HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Like Clockwork: Obama Cav...

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:54 PM

 

Like Clockwork: Obama Caves -- Bye, bye $250,000 and up. Hello $400,000 and up

And so the unnecessary caving begins again.

Dear DU apologists, I understand you adamantly insisted Obama would never cave on the long held campaign promise of raising taxes on households making $250K and up so I am offering you yet another olive branch so you can begin your new spin (and/or burying) of how it never happened

Going over the cliff is still the best option for America but like the Right we on our side have deniers a plenty to the facts. Do nothing and the Left wins. It's a simple strategy. Negotiating a deal with the Right says you either agree with the Right (deep entitlement cuts, more tax cuts for corporations, save the wealthy), or you are the world's worst negotiator.

Unless money is removed out of politics both parties will play their shell games which ultimately always favors the few (who are their biggest donors and expect a return on their investments).

A deal on this fake fiscal cliff will be made miraculously at the 11th hour (as it has always been done in these situations that involve big money for the last 4 years) and both sides will claim victory despite the evidence pointing to a win for the Right.

There is a difference between compromising and caving. It appears many on our side aren't able to comprehend that. Obama caved. And we aren't done yet. The world is in balance again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/obama-fiscal-cliff-offer_n_2319075.html

124 replies, 8318 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 124 replies Author Time Post
Reply Like Clockwork: Obama Caves -- Bye, bye $250,000 and up. Hello $400,000 and up (Original post)
boingboinh Dec 2012 OP
DFW Dec 2012 #1
flpoljunkie Dec 2012 #40
flpoljunkie Dec 2012 #69
politicaljunkie41910 Dec 2012 #83
Exultant Democracy Dec 2012 #2
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #29
samsingh Dec 2012 #36
democrattotheend Dec 2012 #97
Blasphemer Dec 2012 #3
julian09 Dec 2012 #14
SCliberal091294 Dec 2012 #4
jberryhill Dec 2012 #5
boxman15 Dec 2012 #6
Dawson Leery Dec 2012 #26
flpoljunkie Dec 2012 #98
WeekendWarrior Dec 2012 #7
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #30
Myrina Dec 2012 #75
WeekendWarrior Dec 2012 #119
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #121
WeekendWarrior Dec 2012 #122
doc03 Dec 2012 #8
Lil Missy Dec 2012 #9
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #10
doc03 Dec 2012 #12
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #13
doc03 Dec 2012 #15
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #16
doc03 Dec 2012 #21
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #32
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #47
doc03 Dec 2012 #87
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #101
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #42
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #49
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #31
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #48
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #56
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #61
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #68
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #71
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #86
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #100
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #103
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #106
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #114
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #115
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #117
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #118
tularetom Dec 2012 #52
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #62
tularetom Dec 2012 #63
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #65
tularetom Dec 2012 #70
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #72
woo me with science Dec 2012 #108
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #109
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 #11
julian09 Dec 2012 #17
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 #19
julian09 Dec 2012 #23
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 #24
MrSlayer Dec 2012 #18
julian09 Dec 2012 #25
MrSlayer Dec 2012 #33
MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #20
doc03 Dec 2012 #27
MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #84
NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #22
Cha Dec 2012 #28
NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #37
Cha Dec 2012 #38
treestar Dec 2012 #64
Fearless Dec 2012 #90
NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #91
Fearless Dec 2012 #92
Kurska Dec 2012 #34
DFW Dec 2012 #39
Dawson Leery Dec 2012 #96
msongs Dec 2012 #35
flpoljunkie Dec 2012 #41
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #58
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #67
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #88
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #99
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #104
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #105
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #107
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #110
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #112
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #116
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #45
jberryhill Dec 2012 #79
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #80
lunatica Dec 2012 #43
Bonobo Dec 2012 #44
DCBob Dec 2012 #46
Laura PourMeADrink Dec 2012 #50
grammiepammie Dec 2012 #51
forestpath Dec 2012 #53
ellenfl Dec 2012 #66
Walk away Dec 2012 #54
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #55
Jakes Progress Dec 2012 #57
blkmusclmachine Dec 2012 #59
bamacrat Dec 2012 #60
Revolutionary Girl Dec 2012 #73
Myrina Dec 2012 #77
budkin Dec 2012 #74
Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2012 #85
Johnny2X2X Dec 2012 #76
Smilo Dec 2012 #78
jenmito Dec 2012 #81
bocephus0706 Dec 2012 #82
Fearless Dec 2012 #89
yellowcanine Dec 2012 #93
Avalux Dec 2012 #94
Jersey Devil Dec 2012 #95
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #102
sofa king Dec 2012 #111
Whisp Dec 2012 #113
budkin Dec 2012 #120
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #124
Evergreen Emerald Dec 2012 #123

Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:57 PM

1. Bonehead wanted a million

From $250K to $400K is not the same as from $250K to $1 million. The Treasury still gets a LOT more revenue this way. If Bonehead caves on the rest, I can live with this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:51 AM

40. Also deductions will be capped at 28% above $250K and cap gains/dividends go to 20% above $250K

from Jared Bernstein's blog...

The White House plan would permanently extend Bush-era tax cuts on household incomes below $400,000, meaning that only the top tax bracket, 35 percent, would increase to 39.6 percent…

…the president’s plan would cut spending by $1.22 trillion over 10 years, compared with $1.2 trillion in cuts from the Republicans’ initial offer. Of that, $800 billion is cuts to programs, and $122 billion comes from adopting a new measure of inflation that slows the growth of government benefits, especially Social Security.

…The White House is also counting on $290 billion in savings from lower interest costs on a reduced national debt.

…Of the $800 billion in straight cuts, the president said half would come from federal health care programs; $200 billion from other so-called mandatory programs, like farm price supports, not subject to Congress’s annual spending bills; $100 billion from military spending; and $100 billion from domestic programs under Congress’s annual discretion.


http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/edging-closer-to-a-deal-on-the-cliff/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flpoljunkie (Reply #40)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:30 AM

69. Simpson-Bowles counted reduced interest payments as reduced spending. Why not you, Boehner?

You have said you want a 'Simpson-Bowles like' deficit reduction plan, have you not? Except for the part you willfully ignore--like this one and Simpson-Bowles assumption the tax cuts for the top 2% would expire at the end of 2012.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:21 PM

83. and still does, and he'll probably get it too. This is how they will do it. Boehner intends for

the House to introduce a bill lowering taxes on those making less than a million, just in case they don't reach a deal with the President by January 1. Then if they don't, the rethugs will have their bill passed in the House, and they'll say to the Senate, "where is your bill"? Well the Senate Dems with their Blue Dog Dems will fold like a house of cards; because that's what Dems do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:58 PM

2. 250 to 400. I can live with this.

There are a lot more doctors and professionals that actually work for their money at the lower end of the 1%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Exultant Democracy (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:07 AM

29. You haven't seen the final deal yet. It will be only a percent or two

He isn't just caving on the trigger point. He's caving on the rate. He's probably caving on cap gains and dividends. And it seems almost certain he's giving away Chained CPI.

As I have said, this is the

Worst.
Negotiator.
Ever.

Letting everything expire is a much better deal than the parts he has already given away, and he's not done caving yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Exultant Democracy (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:22 AM

36. $250k, although i can live with, is not very high. $400 is better, though still on the low side.

i can accept either, though. paying taxes for healthcare and Social Security is a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Exultant Democracy (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:23 PM

97. I can live with the floor of $400,000

But this chained CPI thing seems like a really bad idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:58 PM

3. I've never been an apologist but I would not have a problem with this

I've assumed a deal would include raising the threshold. My problem was with people like Schumer offering it up at the beginning of negotiations which was just remarkably stupid. I'm more concerned with social safety net cuts. I'd also like to see what happens with other corporate taxes and tax loopholes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blasphemer (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:25 AM

14. Schumer has the Wall Street fat cats to take care of.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:59 PM

4. ...

They will also cap deductions which should make it closer if they did do 250k. I just want to see some military cuts now, I hope it's at least 50 Billion a year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:01 AM

5. Good falsehood

He said he wouldn't raise taxes on people making less than 250K. But good distortion there.

