Man, I would not like to be John Boehner these days

John Boehner is not acting like a confident man.

Yesterday, the House speaker made a curt, 52-second public statement regarding fiscal-cliff negotiations and then turned and left the room, unwilling to take a question.

Later in the day, the AJC’s Daniel Malloy saw Boehner in a heated discussion with a handful of Georgia Republicans on the House floor. Asked about it later, they told Malloy that Boehner was pleading with them to support his so-called Plan B, which would raise taxes only on those with annual incomes of more than $1 million. At best, they seem unconvinced.

The speaker’s proposal — floated as a way to demonstrate that House Republicans are “serious” about deficit reduction — is scheduled to be voted on today. There’s a chance that it will go down to defeat if enough of Boehner’s fellow Republicans refuse to support it on grounds that it raises taxes, if only on the top 0.19 percent of earners.

It’s also interesting to note that Pope Grover I of Norquist has issued an papal bull decreeing that Plan B is somehow NOT a tax hike, and thus will not be interpreted as violating the no-tax-hikes-ever pledge that so many Republicans have signed. That says a lot about the hypocrisy involved, and about Norquist’s continuing power over party members. They may be elected by the people of their district, but they are answerable first to Pope Grover. They have to wait for him to tell them, like some pope ruling on a theological dispute, whether they have permission to cast a vote one way or the other.

Here’s the angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin rationale released by Norquist through his front group, Americans for Tax Reform, explaining how a bill that raises taxes is not really a tax hike:

—————————–

“ATR has consistently maintained that individual members of Congress make a pledge to their constituents to oppose and vote against tax increases. The House this week will vote on a tax bill. This legislation — popularly known as “Plan B” — permanently prevents a tax increase on families making less than $1 million per year. Republicans supporting this bill are this week affirming to their constituents in writing that this bill — the sole purpose of which is to prevent tax increases — is consistent with the pledge they made to them. In ATR’s analysis, it is extremely difficult — if not impossible — to fault these Republicans’ assertion.

In particular, in this Congress the House has already voted twice to prevent any tax increases on any American. When viewed with this in mind, and considering this tax bill contains no tax increases of any kind — in fact, it permanently prevents them — matters become more clear. Having finally seen actual legislation in writing, ATR is now able to make its determination about a legislative proposal related to the fiscal cliff. ATR will not consider a vote for this measure a violation of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.”

—————————–

The statement is a clear lie, because as even Boehner has said, Plan B does raise taxes. Also note the claim that politicians made the no-tax pledge not to Norquist, but to their constituents. Pope Grover trotted out that same logic recently in his dispute with Sen. Saxby Chambliss, claiming that “If (Chambliss) plans to vote for higher taxes to pay for Obama-sized government, he should address the people of Georgia and let them know that he plans to break his promise to them. The senator’s reference to me is odd. His promise is to the people of Georgia.”

Yet it is Norquist, not the people of Georgia, or Alabama, or North Dakota, who claims the power to define a clear tax hike as not a tax hike at all.

As a further sign of trouble, late last night Boehner and his allies tried to sweeten Plan B by adding spending cuts to the measure, including cuts that would gut ObamaCare. That may help the speaker through this most immediate crisis, but he also knows that when the time comes to recruit GOP votes for a final, negotiated package to avert the fiscal cliff, that package will not include cuts to ObamaCare.

A second GOP bill, also added to the day’s calendar to make Plan B easier to swallow, would end all defense cuts scheduled to take place under sequestration and replace them with still more cuts to social programs. That way, 100 percent of the cuts would come from entitlements and other programs, while defense spending is untouched.

The bottom line remains the same: House Republicans are badly out of step with the American people.

In another in a long string of such polls, a Washington Post/ABC News poll released this week reported that 74 percent of Americans find tax hikes on those making $250,000 or more “acceptable.” Even 51 percent of Republicans find that acceptable. And 76 percent of Americans said House Republicans are not willing to compromise enough.

Overall, just 28 percent back cuts to Medicaid, just 34 percent back reductions in future growth of Social Security benefits and only 36 percent back raising the Medicare eligibility age to 67. The area that draws the most support for cutbacks (defense, at 42 percent; 48 percent among independents) is the only area in which Republicans refuse to even consider cuts.

