House Democrat: “We wouldn`t cut entitlements or the rate of increase for Obama”

lexisnexis transcript of MSNBC LIVE ^ | August 12, 2011 | REP. JERROLD NADLER

[sickoflibs]

Two gems in this, first he said another massive government stimulus would cut the deficit by increasing tax revenue by 'putting people to work' (we saw that in 2009 right???) , and then he said House Democrats wouldnt support cutting entitlements for a Obama 'big deal' after all the spin about Obama putting trillions of entitlement cuts 'on the table'.

If Obama really agreed to cut entitlements he'd get a primary challenge. But just yesterday on his bus tour he repeated this lie and Republicans once again let him get away with it.

[Dr.Deth]

You have to go into deeper debt to get out of debt?

Jabba is absolutely insane.

[GonzoGOP]

Good. The worst thing that could happen to us now is for the Dems to become reasonable and move to the center. The loonies will pull Obama further left, and it won't be hard because that is the direction Obama wants to go in any case. Our best case is for the congressional dems to look out of touch and dogmatic and for Obama to look completely unhinged. And that is exactly where things are going now.

[sickoflibs]

I saw this gem on TV last week and luckily a transcript was posted.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Nadler is dead right! But his reasoning only applies in an alternate universe, where the laws of physics, mathematical induction and economics are all counter to those that apply in the real world.

[ken21]

fixing a screwl means paying the unions more.

[KansasGirl]

Yep, Obama has a real problem. Unlike Clinton, he doesn’t have a Republican controlled House and Senate to allow him to move to the center.

[CodeToad]

Stealing from one to give to another is TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!!! It is not Constitutional!

[DAC21]

The Dummycans need to call Bambi on “The Plan I proposed but Bohner walked away from” That plan was a non starter with the Rat Senate. When Boner called him on it and Dingy and Bug Eyes caught wind they put Bambi in his place at which point Bambi “Moved the Goal Post” on Bohner.

This talking point needs to be taken away, Bambi is already using it on his Magical Misery Tour.

[Fair Paul]

As someone posted at the Wall Street Journal, why doesn’t the government just give everyone a job at a salary of $1 million a year? Problem solved.

[mewzilla]

And that's on top of this...

Baseline Budgeting Makes Real Cuts Impossible in Washington

[liberalh8ter]

Good Lord, these people are idiots. I knew Sharpton was, everyone knows that. But Nadler isn't any better. There ought to be an IQ test administered to all elected officials. Bet it would clear the deck.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

Sorry guys, your slip is showing. You try to make this urgent case for jobs now, as though it is suddenly the objective. But why not in the weeks and months leading up to the debt ceiling dust-up? How is it that you suddenly realize the importance of jobs? If Democrats think the electorate isn't on to their failed economic policy efforts in 2009 and their sudden recognition of the jobs issue, only in the shadow of the 2012 elections, they are going to have a sweet collision with reality on the evening of November 6, 2012.

[Zeppo]

Clearly Nadler hasn’t cut his appetite for, um, spending...

[DJ MacWoW]

47 Days And FR Is Still Short Of Its Goal
We Are In A Fight For Our Republic

Are You In Or Are You Out?

Support Free Republic

[upchuck]

Nadler: poster boy for the terminal mental disease that is liberalism.

Hey Jerry: we tried your idea in 2008-09. Didn’t work. What’s different this time?

[andy58-in-nh]

This is precisely the line of "reasoning" (so-called) that one hears from an increasing number of voices on the Left.

In keeping with their socialist beliefs and adherence to Keynesian economics, leading Democrats including the President have decided to focus not on debt, but on jobs. Their basic principle is that the government, not the private sector, must create employment opportunities (and training for those jobs) through more spending (universally referred to, of course, as "investment").

In turn, those working at these new (preferably "green") jobs will generate additional revenue through their tax payments and stimulate their local economies through spending and investment. In order to accomplish such growth, the central planners in Washington will need to raise taxes on "the wealthy", who will of course hand over the additional money without altering their behavior in the slightest, while Washington also foments additional monetary stimulus, primarily by a renewed program of debt monetization (i.e. - QE2.1, or QE3).

By focusing on job creation rather than debt, Democrats hope to gain a political advantage over Republicans, whom they will portray (as ever) as greedy protectors of Plutocratic wealth. And the debt itself will naturally vanish as millions of Americans are put back to work by the government, building roads and bridges and producing windmills and hybrid car batteries, all of course at unionized jobs at good wages.

Now, if you object that all of the foregoing is an impossible fantasy because central planning does not and cannot work, as it can never allocate capital as efficiently as markets and in fact relies on the destruction of private wealth through excessive taxation and regulation, and that every past attempt to control an economy in such manner results in poverty, scarcity of goods, and tyrannical social controls, they'll probably just call you a "racist Tea Partier" and obviously too stupid to appreciate the depth of their brilliance and the purity of their intentions.

And you will also know how this story ends.

[Lazamataz]

What do you expect. It’s a socialist and a communist, conversing.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Wilkomen in Weimar America!

[Cheerio]

Hey DEMS - where is your ability to compromise? Oh I forgot it is a one-way street with you libtards, similar to being called a racist.

We are at WAR for anyone who cannot recognize what is going on in America. DEMS position on entitlements will ensure they are not there for our kids and grand kids - now that is what I call an UMCOMPROMISING POSITION.

Has there been a response to the issue of compromise from the GOP yet? Oh, I didn't think so.