Maddow is another lib that thinks she is smarter than everyone else. She is loved by the libs that all think they “understand” everything that the rest of the peons don’t get. LOL. If everyone wasn’t so dumb she would have huge ratings. LOL. FACT, YOU are dumb and don’t know it.

Maddow,the personification of why this country is in deep trouble,would never ever be satisfied with anything but a complete liberal take over of the entire us government and all it’s institutions.

I have to give Mr Obama some credit.Although I believe part of his motivation is wanting to get re-elected,I also believe that he does get it.The last election was a message and that message was seen today in a compromise and in a pragmatic solution.

I know partisan political ideologues don’t like compromise.They like it all their way or no way.Doesn’t matter which side all that matters is that that side wins it all.

But guess what,this country was never supposed to be governed by a portion of the population or their agenda and ideology.It was formed to govern and work toward the best possible solution for all by using the ideas and desires by the various segments of society to create a blended compromise solution.

If Obama keeps this up I might even vote for him again,but if he succumbs to partisan ideological politics and tries to govern from the far left again he’s lost me forever.

Maddow must be a racist since she disagrees with Obama’s policy decisions.

Can we start calling the Democrat Party the Donner Party?

MSNBC, they really do eat their own.

gordonbloyershow said:
Maddow is another lib that thinks she is smarter than everyone else. She is loved by the libs that all think they “understand” everything that the rest of the peons don’t get. LOL. If everyone wasn’t so dumb she would have huge ratings. LOL. FACT, YOU are dumb and don’t know it.

What’s the matter Gordo Blowhard, are you jealous that Maddow has a show on a major cable network and probably a pretty nice income? When all you did was have a cheesy little show on a not known station that you had to lease time on. Then when they booted your sorry ass, you had to go making your YouTube video show in your mommy’s basement. Now tell me who’s the one that doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

The Obama clips sounds like they are completely ready to be auto-tuned.

The Rachel Maddow Show reminds me of the age old question….

When a tree in the forest falls, does it make a sound?

When Rachel’s show in on, Does anybody listen?

Hummmm I think not, but if they do…no one really cares.

If Maddow had been paying attention to what Obama was actually SAYING during his campaign, this wouldn’t be a newsworthy development for her. Many of us who supported Clinton at that time weren’t listened to when we argued that she was the candidate who’d actually stand for Democratic values. And who wouldn’t throw her own supporters under the bus. I’m not disappointed in Obama now, because I figured this out in 2007, and got over it in time to vote for him in 2008. Obama has a point when he complains about some liberals being all-or-nothing thinkers and kind of sanctimonious, but he’s the one who promised them the moon when he wanted their time, money, and votes in the last presidential election.

gordonbloyershow said:
If everyone wasn’t so dumb she would have huge ratings. LOL. FACT, YOU are dumb and don’t know it.

*clap clap clap* good show gordon……..good show! how can you refute that kind of logic and insight?!>?!

“I also believe that he does get it.The last election was a message and that message was seen today in a compromise and in a pragmatic solution”

even though a majority of americans dont want to give the rich anymore tax cuts?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20016602-503544.html

da-wdc said:
but he’s the one who promised them the moon when he wanted their time, money, and votes in the last presidential election.

Yes he did promise … everything to everybody.

But you were the “SUCKERS” who believe it…. and now you are sorry!

We Conservatives knew he was full of crap from day 1. He will go down as the worst President ever!

Maddow and the loony left better get used to the word ‘compromise’.

How much compromise was shown towards Republicans during the ObamaCare fiasco? NONE

As I recall, Democrats literally locked Republicans out of debate and forced the bill down everyone’s throat through unsavory, backroom tactics including skewed reconciliation rules. There was absolutely NO compromise then.

Did Democrats compromise during the Stimulus debates? NOPE

I could go on and on.

I know that word isn’t part of the Progressive vocabulary, but if they want to start governing, instead of dictating, they’d better get on board or the next election won’t be just a shellacking, it will be a massacre.

Maddow is a failed radio host now on a failed cable news station. Obama is shaking in his boots that the 13% of the country that is far left is angry at him. He knows they will come back in 2012. Where are they going to go? Just like the blacks, the Dem party has been taking advantage of and using them for decades yet they continue to vote for the slave owner Dems. Maddow is an idiot. Obama is smarter than Maddow, Shultz, Olbermann and Chuck Todd. At the press conference today, Todd forget he was a journalist and became so combative while going after Obama like all good far left nuts do.

I don’t see what was so profound about the clip. Rachel is just learning what the opposition has been saying for months: Obama has no guiding principles other than self preservation. He already has the liberals in his pocket. Who else are they going to vote for? He is looking for votes in the middle of the political spectrum to save his hide in 2012. Once again, all he knows how to do is campaign.