That does not mean that cuts should not be made, in defense as well as social programs. Our fiscal problems cannot be corrected through tax hikes alone, nor through spending cuts alone. It has to be both. And by Boehner’s own admission, President Obama has proposed some $850 billion in spending cuts (the administration says the total is closer to $1.2 trillion once you throw in lower interest payments.)

Overall, those polling numbers tell us that Boehner has very little backing among the American people for the policies that his own caucus is insisting that he pursue to the bitter end. He knows that, and he’s trying to get that point across to his caucus. But in too many cases, he is preaching practicality to people to whom appeals to practicality smack of early-onset RINOism, an often fatal disease in that group.

– Jay Bookman

830 comments Add your comment

straitroad

December 20th, 2012
9:17 am

The taxation side of the argument is purely political theater. We won’t begin to work the problem until we reduce spending.

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
9:18 am

John is in a mighty fix to be sure.

Does he want to keep his job or do his job?

Peadawg

December 20th, 2012
9:20 am

“Overall, just 28 percent back cuts to Medicaid, just 34 percent back reductions in future growth of Social Security benefits and only 36 percent back raising the Medicare eligibility age to 67. ”

I’M SHOCKED!!!!!

josef

December 20th, 2012
9:20 am

al SHARIFF TORQUEMADA

“Here’s the angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin rationale…”

So, it’s all a lot of cabbala? I thought so, but it’s nice to have those suspicions confirmed. :-)

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
9:22 am

straitroad

December 20th, 2012
9:17 am
The taxation side of the argument is purely political theater. We won’t begin to work the problem until we reduce spending.
.
.
.
You do mean to more accurately say reduce spending even more, correct?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

F. Sinkwich

December 20th, 2012
9:23 am

I think Boehner should just roll over and give O’bozo and his euro-socialist cluster everything they want.

RIP USA 1776-2012

Class of '98

December 20th, 2012
9:23 am

It’s not easy being orange.

alittlecommonsense

December 20th, 2012
9:23 am

Looks like Boehner is trying very hard to compromise. You were calling the Republicans intransigent and unwilling to compromise before the election. Looks to me like Boehner is trying to compromise and Obama is the one who is intransigent. It doesn’t look like he will even accept the balanced approach that he campaigned on.

Class of '98

December 20th, 2012
9:26 am

Granny, even assuming that Forbes article is correct, it does not indicate spending CUTS. It indicates a decrease in spending GROWTH.

There is a difference.

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
9:26 am

F. Sinkwich

December 20th, 2012
9:23 am
I think Boehner should just roll over and give O’bozo and his euro-socialist cluster everything they want.

RIP USA 1776-2012
.
.
.

There he goes again…damning America.

Georgia

December 20th, 2012
9:27 am

Early-onset RINOism!! great stuff.

alittlecommonsense

December 20th, 2012
9:28 am

Granny – that link that you attached has been widely debunked. It uses tricks such as assigning bills that Obama signed (stimulus) to Bush because they preceeded the first Obama budget.

F. Sinkwich

December 20th, 2012
9:31 am

“There he goes again…damning America.”

Not me.

O’bozo voters did that in November.

Paul

December 20th, 2012
9:31 am

Speaker Boehner is trying to reason with the unreasonable. But he needs at least some of them to reach an agreement with the White House. So he’s moved from no taxes, then led them to increases on those earning more than a million – I hope it’s his version of tossing the frog in the pot of cold water and raising the heat a little at a time.

“considering this tax bill contains no tax increases of any kind — in fact, it permanently prevents them… ATR will not consider a vote for this measure a violation of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.”

so if it’s not a tax increase on those making over a million a year, it’s not a tax increase on those making more than $250k or $400k, either. Looks like the Pope isn’t infallible, after all.

Having said all that, Democratic proposals for cuts are still inadequate. That Republicans seem amenable to them says a lot about what Republicans really think.

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
9:31 am

Class of 98

And is that a problem?

Less spending?

Goodness Gracious?

Does this make you happier?

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/110606/obama-deficit-reduction-offer-spending-cut-tax-increase-boehner

Corbin Sharpe. Baby Boomer...and Ban the Gun Thug!

