ABQCOWBOY Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 [quote=AsburySkinsFan;8378503 ---------- Post added July-12th-2011 at 05:47 PM ---------- [/color] Seriously...that's where I stopped reading.... Probably in your own best interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I am not against paying for Bills but when your maxed out on your cards, you don't go out and get another card so that you can take a cruse or whatever the case may be. You stop eating out. You stop going to bars, you stop buying designer clothes, you cut spending. Until cuts are outlined by the President, the GOP is not going to go along with this. It's as simple as that. They will take their chances in the court of popular opinion. Dude, where were you 3, 4, 5, 6, years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I don't see it that way but I am not Republican so I'm sure that is probably why. There's a thing called negotiation. If McConnell, Boehner and friends want to give away the responsibility to come to the table and be adults, then they can give away the entire decision including what gets cut and what taxes get changed. Not just part of it. Either they're all in or they're all out, but you don't get to cut the football in half. LOL. Bang is correct. This is a chicken-sh*t move by a guy who is torn between the tea party goofballs' pipe dreams and reality. McConnell seems afraid to pick a position, likely because he values the political game more than doing his job. Giving away even more Congressional responsibility to the Executive? Small government, right? Zero chance that would remain temporary, by the way. Why should they do that? The Democratic Party didn't do this when Bush was in office. Look, this is a situation in which each party has very different ideas about what is the best way to solve this problem. The GOP does not believe that the way to go is to continue to spend money. They are not going to go along with that. ---------- Post added July-12th-2011 at 03:54 PM ---------- Dude, where were you 3, 4, 5, 6, years ago? Watching a Democratic House and Senate. Where were you Wheat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I am not against paying for Bills but when your maxed out on your cards, you don't go out and get another card so that you can take a cruse or whatever the case may be. You stop eating out. You stop going to bars, you stop buying designer clothes, you cut spending. And here is where the analogy of my own credit cards stops equaling that of our economic situation...the debt WILL surpass the ceiling...it will whether you or I want it too or not there is NOTHING that can be done about it now...so if the debt ceiling is not raised then the US defaults and if the US defaults you had better not have your money invested in the markets because the whole thing will come crashing down. The GOP are acting incredibly foolish right now because they are trying to play chicken with a freight train. Until cuts are outlined by the President, the GOP is not going to go along with this. It's as simple as that. They will take their chances in the court of popular opinion. Then the GOP controlled House will be responsible for the US defaulting on our loans. :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 And this is a part of the negotiation. So far, the Republicans and Democrats are at an impasse. Obama has repeatedly scolded the Republicans for being inflexible. So Mitch says, "Fine, we'll be totally flexible. We'll let you do it by yourself." Obama says, "Oh, hell no! You're not sticking me with this." And Mitch responds, "Ok, fine, but if you WANT us to be a part of the decision making process, you're going to have to give on taxes."And it goes on and on until the deadline and they end up with whatever deal they can get. This is probably the most sensible post to come out of all of this. I think that you are dead on with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Probably in your own best interests. So true...I lost enough brain cells reading the first part. ---------- Post added July-12th-2011 at 05:58 PM ---------- And Mitch responds, "Ok, fine, but if you WANT us to be a part of the decision making process, you're going to have to give on taxes." So we're right, the GOP doesn't want to touch taxes at all they just want to cut spending....idiots the whole lot of 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 And here is where the analogy of my own credit cards stops equaling that of our economic situation...the debt WILL surpass the ceiling...it will whether you or I want it too or not there is NOTHING that can be done about it now...so if the debt ceiling is not raised then the US defaults and if the US defaults you had better not have your money invested in the markets because the whole thing will come crashing down. The GOP are acting incredibly foolish right now because they are trying to play chicken with a freight train.Then the GOP controlled House will be responsible for the US defaulting on our loans. :applause: My money is not in the markets but regardless, the point of who is responsible and who is not is in the hands of the American People. They will decide who is responsible. As I said, if what you describe happens, then it's an all in game and we will all see what comes out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 And this is a part of the negotiation. So far, the Republicans and Democrats are at an impasse. Obama has repeatedly scolded the Republicans for being inflexible. So Mitch says, "Fine, we'll be totally flexible. We'll let you do it by yourself." Obama says, "Oh, hell no! You're not sticking me with this." And Mitch responds, "Ok, fine, but if you WANT us to be a part of the decision making process, you're going to have to give on taxes."And it goes on and on until the deadline and they end up with whatever deal they can get. Except they have given in on taxes. A LOT! Seriously, what's wrong with a ratio of 83% spending cut to 17% closing loopholes. NO one's even talking about formal tax increases from what I understand at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 So true...I lost enough brain cells reading the first part.