Yes the lefties don’t walk in lock step like we do! They are not disciplined like we are, my god, they even think for themselves and make their own comments. Not like us on Fox, were told what to say and we better do it or else! We like to be told what to do and say. Makes things a lot easier, we don’t have to think. How can they get away with speaking their minds with out losing their jobs!!

We compromise all the time and we know now to compromise. Look at all we have compromised in congress and the senate for the last 4 years! We have offered to compromise on Health Care, tax cuts for the top 1% and look at what we did the last few weeks on unemployment. How could they ever say we are the “Party of NO”! All we have done is gone way out of our way to be fair and just.

And if you believe any of this shit, you’re out of your freaking mind. What horse shit I have just read with the comments above.

Maddow is a very well spoken and intelligent woman. She is allowed on MSNBC to speak her mind. Thank god there are still some stations that allow free speech even if it doesn’t agree with the party leaders. We are not sheep and it is very plan to see who are from the comments on this blog. What a sad bunch of people with such small minds.

Maybe you RWers should hold off on your victory laps. Bernie Sanders (I) VT that caucuses with the Democrats said he will do everything in his power to stop this bill from going through. He said he’s got more Democrats and even some Rupulicans to stand with him. You RWers all know what a fillibuster is don’t you? Since the Repubs used it a record amount of time the last 2 yrs.

@bees buzz …..”forced the bill down everyone’s throat through unsavory, backroom tactics including skewed reconciliation rules”

ha ha you forgot baseball bats to the knees and chicago style politics

oh btw those skewed reconciliation rules are what allowed the bush tax cuts to exist in the first place. nice try lil dude

BatBoy said:
The Rachel Maddow Show reminds me of the age old question….

When a tree in the forest falls, does it make a sound?

When Rachel’s show in on, Does anybody listen?

Hummmm I think not, but if they do…no one really cares.

Batcrap,

Rachael is loved and respected by many but how would you know, you only see a clip here and a clip there. What ever Fox allows you to view. They sure as hell are not going to show you something that would make them look stupid… would they :)

I guess that multi-millionaire Rachel Maddow has her salary paid by people living in housing projects rather than other millionaires.
Rachel can rail against the very lifestyle that she is very accustomed to now. Does she really want to pretend that she is not a liberal and wealthy elitist who earns 100 times what the average worker earns while she pretends she is just another average Joe….?

Rachel can STFU.

I don’t know why the RWers are celebrating this bill so much. I doubt any of them on here make over $250,000 a yr. But they might be celebrating because of the unemployment extenstion, which was a Democratic demand.

@ rocky…..”He knows they will come back in 2012.(libs) Where are they going to go? Just like the blacks, the Dem party has been taking advantage of and using them for decades yet they continue to vote for the slave owner Dems”

Keep it classy jack ass. conservatives race bait? NEVER!!!!! HA ha ha

NeoKong said:
I guess that multi-millionaire Rachel Maddow has her salary paid by people living in housing projects rather than other millionaires.
Rachel can rail against the very lifestyle that she is very accustomed to now. Does she really want to pretend that she is not a liberal and wealthy elitist who earns 100 times what the average worker earns while she pretends she is just another average Joe….?

Rachel can STFU.

ha ha ha oh jesus christ almighty.,,.,if maddow is a wealthy elitist who earns 100x of the average workers,.,what does that make beck and limbaugh.,,.ha ha

the real john t said:
I don’t know why the RWers are celebrating this bill so much. I doubt any of them on here make over $250,000 a yr. But they might be celebrating because of the unemployment extenstion, which was a Democratic demand.

I doubt that any of them really know what is really going on. They just believe what they are told. Also, all they know how to do or say is negative shit. It makes their little minds think they are smart. I don’t think I have ever run into so many small minded people all in one place! LOL

nrgetick said:
even though a majority of americans dont want to give the rich anymore tax cuts?

What about the clear majority of Americans that supported Arizona’s 1070 and opposed Prop 8, the Health Care Debacle, and the GZ Mosque. I clearly remember liberals on this site arguing that just because a majority of Americans were against (or supported) something doesn’t make it right. They gave the silly example of “What if a majority of Americans supported slavery?”
The majority of Americans then were called racists, bigots, and homophobes.
53% is indeed a majority, but with a +/- of 4 %…

Elaine B said:
I doubt that any of them really know what is really going on.

