Originally Posted By andyll <<Methinks you haven't actually investigated the math very carefully. In this case, "optimist" = "uninformed".>> You will have to explain. In 1993 Clinton raised the tax rates. The 1st quarter GDP growth was half of the previous quarter by by the end of the year and the remaining years of his term it exploded. Bush I had a minor (3% on top bracket) in 1991 and that helped erase a downward trend of GDP growth. Spending... Between 2008-2009 spending increase 29%. Sequestration is asking for a 2.5% decrease. Guess what.... between 2009-2010 we had a 2.3% spending decrease. Our GDP increase 6% during that period. Since 2001 defense has gone from: 300 Billion, 16% of total spending, 3% of GDP to 2011: 705 Billion, 19.65 of total, 4.7% of GDP That doesn't include Dept HS, veterns, and other increased security spending. Don't tell me we can't find 50 Billion from that... especially since congress keeps funding weapons systems the pentagon says it doesn't want. Numbers from this post where taken from: <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals" target="_blank">http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/...toricals</a> <a href="http://www.bea.gov/national/" target="_blank">http://www.bea.gov/national/</a> <a href="http://taxfoundation.org/article/us-federal-individual-income-tax-rates-history-1913-2011-nominal-and-inflation-adjusted-brackets" target="_blank">http://taxfoundation.org/artic...brackets</a>
Originally Posted By fkurucz <i>I would love to believe that Congress is that cunning. Perhaps a few members are. Most of them, I believe, just aren't all that bright.</i> You don't have to be bright to be cunning. Some of the savviest businesspeople I've met are low watt bulbs.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Where did these people go to school, John the Baptist High?<< FWIW, Protestant Fundamentalists don't name their churches or schools after the Saints, as that sounds "Catholic".
Originally Posted By ecdc Aaaand after hammering out a deal that passed the Senate, House Republicans are [shock!] opposed to the bill. At least Eric Cantor is. House Republicans are pathetic children. Sorry, I take that back. I don't mean to insult children like that. They deserve better.
Originally Posted By hopemax My DH and I are in the process of re-watching The West Wing via Amazon Prime and a Roku box. We've been surprised by how much of the storylines carry over to now. The last week, we've been watching the episodes that covered the reaction to Bartlet's announcement that he had MS. There is a part where CJ says "Leo, we need to be investigated by someone who wants to kill us just to watch us die. We need someone perceived by the American people to be irresponsible, untrustworthy, partisan, ambitious and thirsty for the limelight. Am I crazy or is this not a job for the U.S. House of Representatives?" We can ignore the investigations part, but the rest of it as spot on as it was in 2001.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt With such god awful leadership and archaic political platforms I seriously don't understand how anyone could be registered Republican.
Originally Posted By Tikiduck Complete fools, playing political chicken with the nation's economy. No surprise though, I had a feeling it would go like this, because you can always count on the GOP to be contemptuous and insolent.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Eric Cantor so obviously wants to be Speaker, he should just come out and say it. Anything Boehner does, he will be against, just to get Boehner's job. Putting their own political self-interests ahead of the nation and the global economy of which we're a huge part. All of these conservative Republicans make the United States an embarrassment to the rest of the world.
Originally Posted By Tikiduck The House passed it, as you all know by now. I just have to wonder at why all the last minute theatrics? I have a feeling this is a harbinger of the intense battles yet to come. Boehner and Ryan voted yes? Cantor, of course, voted against.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt The whole debacle took another surprising turn when Republican members of the House refused to pass a bill to send federal aid to Sandy victims after the fiscal cliff deal was done. Unsurprisingly, Chris Christie had a few choice words, particularly for Speaker Boehner: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/01/02/chris-christie-rips-the-house-gop-and-boehner/" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/...boehner/</a>
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Apparently, there are some GOP Congress critters who won't be voting for Boehner tomorrow, some because of the lack of Sandy relief vote, and some because of the fiscal cliff deal. It'll be interesting to see if Boehner is replaced by someone like Cantor. If that happens, then it'll be solid gridlock for the next two years. Bad for country, but good for the Dems in 2014.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Cantor has been pretty nakedly lusting over Boehner's job for a while now. Not even being particularly subtle about it, in a way you rarely see. (You didn't see Steny Hoyer trying to undermine Pelosi, or Armey doing so to Hastert.)
Originally Posted By DyGDisney From the article in post #50: "As Christie said, disaster relief was once something that defied politics. When Americans are in trouble, we move heaven and earth to help them." And this is what the GOP has come to: Military and guns = good Helping American people = bad
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I can't wait until these crazy Ayn Randians have been voted into out into obscurity. They just do not want to cooperate in any way whatsoever, and even when they get 80% of what they want, it's not sufficient.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 A lot of them do seem to have this "we're entitled to be the ruling class" mentality. Remember in 2011 when they held the entire faith-and-good-credit of the United freaking States hostage (which they're threatening to do again in a few weeks) with the debt ceiling, till they got what they wanted? Boehner bragged at the time that they got "85% of what we wanted" which was about right. It was terrible to hold our good credit hostage to do it (leading us to have our credit downgraded for the first time in history - and S&P said very clearly WHY they did so, and laid it on Congress). But on one level, it was appropriate - they'd just won the 2010 elections big. They could at least claim that they were doing "what the American people wanted." But guess what? The Democrats won the 2012 elections big. One of the few things Obama ran on specifically was restoring tax rates for the top 2% to the (entirely non-onerous) Clinton levels. And Democrats didn't just win the White House, they picked up Senate seats (which seemed impossible, given how many more they had to defend) and picked up House seats too. More people voted for a Democratic House member than a Republican one, and only gerrymandering kept the GOP in control of the House. They lost big. So it would be entirely appropriate if the Democrats got the lion's share of what they wanted this time. Elections have consequences - or they're supposed to. And that's the back and forth of politics - you win elections, you enact the sort of things you want, and then the voters decide on whether they like that or not at the next election. But Republicans are acting like they're entitled to get most of what they want whether they win OR lose elections. It really is an entitled, "Ruling Class" sort of mentality.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Poll after poll shows that Americans are eager for bipartisan solutions to our problems. Chris Christi enjoys a high favorability rating in part because he is able to work with Obama and other Democrats to solve people's problems in a crisis. I don't know why they aren't getting the message. Must be listening to nothing but Hannity and El Rumpball. Hopefully they will get the message in the 2014 midterms.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Poll after poll shows that Americans are eager for bipartisan solutions to our problems.<< Poll after poll also shows that Americans want the budget deficit eliminated without draconian changes to social security or medicare. And that any politician that even hints at touching either of those budget-busting programs will have his head handed to him on a platter in the next election, if not before. We are SO screwed ......
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I don't know why they aren't getting the message. Must be listening to nothing but Hannity and El Rumpball. Hopefully they will get the message in the 2014 midterms." They've completely forgotten that they lost the election. The outcome of next year's midterms will be fascinating to say the least.
Originally Posted By Tikiduck Is it just me, or does anyone else get the feeling that our current politicians are more interested in being celebrities than public servants?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I think more and more of them, as much as they complain about Entitlements, feel entitled themselves to ignore protocol and treat being newly elected as license to disrespect the highest office in the land. You're a lippy little congressman, one of 435 in a town full of politicians, and he's the one and only President of the United States. Learn your place, you little bug.
