Generally it is.eznark said:I thought this kind of stuff was deemed wildly offensive?
But I think any person who tries to cure gayness with the power of prayer is open game for such jokes.
Generally it is.eznark said:I thought this kind of stuff was deemed wildly offensive?
Chichikov said:Generally it is.
.Hybrid anybody?
WASHINGTON -- The Senate's top two officials are working on what one aide called a "hybrid," fail-safe solution to the debt ceiling debate that could garner enough political support to pass Congress.
The plan, which is being hatched by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), would ensure that over $1.5 trillion in cuts over ten years be passed into law. It would also grant President Obama the authority to extend the debt ceiling through the 2012 election season while requiring him to propose -- but allowing him to ultimately veto -- cuts beyond those initial $1.5 trillion.
Additionally, the deal would create a new "deficit commission" compromised solely of lawmakers who would be tasked with finding additional savings in the budget. The commission's recommendations would be given automatic, amendment-free votes in both chambers of Congress.
First reported by The Washington Post, the plan is far from complete. A Republican source on the Hill cautioned not to treat it as an official option, let alone a top one. "There are a lot of people with a lot of ideas," the source said. A Democratic source said that the language -- let alone composition -- of each part of the deal remains un-finalized.
But the contours do, on the surface, seem promising. The basic premise is to blend the debt ceiling deal crafted in talks led by Vice President Joe Biden with the plan that McConnell proposed this week, which would give the president authority to raise the debt ceiling while vetoing corresponding cuts.
As the dual plan is envisioned, House Republicans would be able to claim that they passed a deal without including revenue raisers or tax hikes. The president, meanwhile, will be able to move the debt ceiling debate into 2013, albeit while having to hold a largely pre-determined vote for a second extension (once the $1.5 trillion in cuts run out) before the election. Democrats would have to swallow a deal that didn't include revenues, but they will have protected entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare from cuts.
"It is a hybrid approach," said the Democratic official familiar with the proposal. "It is a way to get us some cuts now while making sure we have an option that we do not default on our debt."
While the concept may seem politically palatable, it could easily fall apart over the specific details. For starters, negotiators are not yet locked in to the actual cuts that have been suggested during the Biden talks. The president, meanwhile, continues to push for a larger package of cuts and reforms. The failure to include revenue increases in the hybrid plan could pose serious problems for Democratic lawmakers. Further, the composition of the deficit commission -- let alone the number of members -- is subject to haggling.
"There is a lot of detail on the commission part not locked," acknowledged one source familiar with the McConnell-Reid talks.
UPDATE: Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) seemed to embrace the idea of combining the McConnell approach with the Biden talks.
"We would like to see, even if we can't get a grand deal, that some real cuts be added to Senator McConnell's proposal and perhaps Senator McConnell's proposal be modified," Schumer said. "That is another possibility, not as good as a larger deal, but certainly better than just avoiding default."
Gisele is totally a beard.eznark said:So...do we still have to pretend Tom Brady is straight or has Bachmann's husband broken that barrier down?
Hey now, that's not cool.eznark said:So...do we still have to pretend Tom Brady is straight or has Bachmann's husband broken that barrier down?
We are all doomed.The plan, which is being hatched by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Gisele is totally a beard.
I like how obama has proposed far more than $1.5T in cuts, and hundreds of billions in tax increases (combined, the cuts and tax increases would add up to $4T in deficit reduction over 10 years) but the republicans would rather half-ass the spending cuts, keep taxes the same, and reduce the deficit by about 37.5% the amount Obama's proposal would (and far less reduction in spending).LovingSteam said:
this is NOT the same thing as a government shutdown. a government shutdown would be failing to pass a budget. This would be hitting a brick wall and being unable to add any additional credit to our accounts. The moment we fail to meet a payment to a creditor, what do you thiink that would do to our interest rates?gcubed said:They should ask Newt how it worked out for the GOP last time they did
I'm confused. This is just the worst parts of the Biden deal from the Dem perspective along with the worst parts of the McConnel failsafe? If they wouldn't take the Biden deal minus the revenues why would they take the Biden deal minus revenues + blowback political theater during election season? They get none of the good of increased revenues nor no-cuts debt limit increase.LovingSteam said:
GaimeGuy said:this is NOT the same thing as a government shutdown. a government shutdown would be failing to pass a budget. This would be hitting a brick wall and being unable to add any additional credit to our accounts. The moment we fail to meet a payment to a creditor, what do you thiink that would do to our interest rates?
This would cause a shutdown and a debt blowout
eznark said:So...do we still have to pretend Aaron Rodgers is straight or has Bachmann's husband broken that barrier down?
Dude Abides said:Fixed.
Sounds like it. I can't see that as anything but a huge mistake on Obama's part.Blergmeister said:I'm confused. This is just the worst parts of the Biden deal from the Dem perspective along with the worst parts of the McConnel failsafe? If they wouldn't take the Biden deal minus the revenues why would they take the Biden deal minus revenues + blowback political theater during election season? They get none of the good of increased revenues nor no-cuts debt limit increase.
eznark said:I thought this kind of stuff was deemed wildly offensive?
LovingSteam said:
First?eznark said:It's a whole new world of claiming people are gay!
First homosexual World Champion Super Bowl Quarterback Aaron Rodgers of the Green Bay Packers? That would be freaking awesome!
but he's giving them more cuts than they're asking for....LovingSteam said:Looks like the Republicans are now placing all blame upon Obama for this mess. Accordingt to Mitch, Obama is to blame because he didn't accept the Republicans demands.
So... pretty much nothing is new.
President Obama's re-election prospects do not look very favorable at this point...
The blame when the cuts don't stimulate the confidence fairy to create jobs.quadriplegicjon said:How is this favorable to what Dems want? Republicans get cuts, Dems get.....?
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:Random Republican opening a wide lead over Obama in the latest gallup poll.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/Republican-Candidate-Extends-Lead-Obama.aspx
Independents are going with the generic Republican.
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:Random Republican opening a wide lead over Obama in the latest gallup poll.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/Republican-Candidate-Extends-Lead-Obama.aspx
Independents are going with the generic Republican.
gcubed said:good thing there isnt a random republican running? This poll is useless with candidates.
eznark said:It's a whole new world of claiming people are gay!
GaimeGuy said:I like how obama has proposed far more than $1.5T in cuts, and hundreds of billions in tax increases (combined, the cuts and tax increases would add up to $4T in deficit reduction over 10 years) but the republicans would rather half-ass the spending cuts, keep taxes the same, and reduce the deficit by about 37.5% the amount Obama's proposal would (and far less reduction in spending).
Yet somehow, it's obama who is uncompromising, big spending, and difficult to work with.
I hate this country.
Don't be coy, who is this savior of yours?Mr. Serious Business said:As far as I'm concerned, there's only one Republican who could beat Obama in 2012 at this point, and he's not running. And in 1995, Clinton had pretty poor approval ratings (in the 40s), but he still won re-election because the Republican candidate was terrible. I imagine a similar situation in 2012.
....Weren't Independents supposed to be the *smart* ones? I refuse to believe they are that stupid as a whole. WTF, America?Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:Random Republican opening a wide lead over Obama in the latest gallup poll.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/Republican-Candidate-Extends-Lead-Obama.aspx
Independents are going with the generic Republican.
Invisible_Insane said:Don't be coy, who is this savior of yours?
Neeson 2012!
I don't think it's totally useless. It does show that independents are becoming disillusioned with Obama. But as far as predicting the election? Yes... useless.gcubed said:good thing there isnt a random republican running? This poll is useless without candidates.
TacticalFox88 said:....Weren't Independents supposed to be the *smart* ones?
TacticalFox88 said:....Weren't Independents supposed to be the *smart* ones? I refuse to believe they are that stupid as a whole. WTF, America?
Mr. Serious Business said:Oh man, I wish. If he wasn't from the UK, he'd be amazing. Nobody in Congress would defy him.
But the only Republican I think has a chance in hell of beating Obama is Bobby Jindal. He has a lot of advantages working for him (young, ethnic diversity, absurdly popular in his state, responded well to Hurricane Gustav, consistently conservative). I mean...Mitt Romney was a joke of a candidate in a field of joke candidates in 2008. 2012 will just be a disaster.
