Republicans to Boehner: Stick it up your ass!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

This is just opinion. The CBO disagrees with you. The same argument can be made about cutting spending, and in fact, YOU have made it about cutting certain kinds of spending.

The bottom line here is that taxes are about to go up indiscriminately if they aren't able to reach a deal. That's what Boehner's legacy will be. The GOP will cause this, by their unwillingness to compromise even the smallest bit, in a way that only affects 2% of the population.

LOL... The CBO, for all intents and purposes, is a big calculator. As I said, on paper a tax increase generates more revenue, because it assumes there will be just as many taxpayers earning just as much income as before, but that is never the case in actuality. The CBO can't predict what will happen in the future, in fact, they explicitly aren't allowed to evaluate ramifications. All they do is add up the numbers.

This is NOT merely an opinion, it is based on what has happened in actual practice, whenever we've raised top marginal rates. Yes, I have made the same argument with regard to certain types of cuts in spending. Again, if the spending is in the form of incomes, and you cut them, where is the tax revenue coming from? So I don't advocate just willy-nilly cutting ALL spending. I believe we should cut unnecessary spending, on programs that are obsolete or do not work to benefit most Americans.

The bottom line is, I don't care how much taxes are going up, or how high the fiscal cliff is, that's something Democrats should be concerned about, since they are the stewards in charge at this time. If raising taxes is such a great idea and the CBO agrees, what's the problem? Seems the more we raise everyone's tax, the better off we'll be, right? I know you think this can be spun into the fault of Boehner, but Boehner can't make his fellow republicans vote how he wants, so how is this HIS fault?

 

[blackascoal]

Again, he may not have won the presidency if we were a pure democracy. IF we were not individual states, and all lived under a single entity of democracy, he may have. But we are essentially a federation of states, and as a pure democracy, the states would have selected a president. Far more states would have voted for the Republican. It is the fact that we are NOT a democracy, that enables us to have a system of representative government, which allows us to give more weight to larger states with greater population and have an electoral college. In a "democracy" system, we would democratically elect governors and they would pick the person to preside over our federation.

Yes, as I told Desh, if we were a true pure democracy, you and her would be heading to the cotton fields today. 14% of the population would not be able to do anything politically, the majority would hoot you down, IF they even gave you the right to speak.

That's just the bullshit YOU want to believe. It is incredibly ignorant.

YOU don't represent the wishes of white people .. and this past election just smacked you in the face with that truth.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

That's just the bullshit YOU want to believe. It is incredibly ignorant.

YOU don't represent the wishes of white people .. and this past election just smacked you in the face with that truth.

What I said doesn't have anything to do with white people. I am not a white person. I have more Asian in me than white, and I have more Cherokee and Choctaw in me than Asian. Look, if you want to believe that we'd have been better off under "mob rule" all these years, then so be it, I can't change the mind of the ignorant. The fact remains, had we always been a democracy, as desh claimed, the CRA would have never passed and you'd be governed by wealthy white people looking out for wealthy white people's interests. Having a Representative Republic has been a GOOD thing for minorities, not a BAD thing. But for some reason, when I say this, it's got to be attacked and mocked, ridiculed and "proven wrong" because you just can't stand it otherwise.

 

[blackascoal]

What I said doesn't have anything to do with white people. I am not a white person. I have more Asian in me than white, and I have more Cherokee and Choctaw in me than Asian. Look, if you want to believe that we'd have been better off under "mob rule" all these years, then so be it, I can't change the mind of the ignorant. The fact remains, had we always been a democracy, as desh claimed, the CRA would have never passed and you'd be governed by wealthy white people looking out for wealthy white people's interests. Having a Representative Republic has been a GOOD thing for minorities, not a BAD thing. But for some reason, when I say this, it's got to be attacked and mocked, ridiculed and "proven wrong" because you just can't stand it otherwise.

It doesn't make any difference what you are .. your post was incredibly ignorant and devoid of the slightest modicum of serious thinking.

The MAJORITY of Americans elected Obama.

Grow up.

NEWSFLASH: The South lost long ago.

The CRA would have passed.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

It doesn't make any difference what you are .. your post was incredibly ignorant and devoid of the slightest modicum of serious thinking.

The MAJORITY of Americans elected Obama.

Grow up.

NEWSFLASH: The South lost long ago.

The CRA would have passed.

I haven't said that a majority of Americans didn't elect Obama. I said that we are not a pure democracy. Either you disagree with that, which makes you incredibly ignorant, or you agree with that, which means you agree with me. Which is it going to be?

 

[Timshel]

Again, he may not have won the presidency if we were a pure democracy. IF we were not individual states, and all lived under a single entity of democracy, he may have. But we are essentially a federation of states, and as a pure democracy, the states would have selected a president. Far more states would have voted for the Republican. It is the fact that we are NOT a democracy, that enables us to have a system of representative government, which allows us to give more weight to larger states with greater population and have an electoral college. In a "democracy" system, we would democratically elect governors and they would pick the person to preside over our federation.

Yes, as I told Desh, if we were a true pure democracy, you and her would be heading to the cotton fields today. 14% of the population would not be able to do anything politically, the majority would hoot you down, IF they even gave you the right to speak.

A true democracy would choose fewer representatives to elect the President? What?

In a system based on democratic institutions enthusiasm counts. The supposed "silent majority" went unheard and unheeded because they were too chickenshit to say what they actually believed and because they were not actually a majority. They knew their views were repugnant, in decline and had to be hidden.

It's sort of like this bulletin board poster I know that swears he is not Christian, a homophobe or a racist but clearly is.

