From the article: "The deal would also likely put off the scheduled spending
cuts."These leaders can't be serious. Such a deal would
add a paultry amount of revenue without addressing the root cause.
"The White House talks -- at which Obama presented no new offer to
Republicans in Congress -- yielded “no concrete proposal,” Reid told
reporters at the Capitol following the meeting."Still no
leadership - at any level...
I don't get it. We were told the Bush tax cuts were tax breaks for the
rich.Now the cuts are to expire, and it turns out the tax cuts were
for the middle class. A fiscal cliff for over a hundred million.If
Bush was so wrong, why not go off the cliff?Fools are people who
Anyone surprised by these latest developments?
Remember when Clinton was in office and we had budget surpluses and Democrats
were touting what a big deal that was? That was when the national debt was only
6 trillion dollars. Where are those Democrats now?
The White House is not the place any discussions should be taking place,
that's why our congressmen have their own building to discuss and prepare
the budget and laws and that is where they must remain. Leave the white house
and to your jobs of budget controls and spending cuts in the houses of
congress.The only right of litigation the president has is putting
his signature on the bills he is handed. His threats are criminal and
interfering with our government processes where the president has to business
involving himself with. Let alone going to the white house without the full
force of congress with them.The president is obi gated to the houses
of congress, our congress has no obligation to the president on any matter or
worf, Bush was wrong. His tax cuts and massive spending was a huge problem, and
one of the things that caused the crash to be so bad. This is a far different
economic climate then Bush was dealing with. I just have a very hard time
understanding how people like yourself seem not to understand that we had an
incredibly bad world wide economic crash. And we are still dealing with the fall
out if that. A1994, what do you mean, where are they? Yes the
Clinton era surpluses were a big deal, if we had kept on the path that Clinton
left us on the national debt would have been paid off by now. How great would
that have been? Unfortunately, some in this country decided, for
some strange reason I'll never understand, that they did not like the
prosperity that Clinton left, and decided to change course. (Actually the
majority of people didn't. But oh well.) and we got Bush and the
Republicans in that drove up the debt through massive new government spending
and very unwise tax cuts. They drove us right into the ditch.
@my2cents The President is not obligated to congress, he doesn't have
local constituency, he was elected to the EXECUTIVE office, and represents all
the people, even those in the minority that didn't vote for him. His job is
or should be to protect those who can't protect themselves from an
increasingly detached political and economic power structure. It has been said
before and it fits, we get the government we deserve. The American people keep
sending people to congress who have only one purpose, to get reelected. We need
statesmen and leaders instead of pandering ideologues that puff themselves up
and spit out rhetoric instead of finding or creating bipartisan plans to solve
real problems for our country. What most fail to see is the rich don't care
if we go over the cliff they won't miss a meal, and will continue to ride
the backs of others as they manipulate the economy to protect the 1%.
mark,Tax cuts don't hurt the economy. It's the excessive
spending.Bush's spending was on the Iraq war, and now
we're finding the WMD's in Syria.Sorry guy, but sending
billions to the "Muslim Brotherhood" isn't a good thing. Neither
are selling weapons to Mexican cartels.
@my2centswhen I hear people claim that the only role of the president is
to rubber stamp whatever comes out of the house I weep for our public education
worf, Bush's tax cuts did harm the economy. Just because you hear otherwise
on those talk radio shows you listen to doesn't make what you say true. The
massive debt we have is a drag on the economy. Bush cut taxes when he was
spending billions on two wars. And the wars were not the only places where Bush
had massive, unfunded spending. Bush, through his tax cuts and huge spending
drove up the debt. And he was handed a surplus, and we were on a path where the
debt would have been paid off by now, except for the action of Bush and
Republicans. How do you not know that? Do you really know so little of history?
We are not finding Iraq's WMD's in Syria. There is absolutely no way
in the world that Sadam Hussein gave WMD's to other countries. You guys
just make stuff up. Stop listing to talk radio, and believing everything you
read in the chain e mails that are sent to you from your conservative buddies.
As far as the Muslim Brotherhood and guns in Mexico, what does that
have to do with what we are talking about?
@Say No to BO:"From the article: 'The deal would also likely put
off the scheduled spending cuts.' These leaders can't be serious. Such
a deal would add a paltry amount of revenue without addressing the root
cause."Democrats are shred negotiators. They promise cuts in the
future in exchange for tax hikes today. The promised cuts will never happen.
Boehner and his Republican associates are uninformed.@My2Cents:"The only right of litigation the president has is putting his signature
on the bills he is handed."His signature is a power
'right.' If he vetoes, the bill goes back to the Congress to fix it to
the president's liking or override the veto with a super majority... which
the Republicans don't have... since they don't control the Senate.But you're right. The House and Senate should pass what they think
is a proper budget to run the government considering we are not only broke but
are $16.3 trillion in debt. Then they should send their final product to the
president. They shouldn't be negotiating in the White House. Such conduct
makes it look like Obama is king. And he's not even a citizen.
@worfit would take a "fool" to believe your lies. The tax cuts
where across the board including the middle class and the wealthiest americans.
the tax cuts to the wealthiest americans did nothing to stimulate our economy
and instead did far more harm then good.
Kalindra,So why were we told the tax cuts were just for the rich,
and they can pay a little more? That's been reported many times.With the tax cuts expiring, the rich should be paying more,--if what we were
told is true. So why is Obama wanting even more of an increase on the rich?Mark--forget the talk radio spin. I do my own thinking. Spending has
hurt our economy. A blind man can see that.Half our population are
on their knees for entitlements. This is a disgrace for any nation.
@worfObama never claimed that only taxes for the rich where cut. Your
claims are based purely on your attempt to rewrite history.
Is anybody really surprised that our do nothing congress has once again done
nothing?And yet Americans continue to vote in the dead
George:You're joking.There's been plenty of
remarks blaming Bush and his tax cuts for the rich, as the cause for our
economic mess. You do the homework.Can you find any liberal leader
stating the Bush tax cuts were for the middle class?