That’s a fact. I doubt any of them know what is all in that bill.

the real john t said:
Maybe you RWers should hold off on your victory laps. Bernie Sanders (I) VT that caucuses with the Democrats said he will do everything in his power to stop this bill from going through. He said he’s got more Democrats and even some Rupulicans to stand with him. You RWers all know what a fillibuster is don’t you? Since the Repubs used it a record amount of time the last 2 yrs.

im not holding my breath on that one bro! dont get me wrong i love sanders, but i’ll believe it when i see it!

the real john t said:
Bernie Sanders (I) VT that caucuses with the Democrats said he will do everything in his power to stop this bill from going through.

Good luck with that .

SmartAlec said:
What about the clear majority of Americans that supported Arizona’s 1070 and opposed Prop 8, the Health Care Debacle, and the GZ Mosque. I clearly remember liberals on this site arguing that just because a majority of Americans were against (or supported) something doesn’t make it right. They gave the silly example of “What if a majority of Americans supported slavery?”
The majority of Americans then were called racists, bigots, and homophobes.
53% is indeed a majority, but with a +/- of 4 %…

jeeezuuuus. Your treading on a slippery slope mang. one has to do with civil freedoms and one has to do with fiscal policy. I’ll give you h.c. Most americans were against it for a number of reasons,..some because of no public option, some because of individual mandate, some because they percieved it as a govt takeover.(which is false, if obama was pursuing single payer, that statement would have a reasonable basis)

Elaine B… The Evil Witch is back ranting and raving, frothing at the mouth, calling everyone out, railing at the heavens, in high dudgeon… I think she has a “thing” for Rachel Maddow.

TristramShandy said:
Elaine B… The Evil Witch is back ranting and raving, frothing at the mouth, calling everyone out, railing at the heavens, in high dudgeon… I think she has a “thing” for Rachel Maddow.

Blow it out your butt!! Oh…. you would have to get the stick out of it first!!!

Have a nice evening!!!

the real john t said:
I don’t know why the RWers are celebrating this bill so much. I doubt any of them on here make over $250,000 a yr. But they might be celebrating because of the unemployment extenstion, which was a Democratic demand.

I’d like to see economic growth, so that we don’t need unemployment extensions. Tax hikes stifle economic growth, as any economist will tell you.

the real john t said:
That’s a fact. I doubt any of them know what is all in that bill.

Why read the bill? We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it!

Elaine B said:
Blow it out your butt!! Oh…. you would have to get the stick out of it first!!!

You play ball with john t don’t you ? Batter up !

@ george and elaine…….are you guys a married couple? :) I notice you guys are always on at the same time

TristramShandy said:
The Evil Witch is back ranting and raving, frothing at the mouth, calling everyone out, railing at the heavens, in high dudgeon…

ha ha your quite the poet there chief

nrgetick said:
@ george and elaine…….are you guys a married couple? :) I notice you guys are always on at the same time

Nah , Elaine B is a guy .

Georger likes his chicken spicy , just not that spicy . Not that there is anything wrong with that.

nrgetick says:
December 8, 2010 at 12:31 am
ha ha ha oh jesus christ almighty.,,.,if maddow is a wealthy elitist who earns 100x of the average workers,.,what does that make beck and limbaugh.,,.ha ha

Beck and Limbaugh do not talk about the rich like they despise them.
They are pretty rich and do not pretend they’re not. They would like to see everybody get rich while Rachel thinks wealth is something only certain people should have.

Pablo said:
Why read the bill? We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it!

Well if you’d have watched any news except Fox or read anything they would have said what was all in it. But that’s above your intelligence level to do anything like that.

“Club for Growth and conservative kingmaker Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) both came out in opposition to the agreement, threatening the breadth of Republican support for the plan. ”

I am hoping these FREAKS can obstruct the passage of this bill.

George C said:
You play ball with john t don’t you ? Batter up !

George!! Put a shirt on!!

I am not sure who John is, was he the guy with a ball and a glove? Oh gees I don’t want to go there!!

nrgetick said:
@ george and elaine…….are you guys a married couple? :) I notice you guys are always on at the same time

Nah, Geroge is a girl…..

George C said:
Nah , Elaine B is a guy .

Says the guy with a naked man that isn’t him as his avatar.

AH AH AH AH AH !

NeoKong said:
Rachel thinks wealth is something only certain people should have.

can you give me a quote or a clip to substantiate that?

@ elaine & george,..,lol you guys crack me up!!!

Elaine B said:
Geroge

That was you a few days ago wasn’t it ? LOL

the real john t said:
Says the guy with a naked man that isn’t him as his avatar.

Dude seek help , seriously . Otr at least have the courtesy to tell your wife , mmmmKay.

[Turning round and seeing ELAINE B.] Kill that woman! [The soldiers rush forward and crush beneath their shields, ELAINE B, daughter of filth and sin, Princess of nothingness.]

