Senate minority Mitch McConnell takes tax hikes off the table

[ilia25]

Well, here is his actual position, your 'gotcha' soundbite, notwithstanding:

In his first speech since Republicans lost Senate seats and the presidential race last week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Republicans are open to new tax revenue in a fiscal deal in exchange for entitlement reforms.

“Republicans like me have said for more than a year now that we’re open to new revenue in exchange for meaningful reforms to the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt, so that we can reduce the deficit, protect these programs for today’s seniors, and strengthen them for future generations,” McConnell said in prepared remarks for a floor speech Tuesday.

“This is the basic outline of a plan, and it reflects our seriousness as a party,” McConnell said. He argued the government does not need more tax revenue, but said Republicans will accept it “because Democrats from the President on down have said they’re willing to punish everyone if they don’t get it.”

Rhetorically McConnell’s speech contrasts with an interview his remarks to The Wall Street Journal editorial board published this weekend. “Let me put it very clearly," McConnell said in that interview. "I am not willing to raise taxes to turn off the sequester. Period."

McConnell: GOP Open to New Revenue in Return for 'Reform'

Well that speech was two days ago in front of a lot of cameras and this speech was made this morning with the only camera being c-span's. Oh wait, McConnell is a republican, isn't he?

And would 'you people' please get off the 'gotcha soundbite' thing. It is what he said and it is in context. I am sorry if he did not think anyone would hear it.

Dude. I schooled you. Lick your sore ballsack and move on.

LOL

No, you only made fool of yourself. Read your own quote:
"He argued the government does not need more tax revenue".

 

[ilia25]

Your story has holes large enough to drive an oil tanker through. Refusing to allow a tax rate increase is not the equal to refusing to raise revenues. And CEO's were not the only group Maobama had to the WH this week. But hey let's not a few FACTS get in the way of a good fairy tale.

OMG, who said anything about rates, or even about taxes? McConnell said that the government does not need more revenue -- period.

 

[nodoginnafight]

McConnell and crew are trying to substitute eliminating some deductions for raising taxes. For that I think he can probably get a 2% cut in defense spending.

It's not serious reform and not what the voters mandated.

He's got no leverage, he's got no mandate, and apparently he's got no sense.

The tax hikes are coming. How hard it hits is up to the G.O.P. This can go down a little softer if they make real compromises or they can continue down the path of bull-headed obstructionism and it can go down hard - real hard.

And if that happens the Republicans will be lucky to get a dog catcher elected in Nome.

The voters, in fact, re-elected the People's House of Representatives that they elected in '10 to stop Obama's wreckless deficits.

Agree or disagree, or are you a partisan with a dog in the fight?

In fact - more people voted for Democratic candidates in House elections than they did Republicans. The Republicans kept their majority with redistricting. (it's happened four times in the last 100 years) Both sides do it so that's that. But trying to pretend the House of Representative voting gave the G.O.P. any sort of mandate is almost as stupid as ... not going there ... anyway - try to play that card all you want. Just get ready to start saying: "President Hillary Clinton."

 

[emptystep]

Well, here is his actual position, your 'gotcha' soundbite, notwithstanding:

In his first speech since Republicans lost Senate seats and the presidential race last week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Republicans are open to new tax revenue in a fiscal deal in exchange for entitlement reforms.

“Republicans like me have said for more than a year now that we’re open to new revenue in exchange for meaningful reforms to the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt, so that we can reduce the deficit, protect these programs for today’s seniors, and strengthen them for future generations,” McConnell said in prepared remarks for a floor speech Tuesday.

“This is the basic outline of a plan, and it reflects our seriousness as a party,” McConnell said. He argued the government does not need more tax revenue, but said Republicans will accept it “because Democrats from the President on down have said they’re willing to punish everyone if they don’t get it.”

Rhetorically McConnell’s speech contrasts with an interview his remarks to The Wall Street Journal editorial board published this weekend. “Let me put it very clearly," McConnell said in that interview. "I am not willing to raise taxes to turn off the sequester. Period."

McConnell: GOP Open to New Revenue in Return for 'Reform'

LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAID and QUIT LYING.

Need another link? It was one of the lead item news story from yesterday.

Here is what he said, hosebag:



McConnell urged Obama to lead on the issue, asking him to present a specific reform plan. “Republicans like me have said for more than a year now that we’re open to new revenue in exchange for meaningful reforms to the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt,” he said on the Senate floor Tuesday afternoon. “Instead of . . . a willingness to solve the problem, we get the same tired talking point -- that we can’t cut our way to prosperity. Well, that may poll well. But it isn’t a plan. It’s a cliché that’s meant to shut down debate and prevent a serious proposal from ever taking shape,” the Kentucky lawmaker said. “How do we get around the stalemate? That’s simple: presidential leadership. We will arrive at a plan when the president presents one. Or we won’t get anywhere at all.”


Both Sides Stake Out Positions on Cuts, Taxes | RealClearPolitics

You're having a really difficult time understanding this 'yesterday' -vs- 'today' thing aren't you?

 

[SniperFire]

LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAID and QUIT LYING.

Need another link? It was one of the lead item news story from yesterday.

Here is what he said, hosebag:



McConnell urged Obama to lead on the issue, asking him to present a specific reform plan. “Republicans like me have said for more than a year now that we’re open to new revenue in exchange for meaningful reforms to the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt,” he said on the Senate floor Tuesday afternoon. “Instead of . . . a willingness to solve the problem, we get the same tired talking point -- that we can’t cut our way to prosperity. Well, that may poll well. But it isn’t a plan. It’s a cliché that’s meant to shut down debate and prevent a serious proposal from ever taking shape,” the Kentucky lawmaker said. “How do we get around the stalemate? That’s simple: presidential leadership. We will arrive at a plan when the president presents one. Or we won’t get anywhere at all.”


Both Sides Stake Out Positions on Cuts, Taxes | RealClearPolitics

You're having a really difficult time understanding this 'yesterday' -vs- 'today' thing aren't you?

Shall I take a sentence Obama makes out of context, ignore everything he has ever said on the topic, and then protray it to you as his absolute positon on the topic?

'What I was suggesting — you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith '

- President Obama, detailing his religion to America on ABC News

Fucking dumbass.

 

[Oddball]

Your story has holes large enough to drive an oil tanker through. Refusing to allow a tax rate increase is not the equal to refusing to raise revenues. And CEO's were not the only group Maobama had to the WH this week. But hey let's not a few FACTS get in the way of a good fairy tale.

OMG, who said anything about rates, or even about taxes? McConnell said that the government does not need more revenue -- period.

And they don't.

If they can't make it taking in more that $2.5 trillion, then it's quite safe to say that they spend too much.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

And they don't.

If they can't make it taking in more that $2.5 trillion, then it's quite safe to say that they spend too much.

I'd agree if we hadn't already borrowed so much damn money as is. Servicing that debt, and I'm not talking about paying it off but servicing it, eats up a fairly big chunk of the government. revenue as is. I don't see a way to continue offering even the most basic services and pay down that debt.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The dems will require the GOP leadership in the House and the Senate to publicly declare they will vote for a small hike on the $250K and above in return for extending the Bush cuts.

OR
The dems are going to let the Bush cuts expire.

Then the Dems are going to introduce legislation to cut taxes for the $249K and below.

And we GOP will be blamed.

 

[ilia25]

The dems will require the GOP leadership in the House and the Senate to publicly declare they will vote for a small hike on the $250K and above in return for extending the Bush cuts.

OR
The dems are going to let the Bush cuts expire.

Then the Dems are going to introduce legislation to cut taxes for the $249K and below.

And we GOP will be blamed.

Yes, GOP will be blamed. Should have thought about it before promising the moon to its base.

 

[Oddball]

And they don't.

If they can't make it taking in more that $2.5 trillion, then it's quite safe to say that they spend too much.

I'd agree if we hadn't already borrowed so much damn money as is. Servicing that debt, and I'm not talking about paying it off but servicing it, eats up a fairly big chunk of the government. revenue as is. I don't see a way to continue offering even the most basic services and pay down that debt.

Time to face the fact that the debt cannot ever be repaid...Especially in light of the $60-$100 trillion (depending upon whom you're listening to) in unfunded promises to pay.

Besides that, a pretty large chunk of those interest payment are going to the banksters at the Fed...If anyone in the world deserves to get stiffed, it's them.

 

[kiwiman127]

McConnell and crew are trying to substitute eliminating some deductions for raising taxes. For that I think he can probably get a 2% cut in defense spending.

It's not serious reform and not what the voters mandated.

He's got no leverage, he's got no mandate, and apparently he's got no sense.

The tax hikes are coming. How hard it hits is up to the G.O.P. This can go down a little softer if they make real compromises or they can continue down the path of bull-headed obstructionism and it can go down hard - real hard.

And if that happens the Republicans will be lucky to get a dog catcher elected in Nome.

The voters, in fact, re-elected the People's House of Representatives that they elected in '10 to stop Obama's wreckless deficits.

Agree or disagree, or are you a partisan with a dog in the fight?

You have the balls to ask if someone else is a partisan dog?
You should talk.
Here's a recent picture of you reacting to your ideologies' latest directive:

 

[Oddball]

^^^
Godwin fail.

 

[rightwinger]

The dems will require the GOP leadership in the House and the Senate to publicly declare they will vote for a small hike on the $250K and above in return for extending the Bush cuts.

OR
The dems are going to let the Bush cuts expire.

Then the Dems are going to introduce legislation to cut taxes for the $249K and below.

And we GOP will be blamed.

The Dems hold all the cards. McConnell and his cronies hold none. McConnell can play hardball and posture all he wants. The end result will be the Bush tax cuts will expire.
If Republicans want their best deal, they do their bargaining now. Come January, they will be bargaining from pre-Bush tax rates.
Republicans will lose with their base whom they promised to protect tax increases AND they will lose with the middle class who will be pissed that their taxes went up

LOSE-LOSE for McConnell