DEVELOPING... From Eric Dondero:
The Hill and the Washington Post both reported late last night that Boehner, Cantor and House GOP leaders have reached a tentative compromise with Senate Democrats on the buget proposal and continuing resolution. They will "split the difference," between $36 billion proposed by the House GOP and $30 billion agreed to by Senate Democrats.
The compromise will most likely avoid any government shut-down.
After weeks of arguing, Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill began negotiations Wednesday on a possible budget agreement that would slash federal spending by as much as $33 billion and avert a government shutdown.Ezra Klein columnist with WaPo reports that among those items on the chopping block:If approved, the deal would be the largest single-year budget cut in U.S. history.
Planned Parenthood and NPR and hobble health-care reformStill, some Tea Party-oriented Republicans in both the House and Senate, have vowed to vote against any final package that does not include deeper cuts. Originally, fiscal conservatives wanted $61 billion in overall cuts.
33 Bloviations:
This is the equivalent of a family making $75,000 solving their financial problems by cutting $39 from their yearly budget. Sound like chicanery to you too? They are SUCH budget hawks on Capitol Hill.
We had Michelle Bachmann on the radio show last month and she basically put the blame on Boehner without mentioning his name. We still have RINOs in the GOP leadership and obviously the blood letting this past November was not adequate. Basically, Boehner blinked.
Or should I say he blinked first. Boehner et al must go in 2012.
Even the $61 mil is like pissing into the sea to increase the tide.
Yet more proof. Like I have said . . . Republicans are simply Right-Wing Socialists.
The Right-Wing Socialist Party LOVES Big Brother centralized government and Marxist income re-distribution. Every dollar they steal is used to buy votes from their Sheeple followers.
The so-called right and left both have their snouts deep in the trough.
I don't think we anything to worry about. Elected Republicans, no matter what their campaign promises, will eventually lose their spine.
I have complete faith in Republicans to comprimise on EVERYTHING!!! Comprimise meaning thet they will give the Lefties anything they want.
Commenting is apparently required.
Spelling and wording is optional
Do any of you fucking fools understand anything about US government? Are you really so goddam dumb that you imagine the republicans in the house can pass anything they want and it mean a fucking thing if it doesn't get signed?
Children.
"Are you really so goddam dumb that you imagine the republicans in the house can pass anything they want and it mean a fucking thing if it doesn't get signed?"
Depends on what you mean by "mean a fucking thing."
Granted, the House may not be able to get what it wants from the Senate or the President.
On the other hand, the House does have the power to say "if we don't get what we want from the Senate and the President, then the Senate and the President get not one goddamn dime for anything."
And frankly, any government spending proposal which doesn't actually balance the current budget, as opposed to merely making trivial cuts in the projected deficit, isn't "serious" if the goal is to have balanced budgets and begin to pay down, rather than continue adding to, the politicians' existing ~$15 trillion debt.
And Chuck, you were there when Michele Bachmann gave her take on it, is she a child as well? Virtue isn't a label someone uses as a political affiliation. Works must match beliefs or stated beliefs otherwise there would be a disconnect. Again, is Michele a child?
Michelle Bachman doesn't carry the burden of being in a leadership position. She is free to bitch and moan about the manner in which deals are made. 2 years is not a very long time. If, however, the republicans step on their dicks and hand the democrats a lasting PR victory, it's all over.
If brakabama is reelected. The country will not survive it. If the democrat party is not relegated to irrelevance in the legislative branch, it's a done deal. They are trying to bankrupt this country. They are succeeding at it.
Wake the fuck up. The republican party doesn't have a magic wand; and without being elected, you can't do a damn thing. Just why the hell do you think the democrat party is so desperate to "shut down" the federal government? It's their only fucking hope, and you dumbasses are rooting for it right along with them.
Just why the hell do you imagine you've never once heard anyone anywhere in media refer to brakabama "shutting down" the government?
To The Chuck:
Per the Constitution of the United States of America. All spending bills come from the House. Period.
A House with a spine simply does not fund programs or cuts budgets by 50%.
Where is it written that the House must cave in to the spending demands of the Senate or President?
Shutting down the government has some positives...
You are right, Bachmann isn't in leadership and neither is Paul or King, but I bet after 2012 they will be. As Tom siad, the GOP has a lot more leeway than you give them credit. Also, I think you are willing to trade positions for the perception of victory. What have we won with RINOS? What will happen if we don't solve this budget mess now? It may not matter who is president if we take the soft-soap approach, which BTW, has gotten us to where we are fiscally. Boehner ain't going to get us the white house in 2012 just like Steele couldn't deliver. Both men are impediments and any success is in spite of them. It's time Boehner and his ilk get the fuck out of the way. If they don't, they'll get run over.
