Time for Moderates to grow a set of balls

[Oddball]

.]

Bill Clinton.....actually ran a surplus...

The big lie.

That mythical "surplus" was projected from 1998 to occur in 2002.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Time for hardline partisans to grow a set of principles.

On both sides?

So your saying Obama, the dems, and the reps should continue on the current path of non-compromise on anything substantial or are you saying they should drop their hardline principled positions on both sides and grow a new principle of compromise?

The dems wont agree to a short term increase with spending cuts and the reps wont agree to a long term increase with tax increases.

I say the dems need to suck it up on both the short term and the spending cuts and the reps need to suck it up on the tax issue and continue to fight the long term increase of the debt celing.

If the reps cave on the long term increase they will not be re-elected.

Non-compromise? Reps and Dems agree on the most everything, I wish they'd stop agreeing.

Debt isn't important, out of control spending is good, War on Terror is great, War on Drugs is working to perfection, welfare/social security are both great, all the departments are great and sometimes we need to invent more.

 

[Vanquish]

I don't think the "long term debt ceiling" issue is the Rep's issue alone. Both sides want that to stay lowered.

And that's the problem...while there IS commonality...only one side is trying to move towards a consensus.
Obama's already put spending cuts on the table...3 for 1, baby. It's the Repubs who can't even put up the 1.

Bullshit.

Obutthead's timid cuts are spread over more than a decade and are back-loaded, so the real cuts don't come until after he's certainly out of office......He is playing the old bait-and-switch, just like the last time he lied out his ass about cutting the budget.

More and better could be done for sure... but that back-loaded, decade-in-the-future cuts are still cuts. And the Republicans won't budge at ALL on tax cuts.

So...which is better...some or none?

Again...more and better could be done by Barry. But some is better than petulant children who think they have a mandate drawing a line in the sand and saying "it's either our way or the highway."

BTW, you do realize that proposing cuts to the Healthcare Reform isn't the best way to compromise right? You don't start with someone's sacred cow to achieve consensus. You start with areas of commonality first. Then, after you've worked together on the easier stuff...you've got a working relationship that can take on the harder stuff. I conduct or participate at least one mediation a week and even tangled issues, while not simple, have a method by which they can be at least discussed.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The big lie.

That mythical "surplus" was projected from 1998 to occur in 2002.

If there ever was a surplus, the national debt would go down.

It went up every year Clinton was in office.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Time for hardline partisans to grow a set of principles.

On both sides?

So your saying Obama, the dems, and the reps should continue on the current path of non-compromise on anything substantial or are you saying they should drop their hardline principled positions on both sides and grow a new principle of compromise?

The dems wont agree to a short term increase with spending cuts and the reps wont agree to a long term increase with tax increases.

I say the dems need to suck it up on both the short term and the spending cuts and the reps need to suck it up on the tax issue and continue to fight the long term increase of the debt celing.

If the reps cave on the long term increase they will not be re-elected.

Non-compromise? Reps and Dems agree on the most everything, I wish they'd stop agreeing.

Debt isn't important, out of control spending is good, War on Terror is great, War on Drugs is working to perfection, welfare/social security are both great, all the departments are great and sometimes we need to invent more.

I did ask it as a question as I wasn't sure from your post where you were going.

Remember sarcasm does not always translate well on internet forums

 

[Oddball]

I don't think the "long term debt ceiling" issue is the Rep's issue alone. Both sides want that to stay lowered.

And that's the problem...while there IS commonality...only one side is trying to move towards a consensus.
Obama's already put spending cuts on the table...3 for 1, baby. It's the Repubs who can't even put up the 1.

Bullshit.

Obutthead's timid cuts are spread over more than a decade and are back-loaded, so the real cuts don't come until after he's certainly out of office......He is playing the old bait-and-switch, just like the last time he lied out his ass about cutting the budget.

More and better could be done for sure... but that back-loaded, decade-in-the-future cuts are still cuts. And the Republicans won't budge at ALL on tax cuts.

Reputed cuts punted to someone else, who may or may not make those cuts in the end, are no cuts at all and amount to rank cowardice.

Again...more and better could be done by Barry. But some is better than petulant children who think they have a mandate drawing a line in the sand and saying "it's either our way or the highway."

More can always be done by someone who is basically proposing nothing.

BTW, how did that "compromise" thingy work out, when Boiking and his Marxist toadies were jamming Obutthead care up our asses...Who was playing "it's either our way or the highway" then, hmmmmm?

BTW, you do realize that proposing cuts to the Healthcare Reform isn't the best way to compromise right? You don't start with someone's sacred cow to achieve consensus. You start with areas of commonality first. Then, after you've worked together on the easier stuff...you've got a working relationship that can take on the harder stuff. I conduct or participate at least one mediation a week and even tangled issues, while not simple, have a method by which they can be at least discussed.

Tought shit...That stupid "reform" adds more than $1 trillion to the debt...It's time for that turd to get flushed altogether.

And quit it with the "centrist" charade, m'kay....Nobody is buying it.

