http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703405704575015550915960106.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

... and a democrat

Quote :

" ...the commission [proposed by the Obama admin] would have 18 members: six appointed by congressional Democratic leaders and six by Republican leaders, with the president naming two Republicans four Democrats. The panel would be required to report back after the November elections with a blueprint for shrinking the federal budget deficit to 3% of the gross domestic product by 2015 from the current 10% level, and on steps to contain long-term budget problems through tax increases and changes to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. "

but...

Quote :

" Republican Sens. George Voinovich of Ohio and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire dismissed it as a political fig leaf... Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D., N.D.) has also withheld his support. "This is a political-cover exercise," Mr. Gregg said. "It's like putting a car on the road without having an engine in it." "

In the other thread on healthcare, someone speculated that if a reasonable solution were reached, he thought the republicans would get on board, but this seems to indicate that they will work against their own stated positions just to keep the dems from looking good.

1/20/2010 9:37:43 PM

Do the Dems have a decent shot a picking up the NH seat (Gregg retiring)? I mean, it is a pretty blue state...oh wait......

1/20/2010 9:45:58 PM

Quote :

"but this seems to indicate that they will work against their own stated positions just to keep the dems from looking good."

well, yeah. I thought this was well established.

1/20/2010 9:48:32 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtMV44yoXZ0

1/20/2010 9:50:26 PM

This is a fig leaf. There is no confusion how to reduce the deficit: call all departments and begin firing working, starting with those eligible for the most outrageous pensions.

1/20/2010 9:50:37 PM

From the same article...

Quote :

"Republican Sens. George Voinovich of Ohio and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire dismissed it as a political fig leaf and instead called on President Barack Obama to support enactment of a law that would establish a commission and require an up-or-down congressional vote on its recommendations. Tuesday's plan would create the panel by executive order."

There's your difference. Obama just wants a show. The GOP wants a show and a binding vote.

1/20/2010 10:35:56 PM

just like lieberman wanted a medicare buy-in

1/20/2010 10:43:06 PM

Why the presumption that only the GOP plays politics?

1/20/2010 10:52:14 PM

Quote :

"In the other thread on healthcare, someone speculated that if a reasonable solution were reached, he thought the republicans would get on board"

That was me, and your link confirms what I said. The republicans will not oppose this if Obama enacts it in legislation. However, without legislation, this sort of a commission would be akin to what came out of the climate summit in Copenhagen this year.

moron.

[Edited on January 20, 2010 at 10:57 PM. Reason : s]

1/20/2010 10:57:04 PM

Quote :

"This is a fig leaf. There is no confusion how to reduce the deficit: call all departments and begin firing working, starting with those eligible for the most outrageous pensions. "

I can't tell if you're joking, but in the real world, you can't just say "cut all those people" and expect it to be done.

You have to look at where a department's budget comes from, what effect cutting it has, how to reallocate it, which departments can even be cut, and how, etc.. You know as well as I do that legislators are going to resist cutting, and understandably so, programs that benefit their districts.

A commission like this is the first step towards creating an actual plan that's not just dumb rhetoric like "fire all those with outrageous pensions."

Quote :

"Quote : "Republican Sens. George Voinovich of Ohio and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire dismissed it as a political fig leaf and instead called on President Barack Obama to support enactment of a law that would establish a commission and require an up-or-down congressional vote on its recommendations. Tuesday's plan would create the panel by executive order." There's your difference. Obama just wants a show. The GOP wants a show and a binding vote. "

Quote :

" That was me, and your link confirms what I said. The republicans will not oppose this if Obama enacts it in legislation. However, without legislation, this sort of a commission would be akin to what came out of the climate summit in Copenhagen this year. "

You two clearly don't know what an executive order is or how they work.

And if the right was serious about reducing the debt, they could work on the commission while simultaneously drafting legislation. Instead they choose to posture for the sake of trying to hurt Obama, rather than to do their jobs and help the country. It's sad you would defend this behavior.


[Edited on January 20, 2010 at 11:11 PM. Reason : ]

1/20/2010 11:09:39 PM

Quote :

"You two clearly don't know what an executive order is or how they work."

executive orders can easily be rescinded. even by the person who issued it. The pubs want something with teeth. and Obama, as should be expected, won't stick his neck out on anything

1/20/2010 11:13:44 PM

Yea take a look at the pay go rules... Stupid shit they just waive whenever they have an expensive bill to pass

1/20/2010 11:26:07 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_executive_orders

haha

so all of these executive orders were useless? They had no "teeth"?

I expect burro to be so blindly partisan, but i'm a little surprised at you Solinari for following his lead on this one.