George C said:
Dude seek help , seriously . Otr at least have the courtesy to tell your wife , mmmmKay.

I guess my comment flew right over your pointy little head.

Tuez cette femme! Tuez cette femme! ELAINE B…. Tuez cette femme! And the filth and excrement covered up her mouth, silencing her forever.

Elaine B said:
Geroge

That was you a few days ago wasn’t it ? LOL

No my gosh no but I was reading your comments to each other and it was getting very, very strange. I decided to leave you two alone.

TristramShandy said:
[Turning round and seeing ELAINE B.] Kill that woman! [The soldiers rush forward and crush beneath their shields, ELAINE B, daughter of filth and sin, Princess of nothingness.]

you got any more of that shit! cmon why you holding out on us.

nrgetick said:
you got any more of that shit! cmon why you holding out on us.

My god! Don’t encourage the sicko’s!! I got a creepy feeling this one may not go away like a good little wacko…. he is really creepy!!

the real john t said:
I guess my comment flew right over your pointy little head.

the real john t said:
Says the guy with a naked man that isn’t him as his avatar

What was to get ? Just your normal, weak ass swing and a miss, attempt at something glib. Sorry for the baseball analogy , I know how you like your bats and balls .

It is arguably what most would call an iconic pop-culture moment , that you ascribe a sexual conotation to it
the real john t, I would assert , should make men in the next stall worried that you may be trying to play footsie. Know what I mean ? LOL
Ellen recorded a special messge for you john t .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B-hVWQnjjM

George C said:
I know how you like your bats and balls .

You’re the one that seems to be obsessed with them. Always mentioning bats and balls.

the real john t said:
Yeah I know where it is. If you don’t remember, you were in a public restroom bent over begging someone to shove something up your ass. So I gave a guy with gloves on a baseball and he shoved it up your ass. You moaned and had multiple orgasims. It was quite comical. Don’t worry, you can keep the baseball, I don’t want it back.

the real john t says:
October 26, 2010 at 1:59 am the real john t

Freak show .

Let your wife know . It’s only fair .

George C said:
Let your wife know . It’s only fair .

My wife would laugh at loud about that knowing I wrote it about a little pervert like you.

the real john t said:
My wife would laugh at loud about that knowing I wrote it about a little pervert like you.

Mazel Tov ! She pitches and you catch . Shocker !!! LOL

OH and , Batter UP , also too !

I think Rachel misinterpreted Obama’s reference to a “unique situation”. Granted I haven’t yet watched the full presser because I had just missed it when it aired and CSPAN was still processing the archive video, but judging from the clip, the “unique situation” was the middle class tax cuts sunsetting in January and the unemployment expiration, while it appears Maddow interpreted it to mean that the Republicans holding firm was the “situation”

Otherwise, I don’t have time to look for any Candidate Obama clips at this minute, but as @da-wdc alluded to above, there were definitely Obamaheads during the campaign who tried to fault President Clinton for his willingness to compromise and now they must realize that sometimes it is necessary.

As to the tax cuts themselves: I commented to another blog that I expect their continuation to be a big part of the debate in 2012 and right now, I see no reason that whichever side is victorious in that election wouldn’t be able to claim a mandate. If it was a little closer to ’08 and if the issue had been put on the table prior to health care, he probably could’ve claimed one this time around, but instead, he waited too late. Thankfully the next time they come up for a vote, the calendar won’t give him the luxury.

Oh god!! Here we go again!!!

George C said:
Mazel Tov ! She pitches and you catch . Shocker !!! LOL

George C said:
OH and , Batter UP , also too !

That’s it Georgie, keep showing everyone what a little pervert you are. I’m done making a fool of you. You’re not worth losing any sleep over.

It gets better john t LOL

Can someone explain how keeping tax rates the same adds to the deficit?

Everyone does realize that the debate is between keeping taxes the same or having them go up right?

Am I missing something here, or are liberals like Maddow so far up their own asses that they don’t know what’s real anymore?

Rachel- do us all a favor and shut your pie hole. Pun intended.

One of the reasons the deficit is high is that not enough money is coming back into the system.

Can someone explain to ME how keeping the tax rates the same as they have been will somehow magically add jobs? These tax rates don’t seem to have been doing any good for the past few years… why are they suddenly going to be good now?

I must say, I’ve always supported Obama, but I think I lost the thread on this one. And he may have just lost the 2012 election.

omega919 said:
Can someone explain to ME how keeping the tax rates the same as they have been will somehow magically add jobs? These tax rates don’t seem to have been doing any good for the past few years… why are they suddenly going to be good now?

The short answer that might come from the Republican side would be “certainty”. People can now predict their tax burden for the next two years and be able to plan accordingly.