 

[Vanquish]

What a moderate does is recognize that throwing tantrums and holding your breath is not the way to get things done. Reducing the debt must be done by raising revenue and reducing spending. The level of each will depend on compromise

A couple in China was starving. Because of the one child law, they have a two year old son who is the the center of the universe to them, Yi-Chang Publicentitlement. The child weighs 780 pounds. The mother, Yi-Chang Fascistdemocrat demands that every morsel of food that the family be given to the baby, the father, Yi-Chang Republican has agreed. But it still isn't enough. The child has a 40,000 calorie per day diet, though the income of the family is only enough to buy 10,000 calories worth of food.

The father says that there is no choice, the amount of food going to child must be cut. But the mother, Fascistdemocrat shrieks that father is cruel and evil, how could he even suggest her precious darling be deprived of everything he wants? The mother demands that the diet be INCREASED to 50,000 calories and the father be butchered to feed to the child.. She storms out of the house because Republican won't compromise on the question of being butchered and fed to the child. She says "every idea is on the table," as long as father agrees to be butchered and fed to the child. She shrieks that Republican is selfish for not agreeing to be butchered.

^^ Good analogy!

If by good, you mean terribly nonparallel to what's going on in Washington.

Butchering a person is not parallel to asking people for increases in historically low taxation, by the people who can afford it!

In the analogy, the father is being asked to do something he can't do. Tax increases on the wealthy are something they CAN do, but just don't want to.

Companies in America are making record profits. Corporate Profits At All-Time High As Recovery Stumbles

(yeah yeah attack Huffpost as a source, but you can't attack the figures)

Trickle-down doesnt work. People with money aren't risking it. They're saving it. And not using it to create jobs.

We all voted these suckers into office who spent and spent and spent. Republicans as much as Democrats. Now we all have to pay.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

A couple in China was starving. Because of the one child law, they have a two year old son who is the the center of the universe to them, Yi-Chang Publicentitlement. The child weighs 780 pounds. The mother, Yi-Chang Fascistdemocrat demands that every morsel of food that the family be given to the baby, the father, Yi-Chang Republican has agreed. But it still isn't enough. The child has a 40,000 calorie per day diet, though the income of the family is only enough to buy 10,000 calories worth of food.

The father says that there is no choice, the amount of food going to child must be cut. But the mother, Fascistdemocrat shrieks that father is cruel and evil, how could he even suggest her precious darling be deprived of everything he wants? The mother demands that the diet be INCREASED to 50,000 calories and the father be butchered to feed to the child.. She storms out of the house because Republican won't compromise on the question of being butchered and fed to the child. She says "every idea is on the table," as long as father agrees to be butchered and fed to the child. She shrieks that Republican is selfish for not agreeing to be butchered.

^^ Good analogy!

If by good, you mean terribly nonparallel to what's going on in Washington.

Butchering a person is not parallel to asking people for increases in historically low taxation, by the people who can afford it!

In the analogy, the father is being asked to do something he can't do. Tax increases on the wealthy are something they CAN do, but just don't want to.

Companies in America are making record profits. Corporate Profits At All-Time High As Recovery Stumbles

(yeah yeah attack Huffpost as a source, but you can't attack the figures)

Trickle-down doesnt work. People with money aren't risking it. They're saving it. And not using it to create jobs.

We all voted these suckers into office who spent and spent and spent. Republicans as much as Democrats. Now we all have to pay.

We disagree on that one.

Right now, increasing taxes, is going to make us have even fewer jobs as those who create the jobs...the ones holding onto their money because their profits are down...will hold on tighter and hire less.

You have me thinking of this video right now

 

[Oddball]

What a moderate does is recognize that throwing tantrums and holding your breath is not the way to get things done. Reducing the debt must be done by raising revenue and reducing spending. The level of each will depend on compromise

A couple in China was starving. Because of the one child law, they have a two year old son who is the the center of the universe to them, Yi-Chang Publicentitlement. The child weighs 780 pounds. The mother, Yi-Chang Fascistdemocrat demands that every morsel of food that the family be given to the baby, the father, Yi-Chang Republican has agreed. But it still isn't enough. The child has a 40,000 calorie per day diet, though the income of the family is only enough to buy 10,000 calories worth of food.

The father says that there is no choice, the amount of food going to child must be cut. But the mother, Fascistdemocrat shrieks that father is cruel and evil, how could he even suggest her precious darling be deprived of everything he wants? The mother demands that the diet be INCREASED to 50,000 calories and the father be butchered to feed to the child.. She storms out of the house because Republican won't compromise on the question of being butchered and fed to the child. She says "every idea is on the table," as long as father agrees to be butchered and fed to the child. She shrieks that Republican is selfish for not agreeing to be butchered.

^^ Good analogy!

You like that one, you'll love this....

Little Lord Obammyroy, after spending like mad and maxing out his credit card, claims that he'll rein in his extravagant lifestyle...But only if he gets a bigger allowance and the limit on his credit card is raised.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

A couple in China was starving. Because of the one child law, they have a two year old son who is the the center of the universe to them, Yi-Chang Publicentitlement. The child weighs 780 pounds. The mother, Yi-Chang Fascistdemocrat demands that every morsel of food that the family be given to the baby, the father, Yi-Chang Republican has agreed. But it still isn't enough. The child has a 40,000 calorie per day diet, though the income of the family is only enough to buy 10,000 calories worth of food.

