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.
Tax rates are lower than what they were under Republican demi god Reagan. The Bush tax cuts which are costing trillions of dollars were supposed to be temporary anyway. What's the hold up here.
Good, let ALL the tax cuts expire and then watch many of those on the lest whine.
Obama said he wants taxes on the rich... Boehner didn't have to put revenues on the table but he did in exchange for cuts ... now it's Obama's turn... what cuts is he willing to put on the table.
Obama's turn
The GOP is the one insisting on deep cuts. Do they not know what cuts they want? I'm not sure you have ever been in negotiations for anything before, but it's not usual to expect the other side to make your case for what it is YOU want. The GOP wants spending cuts, but refuse to say which ones--why on earth would the other side help them to define their demands? Let them propose what they want, the way the president did, and that will give Obama a place to counter from. "We want spending cuts" gives him nothing.
Again, it's not up to the president to define what it is the GOP wants in return for their concession on revenues. The Republicans are going to have to step up and articulate their own demands.
The president is the Decider -- he holds the veto pen, so it's a waste of time for the GOP to propose anything that he could veto -- he needs to indicate what he would not simply veto.
So which is it, terrorism for blocking bills that will prevent going off the "fiscal cliff", or there is no "fiscal cliff" and it's made up by the GOP? You liberals can't have it both ways, even though you always want it that way.
Or it is you simply want it to be called terrorism whenever anyone disagrees with you and wants to stop your idiotic bills?
The president is the Decider -- he holds the veto pen, so it's a waste of time for the GOP to propose anything that he could veto -- he needs to indicate what he would not simply veto.
Well, ok. If that is the case - no negotiations should have ever taken place - ever ~ in the history of any presidency.
Do you think that is how it has worked in the past?
Tax rates are lower than what they were under Republican demi god Reagan. The Bush tax cuts which are costing trillions of dollars were supposed to be temporary anyway. What's the hold up here.
Quit trying to blame Bush for what Obama has done.
Sorry, Bush hasn't been in office for years you have to take responsibility for decision and actions mad by YOUR party and YOUR president. There are no Bush tax cuts, those expired. There are tax cuts that OBAMA signed into law along with the democrats who control the Senate.
Why don't you try calling them the Obama tax cuts? Don't like the sound of that do you.
They will finally get the message when they are getting poorer and struggling just to survive.
Nope. They had 4 years of that and re-elected Obama anyway.
Quote:
The poor and minorities will be hit the worst, and to think, they VOTED FOR THIS!
All I'm going to do is laugh and tell them to suck it up!
Yep. Many of us will be doing that. They STILL won't understand how they did it to themselves, though.
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.
