HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Republican Doomsday Plan:...

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:11 PM

Republican Doomsday Plan: Cave on Taxes, Vote ‘Present’

Source: ABC News

Republicans are seriously considering a Doomsday Plan if fiscal cliff talks collapse entirely. It’s quite simple: House Republicans would allow a vote on extending the Bush middle class tax cuts (the bill passed in August by the Senate) and offer the President nothing more: no extension of the debt ceiling, nothing on unemployment, nothing on closing loopholes. Congress would recess for the holidays and the president would face a big battle early in the year over the debt ceiling.

Two senior Republican elected officials tell me this doomsday plan is becoming the most likely scenario. A top GOP House leadership aide confirms the plan is under consideration, but says Speaker Boehner has made no decision on whether to pursue it.

Under one variation of this Doomsday Plan, House Republicans would allow a vote on extending only the middle class tax cuts and Republicans, to express disapproval at the failure to extend all tax cuts, would vote “present” on the bill, allowing it to pass entirely on Democratic votes.

...snip...

Still unclear under this plan is what would happen to the automatic defense cuts — “sequestration” — scheduled to go into effect on January 1 without a deficit deal. During the campaign, the President promised the cuts would not happen. As part of the deal to allow the House vote on taxes, those automatic defense cuts could be put off for a year.


Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/12/republican-doomsday-plan-cave-on-taxes-vote-present/



I suspect that, if the Republicans pulled this stunt, the President would discover a Constitutional flaw in the Debt Ceiling vote and just ignore it.

67 replies, 10794 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 67 replies Author Time Post
Reply Republican Doomsday Plan: Cave on Taxes, Vote ‘Present’ (Original post)
brooklynite Dec 2012 OP
Drale Dec 2012 #1
DallasNE Dec 2012 #21
Indydem Dec 2012 #61
DallasNE Dec 2012 #62
24601 Dec 2012 #42
bluestateguy Dec 2012 #2
okwmember Dec 2012 #15
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #24
Bette Dec 2012 #54
kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #26
Red Mountain Dec 2012 #44
FredStembottom Dec 2012 #3
Vincardog Dec 2012 #4
on point Dec 2012 #12
bl968 Dec 2012 #17
GatorLarry Dec 2012 #59
Vincardog Dec 2012 #65
fasttense Dec 2012 #67
SheilaT Dec 2012 #29
reteachinwi Dec 2012 #37
AllyCat Dec 2012 #58
24601 Dec 2012 #43
GatorLarry Dec 2012 #60
jmowreader Dec 2012 #36
crazylikafox Dec 2012 #56
jmowreader Dec 2012 #63
bemildred Dec 2012 #5
1ProudAtheist Dec 2012 #6
DallasNE Dec 2012 #25
BumRushDaShow Dec 2012 #7
madrchsod Dec 2012 #13
melody Dec 2012 #16
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #31
sevenseas Dec 2012 #39
melody Dec 2012 #50
thelordofhell Dec 2012 #8
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #34
thelordofhell Dec 2012 #45
pkdu Dec 2012 #52
Still Sensible Dec 2012 #9
Mr.Turnip Dec 2012 #10
Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2012 #11
n2doc Dec 2012 #14
lyingsackofmitt Dec 2012 #18
cosmicone Dec 2012 #19
bunnies Dec 2012 #27
DallasNE Dec 2012 #20
democrattotheend Dec 2012 #22
Warpy Dec 2012 #35
Arkana Dec 2012 #23
patrice Dec 2012 #28
Botany Dec 2012 #30
docgee Dec 2012 #32
DearAbby Dec 2012 #33
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #38
John2 Dec 2012 #40
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #41
DCBob Dec 2012 #46
underpants Dec 2012 #47
freeandequalpa Dec 2012 #48
cstanleytech Dec 2012 #49
Agnosticsherbet Dec 2012 #51
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #53
Cosmocat Dec 2012 #55
SunSeeker Dec 2012 #64
AllyCat Dec 2012 #57
madrchsod Dec 2012 #66