The longer answer would be that though a lot of rigmarole is being made about the upper income rate reduction remaining in place, the middle and lower class’s rates will also remain the same and the President was able to get the Republicans to agree to a 2% reduction in the payroll tax for 155m workers, there’s an expansion of the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit, additional tax credits for tuition and other items, plus there’s the extension of unemployment benefits and they agreed to the President’s September proposal to let businesses deduct more of their expenses and investments for one year.

Here’s a link to a NYTimes piece that touches upon some of this in more general terms and here’s a longer thing that goes into a little more detail. Together, they draw a better picture.
—-

BarneyFranken said:
Can someone explain how keeping tax rates the same adds to the deficit?

As I did previously, if you’ll allow me to start with the short answer: If the tax rate was allowed to go up on upper income earners (or anyone for that matter), it’d mean more revenue would be coming into the federal coffers.

And the somewhat longer answer is that the CBO has been preparing estimates based upon two scenarios, one would be the projection if the tax cuts were allowed to sunset and the other would be if all of them were extended.

Also there’s the additional cuts and credits that I mentioned in my response to @omega919 and the estate tax rate was temporarily cut from 45 to 35%, which I don’t believe was anticipated.

Elaine B said:
Blow it out your butt!! Oh…. you would have to get the stick out of it first!!! Have a nice evening!!!

Fact: If there is a fact on this site Elaine B knows what it is to take it up the ass maybe even better than her dude want to be lover Madcow!

Magister said:
The short answer that might come from the Republican side would be “certainty”. People can now predict their tax burden for the next two years and be able to plan accordingly. The longer answer would be that though a lot of rigmarole is being made about the upper income rate reduction remaining in place, the middle and lower class’s rates will also remain the same and the President was able to get the Republicans to agree to a 2% reduction in the payroll tax for 155m workers, there’s an expansion of the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit, additional tax credits for tuition and other items, plus there’s the extension of unemployment benefits and they agreed to the President’s September proposal to let businesses deduct more of their expenses and investments for one year. Here’s a link to a NYTimes piece that touches upon some of this in more general terms and here’s a longer thing that goes into a little more detail. Together, they draw a better picture.—- As I did previously, if you’ll allow me to start with the short answer: If the tax rate was allowed to go up on upper income earners (or anyone for that matter), it’d mean more revenue would be coming into the federal coffers. And the somewhat longer answer is that the CBO has been preparing estimates based upon two scenarios, one would be the projection if the tax cuts were allowed to sunset and the other would be if all of them were extended. Also there’s the additional cuts and credits that I mentioned in my response to @omega919 and the estate tax rate was temporarily cut from 45 to 35%, which I don’t believe was anticipated.

Fact: The same NYT that may get investigated for leaking national secrets? The same NYT that has been put out for fraud on running with stories made up by reporters that write them from their apartments and not where the story really takes place? They are the lowest of all news sources! Don’t let the fact slap you in your shellacked face

“The bottom line: Maddow is incredulous at the way Obama took aim at liberals…”

Well, when you have liberals running around complaining about things they know nothing about, no wonder Obama is pissy.

Lawrence O’Donnell on Tuesday surprisingly exposed how ignorant liberals are of the tax code.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz17W2l4xDn

BarneyFranken said:
Can someone explain how keeping tax rates the same adds to the deficit?

I know! they are counting (spending) their chickens before they hatch….

It doesn’t add to the deficit. It might impact their projected tax intake bottom line, but I have yet to see anyone explain how it actually adds to the deficit.

So Republicans promise to oppose everything from here till kingdom-come, the President tries to do what he can to solve the problems in the country, and the Liberals are angry Obama decided to compromise instead of (figuratively) challenging Boehner to a pistol-duel.

No point in saying everyone is being way too partisan? Republicans going out of their way to attack the President, regardless of the damage it does to the country, Dems whinging and complaining, that their idealistic views are not being imposed on the entire country. I watched Mr Olbermann say Obama will be challenged in the primaries for this compromise, and all I could think of was that Olbermann had finally lost his mind.

Personally, I say Fuck it, let’s get Sarah Palin as President in 2012 or 2016, and get on with WW IV with China/Russia/Iran/Gawker or whoever pisses her off.

sarainitaly said:
I know! they are counting (spending) their chickens before they hatch….

It doesn’t add to the deficit. It might impact their projected tax intake bottom line, but I have yet to see anyone explain how it actually adds to the deficit.

Yes, Tumbleweed, the concept of potential revenues being reduced somehow impacting upon the budget is a truly head-numbing, mind-scratching concept.

Maddow had better get a good tax attorney, because I sense an audit coming.