What is the revenue impact? Do you know? Or is 250,000 a magic number to you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:03 AM

6. You're really not losing out on too much revenue by doing that.

Plus, $250,000 in certain areas is closer to middle class than rich. I'd prefer to keep it at $250,000 (maybe even a bit lower), but I have no problem with $400,000. If he took Boehner's $1,000,000 offer, I might be a little more upset.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boxman15 (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:59 AM

26. Warren Buffett said the top rate should apply to income over 500k.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dawson Leery (Reply #26)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:30 PM

98. Buffett's number may be the president's final number. Surely, hope he doesn't go higher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:05 AM

7. Don't pretend you don't know

that there had to be a compromise. Obama didn't cave. It's called running a government.

This my way or the highway mentality is what got the GOP in such trouble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WeekendWarrior (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:09 AM

30. No. No compromise was necessary.

The default path was just fine. There was no "fiscal cliff". That was all bullshit to create a smokescreen for continuing to grease everything for the rich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #30)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:24 AM

75. ^ THIS +10

... and the sooner we all fucking wake up and realize it, the better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #30)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:00 PM

119. Bull and shit.

Politics is a game of perception. Like it or not, we need to maintain control of the Senate in 2014, and if the GOP can paint this as something dire and that it's the Democrats' fault—which they're desperately trying to do as we speak—that "smokescreen" will give them the power they need.

Don't act as if this is a simple black and white, cut and dried issue. It's not. And never will be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WeekendWarrior (Reply #119)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:17 PM

121. When should we expect Obama and the rest of the Democrats to "paint back"

Everything you say is true. But the answer is not unilateral capitulation. The answer is growing a pair and standing up to the bullies. Dems would never lose another election if they ever did that for more than 10 minutes at a time.

Bunch of damn wimps. And they all explain their lack of backbone just the same way you explained it. "Mustn't take a stand. Mustn't take any chances. Mustn't rock the boat. Mustn't offend anyone."

Screw that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #121)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:44 AM

122. Unilateral capitulation?

What planet do you live on?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:08 AM

8. So when Boner turns that down Obama will settle for $500,000 at the very best.

It may be OK if they agree to cut deductions on the rich that would make up the difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:09 AM

9. Your concern is duly noted. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:12 AM

10. Compromise is not a cave.

Stop making the perfect the enemy of the good. This type of mentality will only serve to make the left irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:19 AM

12. Even if we go back to the same rate as Clinton they still get

a tax cut on everything under $400,000 that seems we started the negations with a compromise. I'm glad Obama wasn't on my Union contract negotiating committee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:21 AM

13. Actually they started with $250

which was exactly what the President ALWAYS promised. So $400 isn't a bad compromise. For those mature enough to accept it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:27 AM

15. But even at the $250,000 level they were already getting the same break

on their income under $250,000 as everyone else. That was a compromise from the get go. Oh do they still plan on robbing funding from SS?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:34 AM

16. That's not a compromise.

That's how the tax system works and always has.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:43 AM

21. They will still pay less than the Clinton rate so they are getting a break.

From what I hear the top rate is cut back to 37% and they still get a break on their income under $400,000 they are getting off like bandits. They will also get another $2000 plus from the SS theft.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:15 AM

32. And we have not yet seen what they are doing to cap gains and dividends

I promise you Obama will deal that away before he is done.

This was all so unnecessary. He had it all set up. The default situation gave us a good reset across the board. There was just no reason to give all this stuff away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:12 AM

47. So you want to raise taxes on the poor and middle clase

just to make the rich pay more. Nice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #47)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:17 PM

87. No the cut in payroll tax was a bad idea from the beginning. SS hasn't ever contributed to the debt

now they take away the funding so it goes in to default. Bring back the work pays credit if you want just keep their stinking hands off SS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #87)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:53 PM

101. Well if you had read the article

The payroll tax cut is going away. So you shouldn't have an objection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:58 AM

42. It means taxes will be raised on too few of the rich to matter.

And we both know this will end with all the rich getting off the hook again.

It's not worth anything unless it's MORE than half a loaf.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #42)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:18 AM

49. Sounds like more than half a loaf to me.

The GOP wanted no rate increase. The President wanted rates increases on income over $250. The compromise is income over $400. That's more than half a loaf. Stop making the perfect the enemy of the good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:12 AM

31. Please explain what we get out of the deal?

Do we get any stimulus? Do we get any real cuts in the defense budget? Do we get any real contribution but the biggest corporations? Do we get any significant revenue from the richest individuals?

