Posted on 12/28/2012 5:14:01 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Cliff Deal Hinges on Senators White House Meeting Ends With Expressions of Cautious Optimism From Both Sides on Negotiations By JANET HOOK and CAROL E. LEE
WASHINGTON—The job of averting year-end tax increases and spending cuts landed squarely on the Senate, whose leaders said Friday they would launch a last-ditch weekend effort to avert the so-called fiscal cliff.
President Barack Obama met with all four congressional leaders in an hourlong meeting in the Oval Office to review an increasingly narrow range of options.
He later said he was "modestly optimistic" a deal could be reached, echoing comments from the top Democrat and Republican in the Senate.
"We had a good meeting down at the White House and we are engaged in discussions…in the hopes that we can come forward as early as Sunday" with a plan, said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.). "We'll be working hard to try to see if we can get there in the next 24 hours," he said, adding he was "hopeful and optimistic."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) agreed the meeting was "constructive." In a warning that seemed aimed at lawmakers in both parties, he said, "whatever we come up with is going to be imperfect."
Mr. Obama said Messrs. McConnell and Reid have the weekend to reach and pass a deal.
In a move meant to pressure Republicans, Mr. Obama asked Mr. Reid and House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) to bring up a bill to extend income-tax rates for income under $250,000 and unemployment-insurance benefits if Senate leaders can't reach an agreement. "The hour for immediate action is here, it is now," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
“Getting mad at me won’t help you”
That’s just it, I’m not mad. In fact, I have no feelings about your opinions at all. They are simply wrong and not worth wasting my freedom dealing with.
I wish you as much slave happiness as possible on the plantation, working hard for your GOPe Massah. It will be limited, but you choose it, so good luck and best wishes.
I choose freedom.
You realize that come election time 95%+ of people here and on every other conservative website are going to vote for the Republican candidate.
You are not creating yet another 3rd party, nor creating any momentum towards one (there are already 50+ to pick from), and no 3rd party you waste your vote on is ever going to amount to squat.
In the end, all you are doing is crying that you're not getting your way and throwing a temper tantrum.
Nah, I'm actively out campaigning AGAINST the GOP to family, friends, and neighbors, pointing out that voting GOP is a wasted vote, since the GOP is liberal, AND doesn't win much because of it.
In fact, I've got the anti-Dewhurst ping list for 2014.
/johnny
And just what is that?
You cannot make a tax rate a principle. Tax rates are a dependent variable of spending.
The Republican tax "policy" has been corrupt since the Great Compromise of 1986, now on its last legs.
The notion that cutting taxes could cut spending, by "starving the beast", was plausible when Howard Jarvis and David Stockman were advocating for it, but that was 35 years ago. The theory has been proven false.
It's false because of the Reagan-O'Neill Compromise of 1986 - Republicans could cut taxes, Democrats could spend as much as they wanted, using bills of Credit and inflation to make up the difference.
Now we are at the end game of 1986. The dollar is ruined, the demand for "funding" has never been higher, and the peoples' willingness to "contribute" has never been lower.
And what is the Republican policy about all this? Is it "cut spending by $1.6 trillion immediately"? No, it is not.
Is it "taxation beyond the limits of the Constitution is theft"? No, it is not.
It's a pathetic loser whine to the effect that raising tax rates will hurt "the economy", as if they have done anything - ANYTHING - since 1986 to advance natural resource extraction, exploitation of those resources, invention, and manufacturing - the only important parts of any real "economy".
The GOP is a corpse, and it's time for a decent burial.
They certainly did not.
Most of their ingenious methods regarding choosing the President, for example, were designed to deal with three and four-way races, which they believed would be common.
I can’t disagree with anything you said.
Nope, do your homework. We've effectively had a 2 party system from the beginning. The Federalist Party and the Democratic-Republican Party were the first names. The names have changed a bit, but the effect is the same.
What “parties” did the Founders envision?
They didn't officially enshrine 2 party's, but they created a system that is effectively a 2 party system.
Here you can read up on the concept if you didn't realize that is the system we are living in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-party_system
There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system;[1] historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won an election.
Seems I recall our first President being very concerned about factionalism and taking steps to crush it.
Concerned? Yes. But we still ended up with a 2 party system. Part of it was that they wanted majority candidates to win elections rather than plurality ones. There is an argument for that, but the effect is a 2 party winner take all system.
Washington's farewell speech warned of them. That he was ignored does not mean that there have always been political parties in the United States, far from it. It also does not mean that any existing party is guaranteed any sort of future influence, or even existence.
Parties have come and they have gone. The modern Republican Party has clearly lost any semblance of purpose, and is headed the way of the Whigs in whose wake they arose.
/yawn
Golly gee Johnny, we've never heard of that before. It's as if there weren't 3rd party right of center candidates (and their supporters) who do the same thing every single election cycle and get precisely nowhere. Let's see, the latest big thing for renegade conservatives was supposed to be Virgil Goode and the Constitution Party. Shockingly, that bombed pretty badly. Heck, some site we know very well was officially anti-Romney till in the end it wasn't - and most everyone, predictably, rallied around the only alternative to even more liberal Democrat party candidate(s) from the office of President on down.