So, MadCow, we ought not hear the word ‘compromise’ from your lips ever again, and certainly not once Republicans take over the House. Lib media hacks love beating the ‘compromise’ drum as long as they aren’t the ones doing the compromising. Frankly, I’m glad that she’s angry.

impacting the projected budget is one thing, adding to the deficit is another.

you spout off your typical irrelevant BS, but failed to address the issue – the claims that it actually adds to the deficit.

danger_mouse said:
Personally, I say Fuck it, let’s get Sarah Palin as President in 2012 or 2016, and get on with WW IV with China/Russia/Iran/Gawker or whoever pisses her off.

Is there someone who doesn’t piss her off, short of her klone Cessna?

danger_mouse said:
So Republicans promise to oppose everything from here till kingdom-come, the President tries to do what he can to solve the problems in the country, and the Liberals are angry Obama decided to compromise instead of (figuratively) challenging Boehner to a pistol-duel.

Obama didn’t compromise, he surrendered. There’s a big difference. He raised a white flag and bared his neck. He’s no statesman, he’s just weak.

dhg said:
Maddow,the personification of why this country is in deep trouble,would never ever be satisfied with anything but a complete liberal take over of the entire us government and all it’s institutions.

I have to give Mr Obama some credit.Although I believe part of his motivation is wanting to get re-elected,I also believe that he does get it.The last election was a message and that message was seen today in a compromise and in a pragmatic solution.

I know partisan political ideologues don’t like compromise.They like it all their way or no way.Doesn’t matter which side all that matters is that that side wins it all.

I don’t think it’s the Dems and liberals who are unwilling to compromise. The Dems had actually proposed a good compromise by changing the cut off point from $250,000 to one million so that we could say only millionaires were getting tax increase. It’s the GOP saying all or nothing.

dhg said:
I know partisan political ideologues don’t like compromise.They like it all their way or no way.Doesn’t matter which side all that matters is that that side wins it all.

But guess what,this country was never supposed to be governed by a portion of the population or their agenda and ideology.It was formed to govern and work toward the best possible solution for all by using the ideas and desires by the various segments of society to create a blended compromise solution.

I’m not sure where you’re getting your ideas. I don’t think it’s been the Dems who have been unwilling to compromise. I haven’t had any problems with compromising to find a middle ground and a little give and take. What I’ve seen is a GOP strategy to not compromise because progress might make the Democratic President and congress look too good. Those 1 or 2 Republicans willing to work on health care were criticized by their own party. You’re right, the country was not meant to be run by political ideologues, but I think if you look at recent history you’ll see those ideologues are far more active in the GOP.

sarainitaly said:
impacting the projected budget is one thing, adding to the deficit is another.

you spout off your typical irrelevant BS, but failed to address the issue – the claims that it actually adds to the deficit.

Tumbleweed, this is not calculus. It’s simple arithmetic.

Johnny runs a fruit stand. He has seven apples. Ms. Baker is going to make one of her high rise 12 apple pies. Johnny is going to be able to help her out, however, because the three Spratt brothers are rushing an order to his stand which will include 6 apples.

So far:

12 apples needed – 7 apples in stock = 5 apple deficit.

7 apples in stock + 6 apples en route = 13 apples.

13 apples – 12 apples = 1 apple surplus.

With me?

The three Spratt brothers each eat an apple en route. Buster Spratt also eats a carrot, but that’s irrelevant.

That means 6 apples – 3 apples = 3 apples for Johnny.

When the Spratts arrive, Johnny has 10 apples:

7 apples old stock + 3 apples new stock = 10 apples.

Ms. Baker whose pie was going to become a reality, comes up short.

12 apples required – 10 apples available = 2 apple deficit.

Now, some vacuous rightist ideologue might say: “So. She got closer.” To which I might say “Closer counts in horseshoes, but no where else.”

But, if this pattern continues, each day Ms. Baker wanting to make a 12 apple pie but each day her supplier coming up 2 apples short, eventually, the apple deficit grows from 2 to 4 to 6 to 8. The accretion loses pace with the attrition.

Does this help? Would it have been clearer if I had used Guido, Signora Castelucci, the Testosterona brothers and slices of pepperoni? Let me know if I can further aid your understanding.

nrgetick said:
“I also believe that he does get it.The last election was a message and that message was seen today in a compromise and in a pragmatic solution” even though a majority of americans dont want to give the rich anymore tax cuts? http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20016602-503544.html

What they want is action not games and years long fights over who has the biggest political penis.They want support not being thrown under the bus as some like to say here,that is ALL of us thrown under the bus for political supposed gains by a segment of the government.

Once again ideology and agenda comes along and trumps human decency.

Who does or does not get tax cuts (permanently which is the only adjective that actually matters here) can be dealt with at a time when millions of americans are not looking at a few week time frame until they get shit on,which seems to be what a lot of liberals would have wanted.

CosmosDan said:
You’re right, the country was not meant to be run by political ideologues, but I think if you look at recent history you’ll see those ideologues are far more active in the GOP

Just where is it written that the country was not meant to be run by ideologues? I missed that document (Is it in the same document Obama read that says E Pluribus unum is our national motto, rather than In God We Trust?). And, just how do you decide if someone is an ideologue or not? Is there an agreed-upon statistical method, or do we just point at anyone who disagrees with us? You guys expect Obama to fight for what the Left wants, and you expect the Right to lay down and not fight for what they want. There’s some things you just can’t compromise on.

disenlightened said:
Obama didn’t compromise, he surrendered. There’s a big difference. He raised a white flag and bared his neck. He’s no statesman, he’s just weak.

I understand your point. If the goal were to destroy the nation. I don’t think that’s our President’s goal. I think that’s the goal of MINORITY Leader Chinless Mitch and Speaker-in-Weighting Tanley Boner.

i got it, so i make 50000 a year, but next year i budget for 75000 because i think i am going to get a raise, so next year i have a deficit, so i can cut spending……no, take other peoples money to make up my shortfall…….yes

The Real Royal King said:
I understand your point. If the goal were to destroy the nation. I don’t think that’s our President’s goal. I think that’s the goal of MINORITY Leader Chinless Mitch and Speaker-in-Weighting Tanley Boner.

Spin can be soooo unattractive.

cjd ohio 1 said:
i got it, so i make 50000 a year, but next year i budget for 75000 because i think i am going to get a raise, so next year i have a deficit, so i can cut spending……no, take other peoples money to make up my shortfall…….yes

What wondrous gibberish. Thank you very much indeed.

The Real Royal King said:
I understand your point. If the goal were to destroy the nation. I don’t think that’s our President’s goal. I think that’s the goal of MINORITY Leader Chinless Mitch and Speaker-in-Weighting Tanley Boner.

This is like textbook cognitive dissonance.

disenlightened said:
Spin can be soooo unattractive.

… or it can cut to the chase, as mine did. Sorry for the wound.

the real john t said:
Maddow has a show on a major cable network

There you go lying again.

thanks king, i knew you would understand

disenlightened said:
This is like textbook cognitive dissonance.

I had no idea textbooks were creatures blessed or cursed, as the case may be, with cognition.

The Real Royal King said:
I had no idea textbooks were creatures blessed or cursed, as the case may be, with cognition.

You’ve got it bad.

BeesBuzz said:
How much compromise was shown towards Republicans during the ObamaCare fiasco? NONE

As I recall, Democrats literally locked Republicans out of debate and forced the bill down everyone’s throat through unsavory, backroom tactics including skewed reconciliation rules. There was absolutely NO compromise then.

Where did you hear this? What I remember was the GOP making every effort to misrepresent the Health Care bill, with Death Panels and other bullshit and loudly criticize Olympia Snow for being willing to work on it.

BeesBuzz said:
Did Democrats compromise during the Stimulus debates? NOPE

I could go on and on.

I know that word isn’t part of the Progressive vocabulary, but if they want to start governing, instead of dictating, they’d better get on board or the next election won’t be just a shellacking, it will be a massacre.

You mean the stimulus that started with the Republicans? I think you have a distorted view of how things have gone down. Of course each party, when in power, will pursue the agenda they think is best, but compromise for the sake of some progress is supposed to be part of how DC works. When one party is prepared to block progress for the sake of their political goals, that amounts to throwing the public under the bus. In this case, it’s the GOP who is unwilling to compromise to protect continued tax cuts for millionaires.

everyone understands that taxes are staying the same, right. Not going up or down

The Real Royal King said:
Ms. Baker is going to make one of her high rise 12 apple pies.

The Real Royal King said:
But, if this pattern continues, each day Ms. Baker wanting to make a 12 apple pie but each day her supplier coming up 2 apples short, eventually, the apple deficit grows from 2 to 4 to 6 to 8. The accretion loses pace with the attrition.

That is Mrs. Baker’s problem for trying to bake a 12 apple pie when she only has 7 apples.

If she would wise up and realize that she only has 7 apples a day to make her pies, she wouldn’t run up a deficit.

NeoKong said:
I guess that multi-millionaire Rachel Maddow has her salary paid by people living in housing projects rather than other millionaires.
Rachel can rail against the very lifestyle that she is very accustomed to now. Does she really want to pretend that she is not a liberal and wealthy elitist who earns 100 times what the average worker earns while she pretends she is just another average Joe….?

Rachel can STFU.