The default deal was a much better outcome for the country than this load of crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #31)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:15 AM

48. Did you read the whole article?

Sounds like you didn't.

The president is, however, pursuing some provisions that would make his base pleased. His plan calls for an extension of unemployment benefits -- set to expire at the end of this year -– and money for infrastructure spending. How much money is unclear, though the president's first offer asked for $50 billion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #48)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:16 AM

56. Yes, I saw that.

How much of that do you think will be in the agreement?

He has already given away most of the cards he has in his hand and has not received A SINGLE SIGNIFICANT CONCESSION of anything other than vague talk from Boehner.

Worst.
Negotiator.
Ever.

We would all be far better off if he would simply let all the laws expire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #56)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:38 AM

61. Yet you chose to ignore it.

Let's see what the final deal is before denoucing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #61)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:16 AM

68. It is too late to push back then.

It is probably too late anyway. He never intended to make much of a deal.

Another case where Boehner has a slim majority in 1/3 of the bodies and ends up with 98% of what he wants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #68)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:00 AM

71. To say this is 98% of what Boehner wants

is just not dealing with reality. It is looking for something to complain about.

And the GOP has 33 more seats in the House. That is far from a slim majority. To call it a slim majority is again not dealing in reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #71)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:11 PM

86. Last time Boehner said he got 98% of what he wanted. He's doing better this time.

I don't think Boehner won the last round 98% to 2%. But by being such a coward regarding the government shutdown, Obama surely lost that round 90% to 10%.

And this time, he didn't have to do a damn thing. The default was a big win for America. If he let all the laws expire, he would then be in a great position to negotiate ONLY on the things he wanted. But instead, he has taken to the Christmas spirit, giving away everything. For all the talk of not negotiating with himself, he's sure doing a lot of that. What TANGIBLE thing has Boehner offered? The ONLY concession Boehner has made is to be willing to talk in very vague terms about some small change to the top marginal tax rate. That's a win?

Worst.
Negotiator.
Ever.

It is either that or else Obama intended to sell us out all along. Take your pick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #86)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:52 PM

100. Doing better this time?

Sorry but you really don't seem to have a grasp on reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #100)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:07 PM

103. Let's take stock

Virtually everyone agrees that Obama holds almost all the cards. Even Limbaugh conceded that. Given that situation I would expect the final result to be on the order of about 80% of what Obama demanded/promised.

He has already apparently given up essentially all of the high income tax breaks. He is not insisting on the full Clinton rates and will probably end up at 37% or below. He is not insisting on the $250K limit. He has already give up to $400K and Boehner hasn't really offered anything in good faith yet.

Obama has apparently given up a large cut in social security benefits under the bs guise of the technical term "chained CPI. And he is well on his way to signing up for an increase in the Medicare benefits date. Those are items you can't give up, period, much less give up without getting anything in return.

And we're just getting started. Tell me one tangible, solid thing that Boehner has brought to the table that wouldn't have happened anyway in January of we had simply let the laws expire. There is some talk that Boehner will give a one-year debt extension. Big whoop. That means a year from not he will be back taking hostages. That isn't a give by Boehner. That is a huge win for Beohner.

Worst.
Negotiator.
Ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #103)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:53 PM

106. That's not reality.

None of what you say he's giving up is true. Come back when you have some facts, real facts not talking points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #106)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:18 AM

114. Ecactly whose "talking points" do you think I am representing.

I have looked all over here and I can't find any talking points. I even checked my waste basket and there were no talking points in there.

I will not be bullied into not commenting on what is happening. I will not wait until the whole thing is done to comment on it.