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:17 PM

1. "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law... shall not be questioned"

The 14th Amendment. The Debt Ceiling is 100% unconstitutional and I would love to see a lawyer try and defend that it is constitutional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drale (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:25 PM

21. Kind Of Like The Warpowers Act In That Regard

The debt ceiling law was passed by isolationist Republicans to tie President Wilson's hands following World War I. It is not much more than a Sense of the Senate resolution -- something to pay lip service to but not much more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:12 PM

61. Your history is wrong.

The "aggregate limit" was established so that the congress didn't have to authorize every single item to be paid. It gave the treasury more flexibility and power than it had ever had before.

The Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917 didn't tie the executive's hands - rather, it literally ceded part of congress's constitutionally mandated powers to the executive branch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Indydem (Reply #61)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:27 PM

62. Actually, My History Is Right

You may quibble with the linkage I made between isolationist Republicans and the debt ceiling and whether it was intended to tie Wilson's hands from other military adventures but the history is not wrong.

The other thing is that the SLBA addressed the issuance of bonds to fund the war as an alternative to raising the money through taxation so there is a clear linkage to World War I and the Liberty bonds that financed that war. I would think that a good lawyer could make the case that the limit is moot since we are not talking about dedicated bonds in the current situation just as I don't think this limit was imposed on the rest of the federal budget at that time. Regardless, it is a useless relic of a bygone era.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drale (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:54 PM

42. You won't succeed challenging the constitutionally of the debt authorized by law, only

that debt that has not been authorized by law. The current law limits the authorized debt to those limits passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President.

There is a proposal that would allow the President to raise the debt limit without Congressional action; however, that hasn't been passed. That proposal might be Constitutional, or the USSC could rule that it's not a permissible delegation of legislative power since Article I, Section makes borrowing money "on the Credit of the United States" a power specifically delegated to Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:19 PM

2. That is just asking for carefully worded campaign attack ads

"Congressman XXXX failed to vote for middle class taxcuts"; because you can't say "voted against"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:47 PM

15. Absolutely correct!

I can't wait for 2014 townhalls when constituents start asking why their republican congressman (who by the way is constantly campaigning on tax cuts) didn't support the middle class tax cut.

I also think its pretty funny that this is the first thing that President Obama asked them to do a few days after the election. I seem to recall a statement about how he always has a pen available to sign this very legislation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:29 PM

24. "failed to vote" sounds complicated, but imagine a video

of Democrats' hands raised and your Republican congressman's hand not raised along with the "failed to vote" language.

That could really hurt some of the Republicans in Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #24)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:58 AM

54. Failed to vote..

That sounds like a great idea! Who can we get to make the video? Whatever it takes to expose these creeps is a good plan!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:41 PM

26. I think "REFUSED to vote for" sounds closer to the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:08 PM

44. In tough times.....

you expect your Representative to take a stand.

Now is not the time for cowards.

It writes itself....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:19 PM

3. Please proceed.

I like the one that results in all Dem votes for middle class cuts and against the Bush cuts.

Excellent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:23 PM

4. I say the tax rates have to raise first. After we get the money coming in we can talk

about deductions. Rais the rate on capital gains, make
"carried interest" a thing of the history books,
Make all income subject to SS tax,
Eliminate the CAP on WW wages,
pass a Financial Transaction tax of .003% on every STOCK bond and Derivative trade,

Then we can think about "entitlement reform".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vincardog (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:41 PM

12. Plus big time defense cuts in the 100's of billions $ BEFORE any entitlement cut

Oh and the best way to help the medicare would be to save upwards of 30% by implementing single payer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vincardog (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:54 PM

17. Financial Transaction tax

The Financial Transaction tax needs to be 10% on every STOCK bond and Derivative trade. If you make $36,000 in profit on the trade, you would pay $3,600 to the treasury. for $450 you would pay $45. for $7,500,000 you would pay $750,000. Even at 10% there is still plenty of profit to be had.