1/20/2010 11:34:26 PM

when Congress can just ignore something, it doesn't sound like it is all that important. wouldn't you agree?

1/20/2010 11:38:10 PM

why doesn't obama just call their bluff and put it into legislation?

the answer to that question is the reason why the gop isn't buying the whole kumbaya bullshit

1/20/2010 11:41:05 PM

^ because the executive branch isn't supposed to write legislation, and the Obama admin has been following this so far.

If the right actually care about debts, why is it over the past several decades they've never introduced or tried to pass when they could this legislation? Why is it taking Obama, the evil dirty communist, to get the ball rolling with an executive order? Then he gets attacked for it?

I would die of laughter at the hypocrisy if it wasn't so sad.

[Edited on January 20, 2010 at 11:55 PM. Reason : ]

1/20/2010 11:54:17 PM

well, if he wants to issue an executive order, he should do it. I certainly wouldn't hold it against him.

Instead he wants to vote present on the issue by making sure everyone's on board and double-confirmed they are A-OK before he pulls the trigger.

A leader needs look back to make sure people are following him at times, but jesus christ this guy never looks forward!

1/21/2010 12:10:40 AM

Quote :

"President Obama on Saturday endorsed a Senate bill to create a bipartisan budget commission, whose recommendations for slashing deficits would have to be voted on by Congress. But he remained ready to establish a panel by executive order if the effort to do so by law fails even with his support."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/us/politics/24debt.html

lol

8 years of a republican president, and 6 years with a republican legislature, and it took evil communist Obama and a democratic congress to start a commission to reduce the debt.

republicans pwnt ITT

1/23/2010 8:42:21 PM

I support this effort.

I guarantee that the next president after Obama will do some good stuff also. Maybe we should just start hating Obama now because he won't do that as yet unspecified good thing that the next president will do.

[Edited on January 23, 2010 at 8:45 PM. Reason : s]

1/23/2010 8:45:15 PM

huh?

I'm not hating on Bush.

I'm pointing out that conservatives, counter to their claims, have no interest in following their principles when it's time to put your money where your mouth is.

Democrats have been condemning the deficit for a while, including Obama, and it looks like they are actually trying to do something about it when they have the chance.

I think you are right about future administrations though. Obama is setting a good example for them to follow.

1/23/2010 8:53:23 PM

The recent batch of republicans could hardly be called conservative.

1/23/2010 8:58:03 PM

that's the boilerplate conservative cop-out argument.

"b-b-but they're not really conservative!"

so of the 229 republican majority in the house and 55 republican majority in the senate, and Bush, what percentage of them weren't "really" conservatives?

1/23/2010 9:00:14 PM

pretty much most of them.

1/23/2010 9:53:15 PM

from the article...

Quote :

"Most Republicans object that a commission would inevitably lead to tax increases,"

That can't happen, silly republicans, Obama promised us....

Quote :

""I can make a firm pledge," he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime.""

1/23/2010 10:24:05 PM

ahhh. be he could create a new tax and not break that promise

1/23/2010 10:35:39 PM

who says we need to tax people below $250k?

And is it now the conservative/libertarian position that tax raises are good when they are on the people making less than $250k?



I personally wouldn't have an issue dipping lower than $250k if that's what would appease the right.

[Edited on January 23, 2010 at 10:42 PM. Reason : ]

1/23/2010 10:40:32 PM

where the fuck did you pull any of that from? that's like the Strawman from hell, dude

1/23/2010 10:45:03 PM

I was responding to EarthDogg.

1/23/2010 10:46:05 PM

no you weren't. nowhere did he say we should raise taxes on anyone, dumbass, much less the <250k crowd.

1/23/2010 10:48:54 PM

He was suggesting that he thought it was a dumb idea that Obama "promised" not to raise taxes on people making less than a $250k/yr, implying that he thinks this might be a good idea. Therefore, Obama's idea to raise taxes on the "rich" is bad, but if he were forced to compromise and raise it on the less rich too, then maybe it's not so bad, from an EarthDogg perspective.

EarthDogg is not a rational person, he is just blindly anti-Obama (and probably hates black people too). I'm trying to point this out in an exaggerated way.

[Edited on January 23, 2010 at 10:53 PM. Reason : ]

1/23/2010 10:52:48 PM

republicans republicans republicans. well this country would just be in a god damn zen if it wasn't for those damn republicans now wouldn't it be moron

you should have them all deported since you don't like them so much.

1/23/2010 10:55:08 PM

haha

so what is your opinion on the new commission Obama has pushed for?

