Time to Eat Your Peas, Democrats!

poet said:
Oh, darling , you've underestimated the Hate-O-Meter by a factor of 10. Why are you fucking defending the Bush fucking tax cuts, which benefit no one but the rich? You can't answer that, so STFU. Like you have big money. It's about ideology, which is racist and bigoted at its core, and symbolic in your avatar. All about "white privilege".
Click to expand...

Oh cut the crap and grow up. You sound like a ghetto punk. Pull up your pants and go back to school.
 
Dixie said:
Retarded people shouldn't strain their brain with math. Here's a good example of how morons who are spoon-fed propaganda, view things....You see... Clinton actually paid off our national debt! We were debt free! Things were great and wonderful and we had a surplus of money we didn't know what to do with... then Bush came along and gave all his rich buddies a tax break, causing a $14 TRILLION debt, which Obama inherited! This is how the ignorant see things, and it really doesn't matter how much reason you approach them with, or how many times you point out where they are wrong and their information is incorrect, this is what they believe actually happened, and nothing will change their mind!
Click to expand...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms




Now let's see some evidence to support your claims.


Speaking of math, is 1/3 a real fraction?
 
A post like this represents everything that's wrong w/ the debt talks. Here were are, in the face of a true financial crisis, and one side won't give an inch on one of "their" priorities.

Both sides have to sacrifice, and break promises they have made to their base. Sorry about that.
 
Dixie said:
I simply posted a quote from your beloved president. "Increasing taxes would be a devastating blow to the economy." Quoted from January of this year, after Congress voted to extend the Bush tax cuts. Now, either President Obama was LYING or he wasn't... which one is it, moron?
Click to expand...

Depends on the facts "on the ground". The debt ceiling needs to be raised. Spending, including entitlements need to be cut. And revenues need to be generated. If entitlements are on the chopping blocks, then so should the Bush tax cuts be. It's obscene to ask that seniors and the poor be asked to give up their assistance and that the rich don't give up something as well. When the economy collapses, world-wide, and subsequently, the nation, and the Republicans bear the bulk of the blame, you better not open your mouth to utter a word. Moron? You're not half as smart as me, freak.
 
poet said:
Depends on the facts "on the ground". The debt ceiling needs to be raised. Spending, including entitlements need to be cut. And revenues need to be generated. If entitlements are on the chopping blocks, then so should the Bush tax cuts be. It's obscene to ask that seniors and the poor be asked to give up their assistance and that the rich don't give up something as well. When the economy collapses, world-wide, and subsequently, the nation, and the Republicans bear the bulk of the blame, you better not open your mouth to utter a word. Moron? You're not half as smart as me, freak.
Click to expand...

LMAO... So when Obama said; "A tax increase would be devastating to the economy." it depends on the facts "on the ground?" What the hell is that supposed to even mean? THE FACT IS.... Obama himself, said a tax increase would be devastating to the economy! That was January... what has changed since then? This really isn't very hard, especially if you are as smart as you claim to be, it should be rather clear. If raising taxes were devastating to the economy in January, they are probably still going to be devastating to the economy now. Dontchya think?

Raising taxes on "the rich" will not increase any burden on the wealthy! They have ways to secure their wealth from income taxation, and they are very good at it.... it's how they remain rich, you see? So what you end up doing, is raising taxes on people who are trying to become rich... building a business from scratch... with their whole life... hopes and dreams tied to it being a success.... and you are going to increase their tax burden at a time when they are already struggling, due to the burdens you've already laid on them in the form of more regulations and mandates, specifically on health care coverage. You continue to remain in this jealous rage to punish "the rich" and you are killing the people who produce MOST of the jobs in the private sector.

Even IF your supreme idiocy were valid.... even IF "taxing the rich" were to come to fruition to your gratification... the money it would generate (even by your own flawed theories) would not be enough to cover the first year of Obama's deficit. In fact, you could suspend the Constitution and just TAKE all the combined wealth of the entire Fortune 400...the wealthiest people in America... take their entire fortunes away from them completely.... and it's not enough money to pay for two years of Obama's DEFICIT... We're not talking about it paying for the budget... it's not enough to pay for the amount Obama is OVER BUDGET! That's the size of this problem, and you want to pretend otherwise.
 
Bfgrn said:
They need that false pride.

"All people are born alike—except Republicans and Democrats," quipped Groucho Marx, and in fact it turns out that personality differences between liberals and conservatives are evident in early childhood. In 1969, Berkeley professors Jack and Jeanne Block embarked on a study of childhood personality, asking nursery school teachers to rate children's temperaments. They weren't even thinking about political orientation.

