Only 26% of REPUBLICANS want only spending cuts!

[Chris]

So, both sides have dug in now. It's like the shoot out at the ok corral.

Obama offered $4 TRILLION in cuts. So he isn't dug in.

Republicans would rather sink the country than go against Grover Norquist. How pathetic is that?

Very pathetic.

What will be remarkable is if they kill the profits of all their donors by letting the country default.

They really are the stupidest people on earth.

 

[theHawk]

I approve of tax increases.


Its about time everyone pays their fair share - have the lower 45% pay the same tax as the upper end and see how they like sharing.

 

[Chris]

I approve of tax increases.


Its about time everyone pays their fair share - have the lower 45% pay the same tax as the upper end and see how they like sharing.

That's because 400 people control HALF the wealth in this country.

And 80% of the income increase in the last 40 years has gone to the top 1%.

When are they going to start "sharing?"

 

[Mr.Nick]

So, both sides have dug in now. It's like the shoot out at the ok corral.

Obama offered $4 TRILLION in cuts. So he isn't dug in.

Republicans would rather sink the country than go against Grover Norquist. How pathetic is that?

Very pathetic.

What will be remarkable is if they kill the profits of all their donors by letting the country default.

They really are the stupidest people on earth.

Ha, not only would he be admitting hes a failure then, he'd be giving our nation back to us - the people.

 

[theHawk]

I approve of tax increases.


Its about time everyone pays their fair share - have the lower 45% pay the same tax as the upper end and see how they like sharing.

That's because 400 people control HALF the wealth in this country.

And 80% of the income increase in the last 40 years has gone to the top 1%.

When are they going to start "sharing?"

You're right, it would be so much better if 400 people in the government controlled all the wealth.

Then there would be peace for a thousand years.

 

[Chris]

I approve of tax increases.


Its about time everyone pays their fair share - have the lower 45% pay the same tax as the upper end and see how they like sharing.

That's because 400 people control HALF the wealth in this country.

And 80% of the income increase in the last 40 years has gone to the top 1%.

When are they going to start "sharing?"

You're right, it would be so much better if 400 people in the government controlled all the wealth.

Then there would be peace for a thousand years.

That is the Republican ideal.

Fewer and fewer people contolling more and more of the wealth.

 

[theHawk]

That's because 400 people control HALF the wealth in this country.

And 80% of the income increase in the last 40 years has gone to the top 1%.

When are they going to start "sharing?"

You're right, it would be so much better if 400 people in the government controlled all the wealth.

Then there would be peace for a thousand years.

That is the Republican ideal.

Fewer and fewer people contolling more and more of the wealth.

I understand you are frightened by the idea of so few controlling that much wealth.

The point I am trying to make is that by taxing all of their money you'd just be giving that power to the government, which doesn't fix the problem of so few controlling so much wealth.

I'm just curious though, what exactly do you have against makers of candy bars and software?

 

[appleannie1]

So, both sides have dug in now. It's like the shoot out at the ok corral.

Obama offered $4 TRILLION in cuts. So he isn't dug in.

Republicans would rather sink the country than go against Grover Norquist. How pathetic is that?

Yep, and now they want to change the constitution so it suits them.


The time has come for a balanced budget amendment that forces Washington to balance its books. If these debt negotiations have convinced us of anything, it’s that we can’t leave it to politicians in Washington to make the difficult decisions that they need to get our fiscal house in order. The balanced budget amendment will do that for them. Now is the moment. No more games. No more gimmicks. The Constitution must be amended to keep the government in check. We’ve tried persuasion. We’ve tried negotiations. We’re tried elections. Nothing has worked.

I am not allowed to post URL's yet but you can hear him in his own words at youtube.
McConnell Hates Democracy.

 

[FA_Q2]

So, both sides have dug in now. It's like the shoot out at the ok corral.

Obama offered $4 TRILLION in cuts. So he isn't dug in.

Republicans would rather sink the country than go against Grover Norquist. How pathetic is that?

Very pathetic.

What will be remarkable is if they kill the profits of all their donors by letting the country default.

They really are the stupidest people on earth.