December 20th, 2012
9:32 am

Sinkwich,
you are becoming the Joe Btfsplk of Jay’s blog…

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
9:33 am

alittlecommonsense

December 20th, 2012
9:28 am
Granny – that link that you attached has been widely debunked. It uses tricks such as assigning bills that Obama signed (stimulus) to Bush because they preceeded the first Obama budget.
.
.
.
Debunked? Widely?

Oh please share…I Can hardly wait.

Regnad Kcin

December 20th, 2012
9:33 am

I think Boehner is offering his Plan B as a smokescreen, allowing him cover to say “look at Plan B – it had everything the Tparty wanted – I tried”. Boehner will ultimately cave, but this is an attempt to acheive some “street cred” first.

josef

December 20th, 2012
9:33 am

The economics end of all this is alien territory to me. But Jay’s metaphor in this post does make sense. This whole stand off smacks of an entrenched orthodoxy standing its ground against the forces propelling an age of Reformation. Perhaps Boehner should revisit Savanarola and Hus…

Brosephus™

December 20th, 2012
9:33 am

I’M SHOCKED!!!!!

Why? Medicaid and Social Security have their own funding streams. Increase the number of people working jobs other than minimum wage clerking jobs at Walmart, and you increase the revenue stream to those programs without tinkering with a damn thing. Unless you and everybody else is willing to simply fund those programs from the general fund, they should not be part of a conversation dealing with general fund program cuts.

As to Jay’s article, regardless to what Boehner thinks he can do, the position of advanage belongs to Obama as he doesn’t have to sign a single thing to get the tax hike that he wants. As an added bonus, he’ll also give the GOP the spending cuts they want, so the ideal compromise is for nothing to get signed into law.

Sure, we’ll likely trigger a global recession and all, but what’s a little pain in order to get our spending under control, right? Isn’t that what the GOP has been preaching all along? They should pack their sh*t and go home until the next session starts as far as I am concerned. They were elected to do a job, and they chose this route as their path forward. I say let’s hit their path full steam so people can truly experience the jackassery they’ve been voting for repeatedly. Maybe this will finally wake people up and actively pay attention to these things all the way to the voting booth.

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
9:34 am

F. Sinkwich

December 20th, 2012
9:31 am
“There he goes again…damning America.”

Not me.

O’bozo voters did that in November.
.
.
.
Ah, nope.

skipper

December 20th, 2012
9:37 am

Bro……….well said!

Corbin Sharpe. Baby Boomer...and Ban the Gun Thug!

December 20th, 2012
9:38 am

Bro’
The GOP just want to put medicare and social security in private hands…can’t have a couple of programs that some fat cat can’t make money off of….

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
9:39 am

Bro

Here! Here!

UNCLE SAMANTHA

December 20th, 2012
9:41 am

Brosephus™

December 20th, 2012
9:33 am
I’M SHOCKED!!!!!

Why? Medicaid and Social Security have their own funding streams. Increase the number of people working jobs other than minimum wage clerking jobs at Walmart, and you increase the revenue stream to those programs without tinkering with a damn thing. Unless you and everybody else is willing to simply fund those programs from the general fund, they should not be part of a conversation dealing with general fund program cuts.

=====================================================================

the math doesn’t add up………. the baby boomers will suck money to the RED in these programs as they age

the revenue streams include IOU’s (bonds) which is money borrowed from the the entitlements spent on the general revenues………. the only reason they will maintain solvency in the near future is that the general revenue funds must pay the money back into SS and MEDICARE

but then that takes up money from general revenues that could be spent feeding starving children

BOTH PARTIES HAVE USED ACCOUNTING TRICKERY………….. and the ponzi scheme is about to collapse when the full brunt of the baby boomers RETIRE

Aquagirl

December 20th, 2012
9:42 am

Ah, nope.

You’ll have to excuse Sinky, he and other menz like Pope Grover are frustrated because they don’t control everything any more. Very tough on their unrestrained ids.

Therefore, voters disagree with angry white men = voters clearly want to damn America.

Welcome to the Occupation

December 20th, 2012
9:42 am

Ah yes, those intractable Republicans are at it again! If they were only reasonable like us end-of-history Democrats by default.

