Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     


    Woodward one of our finest investigative reporters.



    Heh.  Now that's funny.

    I do so love when some conservatives drop the librul media hatefest facade - even briefly.

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    If we do not cut real spending, significantly, and soon, we will cease to exist.



    Speak for yourself.

    I'll still be here, so you can take comfort in that....

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    If the sequester goes through and isn't fixed, it will reflect that Obama and Boehner miscalculated and, in fact, there aren't enough grown-ups in the room.



    I'll drink to that.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

     


    Woodward one of our finest investigative reporters.

     



    Heh.  Now that's funny.

     

    I do so love when some conservatives drop the librul media hatefest facade - even briefly.

     

     



    Come on this is the Pentagon papers guy.  He only speaketh the truth.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    I do so love when some conservatives drop the librul media hatefest facade - even briefly.

     Common this is the Pentagon papers guy.  He only speaketh the truth.


    LMAO!!

    Stop it!!  You're killing me..!

    Hooo.....!

     

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    This sounds like its more Obama then GOP.  Woodward one of our finest investigative reporters.

    Woodward continued: "Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-Nev.]. They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved."

     




     

    Well of course it sounds that way if you choose to ignore:

    - The reason anyone found it necessary to talk about a sequester

    - Boehner's own efforts to send a sequester to his party

    - All other history and sources.

    And focus on one guy who makes a claim that sounds that way.

     

     

     

    Similarly, it sounds like the moon landing didn't happen if one chooses to ignore all evidence that it did.

     



    Yes, you see after all this.........the President is just a s guilty and he doesn't get a freakin free ride although the MSM is committed to giving him one in that they continue to push poll blaming the GOP.  It's that level of divisive manipulation that really sets me off.

     

     




     

    Uh-oh, again with the MSM conspiracy theories.

    Do you have any proof that the MSM is push polling anything on this?

    And no, just because you don't like the results of a poll is not a legitimate answer.



    Its not that I don't like it, its that the polls don't reflect the facts.  

    So if there is enough blame blame to go around on all sides how can polls show the blame will go to the GOP, by a significant margin?  People are either stupid, or people only take quick looks at headlines to determine their positions and where do those headlines come from the nightly news.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    If the sequester goes through and isn't fixed, it will reflect that Obama and Boehner miscalculated and, in fact, there aren't enough grown-ups in the room.



    That's only if the results aren't what the may have intended (or settled for) all along.

    Personally, I think it's part of O's long game, but that's just me....

    We're only here because the WH and HoR couldn't agree on taxes vs. revenues.  Period.

     

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    Stop it!!  You're killing me..!

    Hooo.....!

     

     



    I'd never do that, as I enjoy the debate too much.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    Its not that I don't like it, its that the polls don't reflect the facts.  

    So if there is enough blame blame to go around on all sides how can polls show the blame will go to the GOP, by a significant margin?  People are either stupid, or people only take quick looks at headlines to determine their positions and where do those headlines come from the nightly news.



    That's your opinion.

    The simpler truth is that nobody likes a tie game.  Even less when it's 0-0.

    The people have consistently attached more blame to the repubs than dems on these matters.  POTUS is a dem.  This isn't brain surgery.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    If the sequester goes through and isn't fixed, it will reflect that Obama and Boehner miscalculated and, in fact, there aren't enough grown-ups in the room.

     



    That's only if the results aren't what the may have intended (or settled for) all along.

     

    Personally, I think it's part of O's long game, but that's just me....

    We're only here because the WH and HoR couldn't agree on taxes vs. revenues.  Period.

     

     

     



    Is the HoR position that they already gave in on taxes and now its time to talk cuts completely unreasonable?

    To me the good faith response is to provide some level of cuts based on the already increased taxes. Then move for more cuts and revenue.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

     

    Its not that I don't like it, its that the polls don't reflect the facts.  

    So if there is enough blame blame to go around on all sides how can polls show the blame will go to the GOP, by a significant margin?  People are either stupid, or people only take quick looks at headlines to determine their positions and where do those headlines come from the nightly news.

     



    That's your opinion.

     

    The simpler truth is that nobody likes a tie game.  Even less when it's 0-0.

    The people have consistently attached more blame to the repubs than dems on these matters.  POTUS is a dem.  This isn't brain surgery.

     



    Well our opinions are always based on how we interprept the facts, and the same goes for you.

    So I'm convinced that there is enough blame to go around, so why does the GOP get tarred with it.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    This sounds like its more Obama then GOP.  Woodward one of our finest investigative reporters.

    Woodward continued: "Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-Nev.]. They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved."

     




     

    Well of course it sounds that way if you choose to ignore:

    - The reason anyone found it necessary to talk about a sequester

    - Boehner's own efforts to send a sequester to his party

    - All other history and sources.

    And focus on one guy who makes a claim that sounds that way.

     

     

     

    Similarly, it sounds like the moon landing didn't happen if one chooses to ignore all evidence that it did.

     



    Yes, you see after all this.........the President is just a s guilty and he doesn't get a freakin free ride although the MSM is committed to giving him one in that they continue to push poll blaming the GOP.  It's that level of divisive manipulation that really sets me off.

     

     




     

    Uh-oh, again with the MSM conspiracy theories.

    Do you have any proof that the MSM is push polling anything on this?

    And no, just because you don't like the results of a poll is not a legitimate answer.

     



    Its not that I don't like it, its that the polls don't reflect the facts.  

     

    So if there is enough blame blame to go around on all sides how can polls show the blame will go to the GOP, by a significant margin?  People are either stupid, or people only take quick looks at headlines to determine their positions and where do those headlines come from the nightly news.

     




    Because people don't like it when politicians take hostages over unconnected issues.

     

    The wingnuts shot themselves in the foot when they grandstanded on the debt limit and sent a ransom letter to the rest of the country.

    People are smart enough to know the not raising the debt ceiling has absolutely nothing to do with future budgets.

    PotUS responded to the ransom letter with his own bipartisan approach.

    The fact remains that none of this would have happened if the wingnuts hadn't tried to conflate two seperate issues for what they thought would be political gain.

    Now that it's backfired the wingnuts have no one to blame but themselves and the voters agree.



    You're reaching; I can go back and say that you and many others have never played fair since Gore lost in 2000.

    Your ransom claim doesn't follow if you're committed to a solution instead of a blame.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Is the HoR position that they already gave in on taxes and now its time to talk cuts completely unreasonable?

    So just because they budged on the rich....they now get spending cuts only from here on out?


    If it was such a shame why did Obama agree to it?

    He agrees to it and is now saying "they forced me"?

    Sounds lie he talking out of both sides of his mouth to me!

    But, the 47% he depends on will support him no matter what!

    Another 47% will support the right so, it's just a game to them.

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    Look, enough of the BS from both sides.  We are in a world of trouble if we can't cut 1% in the rate of growth in spending.

    Enough borrowing from the future to pay for the largess of today. 

    Enough of the making all the cuts in the places theat will hurt the most number of people.

    Enough of the political positioning by both sides:  no one in Washington is taking this seriously.

    If we do not cut real spending, significantly, and soon, we will cease to exist.

     




     

    Every country in the EU that cut spending is now in a double-dip recession.

    This is why the wingnut idea of cutting our way out of this is ridiculous.

     



    Not true, as I posted in another thread, with the spending country by country numbers, there is no austerity in Europe.  Spending is up 3.9% across Europe, and is flat to up country by country in Western Europe, with minor variations, outside of Greece.

    This austerity and it's supposed effects is a liberal construct with no basis in reality.

    read this:

    http://cafehayek.com/2012/05/the-slashed-spending-of-european-governments.html

     

    As far as cuts:  We are borrowing from the future.  What this is doing is papering over that our economy has shrunk significantly.  Take out the long term borrowing, and our economy is about the size ofthe economy in the middle of the Bush years.

    Here's the bottom line:  the government is lying to you.  We are in trouble, deep trouble, and we obviously can't spend our way out of it any more than you can spend your way out of a personal deficit/debt.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Is the HoR position that they already gave in on taxes and now its time to talk cuts completely unreasonable?

     

    So just because they budged on the rich....they now get spending cuts only from here on out?



    That's not what I said, stop clipping and read my whole point.

    They budged some so the Prez needs to budge some in good faith, then they can talk about more revenue and more cuts.

    There won't be a conversation until give and take happens in a fair way.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Is the HoR position that they already gave in on taxes and now its time to talk cuts completely unreasonable?

     

    So just because they budged on the rich....they now get spending cuts only from here on out?

     



    That's not what I said, stop clipping and read my whole point.

     

    They budged some so the Prez needs to budge some in good faith, then they can talk about more revenue and more cuts.

    There won't be a conversation until give and take happens in a fair way.

     




    Right which is why the obstinate wingnuts need to compromise.

     

    First round of deficit reduction was only cuts.

    Second round was 1/3 revenue and 2/3 spending.

    The next round should be 50/50.

     

    That is compromise. Not retreating to their first position of no revenue.




    But, the cuts never materialize.  The amount of spending goes up every year, and politicians and special interest groups scream bloody murder every time someone suggests a cut.

    We, meaning the collective we,  need to get into the real world, face the truth.  The truth is that borrowing for long term debt artifically makes our GDP look bigger.  it is not as big as it appears, and has been shrinking.  It is borrowed from future GDP.  Look at Europe, it is a great example how as borrowing slows, the truth in where the economies are at emerges. 

    We also need to understand that cutting real spending needs to happen, and does not cause the GDP to fall, but it reveals where the GDP truly is.

    We also need to understand that tax increases works against getting the economy to a healthier place.  It simply shifts capital out of private hands into government hands, and governemnt is a poor substitute for private capital.

    That's just the way it is, that's basic economics.  following a party line that we need to raise taxes, that slowing the rate of growth is a spending cut, that we can borrow our way out of this problem is just fantasy at best, or lies from politicians at worst.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    This sounds like its more Obama then GOP.  Woodward one of our finest investigative reporters.

    Woodward continued: "Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-Nev.]. They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved."

     




     

    Well of course it sounds that way if you choose to ignore:

    - The reason anyone found it necessary to talk about a sequester

    - Boehner's own efforts to send a sequester to his party

    - All other history and sources.

    And focus on one guy who makes a claim that sounds that way.

     

     

     

    Similarly, it sounds like the moon landing didn't happen if one chooses to ignore all evidence that it did.

     



    Yes, you see after all this.........the President is just a s guilty and he doesn't get a freakin free ride although the MSM is committed to giving him one in that they continue to push poll blaming the GOP.  It's that level of divisive manipulation that really sets me off.

     

     




     

    Uh-oh, again with the MSM conspiracy theories.

    Do you have any proof that the MSM is push polling anything on this?

    And no, just because you don't like the results of a poll is not a legitimate answer.

     



    Its not that I don't like it, its that the polls don't reflect the facts.  

     

    So if there is enough blame blame to go around on all sides how can polls show the blame will go to the GOP, by a significant margin?  People are either stupid, or people only take quick looks at headlines to determine their positions and where do those headlines come from the nightly news.

     




    Because people don't like it when politicians take hostages over unconnected issues.

     

    The wingnuts shot themselves in the foot when they grandstanded on the debt limit and sent a ransom letter to the rest of the country.

    People are smart enough to know the not raising the debt ceiling has absolutely nothing to do with future budgets.

    PotUS responded to the ransom letter with his own bipartisan approach.

    The fact remains that none of this would have happened if the wingnuts hadn't tried to conflate two seperate issues for what they thought would be political gain.

    Now that it's backfired the wingnuts have no one to blame but themselves and the voters agree.

     



    You're reaching; I can go back and say that you and many others have never played fair since Gore lost in 2000.

     

    Your ransom claim doesn't follow if you're committed to a solution instead of a blame.

     

     

     




    Huh?

     

    We're tallking the current Congress and the current PotUS.

    What does going back to Gore have to do with it.