The father says that there is no choice, the amount of food going to child must be cut. But the mother, Fascistdemocrat shrieks that father is cruel and evil, how could he even suggest her precious darling be deprived of everything he wants? The mother demands that the diet be INCREASED to 50,000 calories and the father be butchered to feed to the child.. She storms out of the house because Republican won't compromise on the question of being butchered and fed to the child. She says "every idea is on the table," as long as father agrees to be butchered and fed to the child. She shrieks that Republican is selfish for not agreeing to be butchered.

^^ Good analogy!

You like that one, you'll love this....

Little Lord Obammyroy, after spending like mad and maxing out his credit card, claims that he'll rein in his extravagant lifestyle...But only if he gets a bigger allowance and the limit on his credit card is raised.

Another good analogy for the situation.

 

[Vanquish]

And quit it with the "centrist" charade, m'kay....Nobody is buying it.

No. YOU don't buy it because currently I'm handing your ass to you on a wooden stake.

1. Pro Gun rights
2. Pro Life
3. Hardliner on immigration
4. Want to cut foreign aid (despite how little of a % it is of the budget - it's the principle of the thing)
5. Hardliner on crime

Whatever dude. You know know shit about me...or politics. Maybe you should go find a "My Little Pony" forum board and let your freak flag fly.

 

[rightwinger]

.]

Bill Clinton.....actually ran a surplus...

The big lie.

That mythical "surplus" was projected from 1998 to occur in 2002.

You mean there was no actual surplus? That it was all made up?

But that was the reason George Bush gave to cut taxes once he became President. "The surplus belongs to the people"

Are you accusing George Bush of lying to get what he wanted?

 

[Uncensored2008]

If by good, you mean terribly nonparallel to what's going on in Washington.

That you happen to be mentally retarded doesn't alter the value of the parable.

Butchering a person is not parallel to asking people for increases in historically low taxation, by the people who can afford it!

You seek to sacrifice your fellow citizens to feed an insatiable appetite. That it will barely stave off the demands for more, more, more, doesn't dawn on you at all. You figure you can just take more from others, without end.

In the analogy, the father is being asked to do something he can't do.

Sacrifice himself to the greed of entitlements, exactly as you and Obama are demanding of the productive segments of our society.

Companies in America are making record profits. Corporate Profits At All-Time High As Recovery Stumbles

Funny how that works, when Obama hands them trillions of dollars.

Trickle-down doesnt work. People with money aren't risking it. They're saving it. And not using it to create jobs.

Your lack of comprehension of macroeconomics has no bearing on the the desire to sharply increase the burden on wage earners not exempted by targeted exemptions. (Under your plan, Boxer and Pelosi won't pay a dime more - taxes are for the little people.)

We all voted these suckers into office who spent and spent and spent. Republicans as much as Democrats. Now we all have to pay.

So Dear Leader is proposing a blind consumption tax? So that all pay, regardless of station or political connections? I missed that.

 

[saveliberty]

Many liberals don't get a fact, now you expect them to grasp an analogy?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Are you accusing George Bush of lying to get what he wanted?

Nah, we're accusing you of lying... Because, well, you are lying.

 

[Vanquish]

I have a degree in Economics (among other things) and have studied Russian's Early 90's Hyperinflation problem for the World Bank, Cato Institute, and Heritage Foundation.

OH SNAP!!!!!!!!

You've offered bare assertions that I'm clueless, without proving JACK. Nice try though. Next?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Many liberals don't get a fact, now you expect them to grasp an analogy?

I'm trying to make it simple for their little minds.

 

[Vanquish]

Many people, regardless of political affiliation don't get a fact, now you expect them to grasp an analogy?

Fixed. Yer welcum.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I have a degree in Economics (among other things)

You have a degree in economics, yet use a term like "trickle down?"

Color me skeptical.

and have studied Russian's Early 90's Hyperinflation problem for the World Bank, Cato Institute, and Heritage Foundation.

Of course, Cato and Heritage are known for far left Keynesians....

You've offered bare assertions that I'm clueless, without proving JACK. Nice try though. Next?

I don't need to prove you clueless, you've done an admirable job of that already.

 

[yidnar]

name one instance when taking more money from people increased revenue.Hillary went to Greece [they are cutting taxes and spending to get out of the economic disaster they are facing]and gave them our blessings and said that the U.S.agrees with the actions they are taking!!!

Bill Clinton.....actually ran a surplus and the economy boomed with a 39% tax rate

Since the Bush/Obama tax cuts we have borrowed $2.5 trillion to pay for cuts that did nothing for the economy.

Actually, that's not true. Under Bush we won a war and between 1 and 4 million jobs were created. It's a lackluster performance, but it beats borrowing the same amount and losing between 2.5 and 2.8 million jobs. Your point about the Clinton years is valid. Why aren't Democrats returning to that model?

because we don't have republican majority in congress to drag their ignorant asses to the table of common sense.like we had then.but we do have enough votes to stall them and save our country.