Tah Dumb!
The GOP's slip is showing
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-gops-slip-is-showing/2011/12/22/gIQAnhgPCP_story.html?hpid=z3
This action will have far reaching consequences in this political season. A power play has been made big time and now the destruction of the remnants of the Republican Party are left blowing in the winds of the political wasteland. They have assured the American People four more years of leadership by President Barack Hussein Obama. This is a Victory For Obama but greater still it is a victory for the American Worker, a victory for Social Democracy and victory for the world economy.
As the TeaParty/GOP gets their marginalization due, obstructionism proves it's worthlessness!
All hail to the chief!
Amazing how it worked out:
1. The president requests a 12 month extension on payroll tax cuts, and a tax increase on the wealthy.
2. The house passes a 12 month extension on payroll tax cuts, with no tax increase on the wealthy, and the temporary extension is paid for with spending cuts. No money is robbed from Social Security.
3. The president openly poo-poo's the plan, and demands that the senate come out with an alternative 12 month extension, and tax increase on the wealthy.
4. The senate Dems come back with a 2 month extension, and the money comes partially out of Social Security, and partially from a tax on new home buyers, and mortgage refinancing. To get enough support to pass it the Rethuglicans add the approval of a longitudinal Oil pipeline across the United States that would create over 200,000 jobs and drop the cost of energy.
5. Bill is poo-pooed by the president because it has the pipeline and no tax increase on the wealthy, BUT not because it raises taxes on families trying to buy, refinance, or just stay in their homes, and not because it steals from Social Security, and not because it is only two months.
6. Christmas Vacation looming.
7. Bill very reluctantly passed.
8. President signs a bill that approves the largest pipeline project in over a decade. Trades a small two month tax cut for a tax increase on people buying homes, and steals money from Social Security. Gets no tax increase on "those not paying their fair share." Now has to face the debate again in February when the tax cut is slated to expire again 8 months from the election, where another failure could really hurt him.
President Obama's only victory here is that he passed the first private sector jobs initiative in his three years as president, and he can't tout it, because he doesn't have the spin skills of Bill Clinton. You can also bet that you won't hear him talking about taking the money from grandma or middle class families trying to buy or refinance their homes.
Nice victory.
Quote from: Gaspar on December 23, 2011, 09:52:55 AM
Amazing how it worked out:
1. The president requests a 12 month extension on payroll tax cuts, and a tax increase on the wealthy.
2. The house passes a 12 month extension on payroll tax cuts, with no tax increase on the wealthy, and the temporary extension is paid for with spending cuts. No money is robbed from Social Security.
3. The president openly poo-poo's the plan, and demands that the senate come out with an alternative 12 month extension, and tax increase on the wealthy.
4. The senate Dems come back with a 2 month extension, and the money comes partially out of Social Security, and partially from a tax on new home buyers, and mortgage refinancing. To get enough support to pass it the Rethuglicans add the approval of a longitudinal Oil pipeline across the United States that would create over 200,000 jobs and drop the cost of energy.
5. Bill is poo-pooed by the president because it has the pipeline and no tax increase on the wealthy, BUT not because it raises taxes on families trying to buy, refinance, or just stay in their homes, and not because it steals from Social Security, and not because it is only two months.
6. Christmas Vacation looming.
7. Bill very reluctantly passed.
8. President signs a bill that approves the largest pipeline project in over a decade. Trades a small two month tax cut for a tax increase on people buying homes, and steals money from Social Security. Gets no tax increase on "those not paying their fair share." Now has to face the debate again in February when the tax cut is slated to expire again 8 months from the election, where another failure could really hurt him.
President Obama's only victory here is that he passed the first private sector jobs initiative in his three years as president, and he can't tout it, because he doesn't have the spin skills of Bill Clinton. You can also bet that you won't hear him talking about taking the money from grandma or middle class families trying to buy or refinance their homes.
Nice victory.
Maybe he should hire you Scott, since you have the ultimate skills of spinning nothing into something...
:D
Quote from: Gaspar on December 23, 2011, 09:52:55 AM
Amazing how it worked out:
1. The president requests a 12 month extension on payroll tax cuts, and a tax increase on the wealthy.
2. The house passes a 12 month extension on payroll tax cuts, with no tax increase on the wealthy, and the temporary extension is paid for with spending cuts. No money is robbed from Social Security.
3. The president openly poo-poo's the plan, and demands that the senate come out with an alternative 12 month extension, and tax increase on the wealthy.
4. The senate Dems come back with a 2 month extension, and the money comes partially out of Social Security, and partially from a tax on new home buyers, and mortgage refinancing. To get enough support to pass it the Rethuglicans add the approval of a longitudinal Oil pipeline across the United States that would create over 200,000 jobs and drop the cost of energy.