You are welcome to do that if you choose, but don't criticize others for being more engaged than you choose to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #114)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:49 AM

115. Then comment on reality.

Not on fantasy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #115)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:37 AM

117. Here's reality

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #117)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:43 AM

118. As I thought

No reality just BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:50 AM

52. It is a cave if the other side offers nothing

He's negotiating with himself again. If Bonner just keeps his mouth shut he'll end up with everything he wants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #52)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:40 AM

62. Boehner wants no rate increases.

So it doesn't sound like he's getting everything he wants. And we have to acknowledge the reality that as long as the GOP holds the House, we can't get everything we want. There HAS to be compromise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #62)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:47 AM

63. He isn't getting everything he wants - yet

But if he doesn't respond, Obama will keep giving him a little more and more and eventually he'll wind up with no rate increases.

We've watched this little drama play out time and again. I hoped it might be different this time after the voters pretty much told the President they were behind him if he held the line.

But it looks like the same old shit in a different package.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #63)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:12 AM

65. Actually most voters polled said they wanted

both sides to compromise. I'd love to get everything but that is just not realistic. The refusal to compromise is making the GOP irrelevant. The same with happen to the left if we adopt the same additude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #65)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:46 AM

70. Even if every voter said they want compromise what we are seeing now is not compromise

Compromise involves meaningful concessions by both sides. It appears that only one side is making those concessions because the other side sees no need to do so.

Boner knows how to bargain with the President. Just clam up, don't comment and wait. You'll get a better deal in a few days. And if you wait long enough you'll probably get everything you wanted. Maybe more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #70)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:02 AM

72. Boehner and the GOP doesn't want tax rates to go up

on anyone. They want deeper cuts in SS and Medicare and no cuts in Defense. This is compromise whether you will be honest enough to admit it or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:59 PM

108. Utter bullshit.

Last edited Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:36 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021842702#post5

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1798380

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1



Here it is. The bid for compromise. What a ridiculous, reeking load of nonsense. Democrats are lectured for being one-sided and "purist," as though WE are the ones insisting on getting our way, all the time, with no compromise....when the truth is that this country has been dragged *so far* to the right over the past 30 years that:

*our middle class has been virtually obliterated through policy

*forty percent of our wealth has been looted

*virtually ALL new wealth of the past 30 years has gone to the top one percent

*93 percent of the "recovery" has gone to the top one percent

*over a million American schoolchildren are now homeless

*America now ranks higher than any other developed nation in child poverty with the exception of Romania, which a DUer mentioned was only recently added to the list, perhaps to spare America the embarrassment of being last...

*CEO pay is now 350 times the average worker's pay, up from fifty times between 1960 and 1985

*CEO pay has skyrocketed 300% since 1990. Corporate profits have doubled. Average "production worker" pay has increased 4%. The minimum wage has dropped. (All numbers adjusted for inflation).

*After adjusting for inflation, average hourly earnings haven't increased in 50 years.

*income inequality has gotten so extreme here that the US now ranks 93rd in the world in "income equality." China's ahead of us. So is India. So is Iran.

*Social mobility is near an all-time low.

*The top 1% of Americans own 42% of the financial wealth in this country. The top 5% own nearly 70%.

*Hundreds of millions of Americans are deep in debt.

*Taxes on the highest earners are near the lowest they've EVER been and lower than for many who earn less.

etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.

*much, much more at link below,and that's just one of MANY we could post here...


______________________________


We have received no compromise. We have been looted, again and again and again, with no end in sight. And still the message comes, like a drumbeat: You have not compromised enough. You are being a purist.

It doesn't fly anymore. In fact, it has reached the point of ludicrousness.



________________________________________________________

*Much here taken directly from this article at Business Insider, perhaps the best summary I have seen of the looting of America: http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1

There is much, much more there. I strongly recommend that every DUer click through the whole thing again for a reminder of how how much "compromise" WE have received from the ones who are looting us blind:




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #108)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:31 PM

109. I agree

You're post is utter bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:14 AM

11. As long as he gets the full Clinton rate and not 37%, that's a win

The package as being reported will surely drive Boehner to within an inch of his death as Speaker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:34 AM

17. It doesn't matter, they will give themselves a raise to make up the tax rate.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:40 AM

19. In which case the government gets more tax revenue

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:50 AM

23. They will cut workers pay, so everything will remain the same.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #23)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:53 AM

24. You're basically making an argument not to raise their taxes at all

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:35 AM

18. We need all the Bush cuts to sunset.

 

Capital gains has to go up, corporate minimum tax has to come back and the top rate is the least important of the three. The biggest scumbags don't pay income tax at all. How does raising the top income rate equal a win? It doesn't.