It would raise 10 Trillion a year, provide much needed stability to the stock markets, start rebuilding our national infrastructure, and eliminate the national debt in under 5 years. The amount would be paid by the seller of the security when they make the sale.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bl968 (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:45 AM

59. It Won't Work!

I day trade for a living (manually, no HFT) and can tell you that most will just close their accounts based here in the U.S. and open them in another country. There are several viable exchanges around the world that won't implement this crazy idea and all you'll see is already low volume (but for the HFT Computers) dry-up completely and the U.S. markets just . . . die.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GatorLarry (Reply #59)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 02:31 PM

65. If the financial parasites packed up and left, shat would be the harm?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GatorLarry (Reply #59)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:44 AM

67. Your Day Trading can NOT keep up with Goldman's High Frequency Trading

at a rate of 70 Thousand trades a second. Yes, that is correct per second. Small traders like yourself could easily be exempted from the transaction tax with out impacting the massive amount of revenues to be collected.

Not to mention that the big banks have profited handsomely from the Taxpayer, of late, and should be required to do something for the country that bailed their buts out and saved their billions in personal wealth. But instead what we get is head of one of these banks going on TV saying "the American people should not expect to get back what they have paid into Social Security, It's just NOT going to happen."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vincardog (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:55 PM

29. I especially like the idea of a Financial Transaction tax.

There are so many other areas where economic activity is taxed, and generally at a far higher rate.

Here in Santa Fe we have a gross receipts tax of 8.125% (I think I have the exact amount correct) which is huge. Every business in Santa Fe pays that much tax on every dollar it collects.

I believe the Financial Transaction tax has the potential to wipe out the debt after a few years. It might also slow unscrupulous financial people from "churning", that is making many unnecessary trades in an account just to collect their percentage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:43 PM

37. Nurses

 

See nationalnursesunited.org. They are pressing for a financial transaction tax, single payer health insurance, no social safety net cuts, etc. Go nurses!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reteachinwi (Reply #37)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:30 AM

58. Thanks for this and welcome to DU!

Sorry about the Walker thing. I am in a private-sector nurses' union and with the public-sector nurses' unions hit by Walker, we are in a tough spot. But our members are fired up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:56 PM

43. Except that the businesses don't pay it - consumers do as part of the total transaction cost.

And it's totally regressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #29)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:46 AM

60. It Won't Work!

Discussed above . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vincardog (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:34 PM

36. Why that transaction tax rate?

One of the most important things to be done is eliminating high frequency trading.

HFT works by purchasing order flow and trading ahead of it. To make it simple, when a large order of a stock is placed - think hundreds of thousands of shares - the price goes up a couple cents per share. If you have a very fast computer, you can wait till a big order is placed and in the 0.2 seconds before the trade is confirmed, place your own million-share order...then five seconds later when the stock goes up a cent a share, unload the position and keep the proceeds.

Two cents per share is the right amount to tax. It will add almost nothing to the cost of buying stock - a lot of $40 stock will rise from $4000 to $4002 - and it will make HFT so risky people will stop.

The other solution is to just declare it front-running and ban it for that, but taxing it out of existence will work better. And the right wing editorials decrying the death of HFT will be a joy to post here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #36)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:24 AM

56. Bingo. Exactly right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazylikafox (Reply #56)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 02:12 PM

63. You know seven-tenths of all stock transactions now are HFT?

Kinda puts the lie to the justification for the capital gains rate, eh? According to the capital gains apologists, people buy stock so the company whose name is on it can expand and hire. How then do they explain people who own stock for such short periods of time they don't even get a chance to pay for it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:24 PM

5. Their doomsday, perhaps. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:24 PM

6. According To The Terms

 

of the deficit reduction agreement that will take place automatically on January 1st, nothing short of some type of legislation agreed to by both parties would stop it from taking place. The Village Idiot's tax cuts are a separate item, not attached, and also expire December 31st. Agreeing to one does not stop the other unless the two are married, and the current Bill from the Senate that would be the one considered, does not marry them up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1ProudAtheist (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:38 PM

