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.
Big question is, do they know, or are they intent go be memorialized in History by the "Great Republican Depression" of 2011? Or, maybe "The Huge Norquist Boehner of 2011".
None of the above. That's the problem with the view point of liberals. They just don't get it. Its the prism with which you view the world that is at issue.
Big question is, do they know, or are they intent go be memorialized in History by the "Great Republican Depression" of 2011? Or, maybe "The Huge Norquist Boehner of 2011".
They have "won" for all Americans, including you, Bob.
The spending spree could not have gone on forever without disasterous consequences to the nations. Obama and the democrats were completely unwilling to address the spending issue. If the democratic congress was still in power, spending would have continued and resulted in a "Greece type" of economic chaos.
Even liberals should be happy that the republicans have put the brakes on the spending spree of Obama and the previous democratic congress.
Big question is, do they know, or are they intent go be memorialized in History by the "Great Republican Depression" of 2011? Or, maybe "The Huge Norquist Boehner of 2011".
The Dems took over for 2 years and ran through money like it was no tomorrow with no concern. They didn't even pass a budget in 2010. The effects of the stimulus wore off and we're back to where we started out.
Republicans have been in the House only for 6 months and you call "Republican's fault" ?
Blind partisanship is all I can attribute this to.
They have "won" for all Americans, including you, Bob.
The spending spree could not have gone on forever without disasterous consequences to the nations. Obama and the democrats were completely unwilling to address the spending issue. If the democratic congress was still in power, spending would have continued and resulted in a "Greece type" of economic chaos.
Even liberals should be happy that the republicans have put the brakes on the spending spree of Obama and the previous democratic congress.
You are right, I am among the privileged that would continue to benefit from the Republican agenda, "It's the Uppers that deserve the Ups". The thought of that being the reality, just goes against my sense of what is right and just. I would be less comfortable with that than apparently, you.
Big question is, do they know, or are they intent go be memorialized in History by the "Great Republican Depression" of 2011? Or, maybe "The Huge Norquist Boehner of 2011".
Big question is, do they know, or are they intent go be memorialized in History by the "Great Republican Depression" of 2011? Or, maybe "The Huge Norquist Boehner of 2011".
Great link, and it poses a great question. Too bad this all could have been avoided if Obama had embraced the centrist plan of the Gang of Six (based on his own Simpson Bowles commission report, which he also spurned). But no, he had to try to beech-slap "the rich" and "corporate jet owners" to satisfy his own radical urges and those of his base.
Now he will get what he didn't want, and he will have to sign it: a short-term extension, tied to a process that will get us to a Gang-of-Six-type outcome. If the aftermath of this hash is a depression, it will be because your guy vetoed a debt ceiling increase. And the people will see it that way--first the veto, then the trouble. And the rising tide of liberal influence in politics will recede for another generation.
None of the above. That's the problem with the view point of liberals. They just don't get it. Its the prism with which you view the world that is at issue.
You are correct. Additionally, though the "Budget Cuts" have been discussed, the real question is, are they really cuts, or bits and slices like Obama wanted, that actually will increase the budget because they aren't really cuts at all.
Great link, and it poses a great question. Too bad this all could have been avoided if Obama had embraced the centrist plan of the Gang of Six (based on his own Simpson Bowles commission report, which he also spurned). But no, he had to try to beech-slap "the rich" and "corporate jet owners" to satisfy his own radical urges and those of his base.
Now he will get what he didn't want, and he will have to sign it: a short-term extension, tied to a process that will get us to a Gang-of-Six-type outcome. If the aftermath of this hash is a depression, it will be because your guy vetoed a debt ceiling increase. And the people will see it that way--first the veto, then the trouble. And the rising tide of liberal influence in politics will recede for another generation.
Err, he did embrace the idea of it and like many, wanted to pursue developing specifics. Short memory I guess.
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.
You are correct