Twenty years later, they decided to compare the subjects' childhood personalities with their political preferences as adults. They found arresting patterns. As kids, liberals had developed close relationships with peers and were rated by their teachers as self-reliant, energetic, impulsive, and resilient. People who were conservative at age 23 had been described by their teachers as easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3. The reason for the difference, the Blocks hypothesized, was that insecure kids most needed the reassurance of tradition and authority, and they found it in conservative politics.
Psychology Today
Click to expand...

What's so special about a study in role-reversal?
 
What I find amusing and tragic at the same time is: As a country we could raise our tax ceiling without changing anything from the status quo now, commit to gradual changes in the future (enforced by elections), and avoid all the potential harms of a default. Instead, as a country, we've decided to let a group of individuals hold us hostage over a policy that is not good for America in the long run or in the short. This isn't about Republican vs. Democrat anymore. It's about doing what is right for ALL of us and that is to avoid the default.

Personally I blame the Tea Party and other House Republicans. I don't necessarily disagree with their politics, but if the roles were reversed they would call the Democrats un-American and claim that they were trying to ruin the country. Since the President is a Democrat, the Republicans should fight for every inch they can, but in the end the policy has to be something that the President would sign into law, since the Republicans only have a simple majority of one house.
 
Tags said:
What I find amusing and tragic at the same time is: As a country we could raise our tax ceiling without changing anything from the status quo now, commit to gradual changes in the future (enforced by elections), and avoid all the potential harms of a default. Instead, as a country, we've decided to let a group of individuals hold us hostage over a policy that is not good for America in the long run or in the short. This isn't about Republican vs. Democrat anymore. It's about doing what is right for ALL of us and that is to avoid the default.

Personally I blame the Tea Party and other House Republicans. I don't necessarily disagree with their politics, but if the roles were reversed they would call the Democrats un-American and claim that they were trying to ruin the country. Since the President is a Democrat, the Republicans should fight for every inch they can, but in the end the policy has to be something that the President would sign into law, since the Republicans only have a simple majority of one house.
Click to expand...

Man I just love the way pinheads are playing this... Oh, it's not about politics anymore, this is not about Republican or Democrat...but it's all the Republicans fault for every breath they take, every word they utter, and everything they are doing to obstruct Obama and the Democrats from having everything they want! LMFAOOOOOOooooo!


If it's not about politics anymore, then drop the "tax the rich" rhetoric and give up on a tax increase! That seems to be the big stumbling block here... that, and you don't want to cut spending. Hey, most of the Republicans up there, they don't want to really cut spending either, so you both have that in common, you could probably reach common ground there... but the taxation on the rich bullshit has to stop now. That is what is meant by stopping the political rhetoric, stopping it from being about politics and ideology... but the left isn't willing to do that. It's not the right, they've submitted plans... where is the Democrat plan?
 
Dixie said:
Man I just love the way pinheads are playing this... Oh, it's not about politics anymore, this is not about Republican or Democrat...but it's all the Republicans fault for every breath they take, every word they utter, and everything they are doing to obstruct Obama and the Democrats from having everything they want! LMFAOOOOOOooooo!


If it's not about politics anymore, then drop the "tax the rich" rhetoric and give up on a tax increase! That seems to be the big stumbling block here... that, and you don't want to cut spending. Hey, most of the Republicans up there, they don't want to really cut spending either, so you both have that in common, you could probably reach common ground there... but the taxation on the rich bullshit has to stop now. That is what is meant by stopping the political rhetoric, stopping it from being about politics and ideology... but the left isn't willing to do that. It's not the right, they've submitted plans... where is the Democrat plan?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call "Cut, Cap, and Balance" a plan. The Tea Party knew it was a failure before voting on it, but they did it out of a political need to spite the President. The Democrat "plan" has been talked about on every news network except Fox. You know those meetings that Boehner and McConnell keep going to? Thats the plan! Reach a CONSENSUS, something that will actually get enough votes in both houses and be signed by the president, and put it on paper.

Before you go all name-calling on me again, I don't support either parties plan. I think tax REFORMS have to happen. I don't want the "Democrats to win" per se. The Republicans dropped the ball. Getting this topic set up for the next election (and then allowing the President to beg for a debt ceiling increase and actually giving it to him) would have ensured IMMENSE support for the Republicans, guaranteeing a sweep of both Houses and the Presidency. Unfortunately, they have forced a situation that is "US OR THEM" which is exactly the mentality you have. There is no "US OR THEM". If the President accepts Cut, Cap, and Balance, he loses. If the Tea Party accept tax hikes, they lose. Now the only option is to default and screw everyone. I'm not a Democrat, but you are so indoctrinated you can't see that.
 
I wouldn't call "Cut, Cap, and Balance" a plan. The Tea Party knew it was a failure before voting on it, but they did it out of a political need to spite the President.
Click to expand...

What the fuck do you mean? Do you even listen to yourself? Listen to how fucking stupid and moronic you sound.. what the hell do you mean, cutting spending, capping increases, and balancing our budget is NOT A PLAN????? Are you smoking crack today or what? If "the plan" isn't to cut spending, stop spending so much, and live within our financial means... what the fuck do you propose as an alternative to that, moron?

And what the hell do you mean the TEA Party knew it was a failure... it passed the House and liked only 4 votes passing the Senate, after Harry Reid hamstrung the legislation with rules and procedures. 4 votes.... that's all it needed... but in your eyes, everyone knew it couldn't pass and was only done out of spite? I beg to differ, it almost DID pass, in spite of the media and talking heads, and all the experts on Capital Hill, telling us it had no chance... and ya know what? I predict Cap, Cut, and Balance will be back again, and next time, it WILL pass!
 
Don't you claim to live on less than $50K a year, Dix?


Amid complaints about high taxes and calls for a smaller government, Americans paid their lowest level of taxes last year since Harry Truman's presidency, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data found.



Some conservative political movements such as the "Tea Party" have criticized federal spending as being out of control. While spending is up, taxes have fallen to exceptionally low levels.














http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...10-taxes_N.htm
 
Amid complaints about high taxes and calls for a smaller government, Americans paid their lowest level of taxes last year since Harry Truman's presidency, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data found.
Click to expand...

LMGDMFAOoooo... Yeah, when 25% of us HAVE NO FUCKING JOB.... it's no wonder tax revenues were low last year!!
 
Dixie said:
What the fuck do you mean? Do you even listen to yourself? Listen to how fucking stupid and moronic you sound.. what the hell do you mean, cutting spending, capping increases, and balancing our budget is NOT A PLAN????? Are you smoking crack today or what? If "the plan" isn't to cut spending, stop spending so much, and live within our financial means... what the fuck do you propose as an alternative to that, moron?

And what the hell do you mean the TEA Party knew it was a failure... it passed the House and liked only 4 votes passing the Senate, after Harry Reid hamstrung the legislation with rules and procedures. 4 votes.... that's all it needed... but in your eyes, everyone knew it couldn't pass and was only done out of spite? I beg to differ, it almost DID pass, in spite of the media and talking heads, and all the experts on Capital Hill, telling us it had no chance... and ya know what? I predict Cap, Cut, and Balance will be back again, and next time, it WILL pass!
Click to expand...

So first of all, I was not debating the merits of Cut, Cap, and Balance. Cut, Cap, and Balance isn't a plan, because it would be voted on along party lines... HENCE A FAILURE with no chance. Even if it the Republicans controlled Senate it would have been vetoed along party lines by the President. "Almost passed" is horse-shit. Everyone, except you, KNEW that it would pass the House and fail in the Senate. Not one Dem voted for it and they control the Senate. Thats what I mean by knowing it was a failure. Everyone in the House and Senate knew that it would happen that way, but they did it anyways to spite the President. Since your predictions are based solely on your supporting your individual belief system, you've shown you aren't rational and are a "wishful thinker". Until the make-up of Congress changes, "Cut, Cap, and Balance" has no chance.

Now if you want to talk about the merits of the system we can. I agree we need to cut spending (OMG, did I just say that?). I agree that entitlement programs need immense reform. I would like to see them eventually phased out and replaced by entrepreneurs. I also believe in reforming the tax system, since it is currently flawed. This will probably mean that taxes go up slightly from what they are right now, but we can lower them in the future as we get the ball rolling in the right direction. I disagree with a balanced budget amendment. An amendment of this type in the 1930's and 1940's would have locked us into the Depression indefinitely and we would have lost WWII. If Congress doesn't have the option to rack up some debt then our government will stagnate and our national security will be at risk. A balanced budget amendment removes that option. Plus, the amendment would never pass the amendment process. Under the current environment, there is almost no chance of any amendment being passed.

So, before you call all the people that said "Cut, Cap, and Balance" legislation would fail pinheads, you might want to realize that they were still right.

The alternative I propose is RAISE THE FUCKING DEBT CEILING SO WE DON'T DEFAULT. That's all I care about. If we default it is going to cost this country ALOT more money through higher interest rates, which will make it harder to "live within our financial mean" as you put it.
 
Tags said:
So first of all, I was not debating the merits of Cut, Cap, and Balance. Cut, Cap, and Balance isn't a plan, because it would be voted on along party lines... HENCE A FAILURE with no chance.
Click to expand...

EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE VOTED ALONG PARTY LINES! Do you think Democrats are going to wake up in the morning and decide they'll go along with Republicans on ANYTHING????

Even if it the Republicans controlled Senate it would have been vetoed along party lines by the President.
Click to expand...

And how the hell is THAT republican's fault??? Who the fuck does it look like is playing politics here, republicans or the president? We've got a major financial crisis on our hands, our country is about to run out of money, and the only way to avoid default is to raise the debt ceiling, and this plan would have allowed for that to happen, while responsibly trimming back spending and mandated increases in spending over the next decade, as well as a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution, for the people to have the opportunity to ratify. Now, it doesn't get much better when it comes to "A PLAN" than this... but what do the Democrats do? Reject it, and continue to point their crooked dishonest finger at REPUBLICANS to blame! Republicans are the ones who are coming up with plans... not the Democrats... they haven't done shit except reject anything a Republican has to say, and call it "the worst legislation in the history of legislation!"

"Almost passed" is horse-shit. Everyone, except you, KNEW that it would pass the House and fail in the Senate.
Click to expand...

It may have very well passed the Senate if each side had been given time to debate and amendments could be made, like we do with virtually every piece of legislation to come from the House to the Senate... but Harry Reid controls the rules, and procedures, and made sure that didn't happen here.

Not one Dem voted for it and they control the Senate.
Click to expand...

Then they need to be held accountable and answer for why they oppose cutting spending, capping increased spending, and balancing the budget. And we need to get off this Republican bash-fest we're having on this, and put the blame squarely on the party who is obfuscating and wants to demagogue!

Thats what I mean by knowing it was a failure. Everyone in the House and Senate knew that it would happen that way, but they did it anyways to spite the President.
Click to expand...

No, they did it because it's a reasonable PLAN to deal with this problem. Where the fuck is the Democrat plan????

Since your predictions are based solely on your supporting your individual belief system, you've shown you aren't rational and are a "wishful thinker". Until the make-up of Congress changes, "Cut, Cap, and Balance" has no chance.
Click to expand...

Well then, we will save it until Jan 2013, when Republicans take control of both houses.

Now if you want to talk about the merits of the system we can. I agree we need to cut spending (OMG, did I just say that?). I agree that entitlement programs need immense reform. I would like to see them eventually phased out and replaced by entrepreneurs. I also believe in reforming the tax system, since it is currently flawed. This will probably mean that taxes go up slightly from what they are right now, but we can lower them in the future as we get the ball rolling in the right direction.
Click to expand...

You don't even know what the fuck you're yammering about. We are nearly $15 trillion in debt... growing by $1.6 trillion per year! We can not sustain this spending, regardless of whether we raise or reform taxes... WE HAVE TO MAKE DRASTIC CUTS! There is no other way. With taxation, anything you do, is going to effect the economic conditions. Raise the rates on the upper-level earners, and you will kill private sector jobs and economic prosperity. Raise tax rates on ANYONE and it's that much LESS money that can go to work in our economy, buying things, selling things, paying wages... earning taxable income. The BEST scenario would be to transition over to a consumer-based tax, and put an end to the Class Warfare rhetoric from the left. But regardless of WHAT we do with taxes, we are going to HAVE TO CUT SPENDING!


I disagree with a balanced budget amendment. An amendment of this type in the 1930's and 1940's would have locked us into the Depression indefinitely and we would have lost WWII. If Congress doesn't have the option to rack up some debt then our government will stagnate and our national security will be at risk. A balanced budget amendment removes that option. Plus, the amendment would never pass the amendment process. Under the current environment, there is almost no chance of any amendment being passed.
Click to expand...

Well again, you're a fucking idiot. What the hell do you mean, it has no chance? Don't you believe that MOST Americans would agree that Congress shouldn't spend more money than it takes in? What kind of moron wouldn't want us to balance our budget? It's beyond stupid, it's irresponsibly and recklessly stupid. As for the bullshit about national emergencies, the BBA would have built-in language to deal with times of war and national disaster or emergency, the hands of Congress would not be tied in trying to deal with a crisis. What they WOULD have to do, is present a budget that is balanced, instead of continuing to run up DEBT!

So, before you call all the people that said "Cut, Cap, and Balance" legislation would fail pinheads, you might want to realize that they were still right.
Click to expand...

No, they aren't still right... they haven't ever been right... won't ever be right. Cut Cap and Balance WILL pass... mark my word. It may take another butt whooping election like we had in 2010, but it WILL pass. I am confident of that.

The alternative I propose is RAISE THE FUCKING DEBT CEILING SO WE DON'T DEFAULT. That's all I care about. If we default it is going to cost this country ALOT more money through higher interest rates, which will make it harder to "live within our financial mean" as you put it.
Click to expand...

That's not a PLAN! That's ignoring the problem and kicking the can down the road, because you don't want to FACE the problem. let me ask you something.... What PURPOSE is the "Debt Ceiling" if every time we reach it, we raise it? Can you answer me that question???? No sir... we will NOT just keep raising the debt ceiling so Democrats can continue to spend and be irresponsible... it stops here and now! We'll get MAJOR cuts in spending, and NO tax increase.... or we'll take the country over the edge and default! Might as well do it now and get it over with, because it's going to eventually happen anyway, we can't keep spending money we don't have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top