25. Plus, Pelosi Has Threatened A Legislative Maneuver

To force the bill out of Committee in the House and the "present" vote is in response to the Pelosi maneuver. The problem for Boehner and Republicans is how gutless voting present is so it is almost certain to backfire on Republicans in the 2014 elections. Frankly, this may not be a serious proposal but a trail balloon to see what sells and what doesn't -- how will the talking heads spin this, etc. Bottom line, Pelosi is forcing Boehner's hand on this issue so we need to give thanks to Nancy Pelosi.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:24 PM

7. Rethugs will be setting up for a rout in 2014

if they can't P.R. their silly stunt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:44 PM

13. they are not worried about the pr...

they have all the major radio and television shit mouths to do the demonizing for them

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madrchsod (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:47 PM

16. Because that worked so well for them last election? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to melody (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:21 PM

31. Sun Tzu...

 

Don't underestimate them. It worked damn well for them in 2010. It could happen again. Romney wasn't exactly hardline Tea-party, and their base didn't turn out. It seems in recent years the farther right the GOP runs, the better they do, 2010 being the most frightening case in point.

I think there are a lot more rednecks and tea people out there than we would like to believe, and if they get fired up enough they will vote and we will get stuck with somebody like Sarah Palin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #31)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:07 PM

39. I totally agree, UndahCovah -

Have you seen the Governor of South Carolina?

Those shallow rednecks in SOUTH CAROLINA elected her because she resembled Sarah Palin.

How's that workin' out for ya', South Carolina?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #31)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 10:39 PM

50. But it didn't

If there goal is only to keep Obama from doing anything, then they'll merely expedite another Democrat into the White House in 2016. The need to get the GOP out will be more strident than ever. Their bullying isn't working anymore, whether they choose to believe it or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:28 PM

8. So republicans want the Democrats to have all the credit for the middle class tax cut??

Sounds like a win/win........do this and immediately pass everything else the 1st week of the new congress...........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thelordofhell (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:24 PM

34. The new congress is still repub dominated nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #34)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:29 PM

45. But by then, they should be shamed..........

even though republicans have little shame as it is.............

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #34)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:42 PM

52. Not congress....just the House. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:32 PM

9. That's probably an okay short term outcome, but

I'm pretty sure after the 1st the rest will revert to the same old stalemate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:39 PM

10. Yeah sure, give us a situation where we can actually say that we alone helped ease the Middle Class

Tax Burden while the Republicans were so crazed about the top 2% that they refused to even vote yes on that. I mean really how can they really spin that? And I really doubt America want another damn Debt ceiling debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:40 PM

11. Republican Aide: "You don’t take a hostage you aren’t willing to shoot”

And this, my friends, pretty much sums up the modern Republican Party. The people they are sworn to serve are nothing more than hostages and, in this case, they've decided to let them live.

Those are some seriously magnanimous mother fuckers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:45 PM

14. holding the debt ceiling didn't work last time

and it really won't work now, given that they are pushing for SS and medicare cuts and tax cuts for the rich in exchange. Screw them, go ahead and let the dems be the only ones responsible for tax relief. Plus Obama can rightfully say he is cutting spending.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:59 PM

18. What a bunch of

chicken shits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:02 PM

19. Epic Fail

The democrats will also say present, the senate will not vote on it saying it is just a republican game and Obama can still veto it.

People will see right through the games.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #19)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:43 PM

27. This is about the middle-class tax cuts only.

Dems will vote YES and Obama will sign it proudly without a single republican vote.

I think you might be thinking of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:18 PM

20. A Gutless Move Sure To Backfire

A few decades ago our Governor allowed a sales and income tax bill to become law without his signature, in effect voting present, and that ended his political career.

Let them vote "present" and watch Democrats make hay on that vote in 2014 over the gutless nature of that maneuver.

Frankly, leaving the rest of it until after the first of the year could well be for the best. Especially if Reid follows through with the filibuster change. There are way to stretch out the spending cuts so that rather than being a waterfalls they are a rapids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:28 PM

22. Would capital gains and dividend tax cuts also expire?

Are those Bush tax cuts set to expire at the end of the year, or just the rate cuts?