And the fact that these cuts are over 10 years just flew right over your head. Here is a hint:
At the current rate, the debt we will owe over 10 years is: 15 TRILLION

They want to cut spending 4 TRILLION!!!

How is this reducing the debt??

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Obama offered $4 TRILLION in cuts. So he isn't dug in.

Republicans would rather sink the country than go against Grover Norquist. How pathetic is that?

Very pathetic.

What will be remarkable is if they kill the profits of all their donors by letting the country default.

They really are the stupidest people on earth.

And the fact that these cuts are over 10 years just flew right over your head. Here is a hint:
At the current rate, the debt we will owe over 10 years is: 15 TRILLION

They want to cut spending 4 TRILLION!!!

How is this reducing the debt??

More importantly what is to stop any Congress during that 10 years from simply changing the plan? Cuts now not later.

 

[Synthaholic]

i will answer your question when you can show me a GOP president in the last 50 years that has had a balanced budget.

Presidents don't balance budgets, they only sign off on or veto them.

Taxing and spending authority and legislation originates in congress, by law.

Then:

Why isn't the House dealing with the debt ceiling by themselves, as the Constitution demands? Why is the President even involved?

Why hasn't the House proposed a balanced budget?

Why are Republicans blaming the President for unemployment? The President cannot legislate or create a jobs bill, as you say.

 

[Synthaholic]

Presidents don't balance budgets, they only sign off on or veto them.

Taxing and spending authority and legislation originates in congress, by law.

same question then, name a GOP controlled congress that has balanced the budget.

and if spending is the responsibility of congress, as is raising the debt ceiling, then by your logic how is this Obama's fault?

Nobody balanced the budget...The fake "balanced budget" scam projected the budget to be in balance in 2002, from 1998...It was a lie from the get-go.


Obutthead is the one demanding that the debt ceiling be raised.

You're not really that up on current events, are ya?

That's a lie. Not surprising, coming from a liar.

 

[theHawk]

i will answer your question when you can show me a GOP president in the last 50 years that has had a balanced budget.

Presidents don't balance budgets, they only sign off on or veto them.

Taxing and spending authority and legislation originates in congress, by law.

Then:

Why isn't the House dealing with the debt ceiling by themselves, as the Constitution demands? Why is the President even involved?

Why hasn't the House proposed a balanced budget?

Why are Republicans blaming the President for unemployment? The President cannot legislate or create a jobs bill, as you say.

They are "dealing" with it. They won't raise it unless there are big cuts in the budget.

The President is "involved" because he is the leader of the Democrat Party so he should be able to agree with the Senate. Not to mention he has to sign the bill.

Every President gets the blame for unemployment. Sure it is not his job to do the hiring but he is the one who promised he would lower it. The government certainly sets the conditions for business in this country with their tax code, and Obama's Party is still in the majority control of government as they have been for over four years. So guess what, that means he takes responsibility as the leader of the Dem Party.

 

[GHook93]

So, both sides have dug in now. It's like the shoot out at the ok corral.

Obama offered $4 TRILLION in cuts. So he isn't dug in.

LOL, if you really believe those fake cuts are real cuts, then I have a bridge to sell you!

 

[Jarhead]

i will answer your question when you can show me a GOP president in the last 50 years that has had a balanced budget.

Presidents don't balance budgets, they only sign off on or veto them.

Taxing and spending authority and legislation originates in congress, by law.

same question then, name a GOP controlled congress that has balanced the budget.

and if spending is the responsibility of congress, as is raising the debt ceiling, then by your logic how is this Obama's fault?

Something as sensitive and important as this requires strong non partisan leadership.
He has offered none that I can see.

He is using scare tactics, and partisan rhetoric.

He is implying he is neutral but when you read into what he is proposing, he is not neutral..he is using this situation for political poisturing...as both sides in congress do all the time.

He is acting like the children we have in congress.

He needs to rise above it.

In my eyes, He hasn't.

That is why I blame him. I expect no more from congress. They are only in it for their careers and their parties.

I expect better from our president. Her promised to serve ALL of the people.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Did you even read the poll data?