The equivalent for $75,000 is roughly $1,250. Not a solution but a start.
We need a Republican Senate. Maybe an R President.
I got it wrong. I had assumed $60 bn.
Make it about $600 out of $75,000. A token.
"Shutting down the government has some positives..."
For democrats, hell yes it does. It's the fucking lottery.
Guess who decides what "essential" services are in the event of a "shutdown".
I'll give you one hint: He's a bony-ass bucktoothed Communist whose mother named him after a circus elephant.
That's at the shallow end of the pool. He doesn't have the bully pulpit, even if he has the office. Most people lack confidence in him. The problem the GOP has is framing it for what it is: We are going down the tubes financially and we have the progeny of urkel and mr magoo at the helm. I really don't think people understand how bad it is for all of us. We'll be indentured to the chinese real soon.
Has Presidential of the Opposite Party Derangement Syndrome always existed, or is it a relatively new phenomenon?
I don't remember people getting as worked up about LBJ, Nixon, Ford or Carter as they have about presidents since. But I was young during that earlier era and may have just missed it.
Brakabama is the first president to show open contempt for his own country. Had you any appreciable degree of integrity or intellect, this "relatively new phenomenon" would be glaringly obvious to you. But alas, being a good little leftist comes before anything else for you.
What a waste.
"The problem the GOP has is framing it for what it is:"
The problem, Jim, is willful blindness on the part of otherwise intelligent people. The GOP is securing real budget cuts. Unprecedented budget cuts. This can't all be done at one time, but if they create this "shutdown" situation, NOTHING will change for the better legislatively while the scumbag leftists of the democrat party will be given a giant PR victory and pay absolutely nothing for it.
The legislative process is what it is. Wishful thing or stamping your goddam feet won't change it. 2 thirds of elected government is intent on bankrupting the country. The other one third can't simply wish that away.
It's all relative chuck. In the past, cuts in increases were called cuts, so any real cuts from the bottom are are called unprecedented. In the scope of the total budget and total debt, the cuts are minuscule and ineffective in reducing the debt in any appreciative way.
Tom:
it's as if we have a president that isn't American. I mean that culturally. He might as well have been born in Denmark or England as his outlook/heart is purely socialist and to some it's apparent, to others not. I se a real fight coming between the manorialists and the individualists. Socialism and social democracies are really an evolved form or manorialism. Some people want to still be taken care of and are willing to be indentured. Many are not. Choosing to be a slave is ludicrous.
"It's all relative "
Bullshit. The difference between something and nothing is not "relative". It's existential.
Face up, it's relative. Read Tom's article. Now that is both entertaining and accurate.
Reality exists whether you "face up" or not. One party is proposing cuts and the other is advocating bankruptcy.
The only way the difference between those two is "relative" is if you are a fool or you are being fundamentally dishonest in hopes of "winning" some argument.
Dishonest? You are like the whore who will sell her snatch for $5 thinking she'll get $100 some day. Your incremental logic doesn't work, never has. We have the cards, use them. If you want to sell it for a pittance, you are foolish. Tom is right on this and so am I. You just want to kick the can down the road just a little farther. It's not about winning arguments with you, it's about being effective as opposed to the appearance thereof. 33 Billion isn't squat in the big picture.
There is no such thing as "incremental logic". Only that which is true and that which is not.
The house cannot overcome the other 2 thirds of elected government. You not liking it changes nothing about it.
I'm simply approaching this rationally. I don't allow my fantasies to create strategies. That is a recipe for failure. Failure we cannot afford.
This is not a fucking game.
"The house cannot overcome the other 2 thirds of elected government."
If the House doesn't appropriate money, the other two thirds of elected government can't spend that money.
It really is just that fucking simple.
And no, Barack Obama is neither the first president to show open contempt for America, nor particularly remarkable in that regard. The last president not to was Reagan.
It isn't rational to bail out a sinking boat with a thimble.
"It really is just that fucking simple."
Only to the simple minded.
"It isn't rational to bail out a sinking boat with a thimble."
In a world where the will to power rests in a single body, you are correct. Thing is, it's either bail with a thimble now or give up and acquiesce to the people who desperately want to sink the ship.
This is about momentum, friend. Momentum is everything.
We don't have to bail with a thimble. We can use a bucket or even get the bilge pump. It's up to us.
Post a Comment