An Era of Bipartisanship?

Given that senate and house numbers are pretty much unchanged, is this lame duck city, or given the political trauma the American people have just recently endured, is it possible that an era of bipartisanship awaits?

It's plausible that the Republicans will stop with the scorched earth tactics since President Obama can't run for reelection.

But I doubt it.

Originally posted by kmax87
Given that senate and house numbers are pretty much unchanged, is this lame duck city, or given the political trauma the American people have just recently endured, is it possible that an era of bipartisanship awaits?

No, I'm pretty tired of the last four years of namby-pamby-itis.

It's time for Obama to take the gloves off.

He can start by telling the rich making over 250K that not only are the Bush tax cuts dead for them, but they can damn well expect an increase in their rate, above and beyond what the tax cuts took away.

Originally posted by Suzianne
No, I'm pretty tired of the last four years of namby-pamby-itis.

It's time for Obama to take the gloves off.

He can start by telling the rich making over 250K that not only are the Bush tax cuts dead for them, but they can damn well expect an increase in their rate, above and beyond what the tax cuts took away.

He can tell them that all he wants, but the executive branch can't just decide that.

Originally posted by Suzianne
No, I'm pretty tired of the last four years of namby-pamby-itis.
It's time for Obama to take the gloves off.
He can start by telling the rich making over 250K that not only are the Bush tax cuts dead for them, but they can damn well expect an increase in their rate.

The gop's favourite meme is that he had a 2 yr supermajority and did nothing.

Apparently it only lasted around 72 days. Issues around Al Franken's election, Kennedy's illness and death, Byrd's illness and death and a couple of conservative Dem's who were more aligned with the GOP and were beholden to appear fiscally responsible, meant that for most of Obama's presidency, the gloves were firmly on and Obama had to build consensus cause he never had the numbers to steamroll....

Wingnuts broke the system just a little more.

I can't wait for Werner Herzog to do a number on this farrago.

Originally posted by Suzianne
No, I'm pretty tired of the last four years of namby-pamby-itis.

It's time for Obama to take the gloves off.

He can start by telling the rich making over 250K that not only are the Bush tax cuts dead for them, but they can damn well expect an increase in their rate, above and beyond what the tax cuts took away.

Suzianne - I am one of those "rich". I paid $76,000 in income taxes last year. You can kiss my ass.

Originally posted by sasquatch672
Suzianne - I am one of those "rich". I paid $76,000 in income taxes last year. You can kiss my ass.

Better hold onto it tight. We're sending around a posse of hippies and welfare cheats to redistribute your wealth. Your tax bill will be much less next year.

Originally posted by rwingett
Better hold onto it tight. We're sending around a posse of hippies and welfare cheats to redistribute your wealth. Your tax bill will be much less next year.

Some of them are so god damn dependent your bank balance just automatically drains in their vicinity.

God damn hippy money sumps. If only wigs were still in fashion, they could be good for something.

Originally posted by sasquatch672
Suzianne - I am one of those "rich". I paid $76,000 in income taxes last year. You can kiss my ass.

You are a rich worker. You aren't the problem. It's the capitalists who are the problem.

And keep in mind that a lot of your career has been tax funded, not free market.

Originally posted by kmax87
Given that senate and house numbers are pretty much unchanged, is this lame duck city, or given the political trauma the American people have just recently endured, is it possible that an era of bipartisanship awaits?

Screw bipartisanship. Nonpartisanship is the only way to go.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
You are a rich worker. You aren't the problem. It's the capitalists who are the problem.

And keep in mind that a lot of your career has been tax funded, not free market.

So my boss is the problem? He owns the company. He gives over 900 people a living. He's the problem?

Originally posted by sasquatch672
So my boss is the problem? He owns the company. He gives over 900 people a living. He's the problem?

Tsk, tsk. Your boss gives nobody a living. He is a placeholder in a system. It is only by grace of the Market that your boss is permitted to thrive, and others to thrive under him.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Tsk, tsk. Your boss gives nobody a living. He is a placeholder in a system. It is only by grace of the Market that your boss is permitted to thrive, and others to thrive under him.

You don't really think that, do you, Comrade?

Originally posted by sasquatch672
You don't really think that, do you, Comrade?

As an epiphenomenon of historic process, it would be more accurate to say that 'I am thought' rather than that 'I think'. That aside: the myth of the self made man (rugged individualism) is more than a little delusional.