Your just regurgitating the same stuff we hear every election cycle. It's nothing new or interesting. No one is impressed or cares.
Over 200, and your point being? The two parties are the solution to all our problems? Please.
It’s been the 3rd parties that bring the new blood and new ideas to the dialog. They’re the ones that make people start to sit-up and take note; start the process of “Hey, that’s right”.
What were the differences between the two parties the last few elections? “You have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency”, the man who banned ‘assault weapons’ in his State, neither could reference, nor articulate the Constitutional basis to say ‘let’s rein this back’
Who’s the one ‘wasting their votes’, dumping their convictions so THEIR guy hopefully wins?
It’s the ‘only 2 parties can win’ schtick that’s the killer here; be glad you voted for the GOP, the same one that bent over from the start. I’ll be content I voted other, and can rightfully give the bent-over a firm kick in the ass for staying on the plantation in hopes their chains rest lightly on the Benedict Arnolds in their own party.
No political partIES were enshrined by the founders, but the structure they created - a winner take all setup with no chance of coalition government, effectively established a 2 party system whether they wished for that or not.
It is what it is. You can try to pretend every election cycle we don't have 2 options, but we do and everyone knows it.
The modern Republican Party has clearly lost any semblance of purpose, and is headed the way of the Whigs in whose wake they arose.
That almost certainly will not happen. And even if it did, the new party would aborb the carcass of the GOP and become the new second leg of the 2 party system. The problem is there is no critical mass over any major issue that could lead to this new political party some are dreaming of. There is the Constitution Party and any number of other partIES right now, and they just don't amount to squat.
The problem is for every Republican voter that thinks the party is not conservative enough on say fiscal issues, another thinks it should be more libertine on social issues, and yet a different person thinks we should be more isolationist, and another thinks precisely the opposite. There is no one issue creating some giant schism that would shatter the party. Instead we have lots of competing interests, which is normal (especially after an election) that are jockeying for a dominant role.
Face it folks; no politician in either party thinks we can ever balance the budget again. If they did they would not be engaged in bitter battles about how to shave a mere $200 Billion off a deficit that totals $1002 Billion. What about the fiscal cliff which both sides fear like it was Armageddon? It only reduces the red ink by $464 Billion leaving a hole of more than half a Trillion dollars. If cutting spending and increasing revenues enough to reduce the deficit to $538 Billion will crash the economy and send us all to financial ruin how in the hell can we ever get it to zero?
Yes, most of the politicians suck - but what we really have is a people problem. Look at most any poll, people will say they think government should be reduced, but then oppose every specific cut other than maybe prisons and foreign aid (tiny amounts of the overall problem). True, there are very few inspirational leaders who want to do the right thing, but what passes for the American public these days has no will to cut much of anything.
The politician that tries to stand up and do the right thing finds precious little support among their constituents. Heck, talk about reforming or slimming down Medicare and Social Security at a Tea Party meeting and see what happens. Even among the best conservatives there is surprisingly little will to scale down big ticket items like that. Most people feel they've paid into it and want their share. It's almost always other people's stuff that should be cut. And hey, once a system is established it's hard to fault people for fighting for their piece of the pie.
I rather suspect the lack of will means we will follow Europe's example and keep kicking the can down the road. One day it will catch up with us and the whole economic house of cards will implode, but that could be a ways off.
“I’m ready to crash and reset.”
That’s what marxists say.
Some extremists relish the illusion that everything will fall apart and the world wil be cleansed in damnation.
It wont. Reality is more boring than that.
There is a difference between the two parties. There is a difference between ‘better’ and ‘worse’. Evil happens when those who know good do nothing to stop evil; worse happens when you and I find excuses not to work for the better.
Since nobody’s perfect, you have all the excuses in the world to throw rocks at people trying to do good and whining about their imperfections and claiming they dont do anything for you. That’s the way of powerless extremists, always whining, never solving.
If you don’t see where we are headed, you are willfully blind.
A good start: but now we need to get rid of the remaining RINOs and replace them with Tea Partiers.
Your mistake was twofold: first in thinking that all the incumbents are bums; second in thinking that voting all the bums out would *necessarily* mean voting more Democrats in.
Nice try, though.
Cheers!
Look clown, don't interject yourself into conversation when you don't know what the discussion is about. You still don't know what my point was and yet you continue babbling on making yourself look foolish.
I don't want to have to explain it to you again, because, quite frankly, I don't think you are sharp enough to understand.
The TEAparty.
“You have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency”
That was the traitorous RINO McCain and the worthless GOP-E.
Your point (and your premises, and your conclusions, were, and remain, wrong).
It's not that I don't get them -- it's that I completely reject them.
Here's a John Boehner bobblehead doll, it'll cheer you up.
Cheers!
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.