     

    You asked why the public believes that the wingnuts are to blame for the current impasse.

    I gave you the answer.

    It may have nothing to do with how it will ultiimately get resolved but it does have everything to do with how each side presents their position.

    The wingnuts are, according to public opinion, going about this the wrong way.

    Every poll in the country shows that the large majority of voters want cuts and revenues.

    The wingnuts can't keep flipping the finger to these voters and not expect bad polling.

    As you admitted, MSM isn't push polling they are just reflecting the attitude of the country.

    So if the country is 40/40 with 20% true independents then that means the wingnuts are losing a big majority of those independents as well as a few wingnuts.

     



    On my score card the GOP gave last time with higher taxes.  So now its time for a good faith implementation of cuts, at some level.

    Next once the give and take of trust is developed then they should talk about cuts and revenue.

    Government programs are like crack for the ones that use it; similar to NIMBY, no one wants their program cut.

    I do believe the MSM is push polling the blame question.

    The latest talk in an NPR panel I heard last night, seems to show that the WH and Dems may have over played their hand.  The GOP is resolute; sequestration in some form or another will happen on Mar 1st, but most agree that little or anything will happen immediately.  The next test is Mar 27th, but once again there are ways to implement the sequestration cuts in which they get phased in.  No one party wants to be the one who immediately creates a painful cut, and then upon investigation it is found out that it didn't have to be that bad.  

    Reid and Boehner are said to be in discussions concerning adding language to sequester implementation that allows some agency discretion in implementation.  This is when the cuts are shown to be what they really are, adjustments in spending within a tight budget.  Generally in tight times managers like families would reduced ordering  supplies, office equipment, vehicles, put holds on new hires, defer training, delay that software update, keep that laptop 6 more months etc.  When you're cutting 5-10% any manager can deal with those cuts; especially short term.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Is the HoR position that they already gave in on taxes and now its time to talk cuts completely unreasonable?

     

    So just because they budged on the rich....they now get spending cuts only from here on out?

     



    That's not what I said, stop clipping and read my whole point.

     

    They budged some so the Prez needs to budge some in good faith, then they can talk about more revenue and more cuts.

    There won't be a conversation until give and take happens in a fair way.

     




    Right which is why the obstinate wingnuts need to compromise.

     

    First round of deficit reduction was only cuts.

    Second round was 1/3 revenue and 2/3 spending.

    The next round should be 50/50.

     

    That is compromise. Not retreating to their first position of no revenue.



    What happened to the latest round when taxes went up?  That one doesn't count?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Is the HoR position that they already gave in on taxes and now its time to talk cuts completely unreasonable?

     

    So just because they budged on the rich....they now get spending cuts only from here on out?

     



    That's not what I said, stop clipping and read my whole point.

     

    They budged some so the Prez needs to budge some in good faith, then they can talk about more revenue and more cuts.

    There won't be a conversation until give and take happens in a fair way.

     




     

    And Obama "budged" too back then. Giving up what should have been something conseravtives favored in a bad economy for starters: Extension of the payroll tax cut.



    Budged? he got more revenue and life went out without a disaster.  SS is a diasaster in itself it was time to start getting that revenue again.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Administration implementation of Oquestration impacts developed for maximum pain

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Is the HoR position that they already gave in on taxes and now its time to talk cuts completely unreasonable?

     

    So just because they budged on the rich....they now get spending cuts only from here on out?

     



    That's not what I said, stop clipping and read my whole point.

     

    They budged some so the Prez needs to budge some in good faith, then they can talk about more revenue and more cuts.

    There won't be a conversation until give and take happens in a fair way.

     




     

    And Obama "budged" too back then. Giving up what should have been something conseravtives favored in a bad economy for starters: Extension of the payroll tax cut.

     



    Budged? he got more revenue and life went out without a disaster.  SS is a diasaster in itself it was time to start getting that revenue again.

     



    Don't get me started on social security.  BTW:  Why when Obama lowered the social security tax it was a "cut", and now that it is back up it is not a "tax increase"?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share