We were always going to get fucked in whatever deal was cut. I don't know why anyone would be surprised when it happens. The owners are going to get what they want as always.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:55 AM

25. They should have a transaction tax on stock market trades

 

but NY Sen Schumer, has to protect Wall Street firms above all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #25)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:33 AM

33. Absolutely we should.

 

And of course he does. That's who he works for. It certainly isn't us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:41 AM

20. like clockwork, the trolls come out

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #20)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:01 AM

27. Who are the trolls the ones that defend whatever compromise Obama makes or

the ones that want him to stand his ground.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #27)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:34 PM

84. They've been Obama's enemy since he was elected. Not even fairweather friends, really.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:48 AM

22. Oh goody. Election is over so the anti-Obama, anti-Dem trashing can begin again.

Keep up the good work!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:02 AM

28. Oh, this one was

bashing Pres Obama during the campaign.. now he thinks he gets to insult those who basically have the President's back.. by waving his whatever in our face with the stupid "Obama caves" meme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #28)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:36 AM

37. Yep. Same shit, different day.

As if we haven't heard it all before.

They remind me of the people who attacked FDR from the left, who claimed he wasn't sufficiently liberal. They even wanted to primary him in 1936 -- the idea being that the Republican would win, everyone would then everyone would wake up and elect a "real" liberal in 1940.

Sound familiar?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #37)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:19 AM

38. Like

Clockwork.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:49 AM

64. Entirely predictable

Some people are just "my way or the highway" and couldn't run a government at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:23 PM

90. If he does something wrong who else is going to call him on it?? Republicans whom he caves to?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fearless (Reply #90)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:30 PM

91. "If he does something wrong"...not hair-on-fire fearmongering based on anonymous rumors.

There's a difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #91)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:32 PM

92. Chuck Schumer is not exactly anonymous

Neither is the White House press secretary who stated that it was "Boehner's idea" but the president will support it this morning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:57 AM

34. No real issue, if you think about it with inflation the 250k's of yesterday are closer to the 300k

today.

Long as it is a million or under I'm happy basically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kurska (Reply #34)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:30 AM

39. Eleven years of modest inflation

Puts the purchasing power of $400K close to $250K in 2001 anyway. Cut pork projects in districts represented by Bonehead, Louie Gohmert and other House Teabagger Radicals, and you won't have to cut much in the way of projects that really matter..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kurska (Reply #34)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:14 PM

96. Apply the 39.6% marginal rate to all income above $500,000.

Certainly that is acceptable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:21 AM

35. the appropriate jump is from 250K to 300K, not to 400K

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #35)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:57 AM

41. The president has to work with the Republican House and Senate he has, not the ones he, or we, want.

There are a number of Democratic senators in states like New York and California who would prefer a much high threshold than $250,000. Remember when Nancy Pelosi suggested a $1 million threshold? It was to put them on the spot, but instructive as to the fact that a number of Dems wanted a higher threshold than $250,000. That said, we may well end up with $500,000 so Boehner can say he got a concession from the president on the tax threshold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flpoljunkie (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:19 AM

58. No he doesn't. It is a very good option to just let everything expire and then negotiate

some tactical things after the new year.

There is no freaking "fiscal cliff." The stock market has been booming all the time that these talks have been stalled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #58)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:15 AM

67. Except that millions will lose their food stamps

and unemployment insurance and other benefits that they need to survive. It may not be a fiscal cliff for the governement or Wall Street but it is for those people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #67)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:18 PM

88. That is mostly going to happen anyway.

In January, Obama could have negotiated on those exact items, in exchange for TEMPORARY middle class tax cuts and adjustments to the Pentagon budget and other spending cuts.

Instead he is giving on all of that and most likely emerges with MUCH less than if we had simply let everything expire.

Look, there are bigger principles the continuing unemployment. The whole Republican strategy for the past 30 years is to lock the Federal budget into such a structural deficit that we will have to kill our social safety net. By mostly extending the Bush tax cuts, Obama is doing exactly what the Republicans want. At the Clinton rates (for EVERYBODY, not just the rich), we funded our government, so the Republicans had no argument for killing Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, Veteran's benefits and everything else they want to destroy. Obama is HELPING the Republicans destroy these programs, first through ill-advised direct cults like Chained CPI, and secondly by locking us into a permanent structural deficit.

