Dems To Increase Debt Limit Another $1.9 TRILLION?

[Magox]

Not while the administration's lining the pockets of the AFL-CIO, it doesn't.

I would have to rank the treatment and concessions that they have given to the Unions as one of the most loathsome issues I have seen from this administration.

[Adam]

I would have to rank the treatment and concessions that they have given to the Unions as one of the most loathsome issues I have seen from this administration.

You are so kind

 

I guess you havn't been noticing the Tea Party Movement. Maybe you like many others laugh at them, call them teabaggers and ignore what their movement is about. There is an awakening going on right now and they carry more clout than what most people tend to believe. So you keep thinking what you think, and we'll see who's right.

 

 

 

 

bull ****!

I have been following them- I follow all groups, not just the two big ones.....that was sarcastic humor, Magoz, not a dig at you

[DC Tom]

I would have to rank the treatment and concessions that they have given to the Unions as one of the most loathsome issues I have seen from this administration.

 

My post was meant as an dig (largely unfair) at pBills...but I agree with you. The royal screwing by executive fiat of the GM bondholders on the auto unions' behalf still burns my cheese.

[Simon]

Because the alarm bells are beginning to ring. Awareness of the risks of our national debt are going to become much more pronounced in the not so distant future much more so than what we have ever seen. The National debt has been taken for granted for much too long because we havn't seen the downside of those risks. At some point over the next few years those risks will start becoming a stark reality that we will all see.

 

It will look something like this:

 

1. Foreign creditors begin to shun financing our debt

2. U.S loses it's AAA rating

3. Dollar starts to fall precipitously

4. Chinese and other foreign creditors start blaming U.S for not keeping their fiscal house in order

5. Talks of emergency plan to replace the dollar with an alternate currency will begin to gain traction.

6. Inflation through the wazoooo

7. Unemployment through the roof

 

Beginning to ring? They've been ringing for years. And half the stuff you mentioned is already happening. But the loudest, most influential part of our constituency is too busy playing kindergarten lib/con games to grow up and do something meaningful about it.

Neither the Republicans nor Democrats are going away any time soon. So which one of them do you think is suddenly going to find the fortitude to eliminate their pet projects, freeze out their benefactors and cut spending? You know damned well neither side of the aisle has the wherewithal to do it; they'll continue to run around preaching about their ideals while they spend us into oblivion every time they get their opportunity at the trough.

And too much of America will continue to lap it up while they run around looking for reasons to call each other libs and neocons, while waiting for their next opportunity to do exactly what they've been emptily preaching against.

[Adam]

Beginning to ring? They've been ringing for years. And half the stuff you mentioned is already happening. But the loudest, most influential part of our constituency is too busy playing kindergarten lib/con games to grow up and do something meaningful about it.

Neither the Republicans nor Democrats are going away any time soon. So which one of them do you think is suddenly going to find the fortitude to eliminate their pet projects, freeze out their benefactors and cut spending? You know damned well neither side of the aisle has the wherewithal to do it; they'll continue to run around preaching about their ideals while they spend us into oblivion every time they get their opportunity at the trough.

And too much of America will continue to lap it up while they run around looking for reasons to call each other libs and neocons, while waiting for their next opportunity to do exactly what they've been emptily preaching against.

[Alaska Darin]

Beginning to ring? They've been ringing for years. And half the stuff you mentioned is already happening. But the loudest, most influential part of our constituency is too busy playing kindergarten lib/con games to grow up and do something meaningful about it.

Neither the Republicans nor Democrats are going away any time soon. So which one of them do you think is suddenly going to find the fortitude to eliminate their pet projects, freeze out their benefactors and cut spending? You know damned well neither side of the aisle has the wherewithal to do it; they'll continue to run around preaching about their ideals while they spend us into oblivion every time they get their opportunity at the trough.

And too much of America will continue to lap it up while they run around looking for reasons to call each other libs and neocons, while waiting for their next opportunity to do exactly what they've been emptily preaching against.

We have a winner.

[IDBillzFan]

We have a winner.

But saying it over and over doesn't do anything beyond repeating the obvious over and over. One of the reasons I like the tea party movement is that, despite what you hear from the far left, these people don't care if you're a Democrat or Republican. If you're a career politician, you're part of the problem. You're taking your pork and bundling bad ideas into good bills so when their competition votes against the bad idea they can point and say how they voted against the good bill. Most of these people don't give a crap about religion or gay rights or whether you're black or white. They care about the ridiculous and wreckless power grabs by the government, and they're targeting anyone, D or R, who doesn't stand for smaller government, restrained spending, a balanced budget, and a strong defense. Yes, that sounds more like Republicans, but they also understand that Republicans are as much a part of the problem as anyone else.

 

I reluctantly went to a meeting this week for my county's GOP gathering, and was surprised to hear the chairman tell everyone exactly this: we're part of the problem, and we have to stop supporting corrupt GOP candidates. And the first line in the sand is to refuse to endorse any candidate who takes union donations. A small step, but the first step to fixing the problem is to admit you have one, and the dude completely threw himself and the entire group on its sword...to a resounding reception. Will it stick? Time will tell. But it was an interesting turn of events.

 

Time will also tell if the Scott Browns of the world are worth their salt. I was intrigued by the fact that, outside of getting a little quiet help from Romney and McCain, you didn't see the GOP throwing themselves behind his campaign because he didn't want it. No Michael Steele. No Sarah Palin. He pulled in millions of dollars from all over the country (an average donation of something like $78 per person) while Coakley was getting money from SEIU, insurance and big pharma. I think THAT is one of the big things that put him over the edge, and I plan to watch him carefully to see if he truly sticks to his guns.

 

So is something changing? Maybe. But just pointing at the problem and repeating it over and over doesn't do very much in the meantime.

[Magox]

Beginning to ring? They've been ringing for years. And half the stuff you mentioned is already happening. But the loudest, most influential part of our constituency is too busy playing kindergarten lib/con games to grow up and do something meaningful about it.

Neither the Republicans nor Democrats are going away any time soon. So which one of them do you think is suddenly going to find the fortitude to eliminate their pet projects, freeze out their benefactors and cut spending? You know damned well neither side of the aisle has the wherewithal to do it; they'll continue to run around preaching about their ideals while they spend us into oblivion every time they get their opportunity at the trough.

And too much of America will continue to lap it up while they run around looking for reasons to call each other libs and neocons, while waiting for their next opportunity to do exactly what they've been emptily preaching against.

This isn't about being a Republican or being a democrat, it's about who is going to step up to the plate and make the tough decisions to turn this ship around. Unfortunately the vast majority of the people in charge belong to one of these two parties and I myself having only the power of my vote to influence the outcome of future policy am handcuffed into deciding who I believe best represent my fiscal values. The idea to automatically discard a candidate just because he has a R or a D before his name is not only retarded but recklessly convenient.

 

You think you are the only one disgusted with what is going with the hypocrisy from both sides? So what to do, just sit back and cast stones at both parties and do nothing or vote in some joker from the third party?

 

Ya, it's easy to sit back and just make the empty "vote out all the incumbents" argument, when in reality as attractive as they may sound isn't necessarily the best solution either. That's when you have to look at the candidate and make the decision that you think will best benefit our country, and as I mentioned earlier the only tool we have is our vote.

[Adam]

This isn't about being a Republican or being a democrat, it's about who is going to step up to the plate and make the tough decisions to turn this ship around. Unfortunately the vast majority of the people in charge belong to one of these two parties and I myself having only the power of my vote to influence the outcome of future policy am handcuffed into deciding who I believe best represent my fiscal values. The idea to automatically discard a candidate just because he has a R or a D before his name is not only retarded but recklessly convenient.

 

You think you are the only one disgusted with what is going with the hypocrisy from both sides? So what to do, just sit back and cast stones at both parties and do nothing or vote in some joker from the third party?

 

Ya, it's easy to sit back and just make the empty "vote out all the incumbents" argument, when in reality as attractive as they may sound isn't necessarily the best solution either. That's when you have to look at the candidate and make the decision that you think will best benefit our country, and as I mentioned earlier the only tool we have is our vote.

I think one of the biggest problems is that the American people want the deficit to be gone, but they don't want to bite the bullet to get it done. In response, politicians aren't stupid. They claim they are for reducing the deficit, but actually keep everything status quo, so they don't get voted out.

[keepthefaith]

Beginning to ring? They've been ringing for years. And half the stuff you mentioned is already happening. But the loudest, most influential part of our constituency is too busy playing kindergarten lib/con games to grow up and do something meaningful about it.

