Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

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

    Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

     Nov. 7, House Speaker John Boehner announced that Republicans in the lower chamber would accept a deal to solve the fiscal cliff that included new revenue, castor oil for conservatives by another name. Four weeks hence, Boehner is still waiting, hand extended, for President Obama to meet him in the middle of the road.

    Obama has been unwilling to even hint that he’ll ask the same compromise from his liberal base as he expects Boehner to extract from conservatives. Boehner says his negotiations with the White House are at “stalemate” - an indication the president has no intention of cutting a deal that could win the votes of the conservatives who voters put in charge of the federal purse.

    The president, according to a front-page New York Times piece on Dec. 2 by Peter Baker “is trying to leverage what he claims as an election mandate.” In doing, Obama seems intent on ignoring the other clear election outcome - the fiscal chaperones the voters have shackled to him in two straight elections for the U.S. House.

    If Obama won’t accept the mandate that he negotiate a compromise with the voters’ preferred House majority, perhaps Boehner should let him try to negotiate a deal with the House minority. That might be the Republicans’ best gambit on this chessboard.

    Why not find out what kind of fiscal cliff legislation Obama could craft that could earn the votes of every single one of the lower chamber’s incoming 201 Democrats? Once the president has 201 votes, he’d need to find just 17 Republicans to go along with him.

    During the Bush administration, Democrats forced Republicans to muster party unity on the president’s toughest legislative sells before they gave any real help. Partisan-minded Democrats, like then-Senator Obama, were thus free to cast showy votes against “must-pass” legislation like raising the debt ceiling while a small number of pragmatic Democrats helped Bush keep the government running.

    Why should Obama be spared quarter he, himself, would not give George Bush?

    The reason Obama has no taste for a Democrats-first solution is that he tried that route before and it yielded the 2010 mid-term election boomerang. Obama negotiated his 2009 stimulus and his health care law with an eye toward uniting congressional Democrats and the result both times were left-wing overreach that the public soundly rejected.

    Perhaps Republicans should seek that same exposure again. The Obama who had to outsource his policy to wacky liberals in the Progressive Caucus was an Obama who enraged swing voters. That same Obama is still in the White House as evidenced by his desire for yet another $50 billion in short term stimulus spending in the midst of a conversation ostensibly about spending cuts.

    Congressional Republican leaders have complained in recent days that Obama will not produce a fully fleshed-out fiscal cliff plan of his own. As Baker’s Times lede said, Obama is telling House Republicans “you first.”

    But House Republicans hold the one power that can force Obama’s hand - control of the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, where all revenue measures must begin, according to the Constitution.

    Having reached an impasse in their good faith effort, why shouldn’t Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Boehner offer Obama a free shot at his own solution? They could schedule a full day of debate on the House floor to debate whatever fiscal cliff plan the president desires. If Obama and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi can muster 201 Democrats to vote for a plan, surely the persuasive president could find 17 Republicans to help, right?

    This exposure would put the fiscal cliff debate in a more balanced light for the American public, revealing the one important angle the mainstream media has ignored. The president is negotiating like he’s a hostage to the left wing of his party, so Republicans should force the press to broadcast the demands of the ransom note.

    Control of the legislative calendar is one of the few levers Republicans fully control in this standoff and using it is the kind of theater it takes to out-bully the guy with the bully pulpit.

    In 2005, George Bush emerged from his re-election claiming a mandate for private-sector reform of Social Security. He soon found out neither the country, nor the elected members of Congress, were with him. Obama, seemingly unable to reconcile the reality of voter-delivered divided government, is due a similar comeuppance. House Republicans should let him get it.

    http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=AFC38AA5-6503-4219-A743-FD0B0F8A898B

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    Has Boehner accepted the plan to eliminate the tax breaks for the wealthy?  No.  He talks vaguely of eliminating "loopholes" and the iike, things that will impact the middle class and wont seriously put a dent in the deficit.  And that was Romney's plan: he lost the election.  When will Boehner accept that Obama's plan has to be included in the overall plan? Soon I expect.  Then it will be combined with spending cuts for a real compromise.  But Boehner has to recognize that Obama and his plan won...

     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Has Boehner accepted the plan to eliminate the tax breaks for the wealthy?  No.  He talks vaguely of eliminating "loopholes" and the iike, things that will impact the middle class and wont seriously put a dent in the deficit.  And that was Romney's plan: he lost the election.  When will Boehner accept that Obama's plan has to be included in the overall plan? Soon I expect.  Then it will be combined with spending cuts for a real compromise.  But Boehner has to recognize that Obama and his plan won...

    [/QUOTE]

    The political divide on this is very wide.

     

    Boehner is open to revenue, loophole limits and even possibly the upper rate.  You need to remember that Obama's winning coalition had many issues and it doesn't mean that his winning 52% were all onboard with his economic plan.  He won on the war on women, on a friendlier position on immigration with Latinos, and he won Gen X's with a strong get out the vote effort.

    But he has no mandate on the economy, its called a divided government and it requires compromise.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    Yeah, let's raise the age of Medicare to 67, effectively raises the cost of Health Insurance for everyone.

    I have a better idea.  Let's raise the rate on Capital Gains to that same rate as regular income?  Why should the working man have to pay payroll taxes and income taxes while some trust fund baby sitting at home pays 15% on his income from his inheritance?

    The idle rich pay a tax rate of 15% while the working man sees half his pay check go to taxes, social security, and medicare.  And the righties want to protect the idle rich by making the working man pay even more for medicare and health insurance.

    No one wants to pay taxes.  But there is something wrong when someone making millions by sitting on their behind pays a lower tax rate than someone going to work every day.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Has Boehner accepted the plan to eliminate the tax breaks for the wealthy?  No.  He talks vaguely of eliminating "loopholes" and the iike, things that will impact the middle class and wont seriously put a dent in the deficit.  And that was Romney's plan: he lost the election.  When will Boehner accept that Obama's plan has to be included in the overall plan? Soon I expect.  Then it will be combined with spending cuts for a real compromise.  But Boehner has to recognize that Obama and his plan won...

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you think it a reasonable approach to target those who earn more?  Wouldn't it be fairer to have everyone pay the same rate/no deductions?

    What scares me about increasing taxes on "the rich", which started as the top 1%, has magically become increasing taxes on the top 2%, is that it will not stop there.  I'll leave the inmorality of such a plan out of it.  The bulk of the taxable revenue is in the middle class.  Our taxes will go up, period, despite the class warfare approach of the left.  Raising taxes on the top 2% is simply a scalp for Obama to hang from his belt.  No real impact on the debt, the deficit, or revenues.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    To compromise you have to negotiate!

    Boehner and Obama met and we will see. They both need to get serious and stop just blaming the other and saying basically "it will hurt them more than us if, we dont get a deal

    "IT WILL HURT US AND THE ECONOMY!!

    Boehner said 800 billion in additional revenue through tax rate increases for the welthiest Americans and closing loopholes along with

    Obama said spendiing cuts startinh in 10-20 years, 1.6 trillion in new revenus and the power to raise the debt limit at will.

    The real telling part of this is that Democrats in the senate state they can not approve Obama's plan!!

    Remember his budget's previously were shot down by the dem controlled senate 99-0 and 97-2

     

     

     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    The political divide on this is very wide. Boehner is open to revenue, loophole limits and even possibly the upper rate.  You need to remember that Obama's winning coalition had many issues and it doesn't mean that his winning 52% were all onboard with his economic plan.  He won on the war on women, on a friendlier position on immigration with Latinos, and he won Gen X's with a strong get out the vote effort. But he has no mandate on the economy, its called a divided government and it requires compromise.




    But I thought the election was all about the economy?

     

    Two ideas were presented and Obama won, overwhelmingly, and picked up seats in the Senate and a few in HoR to boot.

    And if the states weren't so heavily gerrymandered, the Dems would've picked up more seats in the HoR as well. They won the over all popular vote for HoR races.

    The Dems won the popular vote for President, Senate and HoR.

    That's a mandate.

    [/QUOTE]

    All parties in charge skew redistricting to thier advantage, don't whine when its not your turn.

    So Bush won and he had a mandate in 2000 and 2004?

    When the exit polls where reviewed the reasons for voting wasn't heavily on the economy, it should have been, - but other hot button issues drove many of Obama's constituents more then the economy.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Has Boehner accepted the plan to eliminate the tax breaks for the wealthy?  No.  He talks vaguely of eliminating "loopholes" and the iike, things that will impact the middle class and wont seriously put a dent in the deficit.  And that was Romney's plan: he lost the election.  When will Boehner accept that Obama's plan has to be included in the overall plan? Soon I expect.  Then it will be combined with spending cuts for a real compromise.  But Boehner has to recognize that Obama and his plan won...

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you think it a reasonable approach to target those who earn more?  Wouldn't it be fairer to have everyone pay the same rate/no deductions?

    What scares me about increasing taxes on "the rich", which started as the top 1%, has magically become increasing taxes on the top 2%, is that it will not stop there.  I'll leave the inmorality of such a plan out of it.  The bulk of the taxable revenue is in the middle class.  Our taxes will go up, period, despite the class warfare approach of the left.  Raising taxes on the top 2% is simply a scalp for Obama to hang from his belt.  No real impact on the debt, the deficit, or revenues.

    [/QUOTE]

    We have had a progressive insurance system for about 100 years. The strength of the coumtry is in the middle class.  Those folks are under a lot of stress.  The wealthy have seen their situation improve.  They get more benefit from America, they should pay back more too.  

    Your slippery slope argument leads no where. Deal with what is on the table not your paranoid conspiracy theories. 

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    The political divide on this is very wide. Boehner is open to revenue, loophole limits and even possibly the upper rate.  You need to remember that Obama's winning coalition had many issues and it doesn't mean that his winning 52% were all onboard with his economic plan.  He won on the war on women, on a friendlier position on immigration with Latinos, and he won Gen X's with a strong get out the vote effort. But he has no mandate on the economy, its called a divided government and it requires compromise.




    But I thought the election was all about the economy?

     

    Two ideas were presented and Obama won, overwhelmingly, and picked up seats in the Senate and a few in HoR to boot.

    And if the states weren't so heavily gerrymandered, the Dems would've picked up more seats in the HoR as well. They won the over all popular vote for HoR races.

    The Dems won the popular vote for President, Senate and HoR.

    That's a mandate.

    [/QUOTE]

    "But I thought the election was all about the economy?"

    It was for conservatives.  Obama didn't address the econoomy at all.  What Obama did is buy votes from various special interests with freebies.

    You are not going to deny that, are you?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

     

    [/QUOTE]

    They already do pay more than middle class. You mean you want the rich to pay even MORE. Let's at least be honest here.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I am being honest.  They should pay even more.  And we had much, much higher rates in the past.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

     

    [/QUOTE]

    "But I thought the election was all about the economy?"

    It was for conservatives.  Obama didn't address the econoomy at all.  What Obama did is buy votes from various special interests with freebies.

    You are not going to deny that, are you?

    [/QUOTE]

    That's a lot of special interests... in fact added together they make a majority.  That means a general interest.  Sorry you lose.  Have better ideas next time.

    By the way, a lot of conservative thinkers say the G.O.P. is neglecting policies to benefit the middle class and that is a major reason for defeat.  But maybe, you think the middle class is just a special interest...  

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    All parties in charge skew redistricting to thier advantage, don't whine when its not your turn. So Bush won and he had a mandate in 2000 and 2004? When the exit polls where reviewed the reasons for voting wasn't heavily on the economy, it should have been, - but other hot button issues drove many of Obama's constituents more then the economy.




    Since when is stating a FACT whining? It's a FACT that HoR races are not a good indication of the interests of the country. Especially when one party loses the overall popular vote in said races.

     

    The wingnuts were the ones who kept saying that baby_Bush's less than 50% of the vote in 2000 was a 'mandate'. They said his barely 50% win was a stay-the-course mandate. But now that Obama has won with much wider margins the wingnuts want to rewrite the terms of what it means to have a mandate.

    What the heck are you talking about on the exit polls?

    The economy was OVERWHELMINGLY the biggest issue.

    Economy 60%  -  Healtcare 18%  -  Budget deficit 15%

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/2012-exit-polls/index.html

     

    Geepers, ya can't keep ignoring reality.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bush's 2000 electoral college win wasn't a mandate he just won based on the constitution and a process intended to protect small states.

    Bush's 2004 win was a slim win 50.73% with a margin of 2.76%

    Obama's 2008 win was a little better with 52.87% with a margin of 7.27% (Strong win %)

    Obama's 2012 win was weaker with 50.96% (Bush Territory) with a margin of 3.64%

    IMHO that last mandate election was Reagan 1984 - 58.77% with a blow out double digit margin 18.21%.

    Mandate elections have the candidate winning the second election by a stronger margin then the first and that was not Obama's case.  Every re-election since Eisenhower showed the second term of a winning re-election to be stronger then thier first, unless they lost like GHW Bush or  Carter.  Therefore its my case that Obama doesn't have a mandate, in any sense of the term.

     

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bush's 2000 electoral college win wasn't a mandate he just won based on the constitution and a process intended to protect small states.

    Bush's 2004 win was a slim win 50.73% with a margin of 2.76%

    Obama's 2008 win was a little better with 52.87% with a margin of 7.27% (Strong win %)

    Obama's 2012 win was weaker with 50.96% (Bush Territory) with a margin of 3.64%

    IMHO that last mandate election was Reagan 1984 - 58.77% with a blow out double digit margin 18.21%.

    Mandate elections have the candidate winning the second election by a stronger margin then the first and that was not Obama's case.  Every re-election since Eisenhower showed the second term of a winning re-election to be stronger then thier first, unless they lost like GHW Bush or  Carter.  Therefore its my case that Obama doesn't have a mandate, in any sense of the term.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    "Mandate" definitions don't matter.  Obama has the power and was given it by a majority in the country.  His ideas have to be accepted on some level, just as the House's ideas will also be accepted to a degree because it has the power too.  Of course the President has an advantage because he was the only one elected nationally and this is a national problem.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    If any of you can see past your party; this thread is about both parties need to find compromise and do the work of the American people!

    They have no pressure to compromise because their constituents are so blinded by party they just blame everything on the other party!!

    EVERYONE needs to wake the fivck up and hold both parties acountible!

    The President put forth a plan; the republicans countered. Now both these childish little suck wads need to sit the fivck down and find a way to get it done and STOP BLAMING THE OTHER PARTY!!!

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If any of you can see past your party; this thread is about both parties need to find compromise and do the work of the American people!

    The POTUS has to lead with a calm voice and at least look compassionate and willing to actually cut spending!

    The congress has to find more ways to cut loop holes and be open to more revenue streams!

    They have no pressure to compromise because their constituents are so blinded by party they just blame everything on the other party!!

    EVERYONE needs to wake the fivck up and hold both parties acountible!

    The President put forth a plan; the republicans countered. Now both these childish little suck wads need to sit the fivck down and find a way to get it done and STOP BLAMING THE OTHER PARTY!!!

    [/QUOTE]


     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    Our elected officials know their constituents will just follow their lead and blame the other party!!

    Why we let them do this is insanity on steroids!!

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Has Boehner accepted the plan to eliminate the tax breaks for the wealthy?  No.  He talks vaguely of eliminating "loopholes" and the iike, things that will impact the middle class and wont seriously put a dent in the deficit.  And that was Romney's plan: he lost the election.  When will Boehner accept that Obama's plan has to be included in the overall plan? Soon I expect.  Then it will be combined with spending cuts for a real compromise.  But Boehner has to recognize that Obama and his plan won...

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you think it a reasonable approach to target those who earn more?  Wouldn't it be fairer to have everyone pay the same rate/no deductions?

    What scares me about increasing taxes on "the rich", which started as the top 1%, has magically become increasing taxes on the top 2%, is that it will not stop there.  I'll leave the inmorality of such a plan out of it.  The bulk of the taxable revenue is in the middle class.  Our taxes will go up, period, despite the class warfare approach of the left.  Raising taxes on the top 2% is simply a scalp for Obama to hang from his belt.  No real impact on the debt, the deficit, or revenues.

    [/QUOTE]

    We have had a progressive insurance system for about 100 years. The strength of the coumtry is in the middle class.  Those folks are under a lot of stress.  The wealthy have seen their situation improve.  They get more benefit from America, they should pay back more too.  

    Your slippery slope argument leads no where. Deal with what is on the table not your paranoid conspiracy theories. 

    [/QUOTE]

    The middle class is under stress because of needless government mandates and regulations, and taxation on everything under the sun.  Don't buy that slop that 

    obama cares for the middle class

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

    Re: Where is the compromise and leadership Mr. President??

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The middle class is under stress because of needless government mandates and regulations, and taxation on everything under the sun.  Don't buy that slop that 

    obama cares for the middle class

    [/QUOTE]


    Silly thoughts from a silly man.  You get elected president in this country by appealing to the middle class.  Obama did this better than Romney did.  You have your own slop that you bought long ago. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share