---------- Post added July-12th-2011 at 05:58 PM ---------- So we're right, the GOP doesn't want to touch taxes at all they just want to cut spending....idiots the whole lot of 'em. Well, you probably shouldn't read my posts anymore. I have no idea how many more you have to spare and I certainly do not wish to be the cause of any further damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Except they have given in on taxes. A LOT! Seriously, what's wrong with a ratio of 83% spending cut to 17% closing loopholes. NO one's even talking about formal tax increases from what I understand at this point. Burg, the Republicans are asking, "What's wrong with 95% to 5%?" They're going to angle for the greatest deal they can get...from their perspective. And Democrats should be doing the same. Its all good as long they make some kind of decision before the deadline. PS, I love the capital letters and exclamation points. This really has you riled up doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 My money is not in the markets but regardless, the point of who is responsible and who is not is in the hands of the American People. They will decide who is responsible. Or more accurately "who is responsible and who is not is in the hands of the spin doctors and campaign managers". It doesn't matter that the GOP House will have failed to do what was necessary by sending the appropriate ceiling raising legislation to Obama's desk...all that will matter is how the GOP can spin it next year. And if Obama takes this backwards deal every GOP commercial will say "I didn't vote to raise the debt ceiling...that was Obama stealing from your children". As I said, if what you describe happens, then it's an all in game and we will all see what comes out of it. It's not a matter of IF...what's more is that this isn't a game...real people will get hurt and the GOP could have done something about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/12/it-is-time-to-burn-mitch-mcconnell-in-effigy-he-goes-pontius-pilate-on-the-debt-ceiling/ Ooooff.And this is the toned down extreme right-wing reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Except they have given in on taxes. A LOT! Seriously, what's wrong with a ratio of 83% spending cut to 17% closing loopholes. NO one's even talking about formal tax increases from what I understand at this point. Maybe nothing Burg but first, lets understand when the cuts are going to take place and exactly how they are to happen and where they are going to be made. Again, if we are going to be serious here, then lets propose getting rid of all cuts. Lets do it for all Americans and lets have everybody contribute into the get well plan for America. Would you support a plan like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Burg, the Republicans are asking, "What's wrong with 95% to 5%?" They're going to angle for the greatest deal they can get...from their perspective. And Democrats should be doing the same. I don't believe this at all, they should be working for what is best...not what they can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/12/it-is-time-to-burn-mitch-mcconnell-in-effigy-he-goes-pontius-pilate-on-the-debt-ceiling/Ooooff.And this is the toned down extreme right-wing reaction. So McConnell pissed off the libs on ES and the wack jobs on the right? Score! ---------- Post added July-12th-2011 at 06:09 PM ---------- I don't believe this at all, they should be working for what is best...not what they can get. The Republicans think tax increases are for the best? First time I've heard anyone suggest that. If the Democrats think its best to not reduce Social Security and Medicaid, the should be fighting hard to keep that from happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I don't believe this at all, they should be working for what is best...not what they can get. Elections have consequences. As I recall, this was the approach in the very recent past. That does not sound as if the intent was to be working for waht is best but rather what they could get. I am not saying that is the right approach but it is what happens and it's not exclusive to just the GOP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Who'd a thunk it. The liberals represent small government and fiscal conservatism in this country these days. I was with you until here. This is just... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmacop Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Watching a Democratic House and Senate. Where were you Wheat? The war in Iraq and the Bush tax cuts were passed when the GOP controlled the House and the Senate, and these are the two largest contributors to the current deficit, by far. Also, the GOP Congress passed a debt limit increase five times under Bush. Where were you then? Why do you care about debt limits now, but not then? Also, regarding your credit card analogy, you can also get another job or a higher paying job to pay off those debts. For the federal government, that would mean increasing taxes. The debt can be paid off with increased revenue, not just cutting. In fact, when the country is in an economic downturn, all respectable economists will tell you that decreasing government spending is a sure-fire way to prevent a recovery. We should be relying more on revenue increases and less on spending cuts, at least for the next 2-3 years until the economy recovers. Then, after tax revenue start increasing and people start getting hired, we can focus on debt reduction, which is a laudable goal but one that should be subsidiary to economic recovery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 And this is a part of the negotiation. So far, the Republicans and Democrats are at an impasse. Obama has repeatedly scolded the Republicans for being inflexible. So Mitch says, "Fine, we'll be totally flexible. We'll let you do it by yourself." Obama says, "Oh, hell no! You're not sticking me with this." And Mitch responds, "Ok, fine, but if you WANT us to be a part of the decision making process, you're going to have to give on taxes."And it goes on and on until the deadline and they end up with whatever deal they can get. That's not what your buddy "Mitch" said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Also, the GOP Congress passed a debt limit increase five times under Bush. Where were you then? Why do you care about debt limits now, but not then? Holding precisely the same position Barack Obama did then? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I was with you until here.This is just... It's a little over the top, but what Mitch is recommending is more big government. What the Repubs did under Bush was ever increasing the size of government. If all the Repubs ever do is vote for or recommend increases in government or expansion of power... well, then that's what they stand for. As for liberals representing fiscal conservatism... well, ya got me there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 It's a little over the top, but what Mitch is recommending is more big government. What the Repubs did under Bush was ever increasing the size of government. If all the Repubs ever do is vote for or recommend increases in government or expansion of power... well, then that's what they stand for. As for liberals representing fiscal conservatism... well, ya got me there. And that's precisely why I turned on W. Sadly, for all of us, change = the same old ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmacop Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Holding precisely the same position Barack Obama did then? :whoknows: So you agree with Obama. Great! Your point is that is everyone waffles and is hypocritical, not just Cowboy. That doesn't really make his argument stronger though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 So you agree with Obama. Great! The senator or the president? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 PS, I love the capital letters and exclamation points. This really has you riled up doesn't it? Okay, some of it is theatre on my part, but I really dislike this gamesmanship and think it is not only counterconstructive, but actually destructive to our nation's present and future. Plus, I have to distinguish myself from Larry SOMEHOW!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.