Obama, Republicans reach deal to extend tax cuts, unemployment benefits

[MaggieMae]

Oh please. Obama is done. At this point his emperor's new clothes have been stripped away. Obama does anything and everything for purely political reasons
Look at the Bush tax cut extension decision. He sold out the democrats who supported him thru thick and thin. He has infuriated the far left. Why? because the one thing that all current officers want is re-election. Obama knows damned well if he stayed on the course most desired by the far left wing of the democrat party, he was DOOMED in 2012.
Now his most trusted companions in the House have thrown Obama under a bus.
Not only has the democrat party thoroughly fucked themselves for the 2012 elections, they have put Obama's chances in grave danger as well.

Let's rewrite that for historical context and see if it holds up, circa December 1994:

Oh please. Clinton iis done. At this point his emperor's new clothes have been stripped away Clinton does anything and everything for purely political reasons. Look at the NAFTA decision. He sold out the democrats who supported him thru thick and thin. He has infuriated the far left. Why? because the one thing that all current officers want is re-election. Clinton knows damned well if he stayed on the course most desired by the far left wing of the democrat party, he was DOOMED in 1996.
Now his most trusted companions in the House have thrown Clinton under a bus.
Not only has the democrat party thoroughly fucked themselves for the 1996 elections, they have put Clinton's chances in grave danger as well.

That's exactly what they said about Clinton in 1994. Doomed! Done! And that's because the same people that didn't understand triangulation then don't understand it now, either.

Of course, they couldn't have been more wrong about Clinton in 1994. He went on to absolutely crush Dole in 1996.

Clinton never had a 40% approval rate and never had to deal with a crushing recession. Clinton did float the socialized medicine trial balloon. He read the tea leaves correxctly and quickly backed off the plan. That alone saved his re-election bid. In his second term Clinton listened to his advisors who told him to leave the economy alone. The result was an economic boom.
Very different this Obama person. He is so far in the big water, he is clueless. He has no idea what to do. Obama has an economic room temperature IQ. His domestic policies are so all over the place, his liberal base has left him.
Obama is not even Clinton's pinky finger.
Clinton had to show up at the WH press briefing room today to lend support for Obama's tax plan. I heard Clinton's chat to the press. He sounded like a fiscal conservative. Imagine that.
Even Bill Clinton knows that liberalism and socialism do not work.

Here's the Gallup history of Clinton's favorability just FYI.

Clinton: Job Ratings

 

[MaggieMae]

Ok what makes you think anyone except those on the public dole will have to "sacrifice" anything? Less government spending should NEVER equal a lower standard of living, higher energy costs and a wrecked economy...
Tell me Rod Stewart's girlfriend, how does less government spending leap to $6 gas?
How does less government spending mean people will have to surrender their possessions?
What does your pay tv package have to do with anything?
Why is it you think less government means you will have less?
Look, perhaps a trip back from la la land and cancellation of your subscription to "O" Magazine is in store for you.
Lastly. Who gives a flying fuck how old your tv is. If one has earned the money they can buy 12 tv's if they so desire and if they want to put one in their garage and make sure YOU have to see it every time you walk by ,that's tough shit. It's none of your God Damned business how people spend their money.
BTW shit head. I have three vehicles that I paid for....You think I should have to arbitrarily surrender one to make YOU happy?

So much for "adult" conversation. I think the only thing someone like you "gets" as it relates to the bigger picture is when one of us tells you to go fuck yourself. Do it now.

You threaten the food on my table. You get blasted.
"Go fuck yourself" ...
Does your mother know you use that kind of language?
You're no lady.
You're a trailer trash mouthed hussie.
Us? Speak for yourself, wench.
Now, go wipe the green drippy shit from your nose. Test tube baby.

I treated my response to your filthy mouth in kind. So sorry my rant about gimme gimme gimme struck such a nerve with you that you had to prove you have the brain of an adolescent spoiled brat throwing a tantrum.

 

[MaggieMae]

The hatred is palpable, even worse than for Clinton and Bush. I voted for McCain. I am praying I get to vote for Romney. But, unlike the wackaloons here, I see objectively. BHO learns very quickly, as you folks are going to learn to our collective regret. He has turned his back on the far left, moved to the center, has the most popular president in the last forty years pitching for him, and the GOP is fouling off the pitches. McConnell and his doinks are so far off stride they can't get any lumber on the ball. Boehner, much to my surprise, understands what's going on. Guys, your hatred is blinding you.

The hate card...AGAIN!!!!!! Stow it jakey. It won't wash here anymore.

Who made you moderator of this board? This topic?

 

[MaggieMae]

Meanwhile the Reps want the top wage earners to get cuts in taxes. We KNOW that will increase the deficit, right?

No, we don't know that. An improved economy as a result of not increasing taxes (and there is no tax cut for top wage earners on the table) increases tax revenue.

We have not had these taxes that were so feared for over 2 years and what help did not having those taxes give us? Placing taxes on the rich at this point makes more sense right now because they are not reinvesting here for job creation. Why now all of a sudden will maintaining a tax decrease help when it did nothing before?

ONCE AND FOR ALL -- It was the ONLY way to save the tax cut in place for middle-income wage earners, period. The Dems tried two separate bills last Saturday: One that kept the tax cuts in place up to $250K and another up to $1 million. And both were voted down. End of that part of the story, at least.

 

[MaggieMae]

Did you forget your medication again?

I understand that you, conspiracist, are sick about this issue and project on others your insecurities and fears. You have to stop your fear, son.

I hear you Jake!

It is almost like he has never posted any original topic in over 14,000 posts...
oh .... never mind

That's sick, man. Did you figure out how many threads I've started? Even I don't care. Imagine that...

 

[MaggieMae]

I came to the Board because a friend of mine noted that so much inaccurate OPs and arguments were made here that I could stay busy with just the refutation. How true dat!

Most of the time, if the topic is something currently newsworthy, it's not necessary to start a new thread. In fact, if you do, it will simply get merged or some yahoo will start hollering that THERE'S ALREADY A THREAD ON THAT, like you've committed some violation of a sacred rule.

 

[MaggieMae]

I came to the Board because a friend of mine noted that so much inaccurate OPs and arguments were made here that I could stay busy with just the refutation. How true dat!

Hey , it is your story and you can tell it any way you want........


Many would believe it was/is for different reasons

Many? That's odd, since of the thousands of threads I've participated in, you're the only one who seemed to care.

 

[MaggieMae]

You asked no reasonable question. You twist facts to your perverted philosophy. You put words in my mouth that I did not say or imply. You are not only risible but also pathetic, a simply ineffective hack. Risible.

Why have you not once, in over 14,000 posts, ever start a thread?

Yes, you are correct that is not a reasonable question.
Yes! Now I see it. This question is so "right-wing".



Hmm, speaking of hack.....

Yawn.... Maybe he likes to eat too but has never once cooked for himself. What stupidity that you choose to pursue such a lame subject.

 

[MaggieMae]

No, we don't know that. An improved economy as a result of not increasing taxes (and there is no tax cut for top wage earners on the table) increases tax revenue.

Yes, we do know that, asterism, and, no, we don't know that the same tax levels are going to improve the economy. It has not so far, hmmm?

Not with an expectation of immediate higher costs. That expectation just got reduced. I'm fre to admit I'm wrong when I'm shown to be wrong, so let's talk this time next year. Lower tax rates did NOT cause revenues to fall below 2001 levels for the entire decade as was predicted by the pundits.

Revenue did fall.

Check out Chart 2 here:
tax.com: So How Did the Bush Tax Cuts Work Out for the Economy?

Which was taken from here:
SOI Tax Stats - Individual Statistical Tables by Tax Rate and Income Percentile

 

[MaggieMae]

Make them reveal all of their investments, giving the deductions for investing in American and penalizing them $ for $ investing overseas in companies that directly compete for American market share domestically. Automatic felonies for any fudging the books or returns, including those who do the books and returns as well as the principles.

That would still do nothing to stop them from stashing billions in UBS, which continues to defy a court order to release the names of American tax evaders.

 

[MaggieMae]

Politics as the shadow business casts over society?

It's one thing for elites to manipulate public opinion during a single crisis like 911 or the Crash of '08. I'm wondering what would happen if WikiLeaks takes down Bank of America or JP Morgan Chase (or both) about the same time Sarah Palin wins the Republican nomination for President?

Alexander Cockburn has some thoughts about Sarah in his latest CounterPunch column.

Briefly, if Republican elites don't think she has a snowballs chance in Hawaii of beating Obama, they'll try to convince Blomberg to challenge Sarah for independents.

Especially if on the other side of the aisle, Russ Feingold launchs an independent assault on Obama which could lead to a repeat of the 1948 presidential campaign.

"The 2012 battlefield could turn out to offer the voters a choice not of three but of four serious candidates.