This is not about revenge against the wealthy. It is about funding our government so the Republicans cannot dismantle it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #88)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:50 PM

99. He is not giving in on everything.

It really seems that you care more about revenge against the rich than helping people who need help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #99)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:18 PM

104. Tell me what he isn't giving in on

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #104)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:51 PM

105. Raising the age for Medicare for one.

Still getting rate increases on taxes. Infrastucture spending. Extending Unemployment benefits. etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #105)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:26 PM

107. What do you think the odds are that there is no give on any of those items?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #107)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:32 PM

110. We'll see.

I'm commenting on the proposal that is on the table. Not on some fantasy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #110)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:15 AM

112. How do you know what is on the table?

Everybody is still talking in riddles. There is no agreement. What there is is signals of what each side will give up. In our case, Obama has made it abundantly clear a long list of things he is willing to give up. I still can't say for certain there is a single thing that Boehner has clearly said he would give up. He said something about some possible increase in the top rate under some circumstance , but he doesn't figure to actually push that with his caucus. He never does. He leases all the serious compromises to Obama, and Obama always obliges.

Screw that. Go over the damn cliff. There is no reason to negotiate with these terrorists on their terms. Come January 1, the discussion would be on our terms if only we could get Obama to stand up and claim his election victory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #112)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:50 AM

116. So you admit there is no agreement

yet you have no problem attacking the President over an agreement that doesn't exist. Talk about hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #35)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:46 AM

45. The top bracket starts at $388,000

A jump from $250,000 to $300,000 is, for that reason, not really a jump. It's like a jump from $250,000 to $250,050.01. It wouldn't make any sense from a substantive point of view. What the jump from $250,000 to $400,000 says is that rather than the top three brackets, taxes go up on the top bracket income only.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #45)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:40 AM

79. And....

...what you aren't going to see from the "hair on fire" crowd is any estimate of revenue impact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #79)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:50 AM

80. There's clearly going to be some revenue impact

Probably in the order of $200 billion. That's unfortunate. I'm also not a fan of chained CPI.

At the end of the day, I don't see how the House GOP accepts even this deal. It will be literally impossible for them to ever cut the top rate, since this deal effectively splits the top rate from the others. In order to cut it, they'd literally have to argue for just the top bracket cut. That's what they've been fearing and avoiding. I can't see how they allow it.

It's also good that the Prez has apparently not budged on Clinton era rates for that top bracket. When all this started, people were predicting a split on that (at 37%). That seems a deal breaker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:39 AM

43. And like clockwork haters like you jump to conclusions

Or maybe you're just paid to post your shit.

The one who's caving is the boner, probably your friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:43 AM

44. And he didn't even have to do anything other than let it expire. Sigh. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:51 AM

46. I dont think anyone knows the specifics yet so its a bit premature to claim anyone is caving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:34 AM

50. One good thing about going to 400k

Is that it weakens the right's argument that $250k, for a couple, in a city that is expensive to live in, would be negatively effected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:43 AM

51. boingboinh

We have to compromise also. $400,000 is not that much more and if capital gains go up to 20%, that is good news. Please don't start bashing Obama. If you do I will leave this site again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:51 AM

53. And hello catfood. Merry Christmas, seniors. Enjoy that coal in your

 

Stockings. Somebody had to sacrifice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:13 AM

66. it's reducing cola that i worry about. that's apparently on the table. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:03 AM

54. I have family members in the $250,000 to $400,000 range and no one of them....

had any problem with the possibility of higher rates. My Brother and Sister in Law have been saying it seems fair to them.

The only reason the raise might make sense is that, around here, that kind of income is high end middle class. Higher taxes may reduce spending and effect the economic recovery.

I hope that the cuts don't actually affect the people who really need every penny of Social Security and the other programs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:03 AM

55. Not so fast...

Boehner said "no", so there's more spelunking to be done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:18 AM

57. Ahhh. The apologist/centrist thread.

Let's see if we can think of all the reasons that being a reagan democrat is now a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:32 AM

59. DEEDS, not phony WORDS:

Show me what you DO, and I'll tell you what you BELIEVE.