You by chance do any writing on the side for MSNBC, Jay? :)

larry

December 20th, 2012
9:43 am

Why? Medicaid and Social Security have their own funding streams. Increase the number of people working jobs other than minimum wage clerking jobs at Walmart, and you increase the revenue stream to those programs without tinkering with a damn thing. Unless you and everybody else is willing to simply fund those programs from the general fund, they should not be part of a conversation dealing with general fund program cuts.

Agreed!! Lets see………..what do we fund we our general income taxes………. oh yeah, defense.

Mr. Holmes

December 20th, 2012
9:43 am

Serious, nonpartisan (I hope) question: Why is the convention to call this or that tax legislation “permanent.” Nothing is permanent; Congress can always pass laws that reverse former laws. I guess I understand “permanence” is placed here in opposition to “temporary,” but considering how much of the population can barely read past a headline, doesn’t it at the least misrepresent the issue? Why not just leave off the adjective entirely? If something is temporary, then call it that, but in the absence of the word all laws would be assumed to have no sunset.

Paul

December 20th, 2012
9:44 am

alittlecommonsense

” It uses tricks such as assigning bills that Obama signed (stimulus) to Bush because they preceeded the first Obama budget.”

Even transferring the FY09 stimulus to Obama and attributing the rest of the FY09 budget to Bush (a third of which was a tax cut – you want to repeal that?) does not materially affect the main point.

AmericaShrugged

December 20th, 2012
9:44 am

Norquist might have a point by the WH own reckoning. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/congressional_republican_plan_b_analysis.pdf
Looks like the millionaires get a tax increase for income over $1M and a tax decrease of about $50,000 less on the first million. So if you have say $1.1 to 1.8M in taxable income you’ll actually pay less taxes!!!

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

December 20th, 2012
9:44 am

Well, who cares about this Physical Cliff when tomorrow the Rapture comes and it’s the end of the world? Funny how the Lord would let them heathen Mayans know which day it’s coming and leave us hard-worshipping Christians in the dark about it.

Anyway, I give it some thought and it come to me that it might make sense to let ‘er rip today, seeing as how I’m kinda like the high school senior that already earned enough credits to graduate and is just hanging around for a semester. I think I’ve earned enough credit to get took up with the Lord tomorrow.

So if you’re a Ripper, you got to have a Rippee, right? And that brought to mind women. And then it come to me that all the women these days are like Matti and Aquagirl. They can say one word and it turns you as limp as a earthworm in a downpour. They might as well have knifes in their hands.

So I reckon I’ll just spend my last day on earth hauling beer for all the Sinners to drink. Heck, they got to have something to do while us Christians are walking the Streets of Gold, and it might as well be drinking.

Have a good Thursday everybody.

barking frog

December 20th, 2012
9:44 am

and just how is the president going to be responsible for the expiration
of the bush tax cuts by refusing to sign any tax law or responsible for
the sequestration law ? the speaker is pulling this from inappropriate
places….

Brosephus™

December 20th, 2012
9:45 am

skipper

Appreciated. I’m just growing very tired of this crap altogether. I would rather deal with the oncoming crap as opposed to having to deal with some hastily thrown together crap that will likely have us worse off than if we simply just let things happen as they already planned.

Corbin: The GOP just want to put medicare and social security in private hands…

That would be the single worst mistake that we, as a country, would be able to make if that happens. People are already getting screwed without a reacharound or astroglide with 401ks. By putting those programs into private hands, we’ll basically be nothing more than a commodity to Wall Street and health care providers. If they were worried about the ACA rationing care, what do they think a private company, who’s primary focus is profit, will do to someone who’s going to cost more to keep alive than die?

AmericaShrugged

December 20th, 2012
9:48 am

larry – That’’s sort of true but right now SS benefits exceed it’s not-interest revenues so part of SS benefits are being paid with the interest earned on the treasuries in the trust fund. That interest comes out of the general fund.

Brosephus™

December 20th, 2012
9:50 am

the math doesn’t add up………. the baby boomers will suck money to the RED in these programs as they age

B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T!!!!!

One of Reagan’s greatest feats was that he foresaw that and actually increased the revenues going to Social Security to account for that. What Reagan could not foresee or anticipate is that our “business leaders” would offshore so many damn jobs that we don’t have the job base to support the retiring baby boomers. The income lost by offshoring can’t be replaced, but we can still absorb the baby boomers if we create CAREER TYPE jobs and quit with this whole idea of Walmart clerking ourselves into the future.