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:I don't think it's totally useless. It does show that independents are becoming disillusioned with Obama. But as far as predicting the election? Yes... useless.
HylianTom said:The Republicans I talk to here at home are getting increasingly disillusioned with Jindal, but I do wonder if he might be on the list of potential VP candidates. If he were named to the ticket, the networks would immediately pull out their footage of that god-awful primetime SOTU response speech, along with the requisite Kenneth the Page comparisons..
gcubed said:it shows they are disillusioned with Obama, but hate anything the GOP has even more since when they put a name for him to run against he wins.
Good thing we have a comedy circus of Republican candidates. Call it luck. I call it karma.Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:Random Republican opening a wide lead over Obama in the latest gallup poll.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/Republican-Candidate-Extends-Lead-Obama.aspx
Independents are going with the generic Republican.
John Weaver said:This is the weakest Republican field since Wendell Willkie won the nomination on the sixth ballot in 1940.
Jindal is terrible. Louisiana Republicans hate him. You get what you vote for. As a state worker I despise this man.HylianTom said:The Republicans I talk to here at home are getting increasingly disillusioned with Jindal, but I do wonder if he might be on the list of potential VP candidates. If he were named to the ticket, the networks would immediately pull out their footage of that god-awful primetime SOTU response speech, along with the requisite Kenneth the Page comparisons..
I'm looking forward to his departure, but have no faith in Louisiana voters to pick anyone of worth to replace him. And then they'll whine, "Why are all of the young, talented, educated people leaving the state? Waaah.."Big Baybee said:Jindal is terrible. Louisiana Republicans hate him. You get what you vote for. As a state worker I despise this man.
Bobby Jindal? Really? He's a creeper. I don't think he'd do so well on the national stage. He'd be more ideal as a VP.Mr. Serious Business said:Oh man, I wish. If he wasn't from the UK, he'd be amazing. Nobody in Congress would defy him.
But the only Republican I think has a chance in hell of beating Obama is Bobby Jindal. He has a lot of advantages working for him (young, ethnic diversity, absurdly popular in his state, responded well to Hurricane Gustav, consistently conservative). I mean...Mitt Romney was a joke of a candidate in a field of joke candidates in 2008. 2012 will just be a disaster.
Diablos said:Everyone should be getting seriously concerned about Obama. Republicans hate him, independents are giving up on him, liberals are growing more and more dissatisfied too. It's just not looking good. Period.
Diablos said:Bobby Jindal? Really? He's a creeper. I don't think he'd do so well on the national stage. He'd be more ideal as a VP.
Romney can win the nomination and the Presidency if he plays his cards right. Bachmann is batshit insane but if the economy is doing bad enough and she runs a good campaign, I don't doubt that she could get the nomination. The notion that she's "too crazy" to win is kind of naive. George W. Bush is a nutcase, we all knew it, and he won. Fact is, a lot of the GOP candidates could win the nomination with relative ease and all have an equally legitimate shot at taking the WH from Obama. He's not doing well at all. Clinton had an improving economy on his side and an opposition that was far less aggressive (would you believe) than this one. The GOP paid attention to how Clinton worked things to his advantage and are making this all about perception/2012.
Everyone should be getting seriously concerned about Obama. Republicans hate him, independents are giving up on him, liberals are growing more and more dissatisfied too. It's just not looking good. Period.
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:Random Republican opening a wide lead over Obama in the latest gallup poll.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/Republican-Candidate-Extends-Lead-Obama.aspx
Independents are going with the generic Republican.
I'd still take the DeLorean. But never mention the Mustang II again please.NihonTiger90 said:Those polls are like saying, "Hey, we're giving you a new car. You can either have this 2011 Ford Focus, or you can have a sports car."
Of course, most people will say "sports car" because it could mean anything.
But then, they reveal that your choices for sports car are a Pontiac Fiero, a Ford Mustang II or a DeLorean (not the cool BttF ones ... the real car, which was a total clunker). Suddenly, that Focus doesn't look so bad, does it?