Obama couldn't govern himself out of a wet paper bag

[Reverend Rick]

I'm sorry if this has been posted already, but to all those ******** about the extending of the Bush Tax cuts Obama did it so the Republicans would allow him to pass a START, and IMO a reduction of nuclear arms takes president over tax cuts. But I do agree, unfortunately Democrats have no backbones and wont force anything on the Republicans. We need another Andrew Jackson.

That is the problem, the Democrats cannot get their act together and vote in one block like the Republicans can.

I laugh when the Democrats blame the Republicans for a watered down health care bill.

I don't believe one Republican voted for the health care bill.

It passed without the Republicans, and honestly, it could have had the public option included in the bill.

I was opposed to the health care bill, but if we where going to have one, it would have been better to have it contain the public option.

Getting the Democrats to vote in one block is akin to herding cats.

It is all too funny when the Democrats blame their inadequacies on the Republican party and especially George W. Bush

 

[Magic Man]

I'm sorry mball, the President signed the bill. It's time to discuss other issues now like the start treaty or DADT.

But what does that matter? What we were discussing is your misconceptions about the estate tax. I'm assuming those are still in place, or are you admitting you now realize that stuff about losing farms to the estate tax is just BS?

 

[Magic Man]

I laugh when the Democrats blame the Republicans for a watered down health care bill.

I don't believe one Republican voted for the health care bill.

It passed without the Republicans, and honestly, it could have had the public option included in the bill.

I was opposed to the health care bill, but if we where going to have one, it would have been better to have it contain the public option.

Getting the Democrats to vote in one block is akin to herding cats.

It is all too funny when the Democrats blame their inadequacies on the Republican party and especially George W. Bush

I'm not sure you quite understand. We blame Obama for the watered-down healthcare bill, but it's because of the republicans. It was watered down to try to get them to vote for it.

 

[Reverend Rick]

But what does that matter? What we were discussing is your misconceptions about the estate tax. I'm assuming those are still in place, or are you admitting you now realize that stuff about losing farms to the estate tax is just BS?

It is a non issue now. I'm cool with 5 million and you are not.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I'm not sure you quite understand. We blame Obama for the watered-down healthcare bill, but it's because of the republicans. It was watered down to try to get them to vote for it.

So they watered down the bill to apease the Republicans so they would give them votes they did not need.

Does that even make sense to you Matt?

 

[Magic Man]

It is a non issue now.

No, it's not. Just because there is now an estate tax again doesn't mean the debate about whether or not there should be stops. And again, the main thing I was trying to do is clear up your misconceptions. I'll agree it's a non-issue now, if you can admit that your misconceptions about farms having to be sold to pay the tax were wrong.

I'm cool with 5 million and you are not.

It's better than nothing, but yeah, there's no need for it to be that high. Even when it was at $1 million, there were no scenarios like you laid out. $3.5 million was more than enough exemption, and 45% was plenty lenient, considering on average people ending up paying more like 25%.

 

[Magic Man]

So they watered down the bill to apease the Republicans so they would give them votes they did not need.

Does that even make sense to you Matt?

Yes, it does. It should make sense to you too. Haven't you heard of trying to be bipartisan? Some people would rather compromise on things to try to make sure both sides are at least satisfied, if not happy with legislation. I know it's an alien concept, but there are people like Obama who have that dream.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

So they watered down the bill to apease the Republicans so they would give them votes they did not need.

Does that even make sense to you Matt?

The problem, Rick, is that until the insane levels of tax breaks for the uber-wealthy stop, this issue is not going to go away. So no, we are not going to just sweep this tax debate under the rug.

 

[T-Dawg]

Yes, it does. It should make sense to you too. Haven't you heard of trying to be bipartisan? Some people would rather compromise on things to try to make sure both sides are at least satisfied, if not happy with legislation. I know it's an alien concept, but there are people like Obama who have that dream.

Still doesn't make sense, it just explains their twisted, disgusting motives. I hope the democrats have learned a lesson about trying to compromise with people who disagree with them. They'll need these memories the next time they get elected.

 

[Magic Man]

Still doesn't make sense, it just explains their twisted, disgusting motives. I hope the democrats have learned a lesson about trying to compromise with people who disagree with them. They'll need these memories the next time they get elected.

I'm not saying the tactic they used was a useful one or anything, just that that was the idea behind it. I understand the idea of wanting to try to form legislation that makes everyone at least somewhat happy. The only problem is that's not going to happen with the people we have.

 

[LuisDantas]

The problem, Rick, is that until the insane levels of tax breaks for the uber-wealthy stop, this issue is not going to go away. So no, we are not going to just sweep this tax debate under the rug.

Besides, people are expected to tell their elected representants what they should do, not the other way around.

 

[T-Dawg]

I'm not saying the tactic they used was a useful one or anything, just that that was the idea behind it. I understand the idea of wanting to try to form legislation that makes everyone at least somewhat happy. The only problem is that's not going to happen with the people we have.

My point exactly . I hope the democrats don't try this "tactic" again, the last thing we need is republican-approved legislation.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

My point exactly . I hope the democrats don't try this "tactic" again, the last thing we need is republican-approved legislation.

D-fense!!! D- Fense!!! D-FENSE!!!

muwhahaha

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

Besides, people are expected to tell their elected representants what they should do, not the other way around.

Directly, yes. Indirectly, no, because they create the laws that we have to follow. But I do think that people need to be a lot more involved with and informed of their government's affairs, not just look at them through the filtered lens of news organizations or Fox "News."

D-fense!!! D- Fense!!! D-FENSE!!!

muwhahaha

That's pretty much looking like what the 2012 election will be. I will say this: If a Republican president is elected in 2012, then America will long for the days of George W. Bush. We should be TERRIFIED--and I rarely suggest that--of having a Republican president back in office.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

That's pretty much looking like what the 2012 election will be. I will say this: If a Republican president is elected in 2012, then America will long for the days of George W. Bush. We should be TERRIFIED--and I rarely suggest that--of having a Republican president back in office.

Yep. We'll be blasted back to the stone age.

God help us.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yep. We'll be blasted back to the stone age.
God help us.

Dem or Repub in 2012, I'm learning to make stone axes.

 

[Reverend Rick]

The problem, Rick, is that until the insane levels of tax breaks for the uber-wealthy stop, this issue is not going to go away. So no, we are not going to just sweep this tax debate under the rug.

LOL, I guess the art of compromise is too much for you. I say this with the nicest of intentions.

What is wrong with agreeing to disagree?

Seriously, if you have something you want done and I have something I want done and we both dislike the others pet project, which is better, to do neither or do both in the spirit of compromise?

 

[T-Dawg]

LOL, I guess the art of compromise is too much for you. I say this with the nicest of intentions.

What is wrong with agreeing to disagree?

Seriously, if you have something you want done and I have something I want done and we both dislike the others pet project, which is better, to do neither or do both in the spirit of compromise?

Depends on what the pet projects are and how important they are.

At any rate, that's not what happened with the democrats and the republicans. What they did was entirely different; they wanted something done and the republicans didn't want anything good to get done under the Obama administration, so instead of just using their supermajority (while they had it) to do it without republican consent, they kept modifying it in pathetic attempts to make republicans happy, which of course never worked. The republicans played the frail democrats' lack of assertiveness brilliantly.

 

[LuisDantas]

LOL, I guess the art of compromise is too much for you. I say this with the nicest of intentions.

How could you tell in this case, however? Aren't you blaming Obama (fairly, I must add) for compromising too much?

What is wrong with agreeing to disagree?

It really depends on the consequences.

Seriously, if you have something you want done and I have something I want done and we both dislike the others pet project, which is better, to do neither or do both in the spirit of compromise?

Where is the GOP's spirit of compromise?

 

[Troublemane]

If you want a liberal to argue for a progressive tax, read Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, on progressive taxation. He argues for it.

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more in proportion."--Adam Smith, from Wealth of Nations.

Not a really huge endorsement, rather more of a "they should do it because they can" type argument. Not what I was looking for.

Besides, I'd rather hear your argument, not you giving me someone elses.