[paraclete]

Lots of things ain't happening Tom, but you have to loose the idea it will be right in the morning, I think your bonehead just dropped off a cliff and he just might have taken everyone with him, maybe the mayans were right and this is TEOTWAWKI and look who you have to thank for it

[tomder55]

Who as in one person ? Do you think that even if Bonehead got his legislation out of the House that the do-nothing Senate would've voted for it also ? Where is the President's proposal. Bonehead voted on this plan because the President stonewalled during the negotiations. The Dems want us to go over the cliff so they can blame the Repubics .

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

Yeah, yeah, yeah... He said, she said...

We're going over the cliff, and it's the Republicans who are going to get the blame whether they did this or not.. I think this will spell the END of the Tea Party, and a landslide for the Democrats in 2014.

excon

[tomder55]

Unlike the Mayans ;I cannot predict the future.

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

Got nothing to say about the debacle unfolding in your party, huh? I wouldn't either.

Snicker, snicker...

excon

[tomder55]

Let the party disintegrate. They have been useless statists for the most part.Bonehead did this to himself trying to purge TP from committee chairs .

[paraclete]

[QUOTE=tomder55;3351388]let the party disintegrate. QUOTE]

We'll remember you said that

[tomder55]

All Bonehead had to do was get his majority to pass an extension of the tax rates or a version of the Simpson -Bowles recommendations , and pass it on to the Senate. Then when the Senate or the President torpedoed the legislation ,how would they then say that it was the Repubics that were responsilbe for the so called fiscal cliff ?

It was the President that torpedoed the negotiations with Bonehead . Then the sucker fell into the President's trap ,and tried to pass legislation he knew his caucus could not go along with .

The Dems purged their party of centrists and moderates.. Why should the base of the Republican party continue to fall in line with Repubics who think their role is caretakers of the nanny state. They can't out Dem the Dems .So why try ?

[paraclete]

Well Tom they may be a little inexperienced with compromise and consensus but it seems some Republicans see the necessity of raising taxes on the rich, the question is always to define who is rich. By world standards anyone with income above subsistence level is rich, by your standards the number is a little higher. In my own nation they set the bar at about $150,000, but then it costs less to live in the US.

I can understand why you are having such difficulty, and the real bonehead was Bush who made temporary adjustments, kicking the ball down the road, so Republicans are in a bind of their own making. The real problem is leadership, do you have a leader?

[tomder55]

and the real bonehead was Bush who made temporary adjustments,

He wouldn't have gotten permanent tax cuts passed... that was some of that compromising you say he didn't do.

[paraclete]

I didn't say he didn't do It, but a decade or more on, in a different world, the idea of compromise doesn't come easy, and of course, it doesn't come easy to both sides of the argument. You see when you do things with a sunset clause, the sunset is supposed to come into effect, otherwise you make a permanent arrangement. Living in the society I do, I find it difficult to understand why all this is so painfull for you guys. Our taxation changes are initiated as part of the budget, there may be some tweeking at the edges, but everyone knows the budget must be passed or they are out of a job. We don't have the situation where things can grind on and on. Now I know it is a long time since anyone raised taxes here except by slight of hand, but things are so much easier, there is certainty. I guess what I am saying is this, the decision is made in caucus, rebellion gets you kicked out of the party, and the decision either gets implemented with the goodwill of your opposition or it doesn't. Once it is passed, unless it is a draconian measure, it is not going to get vetoed. No one would think of vetoing a law because it doesn't tax enough

[tomder55]

We're negotiating... Bonehead will propose plans D E and the President will counter with plans F U .

[paraclete]

your white house secretary keeps saying the President hasn't reached the bottom line, that's no way to negotiate, your problem is you have media interferring in the process, having to be told every little detail and to avoid this the negotiating position is compromised with platitudes. BO has gone from $250,000 to $400,000 bonehead has gone from nothing to $1,000,000, I would think $500,000 and let the cuts to military spending go ahead, a few less soldiers, a few less aircraft carriers, a few less wars, as far as the social side of the equation be gentle, you aren't out of the GFC yet despite some good looking statistics lately, and you know what, it wasn't Republician policies that brought that about.

[tomder55]

your white house secretary keeps saying the President hasn't reached the bottom line, that's no way to negotiate, your problem is you have media interferring in the process, having to be told every little detail and to avoid this the negotiating position is compromised with platitudes. BO has gone from $250,000 to $400,000 bonehead has gone from nothing to $1,000,000, I would think $500,000 and let the cuts to military spending go ahead, a few less soldiers, a few less aircraft carriers, a few less wars, as far as the social side of the equation be gentle, you arn't out of the GFC yet dispite some good looking statistics lately, and you know what, it wasn't Republician policies that brought that about.

Typical pablum... the President reminds me of Wimpy from the Popeye cartoon. "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

The Dems are very good at that canard . Instant tax increases in exchange for future budget cuts that never happen. Well not this time ! He wants Clintoon era taxation then we should have Clintoon era budgets . If he wants a bottom line... let's start with spending levels of 2008 .The year he began running roughshod over the country .

[paraclete]

But Tom your whole economy is based in that theory, pay later, problem is the time to pay up has arrived. Look I agree with you, reality has to get into the mix, have Clinton taxes and expenditure, he balanced the budget.

As an aside and perhaps an insight from a different place. I was looking at our own budgetary position, you know, the one they said they can't return to surplus, it seems revenues have expanded at least 20% while they have been in office, and of, course so has expenditure. I expect the position could be similar over there if someone really took a close look at it. I'd be happy with expenditure five yeas ago, I'm sure you would too. Too much silght of hand in government, defer a little here, spend a little early here, change the inflation rate

[talaniman]

If you go back to the Clinton economy, we still have two wars and a financial melt down (RIP OFF), to be dealt with. Obama didn't start at the same place that your guy did. He had major clean up, pest control and fumagating to do. To make it worse, conservatives have made a mess of the whole process so going over the cliff and restarting the whole debate is the way to go.

Maybe you guys will have a better chance of assimilating the Tea Party into your national Republican party when government returns to a semblance of effective, and efficient governance. Bet the founders and the population would be grateful.

[tomder55]

I proposed as an alternative spending levels that Obama "inherited " .

He had major clean up, pest control and fumagating to do

Yes ,that's why Jeff Immelt is so prominent in his government . Rumors are that he will become the next Commerce Sec. That way he can complete his sell out of the US economy to the Chinese.
He is after all a huge fan of their communist economy .
Jeff Immelt: China's Communist Government "Works" | RealClearPolitics

[talaniman]

I don't know Tom, as that rumor may just be a rumor. I hope so.

Jeffrey Immelt sours on Obama—Charles Gasparino - NYPOST.com

Its an old story but hardly one that gives me faith that this guy would be a treasury secretary

[paraclete]

Well Tom you have uncovered another plot, devilishly cleaver those Chinese but why would they want to buy a bankrupt country now when they will get it for a fire sale later

[tomder55]

They just want our business ;and Immelt was very accommodating sending GE jobs to China .

Trust me Tal . Immelt is the lead candidate .

Immelt for secretary of commerce | Prestowitz