1/23/2010 10:56:08 PM

lol. that took u like 3.0348 seconds to reply. that's the real story behind this

1/23/2010 10:59:35 PM

Quote :

"He was suggesting that he thought it was a dumb idea that Obama "promised" not to raise taxes on people making less than a $250k/yr, implying that he thinks this might be a good idea."

and there would be where you PUT WORDS IN HIS MOUTH. like I said. strawman from hell.

1/23/2010 11:01:35 PM

^ eh... not really.

I'm not surprised you don't understand though, but it's a trivial enough issue that I don't feel like letting it pollute this thread.

^^ my time stamp is showing exactly 1 minute.

[Edited on January 23, 2010 at 11:04 PM. Reason : ]

1/23/2010 11:03:42 PM

yes. really. you know you were putting words in his mouth, so give it up

1/23/2010 11:08:03 PM

He doesn't have space for me to put words in his mouth because your cock is occupying it all.

1/24/2010 1:04:00 AM

at least you are doing something worthwhile with your mouth for once, then

1/24/2010 1:04:37 AM

Quote :

"I'm not hating on Bush. I'm pointing out that conservatives, counter to their claims, have no interest in following their principles when it's time to put your money where your mouth is."

I think its a well known fact that "fiscal responsibility" is MERELY a talking point for republican candidates at the federal level and is not actually followed by republicans in office. If you say you believe something then surely this is how you will act in office...

althoughmoron's graph above is stupid and lacks any credibility. There is no way i believe the median income is <$20000 and that the "50% mean" is $25000. Is the "number of people" y-axis supposed to be "number of people in harlem"???

[Edited on January 24, 2010 at 8:46 PM. Reason : a]

[Edited on January 24, 2010 at 8:47 PM. Reason : a]

1/24/2010 8:46:37 PM

I’m not sure what the graph is of actually, it might be from 1993, and it might be of just some poorish city? It was just the first graph on Google Images that was of what I was looking for.

The general idea though is that the US’s overall income distribution is going to take the same left-skewed shape as that graph.

1/25/2010 1:03:04 AM

For Pete's sake, don't leap to the defense of these Republicans if you're just going to decry them as "not true conservatives".

1/25/2010 1:27:21 AM

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics-government/ci_14262786
Obama to seek spending freeze to trim deficits

1/26/2010 12:32:26 AM

YEAH!

1/26/2010 11:02:00 AM

Quote :

"The freeze would cover the agencies and programs for which Congress allocates specific budgets each year, including air traffic control, farm subsidies, education, nutrition and national parks. But it would exempt security-related budgets for the Pentagon, foreign aid, the Veterans Affairs and homeland security, as well as the entitlement programs that make up the biggest and fastest-growing part of the federal budget: Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security."

lmao. got that one backwards guys (except for farm subsidies)

1/26/2010 11:08:57 AM

NO

SACRED

COWS

1/26/2010 11:12:55 AM

Social Security and Medicare are the biggest problems we have. They're the programs that no politician wants to touch, but either someone steps up to the plate or we're doomed. Those massive liabilities are not going to take care of themselves.

1/26/2010 11:17:11 AM

Quote :

"they will work against their own stated positions just to keep the dems from looking good."

Yes.

And the converse is true as well. It's no longer about getting anything done, it's about your team winning, at any cost. Both Dems and repubs will do whatever it takes to get elected or re-elected, with no regard to actually running the country well.

1/26/2010 11:57:43 AM

Pres. Obama just isn't having much luck lately....

Quote :

"WASHINGTON – The Senate Tuesday rejected a plan backed by President Barack Obama to create a bipartisan task force to tackle the federal deficit this year despite glaring new figures showing the enormity of the red-ink threat. The measure went down because anti-tax Republicans joined with Democrats who were wary of being railroaded into cutting Social Security and Medicare."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100126/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_budget

1/26/2010 1:56:02 PM

Quote :

"althoughmoron's graph above is stupid and lacks any credibility. There is no way i believe the median income is <$20000 and that the "50% mean" is $25000. Is the "number of people" y-axis supposed to be "number of people in harlem"???"

You may need a basic numeracy class if you think that's what the graph says.

1/26/2010 2:50:42 PM

Quote :

"Social Security and Medicare are the biggest problems we have. They're the programs that no politician wants to touch, but either someone steps up to the plate or we're doomed. Those massive liabilities are not going to take care of themselves."

Yes they will. The government will repudiate the debt in order to save the currency. It will be an awesome day when creditors finally realize that government debt is a bad investment.

1/26/2010 4:22:15 PM