, about a quarter of that money already goes to the federal government for federal income. So make that 18 days.

Another 227,000 people earned $1 million or more in 2009.

Millionaires averaged taxes of 24.4% of their income &#8212; up from 23.1% in 2008.

They, too, did not earn enough money to come anywhere close to covering the annual deficits that are $1.5 trillion a year.​

Individual tax collections totaled $1,175,422,000,000 in 2009 &#8212; or 15.4% of all income.

Doubling federal income taxes for everyone would still leave us $400 billion or so shy of balancing the budget.​

 

[Patrick2]

No they aren't. People who call themselves "conservatives", "conservative independents", "tea partiers", or "conservative libertarians"...are all Republicans, and once in power...if they gain power in significant numbers...will have the same 70 lobbyists per day lining up outside their offices. This is human corruption, and it happens in every government, every where, from the beginning till now.

The only thing that's happening now is that the Republican social conservatives have rebranded themselves, and hopefull Republican social conservative consituants have been hoodwinked into thinking that something new is taking place. You wait....within 2 years....Rand Paul will go along to get along. Take the example of Patty Murray WA-D. She was a "mom in tennis shoes" and unseated a hugely connected incumbent, then she turned into the average Washington Democrat

You're just advertising a thorough-going ignorance of the party and its history. Beyond question, the party establishment has been RINO ever since Reagan left office, starting with Bush 1's "kinder and gentler conservatism" - that's 23 years. Bush 2 was pure RINO. Also, implying that Tea Partiers are just social conservatives in disguise is stupid and a standard defamation of the leftwing and liberal media. Does anyone REALLY want to lie in broad daylight with their bald face hanging out and claim the 2010 elections would have turned out the way they did, or anyone would be talking about stopping the ever-growing debt, without the Tea Party?

I prefer Eisenhower and Goldwater conservatism.

Reagan ruined the GOP by inviting the Christian right into politics. There is nothing wrong wih voting based on your morals, but there is everything wrong with invoking God in legislation.

No actually, the Christian right ruined the GOP by voting for RINOs and keeping them in power, the people who never did anything for them, even make a token effort to oppose the Abortion Holocaust, as the lesser of two evils. And there is nothing wrong with invoking God in your legislation - nobody owes you an explanation of why they voted as they did. I would much rather see people motivated by God, than what typically motivates leftwingers - a profound hatred for this country and everything that made it great.

Tea Partiers are nothing but Christian social conservatives. 95% of Tea Partiers voted for McCain.

Pure defamation for which you have no proof whatsoever.

 

[Patrick2]

<snip> Of course, leftwingers have forgotten the "one time only", and the welcoming by the leftwing of up to 20 million illegals for strictly political purposes, which would expand to scores of millions more with chain immigration bears little resemblance to Reagan's action.<snip>

Which is exactly why we can't trust this most recent "compromise"
Any future congress will not be beholding to this deal and would have zero reason to stick to it

That's exactly what I thought when I heard the compromise, but very few people know the history. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

 

[Bfgrn]

I'll try again, regarding the debt, why didn't he take the Simpson Plan, which he had ordered to come up with proposals. Indeed, it was well reviewed by the rating companies, had some support on left and right-you know, the beginning of actual compromise possibilities? $4T in 10 year of reductions. A deal that could have been finished in winter. But he never did, he tossed the problem to Biden and legislators, bringing us to the past 2 weeks.

He does own this problem.

Hey Annie...I guess you just 'forgot'

S&P explains the downgrade:

[...]Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.

______________________________________________________________________

Fmr. GOP Sen. Alan Simpson Calls Republican Refusal To Raise Revenue ‘Absolute Bullshit’

Former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson blasted his intransigent GOP colleagues on the Hill today for failing to reach a deal on the deficit. The blunt-talking co-chairman of President Obama’s bipartisan fiscal reform commission slammed Republicans for kowtowing to Americans for Tax Reform head Grover Norquist (“Republicans can’t be in thrall to him”) and pushed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to stand fast on the August 2 deadline.