The White House has the GOP right where it wants it: IN COMPLETE CONTROL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:37 AM

60. I would be fine raising it to $1M...

if the tax rate above $1M is 50%. Give them up to a million, they can't argue that that will hurt average American business owners. They have already said it is the people who make above $250K but less than $1M are who create the most jobs. Leave their taxes alone , just raise the rate to 50% for those who are getting excess money. Win-win for both sides. We get more money from increased taxes than we would before and let them feel like they got something too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:06 AM

73. Isn't this just a feint?

Couldn't Obama be "offering" this knowing that Harry Reid would never let it pass the Senate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Revolutionary Girl (Reply #73)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:26 AM

77. aaah yes, 47 level quasi dimensional jedi chess ...

... that's worked out so well for us over the last 4 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:11 AM

74. I think he's doing it to prove a point... it simply will be rejected by Bone and co.

Go over the cliff and then reinstate the 250k limit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to budkin (Reply #74)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:06 PM

85. My pearls! Where are my pearls!?

I think you're absolutely right on this. What we're seeing here is the Washington version of Kabuki Theater.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:26 AM

76. I like this

I actually like this compromise. It's not a big move on the President's part and it takes away the argumentthat $250K is not rich iin soome big cities or that it will hurt small businesses. $400K is rich wherever you live, and any small business who nets over $400K can afford it.

It's the cuts I am worried about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:27 AM

78. Roll over, roll over

and they all rolled over and Obama fell out of bed.


Stop capitulating - there is so much support for Obama not to roll, one has to wonder why he is doing this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:51 AM

81. Caving would be extending all tax cuts. And when Rs reject his $400K & up tax hike, we go over the

cliff. He looks reasonable. The Rs don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:53 AM

82. what is wrong with this deal

He does have to work with the other side.....I don't really see a problem here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bocephus0706 (Reply #82)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:22 PM

89. How about it cuts Social Security payments to the elderly for no reason

It lays a bigger tax burden on those who can least afford to pay more. Rinse and repeat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:15 PM

93. So there is a deal?

Oh right, just the usual bleating based on press reports.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:27 PM

94. Did I miss something? Did Obama agree to a deal?

The answer is NO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:48 PM

95. Maybe a WH trial balloon, maybe a Repub trial balloon

but in either case both the White House and the Dems in the Senate are backing away from it. We have to keep letting them know just how much of a screwing it would be to make any cuts at all to SS part of any deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:58 PM

102. Still no source?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #102)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:07 AM

111. The source will be THOMAS

www.http://thomas.loc.gov

That's the Library of Congress, and a link to the compromise bill will certainly be made available... when it is written.

All the bill has to do is pass in the Republican-controlled House, slip past a dozen drunken racist Republican short-timers in the Senate, any one of whom can kill it purely out of spite or to avoid returning to Washington, then it must get to the President's desk in a form that exceeds what the President already gets by simply allowing existing laws to expire.

Oh, and Congress has to reconvene in an unexpected special session sometime in the seven days between Christmas and New Years Day to pass it in this Congress, because they've already gone home.

Otherwise, the caving in this well-informed pundit above is claiming shall be the province of an entirely different Congress, one which, if anything, will be even more difficult for John Boehner to control.

It would appear as if the original poster is unaware of all these things, things which would be critical to the forging an informed opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:16 AM

113. I thought 250 was the low bid all along

 

so it's no surprise to me at all.

that's just the way the game is played, Grasshopper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:25 PM

120. Problem now is he can't ever go back to 250

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to budkin (Reply #120)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:37 PM

124. The only way back is to let the laws expire and declare a "clean slate"

I don't think Obama will do that. That would be the best strategy. Let everything expire. Then force Republicans to make REAL concessions if they want to restore some of the military spending and some of the tax cuts.

As usual, Obama negotiated the shirt off his own back.

Worst.
Negotiator.
Ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boingboinh (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:16 PM

123. On the backs of seniors and middle class

I trusted obama...and I am deeply offended by Pelosi lying to us to cover for obama

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread