Posted on 07/30/2011 8:21:33 PM PDT by Beaten Valve
ABC News has learned that Republicans and the White House have struck a tenative deal to raise the debt ceiling before the Aug. 2 deadline.
It's not done yet, but here is the framework of the tentative deal they have worked out, according to a source familiar with the negotiations:
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
--------------------------
| Clearly, you cannot cut government by giving it more ability to borrow and spend. I don't think it is possible for this country to have a more sorry bunch of losers running the show. Again, cut, cut, cut. An arrogant Marxist was spending Trillions of bucks without comprehending. The piss-stream media concurred Without saying a negative word For the Republic they thought was ending.
|
‘You’re really desperate, aren’t you.’
Criticism from a political Eunuch — what a laugh.
“don’t like the medicare cuts only because the Dems will use this in the election, but then, the Dems own this too.”
We’ve GOT to start running commercials (and often) like the Dems and AARP ad propaganda regarding Medicare cuts. All we have to do is tell the public (most of whom aren’t aware, I assure you) that Obamacare will cut $500B from Medicare benefits, drive current and future doctors from the profession, and force rationing of care, even denial of many (currently available) procedures for the elderly starting in 2013.
We need to wake them up to just how scary the truth of this law is before it’s too late. That alone would be a real game-changer in the election (even younger voters care about their parents and grandparents).
Says a guy defending sellout Congressmen who don’t have a pair between them.
Your analogy is flawed because with the banking regulations set forth in this country, the bank can say you’re crazy for asking for a loan you won’t be able to pay back. Even though they know you might be a credit risk because they’re able to look at your credit history. They can’t turn you down because the federal government and it’s asinine banking laws says so.
“Guarantee BBA goes to the states or no debt ceiling increase.”
Constitution says an amendment has to first be voted on and passed by 2/3 of congress (both houses, I believe), then go to the states and be passed.
But don’t think the voters won’t be watching how these politicians vote on it. All the House and over a third of the Senate have to get re-elected next year, so the BBA has an excellent chance of passing. The states, for obvious reasons, should be a sure thing. The people WANT this.
What about that is rocket science?
“So why should no tax increase on this supposed agreement be considered some sort of victory for our side or America?”
Because BHO himself wanted tax increases so badly. He pushed it daily in his lectures (I mean speeches :-)
Hey, nobody said he lives in reality. He just wanted what he wanted - and that also included NO CUTS. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz said it herself. And THAT little soundbite should be used as often as possible in Republican campaigns.
“I pick elections. Do what you want with violence and murder.”
He used a similar dopey argument like this against me, EV.
I have been defending being concerned about elections. All politicians are the natural enemy of a free people, and can never be trusted. It is necessary to have their gonads in your hands at all times to keep them in line.
Just laugh at him.
Oh, I have been laughing. :-)
‘He used a similar dopey argument like this against me, EV.’
It is not nice to lie about what I said on the same page on the same thread. See my posts, quoted by you in #307 and posted by me in #327. As anyone who can read can easily see, it is not similar to my posts to EV. Try again, sucker.
No tax increase is a big deal because it was a trap. If the republicans fell for the “balanced approach” and “shared sacrifice” b.s. the base would have stayed home in 2012. Further, all the tea party voters would turn on the congressmen they got elected.
The rinos are dumb enough to have fallen for it. The tea party cabal saved the establishment’s rear end by holding the line on this.
“It is not nice to lie about what I said on the same page on the same thread. See my posts, quoted by you in #307 and posted by me in #327. As anyone who can read can easily see, it is not similar to my posts to EV. Try again, sucker.”
I said in an earlier comment that if there weren’t any real cuts in the near-term that the plan was useless. Then, in a bizarre argument relying solely upon hyperbole (much in the same manner of accusing EV of wanting “violence” for disagreeing with you), you accused me of supporting massive tax increases. (Comment 270). Give it up already.
New tagline ...
Good night.
Lets just do nothing; things'll just work themselves out...
according to the link we got screwed again.
Since you don’t seem to know that the President has been pressing for large tax increases even up to today, and that was the alternative to the current proposal, there is no point in discussion with someone who refuses to see the real world.
"even if spending was $2 trillion less than that now scheduled in the “baseline,” as proposed this week by Republican House Speaker John Boehner, it would still total $43.8 trillion, or 55% above last decade’s spending level. Since Senate Democrats vow to veto Boehner’s plan, spending will rise by at least 50% in the coming decade."
That is the truth of it. There are no cuts. They are looking for a political solution. None of what they have been doing for the past week is an actual solution, especially without entitlements and Obamacare on the table.
Even the Ryan plan spends more money.
Rand Paul's Penny Plan is the only thing out there that decreases the deficit. They are solving the wrong problem, as usual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