 

[blackascoal]

I haven't said that a majority of Americans didn't elect Obama. I said that we are not a pure democracy. Either you disagree with that, which makes you incredibly ignorant, or you agree with that, which means you agree with me. Which is it going to be?

It is what it is .. you're incredibly ignorant.

Newsflash for southern dummies .. the era of "picking cotton" ended long before the CRA.

Just incredibly ignorant.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

It is what it is .. you're incredibly ignorant.

Newsflash for southern dummies .. the era of "picking cotton" ended long before the CRA.

Just incredibly ignorant.

Newsflash for black panther wannabes with chips on their shoulder. Slavery only ended because of white people. Blacks have it worse today than in the days of slavery and you support it. Why do you support the destruction of your race?

 

[blackascoal]

Newsflash for black panther wannabes with chips on their shoulder. Slavery only ended because of white people. Blacks have it worse today than in the days of slavery and you support it. Why do you support the destruction of your race?

:0)

That from the most ignorant piece of shit assclown bitch on this board.

Don't look now zithead .. but a black guy is your president.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

:0)

That from the most ignorant piece of shit assclown bitch on this board.

Don't look not zithead .. but a black guy is your president.

half black dumb ass or do you conveniently forget that since you are so desperate to find some validation in your life and the only way it can have any meaning is to have a negro in the top spot?

Well guess what Mr Bitter Boy? Even with a half negro in the White House the plight of you people hasn't gotten any better. It has gotten only worse. How is that fealty to the democrat party working out for you folks? 70% illegitimacy rate for you people? Bet you loves you summa dat don't you home boy? Yeah, that's something to be proud of

How has unemployment for you people done under the half negro president?

What is sad is that you are such limited thinking that you actually think it bothers me that the president is a half negro. I supported Herman Cain in the primaries you dipshit. But, of course that matters little to you because in your world accomplished black men like Herman Cain don't count because "dey ain't down fo da struggle" like you and your masta Jessa Jackson. You gotta be one of those militant blacks hating all the white folks to be down wit you right homey slice?

 

[Jarod]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/12/20/boehner-republicans-fiscal-cliff/1782213/

WASHINGTON — House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, was handed a stunning defeat late Thursday by members of his own party who refused to support his "Plan B" to avoid the year-end "fiscal cliff" that threatens to send the economy in to a recession.

GOP leaders worked intensely Thursday to build support for Boehner's two-pronged legislative effort to cut spending and extend current tax rates for all but those earning $1 million or above, but they could not convince enough Republicans to vote for the proposal in the face of what was expected to be unanimous opposition from Democrats.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We have established what you are, madam. We are now merely haggling over the price." It's the punchline of a joke, sometimes attributed to George Bernard Shaw, and sometimes W.C. Fields and others, but it might well apply to John Boehner tonight.

The PRINCIPLE remains intact. Taxing "the rich" is not a solution to our spending problem, our debt or deficit. In fact, it wouldn't even be guaranteed to increase tax revenue. It certainly wouldn't increase it enough to reduce the deficit, and in order to reduce the national debt, the deficit has to be eliminated entirely. But in the wake of the 2012 elections, Speaker Boehner felt compelled to 'work a deal' and 'compromise' with the president, who claimed he would veto the "Plan B" suggested by Boehner anyway. So, I guess it's for the best that House Republicans rejected Boehner's proposal without a vote and headed home for Christmas break.

Maybe the Zombie Apocalypse will happen tomorrow, and take care of this issue for the Speaker. If not, he may be in for a rude awakening when it comes time to select the new Speaker of the House, because that's not a "done deal" either.

Looks like that backfired... right Dix?

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I think the Democrats added the $10 billion in spending cuts to the "fix" just to underscore the point that Boehner is willing to bend over anytime the liberals want him to........

 

[Howey]

Did Boehner get a boner from the ass-fucking Obama gave him?

(Once you go black, you never go back!)

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Did Boehner get a boner from the ass-fucking Obama gave him?

(Once you go black, you never go back!)

and you have the nerve to mock other's intelligence and the nerve to call anyone else a worthless troll given the above worthless troll post?

 

[signalmankenneth]

So much for Plan B?!!

 

[Liberty]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/12/20/boehner-republicans-fiscal-cliff/1782213/

WASHINGTON — House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, was handed a stunning defeat late Thursday by members of his own party who refused to support his "Plan B" to avoid the year-end "fiscal cliff" that threatens to send the economy in to a recession.

GOP leaders worked intensely Thursday to build support for Boehner's two-pronged legislative effort to cut spending and extend current tax rates for all but those earning $1 million or above, but they could not convince enough Republicans to vote for the proposal in the face of what was expected to be unanimous opposition from Democrats.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We have established what you are, madam. We are now merely haggling over the price." It's the punchline of a joke, sometimes attributed to George Bernard Shaw, and sometimes W.C. Fields and others, but it might well apply to John Boehner tonight.

The PRINCIPLE remains intact. Taxing "the rich" is not a solution to our spending problem, our debt or deficit. In fact, it wouldn't even be guaranteed to increase tax revenue. It certainly wouldn't increase it enough to reduce the deficit, and in order to reduce the national debt, the deficit has to be eliminated entirely. But in the wake of the 2012 elections, Speaker Boehner felt compelled to 'work a deal' and 'compromise' with the president, who claimed he would veto the "Plan B" suggested by Boehner anyway. So, I guess it's for the best that House Republicans rejected Boehner's proposal without a vote and headed home for Christmas break.

Maybe the Zombie Apocalypse will happen tomorrow, and take care of this issue for the Speaker. If not, he may be in for a rude awakening when it comes time to select the new Speaker of the House, because that's not a "done deal" either.

No spending cuts.

Hmmmmmmm, Just another day at the office for republican politicions.

No different than the democrats.