Also, what about the estate tax cut that Republicans extorted the president to sign in 2010 in exchange for extending unemployment benefits and the payroll tax holiday. Is that set to expire or is it permanent?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Reply #22)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:31 PM

35. Yes, all the tax cuts will expire

Republicans are predicting an economic holocaust if the rich get hit. Well, that might be true for their own party coffers.

I'm not convinced the effect of less money per week in the pockets of marginal workers will have that big an effect since the dollar amounts will be so low.

The tax cuts for working people will need to be restored. However, unless people can be convinced to stop voting Republican, that is not going to happen.

The reckless cuts for plutocrats need to end. My taxes will go up and that's OK, and I'm no plutocrat. The country simply can't run on Republican stupidity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:28 PM

23. By all means!

That way Democrats can take legislative credit for a tax cut on working families, and Republicans will have to go back to their constituents and explain why they didn't vote for it due to extreme butthurt.

Delicious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:45 PM

28. Each additional person doing that reduces the power of anyone else doing it, because if you

try to deal behind the scene and reveal what your true price is to anyone, you lose your seat at the table.

It's just a replication of the status-quo stalemate with other labels on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:18 PM

30. Great Plan Guys!

Go for it. Being on record as not voting for a tax break for all Americans
for the first $250,000 while working to protect the very richest of the rich
is a big vote getter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:21 PM

32. Sounds good to me...

The repugs are going to be obstructionist anyway. No one should fall for there bullshit threats...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:24 PM

33. take that vote

201 ayes, 234 present. Ayes have it, and the GOP bared cowardice. They had their bluff called by President Obama, they had a shitty hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:54 PM

38. Kick (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:30 PM

40. That should

 

be fine with the Democrats, if the Republicans just want to vote present. I consider that if this passes, then it will be an amendment to sequestration cuts. We can deal with the other cuts later. I think the President has a trick up his sleeve again. Stay tuned everybody, if I think he is thinking the same thing I am. They will not get the upper hand by underestimating the President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:43 PM

41. Just cave gop to the democrats demands and everything will be ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:35 PM

46. I still believe there will be a deal to avoid sequestration.

It will get ugly for lots of folks including many key GOP consituents, eg.. business owners, investors, military, defense contractors. I dont see how the Republicans can ignore them and only listen to Grover. It makes no sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:37 PM

47. They are really horrible at politics. Propaganda they are great at but politics and governing?-- No

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:53 PM

48. What am I missing?

Why not just let all of the tax cuts expire and then, in January, the Senate can pass legislation reducing the tax rates for everyone earning less than $250k to their 2012 levels? What would the Republicans in the house do? Vote against a tax cut for 98% of Americans? Wouldn't that violate their pledge to Grover?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:09 PM

49. A vote where they dont vote is still a vote and in this case

I say spin it as them voting yes.
It will piss off they rabid nutjobs on the far right who wanted deeper cuts and they cannot really deny that they voted yes for it because they clearly didnt vote no, either way its a win win for the Dems with a side order of Republican Seppuku.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 10:54 PM

51. This redefines a "Do Nothing Congress"

Cowards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:10 AM

53. ROFL? "Doomsday Plan?" Sounds like a pretty humiliating cave to me

Tax rates go up just for top bracket?

Um, OK. Cheers, y'all!



The joke here is that they're already trying to represent an utter cave in on middle class tax rates as a "plan" rather than what it is: a complete cave in forced by the President's maneuvering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:49 AM

55. Please proceed

to quote a certain reelected POTUS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmocat (Reply #55)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 02:29 PM

64. LOL nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:25 AM

57. Do your jobs you a$$holes!!!

Blockade, obstruct, deny, protect the rich...that is all they do and for this they earn a salary, power, and pension with great, taxpayer-paid healthcare?

There is no hell hot enough for these traitors.

If I did my job this badly I would be fired.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:08 PM

66. the us economy will not spin into a depression.



it`s a really bad tv sitcom that will be canceled when the advertisers pull the plug.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread