• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT1| Never mind, Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dr. Pangloss

Member
PhoenixDark said:
The revenue is not the issue, dude. It's about drawing a line in the sand, beyond this line you do not - Walter

And I don't want to hear about poisoning the well. Obama compromised with this bill and what has been the aftermath? Boehner is saying he will no longer privately negotiate with him, McConnell is taking shots, republicans are waiting to take the economy hostage, etc. You deal with a bully by beating his ass, not giving him half your lunch money.

Obama already offered to raise Medicare eligibility, and reports say he was willing to STILL add chained CPI to a deal in late December. That should tell you he is more interested in the glory of accomplishment/success than protecting the social net. As I said earlier, if republicans truly cared about conservative dogma they could have exploited him for the last two years, just because he apparently wants David Brooks to write nice things about him.
Click to expand...

You're context of how our government works is laughable. Boehner can't introduce his own tax cut bill after the fiscal cliff? There won't be any blue dog Senators in Louisiana, North Carolina, or Alaska to help him? How do you think the original Bush tax cuts got through? How do you think Medicare Part D or No Child Left Behind happen? Or Clinton's SCHIP? Or Reagan's tax cuts or his Social Security Reform? It happen the way the fiscal cliff deal did. Obama effectively split the Republican caucus. He got 85 Republican Congress members, and 89 total Senate members to sign off on a deal that was all tax increases and no spending cuts. What are you going to say if that happens again in the debt limit deal? This is how legislating works.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
That Ezra Klein article highlights Obama trying to trade social security cuts for a debt ceiling raise. So he's already negotiating for it. Buckle up for disappointment in two months fellas
 
R

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
PhoenixDark said:
That Ezra Klein article highlights Obama trying to trade social security cuts for a debt ceiling raise. So he's already negotiating for it. Buckle up for disappointment in two months fellas
Click to expand...

zzzzzzzzzz
 
mckmas8808

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
empty vessel said:
You're right in a way. The tax raise was voted on a couple of years ago. Obama still supported it, though, so I don't see how anything is different in that regard.
Click to expand...

The only difference is, it's not a tax raise. They've just stopped the stimulative temporary tax cuts. They were only made with one goal in mind. And that goal was to get the unemployment rate lower, by letting citizens to keep more of their money for a couple years. Letting us spend more money in order to boost the economy. It worked and the government it seems on both sides think that below 8% unemployment means that we don't need it anymore or that it's not cost effective considering the cost.

I personally am glad that it's gone. Yeah I'll probably have to pay an extra $70 a month in taxes, but hopefully the gov't can find a way to use some of that $120 Billion per year on some other forms of job creation or research. If NASA can get a $1 Billion boost now that the payroll tax cut ended I'd be happy (as an example).
 
S

SoulPlaya

more money than God
It's amazing to me that people are freaking out over the possible downgrading of US debt by credit agencies, when S&P's biggest problem wasn't the deficit, but rather, turning the raising of the debt ceiling into a fierce political battle. Hell, their current critique is that letting the payroll tax cut expire may jeopardize the economy, and that they expect another political battle over the debt ceiling soon.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Clevinger said:
So is today the last day Reid can miraculously find his balls and reform the filibuster?
Click to expand...

Reid can immediately recess the Senate instead of adjourning it. This will preserve the "first day" pixie dust until he's ready, at the cost of not being able to do any work until then.
 
G

Giant Panda

Member
Well there will definitely be negotiations going on in two months due to sequestration, the real question is as whether the negotiations will include a raise the debt ceiling or not. Obama needs to be willing to use the 14th Admendment or Trillion Dollar Coin. The only problem is, those two moves could lead to Democrats losing in 2014 due to backlash.
 
Rhomega Beta

Rhomega Beta

Member
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-12-08/us-defense-bill-sodomy/51753518/1

WASHINGTON (AP) – Recently passed Senate legislation would make sodomy and sex with animals legal under military law, ending long-standing prohibitions and triggering cries of perversion from conservative groups.

The bill, which the Senate passed 93-7 last week, would repeal Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice that states any person who engages in "unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy." Those found guilty of sodomy would be subject to court martial.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said Thursday that the repeal was simply a legal change because it's no longer constitutional. A 2003 Supreme Court decision struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.

The committee said the changes in law were recommended by the Joint Services Committee on Military Justice and the secretary of defense.

Senate negotiators are working to reconcile their version of the bill with the House-passed measure and produce final legislation that sets policy for the Pentagon. House Republicans oppose the repeal and want to leave the provision intact.

A congressional aide close to the negotiations said late Thursday that it was unlikely the repeal would stand. The aide spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private talks.

Conservative groups angered by the end this year to the ban on gays serving openly in the military were outraged by the proposed repeal of the sodomy provision.

"Now, in its rush to accommodate the left, Congress may have inadvertently opened the door to even more perversion," Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council said in a statement. "As part of the defense authorization bill, liberals are pushing to make sodomy a legal activity under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. In its haste to make gay sex an official part of military life, the left could be unintentionally repealing the ban on bestiality too."

In an interview, Perkins said he has been talking to House lawmakers involved in the defense negotiations as they push to leave the provision intact, including House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif.

"This blowup over bestiality shows the sloppy nature of this repeal," Perkins said.
Click to expand...
 
C

Clevinger

Member
SoulPlaya said:
It's amazing to me that people are freaking out over the possible downgrading of US debt by credit agencies, when S&P's biggest problem wasn't the deficit, but rather, turning the raising of the debt ceiling into a fierce political battle. Hell, their current critique is that letting the payroll tax cut expire may jeopardize the economy, and that they expect another political battle over the debt ceiling soon.
Click to expand...

Since S&P also mentioned debt, the media got to do the "both sides are to blame" thing.

Also, Moody just said we need deficit reduction/austerity.
 
O

Officerrob

Banned
Of all the things to take a stand on, Republicans choose to show their fake unity by backing the weakest speaker in memory........I approve
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
helloresolven said:
And someone just voted Colin Powell. The Speaker technically doesn't need to be from the House... so what would happen if we had an independent Speaker?
Click to expand...

I was really hoping for more of a Tea Party uprising of something stupid in this vote. Ah, well.

Could you imagine if this was a 219-217 split?
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
The new senate is pretty nice, alas it's hard to see the house passing much of anything noteworthy. I can't help but think it'll be better than the last congress though.

No Walsh, no West. Feels good man
 
N

NihonTiger90

Member
Boehner should win easily. They have 34 votes to play with, so the crazies can get their anger out and still not hurt his chances.

Then again, in 2014 we may be doing this again if Boehner gets primaried.
 
C

Clevinger

Member
So all Boehner had to do was thumb his nose symbolically at Obama to appease the crazies and keep his speakership? That sounds like Republicans all right.
 
T

Tim-E

Member
This party is an absolute mess. Americans already blame the Republicans for stonewalling and being unwilling to compromise, and if Obama does what's been floated and effectively uses his position to constantly repeat how Republican actions are damaging governing, this will be a fun year. It will especially be fun if the Tea Party thinks they can recreate 2010 and try to primary the few Republicans that were sensible enough to compromise for once. If Obama's big legislative battles this year are going to be an assault weapons ban and immigration reform, two popular and fairly easy to understand things (unlike the ACA), their messaging and misinformation won't work so easily.
 
O

Officerrob

Banned
Clevinger said:
So all Boehner had to do was thumb his nose symbolically at Obama to appease the crazies and keep his speakership? That sounds like Republicans all right.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't get it. If there ever was a time to just say "fuck it", and try and get a Tea Partier or someone like Cantor elected, it is now. Boehner couldn't be much weaker
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
12 votes that are Other/Present. At what point do you get nervous?

Officerrob said:
Yeah, I don't get it. If there ever was a time to just say "fuck it", and try and get a Tea Partier or someone like Cantor elected, it is now. Boehner couldn't be much weaker
Click to expand...

They couldn't get 215.
 
O

Officerrob

Banned
ivysaur12 said:
They couldn't get 215.
Click to expand...

So they just fall in line after he stripped them of all their committee seats and in their minds caved on the debt ceiling? Seems like it would be a symbolic message (which we all know the house loves) to at least send it to a second vote
 
S

SoulPlaya

more money than God
thefro said:
So did we vote to put Moody's and S&P in charge of the country in November?
Click to expand...
Anyone who has studied these types of agencies will tell you that these groups are not who you should be listening to when you want to run your country for the benefit of your people.
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
mckmas8808 said:
The only difference is, it's not a tax raise. They've just stopped the stimulative temporary tax cuts. They were only made with one goal in mind. And that goal was to get the unemployment rate lower, by letting citizens to keep more of their money for a couple years. Letting us spend more money in order to boost the economy. It worked and the government it seems on both sides think that below 8% unemployment means that we don't need it anymore or that it's not cost effective considering the cost.
Click to expand...

First, the government did raise taxes. Two years ago, the Congress voted (1) to cut the payroll tax by 2% in 2011; and (2) to raise the payroll tax by 2% in 2012. In 2011, the Congress voted to cut the payroll tax by 2% in 2012 and to raise the payroll tax by 2% in 2013. So, in 2011, the Congress voted to raise the payroll tax in 2013. It is now 2013 and that tax increase has taken effect. Describing the measure as a stimulative measure does not change the fact that the Congress did indeed vote to increase the payroll tax rate and that Obama signed a bill to increase the payroll tax.

Similarly, Republicans in 2001 voted to lower tax rates and then to raise them in ten years. In fact, the Democrats would be stupid to talk about the income tax changes just enacted as an income tax increase. It was a tax cut on income. It was Republicans who voted for an income tax increase back in 2001.

And, by the way, unemployment below 8% is horrendous and unacceptable. It represents an immense loss of wealth to the society to have all of that labor squandered.

mckmas8808 said:
I personally am glad that it's gone. Yeah I'll probably have to pay an extra $70 a month in taxes, but hopefully the gov't can find a way to use some of that $120 Billion per year on some other forms of job creation or research. If NASA can get a $1 Billion boost now that the payroll tax cut ended I'd be happy (as an example).
Click to expand...

The government doesn't need your dollars to give NASA a $1 billion boost. You are presenting a false dichotomy, as money is not a finite resource. It's pretty sad to me that you would support tax increases on yourself for no reason and to the detriment of the economy and society. The result of the payroll tax increase will be more unemployment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

How is it that I own a bunch of Xbox 360 games I never bought digitally?
9
944
dragonyeuw replied
The Drunk GAF Containment Thread
Social Community 7 8 9 10 11
517
11K
Artoris replied
What are you thankful for this turkey day?
17
846
MaestroMike replied
Bad games with redeeming qualities
2 3
116
5K
Koenigssee replied
Next Generation is going to be really strange because of A.I
2
58
2K
midnightAI replied
Top Bottom