Neither the Republicans nor Democrats are going away any time soon. So which one of them do you think is suddenly going to find the fortitude to eliminate their pet projects, freeze out their benefactors and cut spending? You know damned well neither side of the aisle has the wherewithal to do it; they'll continue to run around preaching about their ideals while they spend us into oblivion every time they get their opportunity at the trough.

And too much of America will continue to lap it up while they run around looking for reasons to call each other libs and neocons, while waiting for their next opportunity to do exactly what they've been emptily preaching against.

 

One thing we do know is that the current majority in Congress and the White house will not be the ones to "find the fortitude to eliminate their pet projects, freeze out their benefactors and cut spending"

[keepthefaith]

I think one of the biggest problems is that the American people want the deficit to be gone, but they don't want to bite the bullet to get it done. In response, politicians aren't stupid. They claim they are for reducing the deficit, but actually keep everything status quo, so they don't get voted out.

 

Smart voters in both parties can simply vote out incumbents/candidates that won't support spending cuts. Let's get smart people.

[DC Tom]

Smart voters in both parties can simply vote out incumbents/candidates that won't support spending cuts. Let's get smart people.

 

Most voters don't care, for the same reason that most elected officials don't care: to them, it's other people's money.

[Alaska Darin]

One thing we do know is that the current majority in Congress and the White house will not be the ones to "find the fortitude to eliminate their pet projects, freeze out their benefactors and cut spending"

Nor will the minority in Congress or the party that doesn't hold the White House.

[Simon]

But just pointing at the problem and repeating it over and over doesn't do very much in the meantime.

Yeah, I guess only posting once in a blue moon doesn't accomplish much.

I suppose I could make the same repetitive post about liberals 10,000 times and go to GOP meetings and find encouragement in the fact that they're considering breaking ranks with unions, who have long been a traditional Republican ally.

Or maybe I can swear I've turned over a new leaf and make a commitment to educate myself, then instead of blindly bashing liberals I can go find articles with the express intent of bashing liberals.

You've come a long way, baby!

[DC Tom]

Yeah, I guess only posting once in a blue moon doesn't accomplish much.

I suppose I could make the same repetitive post about liberals 10,000 times and go to GOP meetings and find encouragement in the fact that they're considering breaking ranks with unions, who have long been a traditional Republican ally.

Or maybe I can swear I've turned over a new leaf and make a commitment to educate myself, then instead of blindly bashing liberals I can go find articles with the express intent of bashing liberals.

You've come a long way, baby!

 

I think you should try the caustic, snarky, sarcastic response that illustrates no understanding of subjects but rather serves only to criticize people for being critical.

 

 

 

 

 

You know...like I do.

[Simon]

I think you should try the caustic, snarky, sarcastic response that illustrates no understanding of subjects but rather serves only to criticize people for being critical.

 

You know...like I do.

 

If he keeps it up, I'm going to go pedantic on his ass.......

[Booster4324]

I think you should try the caustic, snarky, sarcastic response that illustrates no understanding of subjects but rather serves only to criticize people for being critical.

 

 

 

 

 

You know...like I do.

 

[IDBillzFan]

Yeah, I guess only posting once in a blue moon doesn't accomplish much.

I suppose I could make the same repetitive post about liberals 10,000 times and go to GOP meetings and find encouragement in the fact that they're considering breaking ranks with unions, who have long been a traditional Republican ally.

Or maybe I can swear I've turned over a new leaf and make a commitment to educate myself, then instead of blindly bashing liberals I can go find articles with the express intent of bashing liberals.

You've come a long way, baby!

Let me get this right: you repeatedly post messages lately bashing me for repeatedly posting messages bashing liberals?

 

Dude, you're awesome. Dreamy and awesome.

[keepthefaith]

Nor will the minority in Congress or the party that doesn't hold the White House.

 

Maybe not. Scott Brown is in a great position to stand on the Senate floor, scratch his head, explain that he's the new guy and isn't really sure how all this works and then talk about some real common sense ideas. It looks to me like he comes in with little or no political baggage, doesn't owe a bunch of people favors and practical grasp of the issues. He might be a catalyst for change that people are looking for.

[IDBillzFan]

Who says DC is lacking bi-partisan efforts?

 

House approves raising debt ceiling; more than 30 Dems join all GOP to oppose.

 

Will Obama sign this in prime time? I hear he's going to be interviewed during the Super Bowl by Katie Couric. Maybe he'll sign it then?

 

That would be cool.