Georgia’s Tom Price a central figure in D.C. drama
With the election finally behind us, President Obama and Congress will now try to set partisanship aside and cut a major deal on taxes, spending and entitlements.
Good luck on that, right?
The good news — which is also the bad news — is that they have enormous incentive to succeed. Without a new law, taxes are set to jump by $400 billion at the start of the year and federal spending will be slashed by $200 billion. If allowed to take full effect, those steps have the potential to set off another deep recession. So the future looks much like the past, with weeks of drama, confrontation, intrigue and brinksmanship looming between Democrats and Republicans, between the House and Senate and between Congress and the White House.
The same can be said of two Georgia Republicans, U.S. Rep. Tom Price of Marietta Roswell and U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss. Over the next three to six months, they’ll be watching each other very closely, and their interactions have the potential to directly affect the course of national politics.
Chambliss is a conservative Republican, but on fiscal issues he has been more willing than many of his GOP colleagues to consider compromise with Democrats. Much as he dislikes higher taxes, he seems to fear soaring debt even more. He has taken a leadership role in the Gang of Eight, a group of four Republican senators and four Democratic senators who have been talking and plotting for at least two years to try to reach agreement on how to slash the deficit.
The day after the election, for example, at a moment when the rest of the nation was still trying to digest what happened, Chambliss joined other gang members on a conference call to plot their course once Congress reconvenes on Tuesday. There’s a lot of skepticism about whether they can succeed, but they represent one of the few forums in which Republicans and Democrats are actually trying to reach consensus.
The broad outlines of a deal are no secret. As a matter of politics and simple math, the only way to significantly reduce the deficit is to increase tax revenues and decrease spending. You do both, or you do nothing. It’s as simple as that. Democrats who are protective of entitlement programs and the safety net have to be willing to make cuts in those programs in return for higher tax revenue, particularly from more affluent Americans. Republicans who have refused to consider higher taxes have to be willing to soften that stance in return for entitlement reform.
Which is where Price comes in.
The former physician from Marietta is one of the most conservative members of Congress and continues to reject the notion of compromise with Democrats. Last week, for example, House Speaker John Boehner made the logical point that with the president’s re-election, ObamaCare is now certain to survive. But in an interview on Fox News Sunday, Price refused to make that concession, insisting that Republicans will continue to fight it at every turn.
Cathy McMorris Rodgers addresses the 2012 Republican National Convention. (AP)
Price has also decided to seek the chairmanship of the House Republican Conference, the No. 4 position in the House hierarchy. There too, he is bumping heads with Boehner, who has thrown his support behind the conference vice chair, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington.
If elected conference chair, McMorris Rodgers would become the only woman in a major leadership role in the House GOP. (For example, none of the 21 House committees is chaired by a woman.) That’s a major image problem for a party having serious trouble attracting female voters. McMorris Rodgers is also more moderate than Price, who is trying to rally fellow House conservatives to his cause.
The race between Price and McMorris Rodgers — to be decided in a secret ballot among House Republicans — will be watched as a test of Boehner’s strength and influence within his caucus. Price is considered the underdog, but should he win, it would bode poorly for Boehner’s ability to deliver his caucus on important budget votes in the next few months.
However, if Price loses, that too could have a serious impact on the national debate over revenue and spending. If his ambitions are frustrated in the House, Price becomes much more likely to take on Chambliss in the 2014 Republican Senate primary. His strategy would be to hang the dreaded RINO nametag around the neck of Georgia’s senior senator, depicting Chambliss as a sellout to the GOP cause.
So every time Chambliss is quoted in the media over the next few months as seeking a “balanced” approach to our debt problem, Price will take note. Every time Chambliss appears in public alongside Senate Democrats preaching compromise, a potential campaign commercial will be born.
And both men, I suspect, will be keeping very close tabs on things here at home, through polling and phone calls, trying to determine just how much leeway Georgia Republicans are prepared to give Chambliss in the budget debate.
Should a backlash develop among the GOP base here at home, the senator may be forced to decide whether addressing a major national challenge is worth significant risk to his political future.
It is.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
894 comments Add your comment
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
November 12th, 2012
2:00 pm
Rumor is that I will win the Oscar for best director.
JamVet
November 12th, 2012
2:01 pm
Paul, if the cons had a clue and wanted to start making up lost ground, they would blow up the Fox News studios, fire Murdoch (et al, ad nauseum), Limbaugh, Beck, Coulter and all of their other fake conservative charlatans that are killing the GOP brand…
Their irrational and insular anger is a no-winner for them anymore. As is their war on sluts, prostitutes and FemiNazis.
People love it when bullies get their asses kicked, and that is what we just witnessed last Tuesday…
RB from Gwinnett
November 12th, 2012
2:04 pm
Joey, “I’m not playing your JM Speaks For Others game, and I’m not letting you get away with it. You don’t speak for me or anyone else on here, and you don’t have the right to tell others what they think.” Oh really? Keep reading….
“I don’t remember hearing that sentiment out of the White House from 2000-2008.” Are you speaking for them, Joe, or did you ask them what they thought?
“I expect several states will do just that.” Do you have any evidence of that or have you spoken to any Governors to lead you to that conclusion or are you speaking for states without their permission?
“It’s pretty clear that you prefer to just make things up,” Don’t recall you asking me anything about my preferences, Joe. Are you attempting to speak for me?
“That’s nice, but that’s not what you said. You said “flatten the tax rates.” I don’t suppose you’re going to ask what he MEANT are you?
“I’m afraid you’ll have to sharpen up your game or else stay in the lower division.” Who gave you the right to make that decision, Joe?
“I bet RB shops at Wal-Mart and gripes because the service is so spitty there.” Speaking for others again, Joe?
You’re an arrogant and bossy little child, Joe. Tossing around rules and regulations here you don’t follow yourself as if anybody really gives a crap about your “demands”. And every time somebody pushes you to back up your phony crap, they get the “divert and dodge” routine from you. Maybe “Joey” would be more appropriate for you, child.
Regnad Kcin
November 12th, 2012
2:04 pm
Rumor is that SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS!
Paul
November 12th, 2012
2:05 pm
JamVet
Saw a talking head say words to the effect of “These guys are like the doctor who opens up a patient, sees cancer everywhere, sews him back up and tells the family ‘it’s fine, nothing to worry about.’”
There is a period, though, when bullies are laid out and they’re thinking ‘this couldn’t be happening to me! From him!!! So they get up and get laid out again. Only question is, how long before the dimbulb light comes on?
getalife
November 12th, 2012
2:06 pm
They reached an immigration deal if the house will vote for it.
Redcoat
November 12th, 2012
2:08 pm
How do we even know if EVERYBODY is paying their fair share? And someone please define fair…… just because it’s legal doesn’t make it fair…..right?
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
2:13 pm
Ever wonder why republicans. Holding out for what they want is being a politician yet a democrat holding out is doing what’s right for the country ?
I support a compromise but a compromise is when both sides give up something not when republicans just do what democrats say.
With that said the assumption that the budget cannot be balanced without tax increases is BS. It’s what the democrats want to go into negotiations as a factual starting point.
Last times checked you can balance your Budget by simply spending what you take in. As far as reducing the debt, again simple math. Spend less than you take in and apply the difference toward debt reduction.
Don’t know why that’s not the real “simple math”
Guess its because dems don’t really want to reduce anything. Once again you may also consider that all of them work off proposed spending not actual. If they propose 10 trillion in cuts that means they were planning to spend 50 trillion.
Remember the real budget in Washington please
Paul
November 12th, 2012
2:13 pm
Redcoat
I think one has to think in terms and ranges. We have a progressive system – the more one makes the more one pays – because a dollar increase to a person of middle means has more value than to a person of extraordinary means.
And when over a thousand people with incomes of a million or more pay no income tax
And when we’ve created a system whereby people who labor for earnings pay a far, far higher rate than people who earn by owning resources
well, that’s the kind of thing people think of when they hear ‘the system is really not very fair.”
Realist
November 12th, 2012
2:18 pm
I have read a lot of these posts and extremely disappointed.Fiirst yes I am a conservative and Yes I voted for Romney and Yes Romney lost. But the serious questions we all have to ask ourselves is not who should pay more taxes but how are we going to pay more taxes, and where is the money oging to come from.
Suppose for a minute you own a business. You work 60,70 or 80 hours a week. You are thinking about your employees, customers, making payroll, paying rent, keeping your business in business 24/7 (and yes this is what business owners do).
Then you get information from our beloved politicians that your you will need to pay the government 20% more in taxes and fees. Your whole business structure changes, your income goes down and the threat of your business going under becomes real.
With these tax and fee hikes the Federal Government has threatened everything YOU have worked for for 20 years (skipped vacations, time spent away from my family, missed paychecks, sleepless nights making payroll, endless 20 hour days, missing kid’s games etc.) by demanding all the new taxes. Now how do you pay for it?
Do YOU raise prices to YOUR Clients (the general public) to make up the diifference?
Do YOU lower YOUR personal standard of living.
Do YOU lay off XX amout of employees to save the others jobs?
Do YOU close your business altogether and layoff all your employees?
DO YOU cut all YOUR employees pay by 20%?
What do you suggest? What decision would you make? That is what every business owner/employer is looking at now. This government has put us all in a situation where we all lose. Maybe not today, but in the near future. Good luck to us all.
The only person you should depend on for your future is YOU. That is what Republican/Conservative principles are. It is not about Abortion, Gay Marriage, entitlements, Welfare etc. Core principles of freedom and independence are that you are responsible for your own future and you have to work hard for it. It will not (and should not) be given to you by any government or intsitution. You need to get it yourself. If the Obama/Liberal supporters worked as hard for getting him re-elected (which I respect, part of American System). If they had put some of that ingenuity toward their own present and future, by filling a need in society, finding a way to make it a product or service that is needed, they could be part of the “lucky” ones to be the EVIL RICH
Yes Elections have concequences, and more importantly there are unintended concequences. These are the ones that are really going to effect your lives. Not who is Speaker of the House, Majoority Leader or even the President, it is the policies that will have an impact oon your daily lives, not today or even 4 years from now, but 20 years from now.
Paul
November 12th, 2012
2:20 pm
Mama says
In what areas have Pres Obama and key Democrats said they wouldn’t compromise? Entitlements are on the table.
You really think we can get there from here thru spending cuts?
How? We borrow somewhere around 40% of what we spend. Haven’t you been hearing the howls from Republicans over the sequester cuts for Defense? Those don’t even come CLOSE to 40%. Not even. And with Republicans wanting to take Defense completely off the table, well, Mama Says, if you can figure out how to cut the dollars required to balance the budget they’ll hail you on Capital Hill as the Person of the Century.
So please, try it out here, first, okay?
tyler
November 12th, 2012
2:20 pm
here’s a crazy thought: how about we decrease spending?
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
2:23 pm
I agree with the fair doctrine Paul. But then we have to fight about what’s fair.
The belief that you pay more because you make more is not fair. The belief that you are taxed at the same rate regardless of income, exempting those who make less than 45000, is fair. Anyone who can do math knows that if all deductions are removed and everyone is taxed at 15% we would get more revenue.
The rich would still pay more because 15% of 2 million is a heck of a lot more than 15% of 60,000.
RGB
November 12th, 2012
2:24 pm
God Bless Tom Price. He’s one of the Good Guys!
Paul
November 12th, 2012
2:25 pm
Realist
“Then you get information from our beloved politicians that your you will need to pay the government 20% more in taxes and fees.”
You lost me there. How do you increase the top marginal rate from 35% to 39.6% on the after deduction and exemption amount of $380,000 and have that equate to “20% more”?!!?
Regnad Kcin
November 12th, 2012
2:26 pm
” The belief that you are taxed at the same rate regardless of income, exempting those who make less than 45000, is fair.”
Mama, would you agree that it is fair, then, to tax all income the same? Capital gains, trust funds, etc.?
Julia
November 12th, 2012
2:27 pm
funny how we can spend like drunken sailors on leave with defense, but heaven help us if we try to look out for those less fortunate.
Paul
November 12th, 2012
2:28 pm
Mama says
“The belief that you pay more because you make more is not fair. ”
Why not?
Why do you think the wealthy legislators who came up with our tax code made that a bedrock principle?
You may want to go to the far right side of this blog, about halfway down, and read Jay’s archive on the topic. Because it’s rather pointless to extract what’s there and reprint it here.
alex
November 12th, 2012
2:30 pm
@moonbat, the TRUTH is you can’t handle the truth, Just kidding-Agree with you, don’t worry-I’m ok!
Redcoat
November 12th, 2012
2:31 pm
Paul…..some pay no income tax because of legal loopholes……is that fair? Again what do you define as fair?
Logical Dude
November 12th, 2012
2:31 pm
tyler
November 12th, 2012
2:20 pm
here’s a crazy thought: how about we decrease spending?
DUH. that is already happening. How about we also revise taxes to increase revenues?
RB from Gwinnett
November 12th, 2012
2:31 pm
Realist, the reality is, these liberals don’t care where that business owner gets the money to pay the additional taxes as long as they feel like they screwed the man. And when they’re no better off in 5 years because their paycheck is stagnant, goods have gone up 8-10%, and they’ve been cut to 30 hr weeks to get under the “full time” employee mark, they’ll start whining for the next “screw the man” tax plan.
How long do you have to be on welfare before you stop being poor?
Moon Mullins
November 12th, 2012
2:32 pm
When 400 people have as much wealth as the bottom 150,000,000 in this country, it’s going to be a pretty easy sell for the President to go before the American People and suggest the wealthy put a little addional “shared sacrifice” in the kitty.
And, the Republicans are going to look pretty silly defending these overbearing oligarchs — the myth about lower taxes for the wealthy and job creation has run its course.
The salvation of the Republican Party will not be in a failed strategy of doubling down on a rabidly conservative posture, but to APPEAR LIKE RATIONAL AMERICANS WHO CARE MORE ABOUT THE COUNTRY THAN GROVER NORQUIST OR POLITICAL AFFILIATION.
To do outherwise, will make them look petty, petulant and intransigent. And, the POTUS WILL POINT THIS OUT TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Regnad Kcin
November 12th, 2012
2:33 pm
“these liberals don’t care where that business owner gets the money to pay the additional taxes as long as they feel like they screwed the man”
===============
It must be horrible to live in your head…
Regnad Kcin
November 12th, 2012
2:36 pm
“The salvation of the Republican Party will not be in a failed strategy of doubling down on a rabidly conservative posture, but to APPEAR LIKE RATIONAL AMERICANS WHO CARE MORE ABOUT THE COUNTRY THAN GROVER NORQUIST OR POLITICAL AFFILIATION.’
Yeah, like THAT will ever happen!
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
2:38 pm
Paul it took 50 years to build this debt. We can’t pay it down overnight.
I will tell you how we do it.
We cut defense spending by 50%, we cut non essential support for all the arts, we end all loopholes and deductions, we apply a flat tax rate to everyone (personal) around 15% and a flat tax rate on business around 20%. AGAIN NO DEDUCTIONS.
We amend the constitution to require that each year congress pass a balanced budget (don’t think the democrats have passed a budget under Obama much less a balanced one and we require by law that the government cannot borrow more than 1% of the revenue raised.
Lastly we require that surplus which would result in these efforts go to debt reduction.
Hell as a con I would be open to raising the tax on the very rich to 50% for 4years but only for 4. If you really believe we cannot balance the budget and pay off the debt with all the revenue we have then it should also be a law that accountants have to submit the budgets yearly instead of our reps. Since our reps are going to bankrupt us.
Paul
November 12th, 2012
2:40 pm
Redcoat
“Paul…..some pay no income tax because of legal loopholes”
I made that point earlier.
It seems to me you don’t want to read Jay’s archive because it might cause you to question your premise and adjust your thinking, so you want to relitigate it on these pages.
Not interested when I can read the same arguments and answers in the archive.
Jay
November 12th, 2012
2:40 pm
That’s a ridiculous bet, Morality. Just by offering it, you reveal a lack of info and understanding about the debt.
Let’s look at the math, shall we, because even a Republican pollster would comprehend just how flawed your case really is:
The projected deficit for fiscal 2013, already underway, is $900 billion. So if I were to win your bet — “if the Fed debt is ONE CENT or more lower on the day he leaves office than it is today” — the budget for the next three fiscal years would have to show an average SURPLUS of $300 billion to offset the deficit for this year alone.
That is not going to happen, and it would not happen in a government under President Mitt Romney, House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Grover Norquist. It is absolutely ridiculous to even pretend it is feasible.
Tundra Dude
November 12th, 2012
2:42 pm
Julia:
funny how we can spend like drunken sailors on leave with defense, but heaven help us if we try to look out for those less fortunate.
It wasn’t spent, it was borrowed.
(not to worry, your grandkids will take care of it)
Thank them fiscally responsible Republicans.
Six years ago, “it was standard practice not to pay for things,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.
“We were concerned about it, because it certainly added to the deficit, no question.”
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
November 12th, 2012
2:43 pm
…even a Republican pollster would comprehend just how flawed…
OH SNAP!
Ol' Timer
November 12th, 2012
2:44 pm
Jack Price reminds me that “Ninety percent of all politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation.” ~Henry Kissinger
We are afflicted with too many politicians and too few statesmen.
I was reading last night about how Orin Hatch and Ted Kennedy — two totally opposite personalities and backgrounds — worked together to accomplish great things for the country and developed a deep and abiding friendship.
Compromise is a dirty word — now it’s capitulation — unconditional surrender and this is bad for the country and ultimately anathema for the political parties leading to “a pox on both of your houses!”
Brosephus™
November 12th, 2012
2:45 pm
Paul @ 1:53
None of that will penetrate the echo chamber though.
RB from Gwinnett
November 12th, 2012
2:49 pm
Julia, “but heaven help us if we try to look out for those less fortunate.”
Why are this nations “less fortunate” less fortunate? Be honest and that is a serious question. Why are they poor?
Jefferson
November 12th, 2012
2:49 pm
Progressive rates are fair and they need to be raised.
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
November 12th, 2012
2:49 pm
Well, sounds like we’re getting there. I always did say Mr. Burns and Scrooge McDuck were misunderstood real bad.
Lord Help Us
November 12th, 2012
2:51 pm
‘Why are they poor?’
I’d like to hear your version…
Regnad Kcin
November 12th, 2012
2:51 pm
“Why are this nations “less fortunate” less fortunate? Be honest and that is a serious question. Why are they poor?”
Well, I know many that lost their jobs due to the financial meltdown. Why do you ask?
Paul
November 12th, 2012
2:52 pm
Mama says
Any Defense cuts… any… are a nonstarter for Congressional Republicans. We can advocate all we want, but it ain’t gonna happen.
Balance budgets don’t work to well in wartime. Heck, the previous administration didn’t even want to record any of the expenses.
But I applaud your willingness as a conservative to advance ideas your Party largely rejects. I’d urge you to run for Congress, but unfortunately, your Party would never let you get out of the gate, let alone past a primary fight.
stands for decibels
November 12th, 2012
2:52 pm
Remember the War on Women?
Looks like the women are hitting back… no fair!
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/planned-parenthood-sues-oklahoma-wic-funding-17700559#.UKFSd2fhcTR
Planned Parenthood is suing the head of the Oklahoma Department of Health over the agency’s decision to withdraw federal funding for three clinics in the Tulsa area that provide food and nutritional counseling to low-income mothers.
more like this, please.
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
2:52 pm
Where the dems go wrong in this math is simple. You decide policy on the source of the money rather than the abject application of policy.
In other words you think fairness is taking more because they have it rather than making sure the government treats us all the same.
Why do you advocate equal rights for everyone and then go against that same principle in tax policy ?
Any republican that agrees to a cut in defense spending in order to pay the debt has compromised since we believe that alone is the core reason for the Federal Governments existence.
To insist that a reduction in entitlement spending is compromise is ludicrous, it’s actually a continuance in an unconstitutional mandate.
Only the government can pass laws that say its ok to take my money so it can give the money to someone else and then rule it to be constitutional.
You think a reduction is entitlement spending is a compromise ?
I say follow the constitution and only do what it says the federal government can do. I don’t see anything about impounding money for welfare or social security. You guys have just made that accepted policy, it’s not as they say –constitutional.
Tundra Dude
November 12th, 2012
2:54 pm
even a Republican pollster would comprehend just how flawed…
OH SNAP!
Ditto! Or Hehhehe…..
Brosephus™
November 12th, 2012
2:54 pm
I will tell you how we do it.
We cut defense spending by 50%, we cut non essential support for all the arts, we end all loopholes and deductions, we apply a flat tax rate to everyone (personal) around 15% and a flat tax rate on business around 20%. AGAIN NO DEDUCTIONS.
No Republican will ever agree to that because
#1 If they’re whining about the defense cuts under the sequester, they will have a Grand Mal over a 50% cut.
#2 If they’re whining about Obama’s tax plan now, they will not agree to a 20% business tax rate with no deductions as that will be a huge tax increase on many of the mega corporations.
As to a balanced budget amendment, why should that be a factor? As it currently reads, Congress isn’t required to pass ANY budget by law.
Just my $.02 to the discussion, but I understand where you’re coming from. Me personally, I’d go a different route and incrementally undo every tax cut and spending increase we’ve done over the past 30 – 40 years until we get a grip on things. We slowly got ourselves into this mess, and it will take the same process in reverse to get out of it. I don’t think any other idea will work.
Redcoat
November 12th, 2012
2:54 pm
Paul……In your opinion are tax rates fair now? Do you think our government spending and borrowing has to be slowed?
Tundra Dude
November 12th, 2012
2:57 pm
Any republican that agrees to a cut in defense spending in order to pay the debt has compromised since we believe that alone is the core reason for the Federal Governments existence
We need a constitutional amendment, something like “separation of Defense from Offense”
JamVet
November 12th, 2012
2:59 pm
As they become more insular, more regional and less inclusive, it would appear that the GOP’s Nixon/Southern Strategy is really starting to come back and bite them in the ass…
4 More!
November 12th, 2012
3:00 pm
republicans—keep making the same mistakes—the democrats have hispanics and women in their pocket, and will win easily again in 2016! Hillary or Joe—in a landslide!!!
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:01 pm
I generally agree Bro,
But the current climate will not allow for incremental efforts. I believe we need to do it in one shot. If we can do it at all we need to do it all.
By the way the reason moderates get pushed out is because non of us are truly moderates.
We say we are but given the option of Chambliss and Price I, like the libs on this blog would take Chambliss but given the option of Chambliss and Harry Reid, I would still be with Chambliss and the libs would vote for Reid.
Moderates can only win if both parties support them
RB from Gwinnett
November 12th, 2012
3:02 pm
“Progressive rates are fair and they need to be raised.”
Jefferson, how many more actual dollars are YOU willing to send to the feds to do your part? Real numbers, please.
MiltonMan
November 12th, 2012
3:03 pm
“Tom Price’s days are numbered as a political figure, even in Georgia. He is of the past. Georgia had the highest number of votes for Barack Obama – immediately behind North Carolina – of those Red states who chose Romney. Georgia is in a process of moving toward the future, not remaining in the past, where Rep. Price resides.”
There is not one democrat in this whole state who could win the 6th district – none.
alex
November 12th, 2012
3:03 pm
To all, what is the purpose of taxes: I suppose they are for defense, , roads, various other buracracies that we may be able to share equally,Does the person paving 20% of income in taxes use twice the resources that the person paying 10% of their income in taxes? Why is paying more fair. Because they can , then fair?. Mabye it’s morally right and they should do it to help their less fortunate brother, but is that fair?………
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:06 pm
Joe Biden will never be our next president and the libs know that. What will it do to your party when you tell the 8 year sitting VP that you want Hillary ?
He will expect uncompromised support from the left, as a con I hope you give it to him.
And how can any of you libs take this election as a mandate ? Seriously. Obama won by 2 points. Most every battle ground state was even and we kept the house. Where is this butt whipping that you guys put on us ?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
November 12th, 2012
3:06 pm
AmVet, I don’t think the GOP is ready to abandon their strategy completely. There appears to be a renewed consideration of changing how electoral votes are awarded in some of the key swing states away from the winner take all approach. And with the Supreme Ct taking up the Voting Rights Act, the battle is far from over on voter suppression.
independent thinker
November 12th, 2012
3:07 pm
Happy Veterans Day all you cons whose leader dissed the veterans. Probably because there has never been a veteran in five generations of Romneys. I hope the disabled veterans remember which party put them in the 47% category and wrote them off as moochers and could not give them a shout out at its convention.
Maybe Queen Anne will join Michelle and Jill Biden in raising funds for veterans and their families. Of course I am sure she is very busy meeting with he accountants, managing those millions made on the auto bailout through her million dollar investment in Delphi, the car elevator design and that horse.Any way only socialists throw government money at veterans- what have they contributed to our economy?Any business man would fire them withh all those excuse about stress and brain trauma- who needs it.
Yeah let’s cut the veteran’s benefits along withe old folks at least 10% so rich folks can keep generating all those jobs they are offering now that Obama is reelected.
Regnad Kcin
November 12th, 2012
3:07 pm
“But the current climate will not allow for incremental efforts. I believe we need to do it in one shot. If we can do it at all we need to do it all.”
Mama, I sympathize, but disagree, and I’ll tell you why.
The “patient” that is the US economy is getting stronger as time passes, but we still have to worry about a “double dip” recession. We want to reduce spending and increase revenues at a slow enought rate to keep the economy improving. When we are back to “normal” levels of economic activity, we can cut away, and solve this thing – until then, easy does it.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
November 12th, 2012
3:08 pm
I posted a new petition:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/sell-state-texas-mexico-and-use-funds-reduce-debt-add-puerto-rico-new-50th-state/6WWF2gmV
Joe Hussein Mama
November 12th, 2012
3:09 pm
RB — ““I don’t remember hearing that sentiment out of the White House from 2000-2008.” Are you speaking for them, Joe, or did you ask them what they thought?”
Precisely what I said, RB. I don’t remember hearing that sentiment out of the White House from 2000-2008. (laughing, pointing)
“I expect several states will do just that.” Do you have any evidence of that or have you spoken to any Governors to lead you to that conclusion or are you speaking for states without their permission?”
Silly RB. Where did I indicate that I was speaking for any Governor, Governors, state or states? (giggling)
“It’s pretty clear that you prefer to just make things up,” Don’t recall you asking me anything about my preferences, Joe. Are you attempting to speak for me?”
I don’t need to, RB. You have as much opportunity as anyone else here to ask other posters to clarify or extend their comments, yet you *never* do it. You could easily ask others to explain their positions, yet you *never* do it. You simply leap to unwarranted conclusions and then *demand* that others respond to your arguments as if your versions of what they said were somehow representative of the truth. And when you’re *confronted* on it, you argue, complain and play the wounded, as if you somehow have the unquestioned right to speak for others who are *right here.*
So yeah, RB. I’m speaking for you — the same way you have *repeatedly* spoken for me and for others. And if you don’t like it, then perhaps you should stop doing it yourself. (chuckling)
“That’s nice, but that’s not what you said. You said “flatten the tax rates.” I don’t suppose you’re going to ask what he MEANT are you?”
I didn’t presume to speak for him in the way that you presumed to speak for me, RB. I pointed out what he said, whereas *you’ve* done no such thing. (laughing)
“I’m afraid you’ll have to sharpen up your game or else stay in the lower division.” Who gave you the right to make that decision, Joe?
I did. I have every right to determine who *I* choose to speak to here, RB. And *you* have *no* right to determine who I speak to here.
“I bet RB shops at Wal-Mart and gripes because the service is so spitty there.” Speaking for others again, Joe?”
Nope. That’s called “conjecture.” Maybe you’ve heard of it? (laughing, pointing)
“You’re an arrogant and bossy little child, Joe.”
And you’re a sad, ignorant and manipulative little person, RB. (cackling with glee)
“Tossing around rules and regulations here”
Silly, silly RB. I don’t make rules or regulations here, and neither do you. I *will,* however, gladly point out when you misrepresent what I or others say. (giggling) ;D
“you don’t follow yourself”
I absolutely *do* follow them. Certainly far better than *you* do.
“as if anybody really gives a crap about your “demands”.
You think anyone cares about *yours*? Do you think anyone really cares what *you* have to say when the best you’ve ever been able to do is lie and misrepresent what others have said and then DEMAND that they answer you to your satisfaction? (snickering)
Oh, boy, do YOU ever need a good close look at yourself in the mirror, RB. (laughing)
And every time somebody pushes you to back up your phony crap”
Like the “phony crap” you made up for me this morning, RB? Why would I “back up” something I didn’t say and didn’t think? Why would I “back up” words that *you* put in my mouth?
“they get the “divert and dodge” routine from you.”
Waaah! Joe won’t agree to the statements I made up for him! (laughing, pointing)
If you were actually a *man,* you’d ask me what I thought instead of shoving words in my mouth and demanding I answer your questions about them. BTW, RB. those are called “have you stopped beating your wife questions.” So, RB — have you stopped beating your wife? A simple yes or no will do just fine. (giggling)
“Maybe “Joey” would be more appropriate for you, child.”
Better to be a child than a dishonest, disreputable and intemperate person like you, RB.
alex
November 12th, 2012
3:10 pm
4 more, think Rubio, The more the dems think they have a group in their pocket, the less they pay attention to them and the smaller that pocket becomes;go on get confident, Gingrich WAS……
stands for decibels
November 12th, 2012
3:10 pm
Finn, no way I’m signing that… unless you figure out a way for us to keep Austin.
Regnad Kcin
November 12th, 2012
3:10 pm
“And how can any of you libs take this election as a mandate ? Seriously. Obama won by 2 points.”
Mama, Obama won about 62% of the vote (in the electoral college, the only place that matters). What percentage would he have to achieve before you agree that he has a mandate?
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:11 pm
The progressive tax policy is stealing pure and simple. There is nothing fair about taking more from someone simply because its there to take.
Never will be
JamVet
November 12th, 2012
3:12 pm
Obama won by 2 points.
No you are looking at the wrong stat, Mama.
The final score was 336 – 202.
A 68% to 32% win for BHO.
The two point differential you cite is as meaningless as the Time of Possession stat!
Fred ™
November 12th, 2012
3:13 pm
LOL Finn. You only need 24,999 more signatures.I’ll bet with a little bit of advertising you can get the 25,000 needed.
Logical Dude
November 12th, 2012
3:13 pm
Tundra Dude: Any republican that agrees to a cut in defense spending in order to pay the debt has compromised since we believe that alone is the core reason for the Federal Governments existence
Well, how about we increase taxes to pay for the wars we’ve been in? Would you agree to paying for Defense that we have?
JamVet
November 12th, 2012
3:13 pm
Yikes, my bad. Reg is correct.
Make that a 62 – 38 win for Obama…
fair and balanced
November 12th, 2012
3:14 pm
Mama says- “”"”"”"”And how can any of you libs take this election as a mandate ? Seriously. Obama won by 2 points. Most every battle ground state was even and we kept the house. Where is this butt whipping that you guys put on us ?”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"
Obama 2012- 232 Electoral votes
George W 2004- 284 EVs after stealing Ohio
And how many Senate seats did the GOP pick up?
Joe Biden made junior the liar look like a total fool in the debates; He’s got more experience than both of the clowns who ran against Biden and Obama. Great American.
That sreet fighter from Scranton and ole Bill the ex-president turned this election around from one where the odds were completely against Obama to a mandate. Deal with it.
Fred ™
November 12th, 2012
3:14 pm
Oh and don’t forget, Vets eat for free at Golden Corral tonight from 4 til close……..
JamVet
November 12th, 2012
3:15 pm
There is nothing fair about giving more to someone simply because its there to give.
End the loopholes, shelters, tax dodges and sweetheart deals for the 1%.
You and I don’t get them, neither should they.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 12th, 2012
3:15 pm
I. Thinker — “I hope the disabled veterans remember which party put them in the 47% category and wrote them off as moochers and could not give them a shout out at its convention.”
Oh, we do. Don’t worry about that. Disabled veterans pay *very* close attention to how both parties treat us.
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:16 pm
Ok if you feel it’s a mandate, it’s a mandate.
Please ignore the popular vote, you do so at your own demise.
When Bush got in on the electoral vote a lot of folks were pissed. To try and say you have a mandate when 50 million voted against you is a mistake.
But I am just a bums racist con from Georgia what do I know
Jefferson
November 12th, 2012
3:18 pm
Clinton rates are just fine with me, jack.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
November 12th, 2012
3:18 pm
Winning the electoral college and the popular vote.
IOAMIYAR? Its only a mandate if you’re a republican (see Bush)
RB from Gwinnett
November 12th, 2012
3:18 pm
Lord Help Us
November 12th, 2012
2:51 pm
‘Why are they poor?’
I’d like to hear your version…”
Is it that you CAN’T answer the question or are you afraid to have a conversation about the realities of what’s making people poor? Just answer the question.
Unemployment is a factor, but we do have unemployment insurance to help with that and I really don’t think that’s what was meant by the poster when she referred to the “less fortunate”.
flagboy?
November 12th, 2012
3:20 pm
“Threat-focused Iran launches “biggest ever” air drills” (via FOX NEWS)
“Iran launched military drills across half the country on Monday, warning it would act against aggressors less than a week after Washington accused Iranian warplanes of firing on a U.S. drone.
The manoeuvres take place this week across 850,000 square kilometres (330,000 square miles) of Iran’s northeast, east, and southeast regions, Iranian media reported.
About 8,000 elite and regular army troops will participate, backed by bombers and fighter planes, while missile, artillery and surveillance systems will be tested, they said.”
oh yay!
alex
November 12th, 2012
3:20 pm
Indepenent thinker, you are about as independent as a welfare receipient on life support, sheeesh—ouch, UGLY and MEAN……
JamVet
November 12th, 2012
3:20 pm
The popular vote for POTUS is not irrelevant. Just so when scoreboard watching…
You can thank the Founding Fathers!
Paul
November 12th, 2012
3:21 pm
Redcoat
“…In your opinion are tax rates fair now?”
No
” Do you think our government spending and borrowing has to be slowed?”
Yes
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:21 pm
Stealing when cons win, the people’s choice when libs win. Ain’t it funny ?
Hey guys when you can have a logical conversation about the 47 % let me know.
We all know what was said and we all know what the libs are saying he meant. Just because you apply your meaning doesn’t make it so.
How much time did Obama spend in he south and Midwest trying to get the white male vote ? Humm he must have discounted it because he knew they weren’t voting for him.
Yet somehow that is different.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 12th, 2012
3:23 pm
Mama Says — “Please ignore the popular vote, you do so at your own demise. When Bush got in on the electoral vote a lot of folks were pissed. To try and say you have a mandate when 50 million voted against you is a mistake.”
Obama received both a greater proportion of the popular vote AND a greater percentage of the popular vote — as well as a larger numerical margin — than Bush did in his “mandate” of 2004.
If it was a “mandate” in 2004, as President Bush claimed in that year, then we have no less of a mandate today for President Obama.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 12th, 2012
3:26 pm
RB — “Is it that you CAN’T answer the question or are you afraid to have a conversation about the realities of what’s making people poor?”
Why can’t he have a *different* reason than the two you’re thinking of?
Tundra Dude
November 12th, 2012
3:27 pm
Logical D
Sorry, forgot to attribute that to Mama.
Well, how about we increase taxes to pay for the wars we’ve been in?
Send the bills to Big Oil and assorted crony capitalists, KBR and such.
Would you agree to paying for Defense that we have?
Only a small portion is needed for defense.
Let Big Oil, and the Big Banks (they’d just Love to entrap Iran into their Web of Debt)
hire their own military.
stands for decibels
November 12th, 2012
3:27 pm
If it was a “mandate” in 2004, as President Bush claimed in that year
I don’t think he actually called it a mandate. I do know he claimed he earned “political capital” and that he was going to “spend it.” relive those fabulous days, won’t you?
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=653831n
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:27 pm
Do what Bush did then.
It worked out wonderfully.
But I do get your point. Again it isn’t a mandate. The country is e envy split. That’s why neither party can govern, they don’t understand that. They think everything is a mandate.
Again I say the libs should go with their gut, if its a mandate to them govern accordingly, please.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
November 12th, 2012
3:28 pm
A grassroots campaign for Macy’s to end their association with Donald Trump has caught fire. Nearly 400,000 people have added their name to a petition on Signon.org for Macy’s, which exclusively sells Trump’s clothing line and fragrance, to dump the controversial businessman.
Hmmmm, he may need to keep his $5 million.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 12th, 2012
3:29 pm
Mama Says — “How much time did Obama spend in he south and Midwest trying to get the white male vote ?”
Quite a bit. Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin — he made multiple stops in those Midwestern states and several others.
I agree, not many stops in the South (I think only once in GA), but the President was all over the Midwest this election cycle.
independent thinker
November 12th, 2012
3:31 pm
If only we had elected a businessman who understands capitalism and not a communist community organizer. Here is a prime example of how bizness is supposed to work in good ole USA:
“”"”"”"”"”"”"The Nation discovered that, in the two weeks immediately following the announcement of the Delphi jobs-saving plan, Paul Singer, Romney’s partner, secretly bought up over a billion dollars of old Delphi bonds for pennies on the dollar.
Singer and partners now controlled the company – and killed the return of Delphi to GM.
These facts were revealed in a sworn deposition of Delphi’s Chief Financial Officer John Sheehan, confidential, but now released on the Web.
Sheehan said, under oath, that these speculators threatened to withhold key parts (steering columns), from GM. This would have brought the auto maker to its knees, immediately forcing GM’s permanent closure.
The extortion worked. The government money that was supposed to go to save jobs went to Singer’s hedge fund, Elliott Management Corporation and its partners, including the Romneys.
Once Singer’s crew took control of Delphi, they rapidly completed the move to China, sticking the US taxpayers with the bill for the pensions of the Delphi workers cut loose.”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”
The Nation discovered that, in the two weeks immediately following the announcement of the Delphi jobs-saving plan, Paul Singer, Romney’s partner, secretly bought up over a billion dollars of old Delphi bonds for pennies on the dollar.
Singer and partners now controlled the company – and killed the return of Delphi to GM.
These facts were revealed in a sworn deposition of Delphi’s Chief Financial Officer John Sheehan, confidential, but now released on the Web.