"The last time this happened was in 1948, which saw a fierce contest between the Democrat Harry Truman and the Republican Thomas Dewey, and also, on the left, the Progressive Party's Henry Wallace (formerly FDR's vice president) and on the right the pro-segregation Dixiecrats, led by Strom Thurmond."

If the US is experiencing a currency crisis shortly after B of A or JP Morgan Chase go the way of Enron all in the middle of a four way contest for the White House, even Goldman Sachs might get a tad confused.

I know I will.

Wink, wink.

Assange never should have hinted he was going after "a" big bank. I immediately envisioned all the overly paid CEOs busting balls to shred documents, delete emails and hard drives, and call in private auditors to do a complete purge and recommend where to move assets so they can't be found.

 

[MaggieMae]

Feingold, Obama, Blomberg, Palin? Obama takes the plurality of popular votes but can't, I think, take the electoral majority. Who then becomes the Hamilton, the King (Queen?) Maker of the House? It will could be Boehner, whether he would be the Speaker again or in the minority leader role again. georgephillip, you have one, sick twisted mind.

Boehner would never be able to stop blubbering if he were ever nominated for President.

 

[MaggieMae]

Politics as the shadow business casts over society?

It's one thing for elites to manipulate public opinion during a single crisis like 911 or the Crash of '08. I'm wondering what would happen if WikiLeaks takes down Bank of America or JP Morgan Chase (or both) about the same time Sarah Palin wins the Republican nomination for President?

Alexander Cockburn has some thoughts about Sarah in his latest CounterPunch column.

Briefly, if Republican elites don't think she has a snowballs chance in Hawaii of beating Obama, they'll try to convince Blomberg to challenge Sarah for independents.

Especially if on the other side of the aisle, Russ Feingold launchs an independent assault on Obama which could lead to a repeat of the 1948 presidential campaign.

"The 2012 battlefield could turn out to offer the voters a choice not of three but of four serious candidates.

"The last time this happened was in 1948, which saw a fierce contest between the Democrat Harry Truman and the Republican Thomas Dewey, and also, on the left, the Progressive Party's Henry Wallace (formerly FDR's vice president) and on the right the pro-segregation Dixiecrats, led by Strom Thurmond."

If the US is experiencing a currency crisis shortly after B of A or JP Morgan Chase go the way of Enron all in the middle of a four way contest for the White House, even Goldman Sachs might get a tad confused.

I know I will.

Wink, wink.

It was the republican elites that with Ron Steele's blessing put up Mc Cain as a sacrificial lamb for Obama.

McCain had a terrific chance of beating Obama until he dragged in Palin, thus proving to Republicans what a terrible decision maker he would be as president.

 

[MaggieMae]

Do you think Republican elites really wanted the White House in 2008?

It's always seemed to me they conceded the WH to the Democrats that year.

No. That is awhy I stated Mc Cain was a sacrificial lamb.
Onama was "made" President. he was packaged and presented very well.
One thing suburban white liberals love is packaging and brand named stuff.
The GOP could have put up a stronger candidate but for what purpose. Obama was a "made" guy. About 15 minutes after he announced his candidacy, he won the election.

That is so not true. He did a lousy job in the debates with Clinton, and many of us thought Hillary should have won. It was the tightest primary race in history, right up until the last one. Obama was no shoo-in, even among the black community because of Hillary's own popularity among them. The primaries became only about Clinton and Obama. Against all the others until they dropped out, yes, you are correct.

 

[Oddball]

Obama, Republicans reach deal to extend tax cuts, unemployment benefits and spend a shitload of money on pork

Fixed.

 

[asterism]

Fine

Then show us the spending cuts that will pay for this tax cut before you extend it for another two years

Sounds fair

Revenue to the government will increase when the economy recovers just like it did last time. The idiots in Washington just need to not increase government spending by even more.

I'd like to see an across the board 10% cut in every agency's budget except Medicare and the Veterans Administration and cut those by 5%. They could do it, trust me. Imagine how much duplication they would miraculously find. In fact, not knowing exactly how deficit reduction will actually affect each of them, I'll bet they're already scrambling to get their respective houses in order. (Social Security is a whole 'nuther issue that needs to be addressed separately from "budget" cuts, and I think we'll see major changes to that also but they won't affect those already receiving it.)

I agree, it would be a great start. However, that reduction cannot be done from inside the bureaucracy or else they will cut essential services to protest. City government managers do that all the time with firefighters and police officers.

 

[asterism]

The Simpson-Bowles recommendations include deep cuts in spending, too. As I said, it's going to take sacrifice by everyone. There's no reason why the American people can't give into their expectations that they deserve everything out there, give in to the demand to constantly keep up with the Joneses. If gasoline goes to $6.00 a gallon, we'll do more carpooling, combine shopping trips, TAKE A BUS, or <gasp> walk a block to the 7-Eleven!! The quasi-rich might have to get rid of that third car!! Oh the horror. The poorer person might have to give up his one car entirely and figure out something else. I might have to reduce my TV package to basic and watch my favorite shows on my computer, which is already 5 years old, by the way. Why do Americans HAVE TO HAVE the latest in IT equipment and toys? I could go on and on, but I think you get my gist.

I understand your point, and I agree with the sentiment. I just think there is a more efficient and sustainable way that won't hurt as much. That way would cause the government to lose a major means to control behavior, so it'll be a tough reform.

I think on a personal level, the credit crunch scared the beejezus out of a lot of people. No one I know plans to go back to a pay-later mindset and that attitude has trickled UP to the government, which is why there are so many people suddenly interested in the deficit. A few years ago, it was just a ho-hum topic.

I hope you are right.

 

[asterism]

Yes, we do know that, asterism, and, no, we don't know that the same tax levels are going to improve the economy. It has not so far, hmmm?

Not with an expectation of immediate higher costs. That expectation just got reduced. I'm fre to admit I'm wrong when I'm shown to be wrong, so let's talk this time next year. Lower tax rates did NOT cause revenues to fall below 2001 levels for the entire decade as was predicted by the pundits.

Revenue did fall.

Check out Chart 2 here:
tax.com: So How Did the Bush Tax Cuts Work Out for the Economy?

Which was taken from here:
SOI Tax Stats - Individual Statistical Tables by Tax Rate and Income Percentile

Revenue fell before the tax cuts. Static analyses seem to miss that part. Revenue fell initially and quickly increased due to the tax cuts.

Also, from your link:

Total income was $2.74 trillion less during the eight Bush years than if incomes had stayed at 2000 levels.

The 2001 recession caused income to fall, so the premise of the analysis is already flawed.

 

[asterism]

Politics as the shadow business casts over society?

It's one thing for elites to manipulate public opinion during a single crisis like 911 or the Crash of '08. I'm wondering what would happen if WikiLeaks takes down Bank of America or JP Morgan Chase (or both) about the same time Sarah Palin wins the Republican nomination for President?

Alexander Cockburn has some thoughts about Sarah in his latest CounterPunch column.

Briefly, if Republican elites don't think she has a snowballs chance in Hawaii of beating Obama, they'll try to convince Blomberg to challenge Sarah for independents.

Especially if on the other side of the aisle, Russ Feingold launchs an independent assault on Obama which could lead to a repeat of the 1948 presidential campaign.

"The 2012 battlefield could turn out to offer the voters a choice not of three but of four serious candidates.

"The last time this happened was in 1948, which saw a fierce contest between the Democrat Harry Truman and the Republican Thomas Dewey, and also, on the left, the Progressive Party's Henry Wallace (formerly FDR's vice president) and on the right the pro-segregation Dixiecrats, led by Strom Thurmond."

If the US is experiencing a currency crisis shortly after B of A or JP Morgan Chase go the way of Enron all in the middle of a four way contest for the White House, even Goldman Sachs might get a tad confused.

I know I will.

Wink, wink.

It was the republican elites that with Ron Steele's blessing put up Mc Cain as a sacrificial lamb for Obama.

McCain had a terrific chance of beating Obama until he dragged in Palin, thus proving to Republicans what a terrible decision maker he would be as president.

Huh?

Substantiate that. McCain was a surefire loser according to a consensus of the polls. Which poll had him up just before the announcement of Palin?

 

[thereisnospoon]

The hatred is palpable, even worse than for Clinton and Bush. I voted for McCain. I am praying I get to vote for Romney. But, unlike the wackaloons here, I see objectively. BHO learns very quickly, as you folks are going to learn to our collective regret. He has turned his back on the far left, moved to the center, has the most popular president in the last forty years pitching for him, and the GOP is fouling off the pitches. McConnell and his doinks are so far off stride they can't get any lumber on the ball. Boehner, much to my surprise, understands what's going on. Guys, your hatred is blinding you.

The hate card...AGAIN!!!!!! Stow it jakey. It won't wash here anymore.

Who made you moderator of this board? This topic?

You're quite amusing.
Bottom line.....the majority of the people are sick of the race card, the hate card and all the other buzzword shit the left uses. We're no longer going to respond to it.
We don't care what your side has to say.
Go waste someone else's time with this childish petty crap.