5. Bill is poo-pooed by the president because it has the pipeline and no tax increase on the wealthy, BUT not because it raises taxes on families trying to buy, refinance, or just stay in their homes, and not because it steals from Social Security, and not because it is only two months.
6. Christmas Vacation looming.
7. Bill very reluctantly passed.
8. President signs a bill that approves the largest pipeline project in over a decade. Trades a small two month tax cut for a tax increase on people buying homes, and steals money from Social Security. Gets no tax increase on "those not paying their fair share." Now has to face the debate again in February when the tax cut is slated to expire again 8 months from the election, where another failure could really hurt him.
President Obama's only victory here is that he passed the first private sector jobs initiative in his three years as president, and he can't tout it, because he doesn't have the spin skills of Bill Clinton. You can also bet that you won't here him talking about taking the money from grandma or middle class families trying to buy or refinance their homes.
Nice victory.
Can you cite these? Has he signed it yet? Very reluctantly by whom?
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 09:57:11 AM
Can you cite these? Has he signed it yet? Very reluctantly by whom?
The House
No gaspar.
The victory isn't the past, it is the present. Today, republican leaders look played.
Every media outlet is carrying the story. They all have the same storylines. The Tea Party is weakened, Boehner is on his way out, and Obama is flying to Hawaii for vacation.
You should be thankful that Senate republicans convinced House republicans to cave before it got worse.
Quote from: Gaspar on December 23, 2011, 09:58:02 AM
The House
The house? All of them? Do you mean just the reps who didn't show up to object like they'd tweeted last night?
Quote from: RecycleMichael on December 23, 2011, 10:03:48 AM
No gaspar.
The victory isn't the past, it is the present. Today, republican leaders look played.
Every media outlet is carrying the story. They all have the same storylines. The Tea Party is weakened, Boehner is on his way out, and Obama is flying to Hawaii for vacation.
You should be thankful that Senate republicans convinced House republicans to cave before it got worse.
Oh, I am, and you are right on every count.
My point is that when you look at what was asked for and what was passed, you wonder who won?
Will Liberals see beyond the delicious politics, and realize that they were just delivered a pile?
They got a bill that opposes, almost everything they stand for.
It taxes the poor, helps bankrupt granny's medicare, builds oil pipelines, leaves the rich untouched, oh. . .and I almost forgot, It's also extends Doc Fix so that evil-rich doctors get to keep more of their income.
Oh Gassie, there's no wonder. There's just a failed tactic of obstructionism with deep roots in racism. And this was just another battle in this new era civil war. And it's not class warfare either. Just can't wait til Mitt gets fitted with the fact that he is a %1er. Landslide has started.
Reagan raised taxes eleven times as President. :)
Quote from: Gaspar on December 23, 2011, 10:17:23 AM
Oh, I am, and you are right on every count.
My point is that when you look at what was asked for and what was passed, you wonder who won?
Will Liberals see beyond the delicious politics, and realize that they were just delivered a pile?
They got a bill that opposes, almost everything they stand for.
It taxes the poor, helps bankrupt granny's medicare, builds oil pipelines, leaves the rich untouched, oh. . .and I almost forgot, It's also extends Doc Fix so that evil-rich doctors get to keep more of their income.
The social liberals aren't subject to the cult of personality syndrome many of the social conservatives have been fed by a very successful "news" organization.
Most know the politicians have no-one's back.
What website are you pulling this stuff off of?
Quote from: Teatownclown on December 23, 2011, 10:28:12 AM
Just can't wait til Mitt gets fitted with the fact that he is a %1er.
Which of our Presidents have not been a 1%er?
Edit:
The present one certainly is.
QuoteToday, the President released his 2010 federal income and gift tax returns. He and the First Lady filed their income tax return jointly and reported an adjusted gross income of $1,728,096. The vast majority of the family's income is the proceeds from the sale of the President's books. The Obamas paid $453,770 in total federal tax.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/18/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-tax-returns-and-tax-receipts
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 10:34:52 AM
Which of our Presidents have not been a 1%er?
Edit:
The present one certainly is.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/18/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-tax-returns-and-tax-receipts
And he earned it.....unlike Mitty
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 10:34:52 AM
Which of our Presidents have not been a 1%er?
Harry Truman was probably the closest to not being a 1%er. Just a guess.
Gas, your penchant for spin and the ommission of facts to build the constructs necessary to justify the overt hatred of Obama, Dems and Liberals is probably what loses conservatives the presidency and control of congress. You have drawn the wrong conclusions because every thing to you guys is winning or losing.
Meanwhile the general population (outside of Iowa) draw a different conclusion and are baffled by Tea Partiers and conservatives who have succeeded in painting themselves as favoring cuts for the rich yet not the average guy. Whether that is true or not, the intransigence of the TPers is their demise.
BTW, all those terrible things you allege Obama just did to old folks, and libs....is only for two months!! This gets taken up again when they return. Hopefully those dummies in the house will have sealed their demise by electing a new, dummie leader or will learn to follow leaders with more experience.
Quote from: Gaspar on December 23, 2011, 10:17:23 AM
Oh, I am, and you are right on every count.
My point is that when you look at what was asked for and what was passed, you wonder who won?
Will Liberals see beyond the delicious politics, and realize that they were just delivered a pile?
They got a bill that opposes, almost everything they stand for.
It taxes the poor, helps bankrupt granny's medicare, builds oil pipelines, leaves the rich untouched, oh. . .and I almost forgot, It's also extends Doc Fix so that evil-rich doctors get to keep more of their income.
You're not entirely wrong, but that's gotten lost in the spectacular failure of the GOP to keep its caucus together. It's been good TV, honestly, and that's overshadowed the truth of the bill.
It was also good TV for another reason: it very graphically proved how unwilling the Tea Partiers are to compromise with the Dems and Obama, even if the Dems and Obama bend over backwards to make a deal work. Which, as you say above, is essentially what happened. The TP Rump of the House won't give Obama a win under any circumstances, whether it's good for the country or not, whether it even fits their own ideology or not.
All of this proved that the Tea Party agenda contains only one concrete plank: screw Obama no matter what.
This is such a blow to gaspar and his band of obstructionists.
A tax cut for the middle class, even for only two months makes his head explode. He has been hammering about a 2% to 4% Bush tax cut for the rich for months now and how important is is. Then the middle class gets a 2% cut and the sky is falling.
Thank you Obama for the Christmas gift. It ain't the money, it is the spectacular show it brought.
Quote from: Teatownclown on December 23, 2011, 10:50:16 AM
And he earned it.....unlike Mitty
At least Mit hasn't turned his silver spoon into a plastic one.
Quote from: we vs us on December 23, 2011, 11:02:03 AM
spectacular failure of the GOP to keep its caucus together.
Merry Christmas (or whatever holiday you observe) Wevsus.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on December 23, 2011, 11:24:01 AM
A tax cut for the middle class, even for only two months makes his head explode... Then the middle class gets a 2% cut and the sky is falling.
Allowing the existing payroll tax cut to expire would have been a tax hike, at least that's the common phraseology. With that in mind, not allowing the existing payroll tax cut to expire is not a tax cut. People were already only paying that much.
That is, of course, unless you are talking about the Bush tax cuts. Allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire was a return to sanity and certainly not a tax hike.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 11:38:28 AM
That is, of course, unless you are talking about the Bush tax cuts. Allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire was a return to sanity and certainly not a tax hike.
That's not what the GOP's been telling us.
Someone's gotta get a story straight.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 11:42:00 AM
That's not what the GOP's been telling us.
Someone's gotta get a story straight.
That's my point. It depends on whether it's "your" tax cut or the other guys'.
Quote from: Teatownclown on December 23, 2011, 10:50:16 AM
And he earned it.....unlike Mitty
Earned it? He's like the luckiest guy since Ringo Starr or Greg Brady as "Johnny Bravo". He fit the suit that's why he's the Prez.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 10:30:35 AM
The social liberals aren't subject to the cult of personality syndrome
Actually, the opposite is true. That's how we wound up with Obama in the White House.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on December 23, 2011, 11:24:01 AM
This is such a blow to gaspar and his band of obstructionists.
A tax cut for the middle class, even for only two months makes his head explode. He has been hammering about a 2% to 4% Bush tax cut for the rich for months now and how important is is. Then the middle class gets a 2% cut and the sky is falling.
Thank you Obama for the Christmas gift. It ain't the money, it is the spectacular show it brought.
Do you realize that when they allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, the middle class gets a tax increase as well?
Quote from: Conan71 on December 23, 2011, 12:04:05 PM
Actually, the opposite is true. That's how we wound up with Obama in the White House.
I believe it was the cult of Palin that got him in there.
Quote from: Conan71 on December 23, 2011, 12:09:18 PM
Do you realize that when they allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, the middle class gets a tax increase as well?
You don't understand, it's about getting the rich to pay their fair share. Nothing else matters. Plus, Obama can then propose to cut taxes for the middle class to the same level as the Bush cuts. The Bush tax cuts for the rich will be replaced by the (nearly same) Obama tax cuts for the middle and lower classes.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 12:10:55 PM
I believe it was the cult of Palin that got him in there.
Palin certainly helped Obama but the Hopey Changey thing didn't hurt. I saw a real cult or mob mentality with the Hope & Change theme. It was a lot like the Army and Marine chants. It was a lot like the noises a football team makes.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 12:27:18 PM
Palin certainly helped Obama but the Hopey Changey thing didn't hurt. I saw a real cult or mob mentality with the Hope & Change theme. It was a lot like the Army and Marine chants. It was a lot like the noises a football team makes.
It most likely depended on the channels/stations we watched/listened to.
I just realized this is probably this election cycle's Palin.
Electorate: "why should we elect you?"
Democratic candidate 2008: "Did you see what the Republicans did?"
Democratic candidate 2012: "Did you see what the Republicans did?"
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 12:32:22 PM
It most likely depended on the channels/stations we watched/listened to.
I think it was more of one's interpretation of what they saw, perhaps enhanced by the commentators.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 12:35:08 PM
Democratic candidate 2008: "Did you see what the Republicans did?"
Democratic candidate 2012: "Did you see what the Republicans did?"
Republican candidate 2012: "Did you see what the Democrats tried to do?"
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 12:41:16 PM
Republican candidate 2012: "Did you see what the Democrats tried to do?"
Won't work at this time. The GOP debacle is too messed up for now. Now if the Democrats screw up and don't keep reminding everyone of this then maybe you could be right IMO.
Okay, apparently now it is signed by Obama.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/23/politics/congress-payroll-tax-cut/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 (http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/23/politics/congress-payroll-tax-cut/index.html?hpt=hp_t1)
QuoteWashington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama signed a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut Friday, ending what had been a heated political stalemate and sealing a hard-fought win for Democrats on an issue -- taxes -- that has historically favored the GOP.
Earlier in the day, the measure cleared the Democratic-controlled Senate and the Republican-controlled House of Representatives by unanimous consent, a procedural move allowing the measure to pass even though most members of Congress were already home home for the holidays.
Among other things, the $33 billion bill also includes a two-month extension of emergency federal unemployment benefits and the so-called "doc fix," a delay in scheduled payment reductions to doctors who treat Medicare patients.
Congress will consider a longer extension of all three measures when it reconvenes in January.
Obama was also expected to sign a separate appropriations bill funding the government through September 2012, wrapping up a legislative year marked by repeated partisan brinksmanship and declining public approval of a seemingly dysfunctional Congress.
Political analysts believe the showdown over the payroll holiday extension has eroded Republican strength on the party's core issue of lower taxes. While GOP leaders first questioned the merit of the tax holiday and then complained that a short-term extension would be more trouble than it's worth, Obama used the standoff to portray the Republicans as defenders of the rich with a callous attitude toward the burdens of the middle class.
The episode also called into question Speaker John Boehner's control over the House Republican caucus. The speaker, according to multiple accounts, initially favored the two-month extension, which had passed the Senate with an overwhelming bipartisan majority. He was then apparently forced to retreat from that position last weekend in the face of a tea party-fueled revolt in which freshman conservatives in particular demanded an immediate 12-month extension.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 12:43:10 PM
Won't work at this time. The GOP debacle is too messed up for now. Now if the Democrats screw up and don't keep reminding everyone of this then maybe you could be right IMO.
No question, the Republicans caved and screwed up on this one. However, November is a long time in politics. I can understand that you won't agree with the negative connotations of "Look what the Democrats tried to do". I expect you to also understand, but disagree with, the thought that not everyone will have negative feelings for "Did you see what the Republicans did?"
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 01:24:52 PM
No question, the Republicans caved and screwed up on this one. However, November is a long time in politics. I can understand that you won't agree with the negative connotations of "Look what the Democrats tried to do". I expect you to also understand, but disagree with, the thought that not everyone will have negative feelings for "Did you see what the Republicans did?"
Sure. Some people actually supported the Palin decision. I'm sure there are some that supported the 2% bump in payroll tax.
I didn't support either and I'm a Republican.
And now Trump's left the table.
It's all falling apart right in front of us. What shall we do without a real leader?
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/donald-trump-bolts-republican-party-eyeing-other-2012-options/ (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/donald-trump-bolts-republican-party-eyeing-other-2012-options/)
QuoteDonald Trump Bolts Republican Party, Eyeing Other 2012 Options
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 01:34:08 PM
What shall we do without a real leader?
Same thing we are now. :D
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 01:45:35 PM
Same thing we are now. :D
Ah, give in and pass those bills through the house.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 01:27:29 PM
I'm sure there are some that supported the 2% bump in payroll tax.
What I heard was that the House wanted a full year extension, not just 2 months. Very clever portrayal of the House Republicans by the Dems. I have to give them that. Stonewalling on both sides.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 01:47:38 PM
Ah, give in and pass those bills through the house.
Actually, in a few years I am going to turn into a Democrat. I will start collecting Social Security benefits that I have been paying in to for close to 40 years. I want some Obama money. Since I don't have any kids, there is no real reason to care what happens to this country in 40 years because I will be gone by then.
/sarcasm
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 01:56:34 PM
What I heard was that the House wanted a full year extension, not just 2 months. Very clever portrayal of the House Republicans by the Dems. I have to give them that. Stonewalling on both sides.
I think the pipeline was an issue.
The left is jazzed over a freakin 2 month $40 tax cut? Man, those folks must have really been bummed out.
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 02:05:50 PM
The left is jazzed over a freakin 2 month $40 tax cut? Man, those folks must have really been bummed out.
It's a pizza night for a guy and his daughters and three days of heating oil for some one else, they are looking out for the common man. ::)
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 02:05:50 PM
The left is jazzed over a freakin 2 month $40 tax cut? Man, those folks must have really been bummed out.
I think they're jazzed because the GOP appeared to kick its own donkey.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:09:35 PM
I think they're jazzed because the GOP appeared to kick its own donkey.
Probably.
Most of us know none of these guys are looking out for anyone but themselves.
This bad of a meltdown is just an unusual thing to see. There's really no reason for anyone to be jazzed. The "they" are only pushing their screwups a couple of months into the future.
I just didn't want to have to donate more of my money to the waste that is government spending. I've got more important things to do with it.
Quote from: dbacks fan on December 23, 2011, 02:09:07 PM
It's a pizza night for a guy and his daughters and three days of heating oil for some one else, they are looking out for the common man. ::)
If $40/mo is the difference between pizza night or not, you probably need to reassess your priorities.
Pizza is not inexpensive.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:19:45 PM
This bad of a meltdown is just an unusual thing to see. There's really no reason for anyone to be jazzed. The "they" are only pushing their screwups a couple of months into the future.
If this gets pushed out, 2 months at a time, I wonder who will get the advantage in November.
Quote
I just didn't want to have to donate more of my money to the waste that is government spending. I've got more important things to do with it.
Pizza time?
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 02:21:14 PM
If $40/mo is the difference between pizza night or not, you probably need to reassess your priorities. Pizza is not inexpensive.
Isn't it about $83 a month for every $50,000?
I bet that's a bunch more than just pizza money for many households in the states.
That's $1,000 a year for every $50k.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 02:24:12 PM
Pizza time?
Is that what you're seeing? "pizza" and "gimmick"? The new buzz words? I've only seen "gimmick" so far.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:25:12 PM
Isn't it about $83 a month for every $50,000?
I bet that's a bunch more than just pizza money for many households in the states.
That's $1,000 a year for every $50k.
Oops, $40/every 2 weeks (approx).
Principle still stands.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 02:21:14 PM
If $40/mo is the difference between pizza night or not, you probably need to reassess your priorities. Pizza is not inexpensive.
I thought the same thing when I read about a family having to sacrifice their pizza night if they didn't get that tax cut. How bad off as a nation have be become that losing a dinner out can be reasonably likened to not being able to afford medication/pay heat bill?
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:26:33 PM
Is that what you're seeing? "pizza" and "gimmick"? The new buzz words? I've only seen "gimmick" so far.
I didn't intend it that way but maybe it is. I missed the original reference to "gimmick".
If someone makes $106,800 annually this will keep $2,136 in their pocket. That's a new car tag for many people. A new fridge, TV, $6 in gas every day...
QuoteFor a Medfield resident earning the town's median household income of $114,250, the payroll tax cut will yield about $2,136 in savings by the end of 2011. Without a deal to extend the cut, those workers will take home that much less next year, which comes to about $41.08 a week.
In a city like Boston, with a median income of $50,684, the tax cut means $1,014 in savings for a worker earning that salary by the end of this year. In Westwood and several other nearby wealthier suburbs — 32 in all — workers at median incomes upward of $106,800 qualify for the maximum tax cut of $2,136.
Read more: Medfield residents get around $2K if House GOP OKs payroll tax cut - Medfield, MA - Medfield Press http://www.wickedlocal.com/medfield/news/x1157706593/Medfield-residents-get-around-2K-if-House-GOP-OKs-payroll-tax-cut#ixzz1hOMAn400
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:26:33 PM
Is that what you're seeing? "pizza" and "gimmick"? The new buzz words? I've only seen "gimmick" so far.
It was a story on drudge. Here's an article:
QuoteMore than 30,000 people have written in so far - around 2,000 per hour, President Obama said.
Another supporter wrote that the $40 means new shoes for two of their children and one more said the loss would force them into a decision of whether to buy insulin or pay the water bill.
'Our cable internet bill is $49 per month. If we lose this payroll tax cut then we will have to give up either internet access or possibly our "Friday Family Pizza" night,' one in Frederick, Maryland, wrote.
Top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell has urged fellow Republicans in the House to drop their opposition to the Senate-passed bill that extends the payroll tax cut for two months.
'House Republicans sensibly want greater certainty about the duration of these provisions, while Senate Democrats want more time to negotiate the terms,' he said. 'We can and should do both.'
[
Emphasis added].
http://m.dailymail.co.uk/mobile/news/article.html?articleID=2077677
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 02:30:11 PM
I thought the same thing when I read about a family having to sacrifice their pizza night if they didn't get that tax cut. How bad off as a nation have be become that losing a dinner out can be reasonably likened to not being able to afford medication/pay heat bill?
I've used that in sales before. "Eat in one night a month and you can justify that cost." People do that a lot.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:34:18 PM
If someone makes $106,800 annually this will keep $2,136 in their pocket. That's a new car tag for many people. A new fridge, TV, $6 in gas every day...
I am just worried about how we are going to keep SS and medicare going if we are not funding it. Robbing Peter to pay Paul has to end at some point.
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 02:36:12 PM
I am just worried about how we are going to keep SS and medicare going if we are not funding it. Robbing Peter to pay Paul has to end at some point.
OK, I'm not putting much faith in those systems for my future. I'd rather invest my own pizza money.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:35:52 PM
I've used that in sales before. "Eat in one night a month and you can justify that cost." People do that a lot.
You lost me (maybe I'm losing it). People were crying out about real suffering and this family is whining about a pizza night?
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 02:30:11 PM
I thought the same thing when I read about a family having to sacrifice their pizza night if they didn't get that tax cut. How bad off as a nation have be become that losing a dinner out can be reasonably likened to not being able to afford medication/pay heat bill?
Astra Zenica (spelling wrong, I know) may be able to help. There are programs to help the unfortunate pay their heating (and electric) bills. I know of no programs to pay for pizza night. ;D
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 02:38:06 PM
You lost me (maybe I'm losing it). People were crying out about real suffering and this family is whining about a pizza night?
I'm not sure about the suffering thing but I think that family might really look forward to having pizza night with the family where no-one cooks and they can all just hang out as a family.
They prob need the internet access so after that, maybe the point was a loss of that fun time together on Friday night. I'm guessing on that one.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:41:54 PM
I'm not sure about the suffering thing but I think that family might really look forward to having pizza night with the family where no-one cooks and they can all just hang out as a family.
They prob need the internet access so after that, maybe the point was a loss of that fun time together on Friday night. I'm guessing on that one.
I look forward to flying my plane to visit some cousins in Florida but then I think about the
fuel cost alone of somewhere around $1200. It would really do me some good to see my cousins that I haven't seen in nearly 15 years. I would also like to visit my sister and some friends in Albuquerque. By flying my own plane I wouldn't have to put up with (most) of the TSA procedures. I need a bigger tax cut than 2% to afford to be able to hang out with friends and family I rarely see.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 02:54:12 PM
I look forward to flying my plane to visit some cousins in Florida but then I think about the fuel cost alone of somewhere around $1200. It would really do me some good to see my cousins that I haven't seen in nearly 15 years. I would also like to visit my sister and some friends in Albuquerque. By flying my own plane I wouldn't have to put up with (most) of the TSA procedures. I need a bigger tax cut than 2% to afford to be able to hang out with friends and family I rarely see.
Well, originally it was a 3.1% cut in place of the 2%. (Dem plan)
http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2011/12/07/why-obamas-payroll-tax-cut-extension-is-best-worst-option/ (http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2011/12/07/why-obamas-payroll-tax-cut-extension-is-best-worst-option/)
QuotePresident Obama is proposing a one-year extension and expansion of the tax holiday already in place on the employee share of the payroll tax, cutting it to 3.1% from the 2011 rate of 4.2%. He also proposes cutting the employer share of the tax to 3.1% from 6.2% on the first $5 million of payroll next year; there would be a complete employer payroll tax holiday for companies that grow their payrolls up to $50 million in a year by hiring new workers or raising the salaries of existing workers.
The payroll tax cut has the advantage of immediacy. It puts money in workers' pockets - $2,170 next year for a married couple filing jointly with $70,000 in gross income, according to White House estimates. That's a meaningful tax break, especially in hard times. And, most of the cut would go to middle and low-income workers. That means most of the money likely will be spent, which is good for the economy.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 02:41:54 PM
I'm not sure about the suffering thing but I think that family might really look forward to having pizza night with the family where no-one cooks and they can all just hang out as a family.
They prob need the internet access so after that, maybe the point was a loss of that fun time together on Friday night. I'm guessing on that one.
I have no problem with hanging out with family. I just don't want to subsidize it at the expense of SS/medicare. Now, if you'll excuse me, I am going to have my version of "pizza night" at El Tequila with my family and the in-laws. I will probably spend more than $40.
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 02:36:12 PM
Robbing Peter to pay Paul has to end at some point.
I see you're still confused about us being on the gold standard.
Quote from: Townsend on December 23, 2011, 03:02:54 PM
Well, originally it was a 3.1% cut in place of the 2%. (Dem plan)
As long as there is enough of you young guys to pay my way in a few years, sounds good to me. :D
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 04:09:24 PM
I have no problem with hanging out with family. I just don't want to subsidize it at the expense of SS/medicare. Now, if you'll excuse me, I am going to have my version of "pizza night" at El Tequila with my family and the in-laws. I will probably spend more than $40.
At your income level, the payroll tax cut will probably still pay for it.
Say "Thank you Mr. President". ;D
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 06:26:31 PM
As long as there is enough of you young guys to pay my way in a few years, sounds good to me. :D
We will. The people that are going to be paying for me are out protesting instead of working. :P
Quote from: guido911 on December 23, 2011, 06:38:55 PM
We will. The people that are going to be paying for me are out protesting instead of working. :P
Thank you.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 23, 2011, 11:29:19 AM
Merry Christmas (or whatever holiday you observe) Wevsus.
Yep, that'd be Christmas, and thanks for the wishes, RA. Right back atcha.
I'm looking forward to Iowa Day.
Hopefully 3 or 4 will drop out and we can start really looking at whatever the 24/7 news cycle decides to show us about the remaining candidates.
Anyone have bets on who'll remain after Iowa?
It's Mitty the 1%er!
Agree with that. The fight is for number 2 and a chance to keep pounding their messages into the process. I say pounding because their messages are not easily absorbed by reasonable people.
Real bottom line here is that Iowa (and a few other states like Okieville)....ain't like the rest of the country. Their importance as a key primary state is diminishing.
Quote from: AquaMan on December 28, 2011, 09:02:44 AM
Real bottom line here is that Iowa ain't like the rest of the country.
Great point. They do, after all, let the gays get married. How can they possibly choose a candidate representative of the rest of the country? :P
We'll lose a couple -- Santorum, Bachmann, maybe Perry. Newt might even take a dive. His fundraising and organization were always flimsy, so even though he has some strong support in some quarters it may not be enough to buttress his flaws.
The ones who've staked their hopes on NH -- Huntsman, primarily -- won't be touched by the goings on in IA.
Quote from: we vs us on December 28, 2011, 09:23:36 AM
We'll lose a couple -- Santorum, Bachmann, maybe Perry. Newt might even take a dive. His fundraising and organization were always flimsy, so even though he has some strong support in some quarters it may not be enough to buttress his flaws.
The ones who've staked their hopes on NH -- Huntsman, primarily -- won't be touched by the goings on in IA.
I think Newt will be out soon. He's intelligent, and a good debater, but he is not organized, and has too much baggage. I think the last thing the Republicans want is to simply promote a candidate because they are an "intelligent debater."
Mitt's progression to candidate seems effortless, from a funding standpoint, as well as a political one. He seems to have everyone else on the defensive with little or no effort. He is calm and steady in the defense of his position while those around him become more agitated and irrational. This morning, Newt demanded that Mitt "tell that to my face!" to which Mitt responded "Hey, it was just a joke." with a chuckle. Newt has become that fat little bully on the playground that likes to call people out and push them around because when he looks down he can't see his own peepee.
Quote from: Gaspar on December 28, 2011, 09:38:09 AM
I think Newt will be out soon. He's intelligent, and a good debater, but he is not organized, and has too much baggage. I think the last thing the Republicans want is to simply promote a candidate because they are an "intelligent debater."
Mitt's progression to candidate seems effortless, from a funding standpoint, as well as a political one. He seems to have everyone else on the defensive with little or no effort. He is calm and steady in the defense of his position while those around him become more agitated and irrational. This morning, Newt demanded that Mitt "tell that to my face!" to which Mitt responded "Hey, it was just a joke." with a chuckle. Newt has become that fat little bully on the playground that likes to call people out and push them around because when he looks down he can't see his own peepee.
I'm with you on that post. I missed the Newt-Romney exchange but I tend to lean with what you're thinking.
Quote from: Townsend on December 28, 2011, 09:46:27 AM
I'm with you on that post. I missed the Newt-Romney exchange but I tend to lean with what you're thinking.
He's cut his bus tour from 40+ stops to 22, and he has had a hard time retaining staff. It may be sooner than later.
It also helps that the prospect of a Newt candidacy revved some of the GOP establishment players into high gear behind Romney. I get the sense that there's been a decision made at certain levels within the Republican power structure that, come what may, Romney's the man . . . and that the longer the romancing of other unelectable candidates goes on the more destructive it will be to the effort to defeat Obama.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/12/28/perry-changes-views-on-abortion.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/12/28/perry-changes-views-on-abortion.html)
Perry Changes Views on Abortion
QuoteRick Perry's efforts to corral the evangelical vote is in Iowa is leading him to revisit some earlier positions. He said Tuesday that he no longer supports abortion under any circumstances, not even in cases of rape or incest. "You're seeing a transformation," Perry told voters when a local pastor asked him how he squared a recent pledge to oppose all abortions with statements earlier in his career that he might support an exception in cases of rape or incest and when the mother's life is in danger. Perry's staff aides note that last week he watched the film The Gift of Life, which features Mike Huckabee interviewing people who say their mothers nearly aborted them.
Quote from: Townsend on December 28, 2011, 10:11:55 AM
Perry Changes Views on Abortion
which features Mike Huckabee interviewing people who say their mothers nearly aborted them.
Kind of (necessarily) one sided.
Well this signals the final sucking sound of the Bachman campaign.
http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/12/28/web-bachmann-pac-goes-romney/
Rather scathing review of the Republican field.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/12/28/krauthammer_embarrassing_candidates_making_obama_look_presidential.html
And the question is still: why has this cycle attracted such a weak showing on the GOP side? Where are the big (or bigger) guns?
It's as if, for all the Obama hate out there on the right, it still somehow can't produce a candidate that will beat him decisively.
Quote from: we vs us on December 29, 2011, 09:26:31 AM
And the question is still: why has this cycle attracted such a weak showing on the GOP side? Where are the big (or bigger) guns?
It's as if, for all the Obama hate out there on the right, it still somehow can't produce a candidate that will beat him decisively.
The problem lies with the GOP machine. Republicans are viewed as no longer relevant. I disagree about beating president Obama though. I think his base has become fractured enough, that people are ready to embrace any campaign that offers real economic solutions over failed experiments and continued cronyism.
We won't know until the candidate and the message emerges.
Quote from: we vs us on December 29, 2011, 09:26:31 AM
And the question is still: why has this cycle attracted such a weak showing on the GOP side? Where are the big (or bigger) guns?
It's as if, for all the Obama hate out there on the right, it still somehow can't produce a candidate that will beat him decisively.
Nobody wants credit for the current economic mess.
Neither side will give way in Congress so there will be no short term fix.
Quote from: we vs us on December 29, 2011, 09:26:31 AM
And the question is still: why has this cycle attracted such a weak showing on the GOP side? Where are the big (or bigger) guns?
It's as if, for all the Obama hate out there on the right, it still somehow can't produce a candidate that will beat him decisively.
I don't think there's a weak showing. We've not even had the first primary yet. You've got seven or so candidates jockeying at the moment so of course the party seems fractured. Looks like though the wagons are starting to circle around Romney. He will be a very strong candidate.
What we've learned so far in the cycle is the sort of vetting that is important in finding a suitable candidate.
So far we've learned:
Gingrich is still a petulant little child and his opinion of himself is far too high
No one really knows what Bachmann is doing in the race other than megalomania
The Cain Train went in and out of too many tunnels (nod to Gaspar for that gem)
Ron Paul is too blunt about race issues and is looking more and more like a moron for allowing his name to be used as publisher and editor on a newsletter that he never read
Santorum same issue as Bachmann
Perry seems to have a psychotic side and I think he scares the moderates of the GOP since he's pandering to the hard right so heavily
Huntsman can't really seem to get a good message out. He's not attracting near the media attention as the other candidates and I don't think anyone is even sure he's serious about the race.
Romney may be moderate enough to garner 50 to 55% of the vote. Not sure how he's going to play in key states like Florida, Ohio, or Pennsylvania. Of the lot, I think he's got the most well-rounded resume of leadership. Key for him will be picking a like-wise moderate VP. If he goes to the far right like McCain did with Palin and picks someone like Bachmann, he will lose because she's as polarizing a figure as Gingrich. He doesn't need the Tea Party to get elected. Tea Partiers will show up and vote against President Obama.
Now, what happens if Ron Paul or Donald Trump goes third party? Trump might get 1 or 2% of the vote because everyone knows it's little more than an ego trip for him. Ron Paul might pull 10% of the vote out which, I believe would favor Obama just like Perot did in 1992 and it helped swing it to Clinton.
Quote from: Gaspar on December 28, 2011, 04:05:27 PM
Well this signals the final sucking sound of the Bachman campaign.
http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/12/28/web-bachmann-pac-goes-romney/
Bachmann: I Can Still Win
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/12/29/bachmann-i-can-still-win.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/12/29/bachmann-i-can-still-win.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
The day after her Iowa campaign chair quit to join Ron Paul's camp, Michele Bachmann is brushing off reports of her campaign's imminent collapse. "Our campaign organization is very strong," she said in Des Moines today, after appearing with her new chairman. Bachmann claimed that Kent Sorenson flipped to Paul simply because he was offered "a lot of money." Still, the Bachmann team hasn't had a good week. A pro-Bachmann super PAC just switched allegiances to Mitt Romney, and a South Carolina endorsement that her campaign bragged about turned out to be a progressive Democrat who said Bachmann's nomination would ensure an Obama win.
Party's whack.
So, have you come to realize only landowners deserve a vote? :D
TOOL TIME!
Send Ricky money!