Sheehan said, under oath, that these speculators threatened to withhold key parts (steering columns), from GM. This would have brought the auto maker to its knees, immediately forcing GM’s permanent closure.
The extortion worked. The government money that was supposed to go to save jobs went to Singer’s hedge fund, Elliott Management Corporation and its partners, including the Romneys.
Once Singer’s crew took control of Delphi, they rapidly completed the move to China, sticking the US taxpayers with the bill for the pensions of the Delphi workers cut loose.
http://truth-out.org/progressivepicks/item/12273-romney-company-shipped-every-single-delphi-uaw-job-to-china
And none of this was disclosed by Romney. But he would never do anything to harm the auto industry or take money from the guvmint would he?
Maybe the voters were smarter than everyone thinks.
RB from Gwinnett
November 12th, 2012
3:31 pm
Wow, Joey, that just amazing. Everybody who read that crap knows you do here EXACTLY what you’ve been whining at me for all day, I present the evidence to you in your own words, and you post yet another screed of BS denying EVERYTHING. Don’t do as Joey does, everybody, do as little childish Joes SAYS.
Here little Joey, I’ll throw you a bone… Why did little Joey post something about CNG/LP vehicles in the first place? What was your point supposed to be? Speak for yourself, Joey, or STFU.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 12th, 2012
3:31 pm
SfD — “I don’t think he actually called it a mandate. I do know he claimed he earned “political capital” and that he was going to “spend it.”
You are right; I stand corrected. Apparently it was VP Cheney who used the word “mandate.”
Paul
November 12th, 2012
3:33 pm
Tundra Dude
“Any republican that agrees to a cut in defense spending in order to pay the debt has compromised since we believe that alone is the core reason for the Federal Governments existence”
Is more better?
Nothing in DoD is wasted or out of whack with priorities?
_______________________________
alex
“4 more, think Rubio,”
What experience does he have to be President?
______________________________________________________
stands
” no way I’m signing that… unless you figure out a way for us to keep Austin.”
Thanks! Good call!
_____________________________________________________
Mama says 3;11
You’re not gonna read Jay’s archive, are you? It’s all about having a forum, not about learning anything or having your views challenged, eh?
You may want to wait for Ben Shockley to show up. You two will get along swimmingly.
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:33 pm
Tundra,
Taxes are taxes they are raised by taking money from the people. If you don’t like what republicans did don’t vote for them.
But then again it’s not that you don’t like the wars not being on the books you just wanted to spend it on other things.
Obama ran his entire campaign saying that the wars were ending and now he could use that money to spend here at home.
If you were concerned about budgets you would ask the libs why they have to spend the very money that they complained about Bush spending.
Wouldn’t it be better to spend that money to lower the debt ? That Obama said was unpatriotic
stands for decibels
November 12th, 2012
3:33 pm
it was VP Cheney who used the word “mandate.”
but he was talking about his abandoned wishes for Mary Cheney.
(ducking and running)
Doggone/GA
November 12th, 2012
3:34 pm
“Me personally, I’d go a different route and incrementally undo every tax cut and spending increase we’ve done over the past 30 – 40 years until we get a grip on things. ”
But that’s not any more fair than something like a flat tax…because on a % basis, middle and lower class wages have essentially remained stagnant, while upper class income has increased exponentially. To simply undo the past tax cuts would be to increase the burden on those not in the upper 1% disproportionately
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:35 pm
Paul I can barely keep up with the point counter point.
I will read it though.
Lord Help Us
November 12th, 2012
3:38 pm
‘Is it that you CAN’T answer the question or are you afraid to have a conversation about the realities of what’s making people poor? Just answer the question.’
Sure. Some people are born into poverty, some people make bad decisions, some people are lazy, some people work their butts off their whole life and never escape poverty, some people lose their job and cannot find work, some people have health issues and do not have insurance, some people try to start and business and lose everything, some people have learning disabilities, some people grew up in broken/dysfunctional homes, some people have substance abuse, some people have a special needs child or family member they care for, some people are stupid…
I could go on, but you get the point…your turn.
DannyX
November 12th, 2012
3:39 pm
Funny how that mandate Republicans thought they got after the 2010 election only lasted 2 short years!
Obviously the American people didn’t like what they saw.
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:40 pm
Paul I am trying to find it. When you say read his archives what/where are you referring to
Mama Says
November 12th, 2012
3:41 pm
That’s why I say the dems will follow the same fate Danny
Tundra Dude
November 12th, 2012
3:41 pm
Paul: I forgot to attribute that to Mama.
“Any republican that agrees to a cut in defense spending in order to pay the debt has compromised since we believe that alone is the core reason for the Federal Governments existence”
Mary Elizabeth
November 12th, 2012
3:42 pm
“There is not one democrat in this whole state who could win the 6th district – none.”
—————————————————————————–
You are correct if you look only at today. But,, today has a way of changing into tomorrow. Even the demographics in the 6th district will change in time – just as they did in DeKalb County from 1975 to 1985.. Huge change in demographics there in that time frame. Even Forsyth County has changed over time – and will continue to change as the years, and perceptions, change.
Paul
November 12th, 2012
3:43 pm
Mama says
Great!
I withdraw the content and tone of my 3:33.
They are quite interesting. Lots of items below the surface of what looks like a good idea. Happens a lot.
Paul
November 12th, 2012
3:46 pm
Mama says
On the right side of my screen the recent posts are listed.
Below that are archives.
Below that are More from around the Web and Blogroll.
Below that is the Fair Tax Archive.
Same principles and concepts apply to Flat Tax, near as I can tell.