Surveying the lay of the current fiscal land, Simpson said, “We’re at 15 percent revenue, and historically it’s been closer to 20 percent.”

He added, “We’ve never had a war without a tax, and now we’ve got two. … Absolute bullshit.”

More

and you, tool, spin and spin. I'm certain that you read the complete text? LOL! Can't even get fucking quotes right.

Yes I did Annie. Adults are able to understand what Simpson is saying. Go find one who can explain it to you...

 

[Salt Jones]

You're just advertising a thorough-going ignorance of the party and its history. Beyond question, the party establishment has been RINO ever since Reagan left office, starting with Bush 1's "kinder and gentler conservatism" - that's 23 years. Bush 2 was pure RINO. Also, implying that Tea Partiers are just social conservatives in disguise is stupid and a standard defamation of the leftwing and liberal media. Does anyone REALLY want to lie in broad daylight with their bald face hanging out and claim the 2010 elections would have turned out the way they did, or anyone would be talking about stopping the ever-growing debt, without the Tea Party?

You do realize Reagan would be considered a RINO. He passed amnesty, raised taxes, and raised the debt limit.

Oh thank you for treating me to the standard leftwing anti-Reagan narrative. Reagan made BIG cuts in tax rates in 1981, which together with his deregulation efforts, set off a 17 year economic boom. The taxes were raised by the democrats, which controlled the House for all eight of Reagan's years, where all tax bills must start. Reagan agreed to a democrat-passed tax increase in 1982, with a promise by the dems to cut spending $2 for each $1 in raised taxes - of course they never kept their end of the bargain. Reagan's amnesty of about 1 million aliens was agreed by all to be a one-time only humanitarian gesture. Of course, leftwingers have forgotten the "one time only", and the welcoming by the leftwing of up to 20 million illegals for strictly political purposes, which would expand to scores of millions more with chain immigration bears little resemblance to Reagan's action. As for debt, Reagan was saddled with the wreckage of Carter's appeasement policy, and had to spend immensely on the military to meet the challenge of the newly-aggressive soviet union.

If " taxes were raised by the democrats, which controlled the House for all eight of Reagan's years, where all tax bills must start", wouldn't the "BIG cuts in tax rates" you attribute to Reagan also start with the democrat controlled house, "where all tax bills must start"?

Is amnesty any less amnesty because it was "one time only"?

Is rewarding illegal behavior ok if it is one time and for only 1 million illegals?

"Reagan was saddled with the wreckage of Carter's appeasement policy, and had to spend immensely on the military to meet the challenge of the newly-aggressive soviet union" yet Obama wasn't "saddled" with Bush's Medicare Part D and two off the books wars?

 

[smgordon1259]

There are only 2 reasons why the 2 major political parties exist

1. To always make the other party look bad.

2. To take as much money from Corporations, special interest groups and lobbyists as they can so they can get elected.

I wish there was a movement that Stood for Justice ,Truth and the American way, a grass roots effort to end corruption in our government.

Corruption that starts with political donations/ gifts to elected officials, Political donations such as those from Corporate, Special Interest and lobbyist groups.

These donations buy favors and votes on laws, these favors and votes violated the basic premise that our nation was founded on "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL" we are not equal when this exists.

We must end these corrupt ways now, or we will slave our lives away for these hijackers of Prosperity.

no 1 party , no 1 man, has done this to us.

The 2 major political parties share the blame for the condition our nation is in. We can not excuse the actions of these corrupt people by arguing who is to blame.

They are ALL TO BLAME.

ALM - The American Liberation Movement

 

[Mr.Nick]

Yeah, democrats have been asserting republicans are "racists" unless they pass X Y and Z.

Of course they do and we get this shit.

Now the Tea Party is being assaulted for saying NO....

Of course the progressives don't understand a word I just said.