Corporations are making record profits. Wealth is accumulating in the top 1% in record numbers. We just saw approximately $2Billion contributed to a presidential campaign in a year’s time. Why can’t we see $2Billion contributed to a job campaign like that? Why is it that corporations and the wealthy are hoarding money instead of using it to make more money? Do you not realize that circulating money is what grows our economy? Hoarding doesn’t, and hoarding actually hurts the economy because it reduces the amount of money in circulation.

bill arp

December 20th, 2012
9:52 am

So we’ll be able to fund our government for 8 days? Awesome! Plus, we get government spending reduced in years 9 and 10 of the deal. This sounds great!

Reward the rich, they do all the hiring!

GT

December 20th, 2012
9:53 am

Georgians as usual show up with very little resume, a state last in about every ranking, but who errantly believe they have something to offer a beleaguered country. The greatest thing Georgia could do is just get the hell out of the way. A lot of this expense they complain about is what floats the state, more so than say New Jersey for mention of one. Lord knows if they could have only won that war this country would have been relieved of this mental illness that has plagued our population since Georgia’s conception.

Aquagirl

December 20th, 2012
9:53 am

Agreed!! Lets see………..what do we fund we our general income taxes………. oh yeah, defense.

You mean we should expect something besides the partially operational DOD wet dream F-22 in return for our tax dollars? Americans are so selfish nowadays.

nobodyyouknow

December 20th, 2012
9:55 am

Politcians STINK! they all lie. All one has to do is look back when OOOO’Bamma was running for president. He promised alot but has delivered little. And Boehner is no different. He looks like a mafia spokes person. Look folks’ they have been stealing from the American people for YEARS. They all leave Washington alot richer than when they first arrived there. Point fingers all you want ,just like they do, but it will never change.

TaxPayer

December 20th, 2012
9:55 am

Man, I would not like to be John Boehner these days

I know what you mean, Jay. Can you imagine sitting down with the Georgia Republican delegation and trying to have a sane, rational, reality-based discussion with Broun injecting his “science is that stuff that comes straight from the pits of hell,” and Price continuously interupting with, “I Object, Madam Speaker.”

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
9:56 am

bill arp

December 20th, 2012
9:52 am

Reward the rich, they do all the hiring!
.
.
.
Not meant to be a factual statement

bill arp

December 20th, 2012
9:56 am

The more people working, the more tax revenue comes in,,, not, the less people working, so let’s tax the very few wealthy folks to make up the difference. It just doesn’t seem like that’s going to work.

bill arp

December 20th, 2012
9:58 am

i simply don’t personally know of any poor people hiring. heck, not even ‘middle class’ folks. But if you know of some, please let us know..

josef

December 20th, 2012
9:58 am

GT

Just what do you know about Georgia at its inception? Methinks Abigail Minis and Mary Musgrove would chew you up and spit you out in no time flat…

mm

December 20th, 2012
9:58 am

Keep it cons. In 2 years, you will lose the house and will have less than 40 votes in the senate.

Just Saying..

December 20th, 2012
9:59 am

The Republican position is: “We insist on bigger spending cuts, just not as big as the cuts we’ve already agreed to.”

The irony is precious. And beyond them.

Doggone/GA

December 20th, 2012
9:59 am

“i simply don’t personally know of any poor people hiring.”

Actually, you do. That you don’t realize it says a lot about how little you know about what drives hiring.

tm

December 20th, 2012
9:59 am

Why? Medicaid and Social Security have their own funding streams. Increase the number of people working jobs other than minimum wage clerking jobs at Walmart, and you increase the revenue stream to those programs without tinkering with a damn thing

——Mr. Ponzi meet Mr. Madoff.

gadem also known as Benghazi

December 20th, 2012
9:59 am

Boehner would be wise to be a leader and not a follower…

Redcoat

December 20th, 2012
9:59 am

Did anyone expect Jay to ever want to be like Boehner?…haha…..Democrats own it……are are still in charge of labeling and defining. I wonder if a Democrat will explain all the good things that will happen, not use that “it would have been much worse if otherwise”?

East Cobb RINO, Inc (LLC)

December 20th, 2012
10:00 am

How about this deal. Let the GOP vote and pass their Plan B and send it off to the Senate. Harry Reid will allow a vote in the Senate on Plan B only if Boehner allows a vote on the bill passed by the Senate currently stalled in committee which extends tax cuts for over 250K. Basically, I will allow a vote on your bill if you will allow a vote on mine. Boehner is scared if that bill makes it to the House floor, it will pass.

joe

December 20th, 2012
10:01 am

I’m sure he would say the same about you…quite literally.

Brosephus™

December 20th, 2012
10:02 am

——Mr. Ponzi meet Mr. Madoff.

I see the Republican Jackass Brigade is marching in.

I’m out. Y’all have fun as I’ve hit my yearly limit of jackassery.

DownInAlbany

December 20th, 2012
10:02 am

Whether it be increased taxed on the $250k or the $1 million, it accomplishes next to nothing. It funds the federal government for what, eight days or something like that?

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

December 20th, 2012
10:03 am

” ……………….. and then turned and left the room, unwilling to take a question.”

Ah ……………. and how many times has Obama done just that ?????

Who cares!

December 20th, 2012
10:03 am

My 12 year old is a lot smarter than Joe Biden, he does say stupid stuff!

barking frog

December 20th, 2012
10:03 am

bill arp
The more people working, the more tax revenue comes in,,, not, the less people working, so let’s tax the very few wealthy folks to make up the difference. It just doesn’t seem like that’s going to work.
……………………………………………………………………………………………
of course it will work. when the wealthy owners of corporations learn
they must use it or lose it they will learn to ‘build it’ in the US.

stands for decibels

December 20th, 2012
10:04 am

Pope Grover I of Norquist has issued an papal bull

After I stopped laughing–at first I thought Jay was just a little over-the-top with this.

Then I read the bull. Specifically:

When viewed with this in mind, and considering this tax bill contains no tax increases of any kind — in fact, it permanently prevents them

[...]

this tax bill contains no tax increases of any kind — in fact, it permanently prevents them

So, glaciers–not permanent. Continents–also not permanent.

But tax regs? Pope Norquist says they’re “permanent,” so I guess it must be so. Along with that “permanent majority” they were building back in the Bush days.

/drive-by

Thulsa Doom

December 20th, 2012
10:05 am

Respect Saban.

And don’t bring a leprechaun to an elephant fight.

TaxPayer

December 20th, 2012
10:06 am

Following the ATR “logic”, the one million dollar threshold can be replaced with ANY other value and still meet the given claim of no tax hike.

Lord Help Us

December 20th, 2012
10:06 am

3Q GDP revised UP to 3.1%…Yup, RIP America…

Jm

December 20th, 2012
10:07 am

“The statement is a clear lie, because as even Boehner has said, Plan B does raise taxes.”

Silliness. Taxes are already schedule to go up. Keeping taxes the same is a tax cut. Bringing tax rates lower than they otherwise would under current law is a tax cut.

jewcowboy

December 20th, 2012
10:08 am

Gail Collins has a great analogy in her column today.

“Attempts to avert the infamous “fiscal cliff” are like a super-high-stakes card game. But you have to imagine a game in which one player needs to go into a back room before he makes his bet and get the approval of a herd of rabid ferrets.”

Guess who are the herd of rabid ferrets?

Thulsa Doom

December 20th, 2012
10:08 am

“I see the Republican Jackass Brigade is marching in.”

Fret not Brocephus. You have 10 divisions of Demorat assclowns to fight them with.

Granny Godzilla

December 20th, 2012
10:08 am

bill arp

December 20th, 2012
9:58 am
i simply don’t personally know of any poor people hiring. heck, not even ‘middle class’ folks. But if you know of some, please let us know..
.
.
.
Perhaps you should get out more.

Oh, and, not sure you’d be what I would consider
worth a letter of recommendation.

Redcoat

December 20th, 2012
10:09 am

Thulsa Doom……those elephants better be ready for that leprechaun “magic” they seem to concoct at the right times…….just saying

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

December 20th, 2012
10:10 am

HEADLINE (New York Times): Reporters Criticized at News Conference

“His words, after five days of extensive news coverage and national debate, were intensely focused on gun violence. He addressed no other topics. Yet judging by the questions that followed his address, most of the members of the Washington press corps had other things on their minds.

“I’d like to ask you about the other serious issue consuming this town right now, the fiscal cliff,” was the first question, from The Associated Press’s correspondent, Ben Feller.

Mr. Obama answered. Then came the next question, again about the so-called “fiscal cliff”: “What is your next move?” Then: “You mentioned the $700,000, $800,000 — are you willing to move on income level?” And so on, for at least 15 minutes, before a question about gun violence was finally asked, by David Jackson of USA Today.”

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/19/at-news-conference-reporters-skip-past-gun-control-and-face-instant-criticism/

Jackie

December 20th, 2012
10:10 am

Interesting reading detailing the top debt holders of the US government.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/biggest-holders-of-us-gov-t-debt.html

Thulsa Doom

December 20th, 2012
10:11 am

“3Q GDP revised UP to 3.1%…Yup, RIP America…”

Yawn. Lemme know when we get 7% growth and 1 million new jobs in one month- like we did under Reagan. Just the facts…

ByteMe - Got ilk?

December 20th, 2012
10:11 am

Sure, we’ll likely trigger a global recession and all, but what’s a little pain in order to get our spending under control, right?

Europe is already in a recession, so anything that happens here isn’t going to be the “trigger” for that.

However, we’re looking at a GDP reduction of 4% when we’re growing at about 2.5%, so what we’re talking about is a pretty mild recession… which we’re due for anyway.

Regnad Kcin

December 20th, 2012
10:11 am

“Whether it be increased taxed on the $250k or the $1 million, it accomplishes next to nothing. It funds the federal government for what, eight days or something like that?”

I agree with DIA that the proposed tax increase is too small.
I agree with DIA that we should increase taxes about 40 times the current proposal, so we can finance the government for the entire year.

Sheesh…

indigo

December 20th, 2012
10:12 am

The Republicans are answerable to Pope Grover AND the NRA.

I wonder if Pope Grover and the NRA are in a power struggle to see who will rule over the lackeys.

Anyway, I’s starting to look like we’re actually going over the cliff.

If that happens, look for a world record set for the loudness and shrillness of Democrats and Republicans blaming each other.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

December 20th, 2012
10:12 am

Our government/economy reminds me of someone who is really out of shape and needs to “muscle up”.

The Republicans have a strict strength coach who believes in working out at the gym the hard way………….. “no pain, no gain”.

The Democrats have someone who reads the “Charles Atlas” advertisements in comic books.

Lord Help Us

December 20th, 2012
10:13 am

‘Lemme know when we get 7% growth and 1 million new jobs in one month- like we did under Reagan. Just the facts…’

Lemme know when we hear a President say, ‘this sucker could go down’ – like we did under W.

Thulsa Doom

December 20th, 2012
10:13 am

I’ll be out the rest of the day. Gotta go before those 10 divisions of assclowns from the Demorat party show up. Plus I gotta work to pay the taxes to make sure they get their daily free shyte. Ya’ll be good. Or not.

clem

December 20th, 2012
10:14 am

boehner needs to tell the georgians God told him to raise the tax rate.

DownInAlbany

December 20th, 2012
10:18 am

Regnad Kcin

December 20th, 2012
10:11 am

“Whether it be increased taxed on the $250k or the $1 million, it accomplishes next to nothing. It funds the federal government for what, eight days or something like that?”

I agree with DIA that the proposed tax increase is too small.
I agree with DIA that we should increase taxes about 40 times the current proposal, so we can finance the government for the entire year.

Sheesh…

Don’t attempt to interpret my words. The point is, both sides of the argument are utterly ridiculous. Anyone who believes that either side is negotiating in good faith, with long-term solutions is a fool.

Show me where I said any of things or admit that you are a LIAR!

UNCLE SAMANTHA

December 20th, 2012
10:19 am

IGNORANT

Bowles is a DEMOCRAT and understands the trickery of washington……… liberals need to educate themselves

=============================================================
If it’s solvent until 2037, why pick on Social Security?
If nothing is done, benefits would need to be cut by 22 percent to keep the system in balance

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41997468/ns/politics/t/if-its-solvent-until-why-pick-social-security/

Lynnie Gal

December 20th, 2012
10:20 am

It’s impossible to reason with ideological lunatics, especially those who have hostages, like our economy, strapped to their waists and are threatening to blow it and themselves up to make their ideological point. In that way, the TP Republicans have something in common with Islamic Extremists. TP Republicans are Ideological extremists, not “Patriots” like they envision themselves. They are suicide bombers hellbent on blowing themselves and everybody else up as their New Year’s Eve gift to the country. Tick, tick, tick…

GT

December 20th, 2012
10:20 am

And that dear josef is a large part of our problem. A violent response from Abigail Minis and Mary Musgrove is very inherit and then who cleans up the mess that used to be me? The federal government I am sure.

