Just heard that the repubs ar thinking of renigging.

[blastoff]

ON the fallbuck cuts they agreed to if the supercomittee fails to reach accord.

I heard the same - PBS news hour. Said they also want more tax cuts for the top tier.

Are they TRYING to blow the 2012 election?

And do we have a link - preferably to a vaguely rational source?

Too funny. But kind of you to offer them some leeway.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No it's not good.

At this point, all cuts in government are good.

We're paying the players in the porky pig-pen a pretty big salary to do their ******* job and produce a definitive and fair source of revenue,

We don't have a problem with revenue, we have a problem with spending. Furthermore, the lions share of spending is on corruption. Payola to corrupt public employee unions, absurd bribes of voting blocs with Medicare D.

A 90% cut in federal spending is a good start, then we can work on the more difficult cuts.

alongside a list of government services We, The People can expect to be provided by that revenue stream.

Gimmee, gimmee, gimmee - the unending refrain from the left.

I expect the federal government to secure our borders - it does not. I expect the federal government to ensure safe passage on the high seas - it barely does so. I expect the federal government to provide a system of courts for resolution of disputes between the many states.

I do NOT expect the federal government to pay my mortgage, nor to pay for my health care or feed my children lunch.

That is the extent of their job description - the rest is expensive, bullshit favoritism.

Slashing budgets across the board will create chaos in the military and beyond.

Good. we need some chaos to get this back under control.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That's true. The Republicans have an AMAZING record of maintaining a certain base in spite of their pretty blatant pandering to the top tier.

Leftist definition of Republican pandering to the top tier: "We won't rob you at gun point."

 

[Uncensored2008]

I say let the cuts go through. When Iran launches nuclear missiles at our European allies, the public might finally wake up to what a bunch of wackos the Dims are. Plus, we'll be rid of millions of socialists.

Why would Iran nuke Europe? They are aiming at Israel. If they do nuke a Muslim country, it won't be France, it will be Saudi Arabia or Jordan.

Iran wants genocide of the Jews, and control of Mecca.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Ok, a little Congressional fact and reality. In order to PASS a new law would require BOTH houses of Congress to pass it AND the signature of the President. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats and the President is Obama.

Remind us again what the chances of such a law being passed is?

Like I said, this is nothing more then a political lie designed to fear monger and cast doubt.

I believe I addressed the chances here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...s-ar-thinking-of-renigging-2.html#post4408595



It is not a lie. Some republicans are talking about the pros, cons politics and legalities of attempting to back out of the deal completely and also parts of it. So are some Democrats.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And there's also reporting that there are efforts to get around the so-called sequester, wherein you would undo the penalty of these automatic cuts if you don't reach an agreement. Is that -- is there truth to that report?

REP. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, there are certainly people who say they want to get rid of the sequester.

Deficit Super Committee Stuck in Stalemate as Deadline Nears | PBS NewsHour | Nov. 14, 2011 | PBS

So some republicans AND some DEMOCRATS are talking of passing ne laws? BUT your head line only says Republicans? And you reported it with a straight face withut informing anyone of the omission?

Remind us again who is Reneging?

Whatever, Dude.

I stand by my posts. Just because I don't mention both parties in all posts doesn't mean I'm starting to play favorites.

 

[Conservative]

Congress can't agree what time to take a coffee break, let alone agree on legislation with enough votes to over ride a presidential veto, regardless of the issue.

It ain't gonna happen.

 

[AVG-JOE]

No it's not good.

At this point, all cuts in government are good.

We're paying the players in the porky pig-pen a pretty big salary to do their ******* job and produce a definitive and fair source of revenue,

We don't have a problem with revenue, we have a problem with spending. Furthermore, the lions share of spending is on corruption. Payola to corrupt public employee unions, absurd bribes of voting blocs with Medicare D.

A 90% cut in federal spending is a good start, then we can work on the more difficult cuts.

alongside a list of government services We, The People can expect to be provided by that revenue stream.

Gimmee, gimmee, gimmee - the unending refrain from the left.

I expect the federal government to secure our borders - it does not. I expect the federal government to ensure safe passage on the high seas - it barely does so. I expect the federal government to provide a system of courts for resolution of disputes between the many states.

I do NOT expect the federal government to pay my mortgage, nor to pay for my health care or feed my children lunch.

That is the extent of their job description - the rest is expensive, bullshit favoritism.

Slashing budgets across the board will create chaos in the military and beyond.

Good. we need some chaos to get this back under control.

You like the current tax code of favoritism and corruption?

​

Step 1) Fair and simple taxes.
Step 2) A budget that is balanced by law.

Without step one, step two is a waste of time.

 

[BDBoop]

You like the current tax code of favoritism and corruption?

​

Step 1) Fair and simple taxes.
Step 2) A budget that is balanced by law.

Without step one, step two is a waste of time.

How would that go, since 9-9-9 has been proven to be a bad idea?

 

[AVG-JOE]

You like the current tax code of favoritism and corruption?

​

Step 1) Fair and simple taxes.
Step 2) A budget that is balanced by law.

Without step one, step two is a waste of time.

How would that go, since 9-9-9 has been proven to be a bad idea?

I kind of like the idea of a low national sales tax, like 3% and a flat income tax of 18%, with every citizen able to earn their first $25,000 free of tax - non-citizens would pay tax on all their income.

It's simple and, as long as it treats everyone the same depending on citizenship, it's fair.

That's just one example - it ain't rocket science.

 

[California Girl]

Congress cannot pass a law that they can't renege on.

All it takes is passing another law.

Ok, a little Congressional fact and reality. In order to PASS a new law would require BOTH houses of Congress to pass it AND the signature of the President. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats and the President is Obama.

Remind us again what the chances of such a law being passed is?

Like I said, this is nothing more then a political lie designed to fear monger and cast doubt.

I believe I addressed the chances here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...s-ar-thinking-of-renigging-2.html#post4408595



It is not a lie. Some republicans are talking about the pros, cons politics and legalities of attempting to back out of the deal completely and also parts of it. So are some Democrats.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And there's also reporting that there are efforts to get around the so-called sequester, wherein you would undo the penalty of these automatic cuts if you don't reach an agreement. Is that -- is there truth to that report?

REP. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, there are certainly people who say they want to get rid of the sequester.

Deficit Super Committee Stuck in Stalemate as Deadline Nears | PBS NewsHour | Nov. 14, 2011 | PBS

Oh, the horror! They're discussing shit! And 'thinking'! I am outraged! Outraged! Out-Raged!

 

[Uncensored2008]

You like the current tax code of favoritism and corruption?

There is LESS favoritism and corruption in the tax code than any other time in my life.

I personally oppose direct taxation by the federal government. Any direct tax will ensure favoritism and corruption.

So indirect tax is the ONLY way to ensure that the rules are applied equally. A consumption tax with exemption for necessities - food and energy, is the most equitable choice.

​

Step 1) Fair and simple taxes.
Step 2) A budget that is balanced by law.

Without step one, step two is a waste of time.

Consumption tax takes care of the first.

Balancing the budget does no good if they can just print money.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How would that go, since 9-9-9 has been proven to be a bad idea?

Proven by whom? The nutjobs on DailyKOS?

ROFL

You come up with the wackiest shit.