Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    07 Dec '10 14:40
    He capitulated almost entirely on the Bush tax cut

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/12/obama-tries-to-sell-tax-cut-extension-deal----to-democrats/1

    For this once, and only once, I wish Dirty Harry and Co. Godspeed.
  2. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    07 Dec '10 14:54 / 1 edit
    I don't get it. If he doesn't get a deal, then the tax cuts are NOT extended for anyone, right? He should be in the driver's seat here. Repeal the tax cuts altogether and move forward. Even politically I think it would be better to play tough on these cuts and then propose different tax cuts for the middle class, his own tax cuts, and make Republicans look bad if they reject it.
  3. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    07 Dec '10 15:17
    Bit of a lame duck, that one. But lame ducks can benefit from physiotherapy; Obama ought to have a word with Jacob Zuma.
  4. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    07 Dec '10 15:22
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Bit of a lame duck, that one. But lame ducks can benefit from physiotherapy; Obama ought to have a word with Jacob Zuma.
    Obama's not a lame duck. He has at least 2 more years of Presidency. Just because he's losing the House next month doesn't mean he has to behave like a lame duck.

    Somebody needs to explain to him that garnering centrist appeal does not mean being unpalatable to both parties.
  5. 07 Dec '10 15:26
    Isn't this the first Bipartisan legislation that has passed since O'bama took office?.... I thought it ffunny that he blamed the GOP again when the GOP could not have stopped the extensions or the tax cuts without some Dems..
  6. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    07 Dec '10 15:28
    Originally posted by sh76

    Somebody needs to explain to him that garnering centrist appeal does not mean being unpalatable to both parties.
    Is he after all just another stupid intellectual?

    He's done a better job furthering the interests of the ogres than the ogres themselves.
  7. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    07 Dec '10 15:32
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Is he after all just another stupid intellectual?

    He's done a better job furthering the interests of the ogres than the ogres themselves.
    What's a stupid intellectual?
  8. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    07 Dec '10 16:16
    Originally posted by sh76
    He capitulated almost entirely on the Bush tax cut

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/12/obama-tries-to-sell-tax-cut-extension-deal----to-democrats/1

    For this once, and only once, I wish Dirty Harry and Co. Godspeed.
    Obama is only "capitulating" to reality. This reality . . .
    "Make no mistake: Allowing taxes to go up on all Americans would have raised taxes by $3,000 for a typical American family. And that could cost our economy well over a million jobs.” - Barack Obama

    But he's sure making lemonade out of it. He got the unemployment benefits extended (without paying for it, of course). He got the death tax reinstated. He got a 2% reduction in the payroll tax to replace his “Make-Work-Pay” thingy.

    But none of this is the real story. We're operating on a continuing resolution right now, and while we all watch the shiny debate over taxes, the Dems are drafting up their wish list.

    http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/06/tying-the-hands-of-the-new-congress/

    The lame duck Congress wants to tie the hands of the new Congress, limiting the ability to change government as the voters insisted in November. And just like other legislation such as Obamacare, this plan is being drafted in secret, not in the open.

    Circulating on Capitol Hill is a draft measure—written by the Senate Democratic majority in backrooms—to fund all the federal government not only through fiscal year (FY) 2011 but also partially into FY 2012. This 183-page plan would:

    * Handcuff the ability of newly elected Representatives and Senators to de-fund Obamacare,

    * Restrict the new Congress’s leverage to rescind unused “stimulus” and TARP spending,

    * Have the outgoing Congress dictate spending for more than the usual one year, and

    * Bypass the normal appropriations process of public committee votes, floor debates, and the ability to offer amendments on the floor of the House and Senate.

    So warmly bipartisan of you to wish them luck.
  9. 07 Dec '10 16:31
    Odd politics. If he keeps this up he might just manage to not get re-elected.
  10. 07 Dec '10 16:57 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    [b]Obama is only "capitulating" to reality. This reality . . .
    "Make no mistake: Allowing taxes to go up on all Americans would have raised taxes by $3,000 for a typical American family. And that could cost our economy well over a million jobs.” - Barack Obama

    But he's sure making lemonade out of it. He got the unemployment benefits exten ...[text shortened]... tax reinstated. He got a 2% reduction in the payroll tax to replace his “Make-Work-Pay” thingy.
    I bet he can't wait until the economy is better so he can raise taxes and take jobs away and have a clear conscience in doing so.
  11. 07 Dec '10 16:59
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Odd politics. If he keeps this up he might just manage to not get re-elected.
    Well the consensus is, since the "W" administration, that spending like a drunken sailor and not increasing taxes coupled with increased entitlements is a winning combination.

    It's change you can believe in!!
  12. Donation rwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    07 Dec '10 17:00
    Originally posted by sh76
    He capitulated almost entirely on the Bush tax cut

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/12/obama-tries-to-sell-tax-cut-extension-deal----to-democrats/1

    For this once, and only once, I wish Dirty Harry and Co. Godspeed.
    The death of the Obama presidency has likewise killed the illusion that we have a democracy in this country. What we have is a system that represents the interests of Wall Street bankers regardless of how the political "elections" turn out. Regardless of whether the Democrats or Republicans triumph at the polls, Wall street wins and the ordinary people lose. No amount of electioneering and voting will ever change that.

    But the sad thing is that it's been that way in this country almost from the very beginning. The US Constitution was designed specifically to check democracy, remove control of financial institutions from popular control, and form a government of, by and for the rich. The common man has been nothing but the clay that bankers and financiers have used to sculpt their own highly unequal vision of America.
  13. 07 Dec '10 17:01
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Is he after all just another stupid intellectual?

    He's done a better job furthering the interests of the ogres than the ogres themselves.
    I would not call him a stupid intellectual. I would simlpy define him as an empty suit of a progressive politician. Both parties do pretty much the same things as both parties have been overcome with the progressive disease.
  14. 07 Dec '10 17:04
    Originally posted by rwingett
    The US Constitution was designed specifically to check democracy, remove control of financial institutions from popular control, and form a government of, by and for the rich. The common man has been nothing but the clay that bankers and financiers have used to sculpt their own highly unequal vision of America.[/b]
    I wouldn't ask them about the Constitution if I were you. They might respond by saying, "The Consta-what-tion?
  15. 07 Dec '10 17:17
    Originally posted by whodey
    Well the consensus is, since the "W" administration, that spending like a drunken sailor and not increasing taxes coupled with increased entitlements is a winning combination.

    It's change you can believe in!!
    It worked for Reagan, but you can only spend so much before people start noticing you can't consistently spend more than you earn.