UNCLE SAMANTHA

December 20th, 2012
10:21 am

the demogrpahic numbers don’t lie

liberals like to CHAMPION demographics in electoral elections……. but when it comes to the finances of SS and MEDICARE they belittle the demographics

Erwin's cat

December 20th, 2012
10:21 am

bookman parrot

December 20th, 2012
10:22 am

libs are dancing everywhere…. because as long as they defeating the evil con ideology, they are happy… no matter the consequences

Aquagirl

December 20th, 2012
10:22 am

Gotta go before those 10 divisions of assclowns from the Demorat party show up.

Excuses, excuses. We all know Doomy’s running from the terrifying Leprechauns. :)

Nero

December 20th, 2012
10:23 am

LOL!!! Sequestraton here we come!!! HAHAHA!!!!! :)

josef

December 20th, 2012
10:24 am

GT

Abigail and Mary in a “violent” response.” Not sure I’m following that one. Fill me in.

Erwin's cat

December 20th, 2012
10:24 am

josef

December 20th, 2012
10:25 am

Aquagirl

Doom’s off to sell some health insurance! He do love that Obamacare… :-)

teacher

December 20th, 2012
10:26 am

jm,
still think banks don’t do well with QE3?? i was wrong on the time line up 20% in 4 mo not 16 mo.

teacher

September 13th, 2012
4:51 pm

QE3 is great for the banks….like it or not buy BAC and C and make 20% by the end of next yr when they raise divs

Jm

September 13th, 2012
4:58 pm

Teacher 4:51

A. You’re 100% wrong
B. You have it backwards
C. You probably shouldn’t be proffering investment advice, especially since you don’t know what you’re talking about, but even if you did….

bill arp

December 20th, 2012
10:28 am

Uh, please tell me the poor people that I personally know that is hiring. I’m wanting to learn here, not be put down, like some of you are doing..you gotta love folks like you..Treat us equal, but let me make fun of people i don’t even know…nice!

Ronald Reagan

December 20th, 2012
10:30 am

Speaker Boehner is a great man & will make the right decision for the WORKING class citizens! He wouldn’t leave a small group dying like President Barry H. & Hillary R. did in Benghazi!

TaxPayer

December 20th, 2012
10:30 am

“Whether it be increased taxed on the $250k or the $1 million, it accomplishes next to nothing. It funds the federal government for what, eight days or something like that?”

No.

TaxPayer

December 20th, 2012
10:31 am

If bill’s so-called “poor people” were to quit purchasing things, how many jobs would be lost.

stands for decibels

December 20th, 2012
10:34 am

Lemme know when we get 7% growth and 1 million new jobs in one month- like we did under Reagan.

Does Obama get to triple the debt, to 36 trillion, like Reagan did, to accomplish this?

I bet he could manage that GDP/job growth and then some if you’ll allow that.

liz

December 20th, 2012
10:35 am

my plan “b” is to marry johnny boner’s dermatologist.

josef

December 20th, 2012
10:36 am

DownInAlbany

December 20th, 2012
10:38 am

TaxPayer

December 20th, 2012
10:30 am

No, what?

TaxPayer

December 20th, 2012
10:38 am

Lemme know when we get 7% growth and 1 million new jobs in one month- like we did under Reagan.

Will W’s 9 million private sector jobs lost due to his Great Recession do as a consolation prize.

Jackie

December 20th, 2012
10:39 am

The demand-supply concept is still relevant when it comes to the economy. Investors are the owner’s of publicly traded companies with many of those companies having made record profits and are collectively sitting on more than $2 Trillion dollars in cash.

It appears the managers of these companies are not leveraging the available resources to obtain a greater market share and a greater return on investment for the actual owners of said corporation.