Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obama needs to come out and specify what spending cuts he will sign into effect. There's no point in the GOP proposing any cuts when Obama has made it clear he will veto them and in fact has much more spending in mind.
Actually, no. Obama needs to put forward what he campaigned on, and he is. Obama really doesn't want spending cuts, but he does want tax increases on the rich, so that is what he is leading with. What he is willing to AGREE TO is for the negotiations behind closed doors. But at least Republicans could lead with what THEY want, ie. what spending cuts do they want and what in the way of tax deduction/loophole closing they want. Then at least both sides, instead of just Obama's would be out there with what they want, and THEN they could negotiate behind closed doors and when the final agreement is reached, we could see where in the middle they met.
But with Obama putting out there what he wants but the GOP not putting out there what they want, how can we tell WHERE the middle is between what the two sides wants? The OP makes a great point- the GOP is complaining about Obama's first offer, but they aren't showing any leadership as to what their first offer, what they really want if they had it all their way, is.
It's called Simpson-Bowles. Obama flatly rejects it.
Wow... it's one thing to rewrite history. It's another to invent it out of whole cloth. Simpson-Bowles is not and never has been a "Republican position" on averting the fiscal cliff, and has not been offered as a counter to the only plan actually on the table; the President's.
And the President has also never "flatly reject(ed)" it. This cannot be said about certain conservative Republicans in Congress such as commission member Paul Ryan who actually voted against it. And of course, here's a sample of what conservatives actually think about Simpson-Bowles.
Quote:
Simpson – Bowles as a “compromise’ is a set-up, because, not only does Simpson-Bowles raise taxes and tax rates, it also took Obamacare and all of its accompanying taxes off the table.
Actually, no. Obama needs to put forward what he campaigned on, and he is. Obama really doesn't want spending cuts, but he does want tax increases on the rich, so that is what he is leading with. What he is willing to AGREE TO is for the negotiations behind closed doors. But at least Republicans could lead with what THEY want, ie. what spending cuts do they want and what in the way of tax deduction/loophole closing they want. Then at least both sides, instead of just Obama's would be out there with what they want, and THEN they could negotiate behind closed doors and when the final agreement is reached, we could see where in the middle they met.
But with Obama putting out there what he wants but the GOP not putting out there what they want, how can we tell WHERE the middle is between what the two sides wants? The OP makes a great point- the GOP is complaining about Obama's first offer, but they aren't showing any leadership as to what their first offer, what they really want if they had it all their way, is.
Obama said he would compromise -- so he needs to indicate what he won't simply veto.
Obama as the leader of this country also needs to inform the people what he would accept as spending cuts. It would be the only decent thing to do since there are people who might be affected and they need to plan accordingly.
If he's going to continue misleading people and keep them believing that spending will only increase, then what happens if for example they don't extend the federal unemployment handouts. Those people might be declining jobs that they should accept -- such as all the UPS and Amazon jobs that those companies are begging to fill.
Or say Obama agrees to cut some useless federal program, it would be better for people working in it to have some clue ahead of time.
Isn't the better question, why isn't the President asking for what he ran on? He said he wanted $800B and would put spending cuts on the table. Instead, he now wants $1.6T in new taxes and an additional $60B in spending. So how can the GOP lay out anything?
It's the same old song and dance. Obama wants gridlock and he's on the bully pulpit again. He won't follow through on his promises and blame is the safest game in town.
You preferred willard's plan, which was...
no, no, no, the better question republicans should ask themselves is "why did we get spanked in the election"?
The majority of Americans know a government needs revenue (tax money) to function off of, like funding defense, lawmaker salaries, ss, medicare, 2 wars, and so forth. We can't help it the tea party folks don't like gubmint fundin'.
Obama said he would compromise -- so he needs to indicate what he won't simply veto.
Obama as the leader of this country also needs to inform the people what he would accept as spending cuts. It would be the only decent thing to do since there are people who might be affected and they need to plan accordingly.
If he's going to continue misleading people and keep them believing that spending will only increase, then what happens if for example they don't extend the federal unemployment handouts. Those people might be declining jobs that they should accept -- such as all the UPS and Amazon jobs that those companies are begging to fill.
Or say Obama agrees to cut some useless federal program, it would be better for people working in it to have some clue ahead of time.
The president was very specific about what he wanted--to retire the tax cuts on the top 2%. Now the Republicans need to be equally specific and articulate what cuts they want on the table. Deep spending cuts was and continues to be the GOP mantra. Why should the president define the GOP's position for them? Let's hear what spending cuts the Republicans want, so the two sides can then negotiate about them.
Again, spending cuts are what the Republicans want, not necessarily what the Democrats want. It's not up to the Democrats to define the Republicans' demands.
Obama said he would compromise -- so he needs to indicate what he won't simply veto.
Obama as the leader of this country also needs to inform the people what he would accept as spending cuts. It would be the only decent thing to do since there are people who might be affected and they need to plan accordingly.
If he's going to continue misleading people and keep them believing that spending will only increase, then what happens if for example they don't extend the federal unemployment handouts. Those people might be declining jobs that they should accept -- such as all the UPS and Amazon jobs that those companies are begging to fill.
Or say Obama agrees to cut some useless federal program, it would be better for people working in it to have some clue ahead of time.
Again - false argument. The Republicans need to put forth what cuts THEY are proposing - THEY are the ones insisting on cuts.
But - they are afraid to do it. Afraid that they will be even less popular (if that is even possible). So, yes, it would be best if the Republicans would get it together and put forth their proposed spending cuts.
What is stopping them? Ball is in their court IF they reject the only proposal currently on the table.
So -every time a President holds the Veto pen - the Republicans will refuse to negotiate? Or put forth a good faith offer?
Obama said he would compromise -- so he needs to indicate what he won't simply veto.
Obama as the leader of this country also needs to inform the people what he would accept as spending cuts. It would be the only decent thing to do since there are people who might be affected and they need to plan accordingly.
If he's going to continue misleading people and keep them believing that spending will only increase, then what happens if for example they don't extend the federal unemployment handouts. Those people might be declining jobs that they should accept -- such as all the UPS and Amazon jobs that those companies are begging to fill.
Or say Obama agrees to cut some useless federal program, it would be better for people working in it to have some clue ahead of time.
No, Obama does not need to show his final offer to the public before it is negotiated behind closed doors. When you publicize your final offer up front, you lose your negotiating position so that instead of negotiating from what you fully want down to a compromise, you end up negotiating from as much as you will give up down to something less. Obama did what he should do- lead with what you want then compromise. The GOP won't even come out with what they officially want.
Again - false argument. The Republicans need to put forth what cuts THEY are proposing - THEY are the ones insisting on cuts.
But - they are afraid to do it. Afraid that they will be even less popular (if that is even possible). So, yes, it would be best if the Republicans would get it together and put forth their proposed spending cuts.
What is stopping them? Ball is in their court IF they reject the only proposal currently on the table.
So -every time a President holds the Veto pen - the Republicans will refuse to negotiate? Or put forth a good faith offer?
Or ball-less Obama is afraid to put forth spending cuts he would agree to sign. Some leader.
A leader that is too scared to lose his Kardashian like celebrity status. He'll simply hide out in Hawaii basking in all his glory.
This is definitely where Romney would have been a better president, a better leader at a time leadership is needed. He wouldn't be as afraid to think up some spending cuts. Obama is proving himself to be very gutless.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