Where exactly is she pretending anything like that? My guess is that Rachel is like a lot of successful liberals who don’t mind paying more in taxes to the nation where they live and found success. It was the liberals who pointed out that people like Rachel, Olberman, Jon Stewart, Beck , Limbaugh, and Hannity are among the small businesses the GOP have been whining about and want to protect.

It was Obama who gave average Joes an additional tax cut when he took office and liberals who are defending tax cuts for the middle class, while the GOP is fights to save tax cuts for millionaires. Rachel is essentially saying she’s willing to pay more taxes for the sake of this nation, while the GOP is defending tax cuts for those who funded their campaigns by donating millions.

no offense, but then she can pay more taxes if she wants, donate the money to the government, rachel is saying everyone should feel like me and want to pay more taxes

cosmos, you are one of the few on here that debates reasonably

BarneyFranken said:
Can someone explain how keeping tax rates the same adds to the deficit?

There’s a particular type of insanity that is convinced that not taking money from people is giving money to people. It’s like saying that if I don’t steal your car, I’ve given you a car. These people are not familiar with with a ledger, and do not understand the difference between revenue and spending.

CosmosDan said:
You mean the stimulus that started with the Republicans? I think you have a distorted view of how things have gone down. Of course each party, when in power, will pursue the agenda they think is best, but compromise for the sake of some progress is supposed to be part of how DC works. When one party is prepared to block progress for the sake of their political goals, that amounts to throwing the public under the bus. I

What is it when one party puts the country another trillion dollars in debt via a failed program? How is that less than 8% unemployment rate that trillion was supposed to buy working out for you?

CosmosDan said:
It was Obama who gave average Joes an additional tax cut when he took office and liberals who are defending tax cuts for the middle class, while the GOP is fights to save tax cuts for millionaires.

The GOP doesn’t want tax hikes on anyone, right? So, that’s not really an honest representation of the situation, is it?

The Real Royal King said:
I understand your point. If the goal were to destroy the nation. I don’t think that’s our President’s goal. I think that’s the goal of MINORITY Leader Chinless Mitch and Speaker-in-Weighting Tanley Boner.

The Real Royal King said:
Is there someone who doesn’t piss her off, short of her klone Cessna?

KING here . I may be far over the hill , but I shall continue my juvenile renaming of others , such as the new Speaker and the Palin children . I am truly a waste of carbon .

disenlightened said:
Just where is it written that the country was not meant to be run by ideologues? I missed that document (Is it in the same document Obama read that says E Pluribus unum is our national motto, rather than In God We Trust?). And, just how do you decide if someone is an ideologue or not? Is there an agreed-upon statistical method, or do we just point at anyone who disagrees with us? You guys expect Obama to fight for what the Left wants, and you expect the Right to lay down and not fight for what they want. There’s some things you just can’t compromise on.

That document would be our Constitution.
What I mean is neither extreme should have it all their way. Our whole system of checks and balances set up in the Constitution is built that way, when it is working correctly.
I’m not sure what your point is on the motto thing but E Plluribus was our first motto when the country was founded and wasn’t changed until 1956 when everyone was afraid of the godless communists.

It’s true that people can have different definitions on what constitutes an ideologue. I only used it in response to another poster who used it, but in general I think of it as blindly partisan. There are people on the left and right like that.
I’m going to suggest that you talk to the individual and discover their views. Not all conservatives or all liberals think alike so phrases like “you expect the right to lay down” are inaccurate about the left as a group and me as an individual. I don’t expect people to lay down, I expect them top compromise, but that doesn’t mean I have to be happy about the suggested one.
In this case it seems to me that it’s the GOP unwilling to compromise on a figure that addresses both the mounting problem of our national debt, which they have been talking about for two years, and economic recovery. It was a Democrat that suggested a change form the $250,000 dollar cut off to one million and even that wasn’t enough. It was all or nothing, along with a refusal to address any other issues until they got their way.

sarainitaly said:
That is Mrs. Baker’s problem for trying to bake a 12 apple pie when she only has 7 apples.

If she would wise up and realize that she only has 7 apples a day to make her pies, she wouldn’t run up a deficit.

Some people have high standards. Sorry that embarrasses you.

Pablo said:
The GOP doesn’t want tax hikes on anyone, right? So, that’s not really an honest representation of the situation, is it?

It is since it was a Democrat who suggested a change in the cut off point to one million and the GOP rejected it insisting on tax cuts for everyone, which at that point, meant they insisted millionaires be given them as well. This after spending two years railing about the problem of our national debt.

damn ,this is a beer commicial, tax more-spend less

The Real Royal King said:
… or it can cut to the chase, as mine did. Sorry for the wound.

Fact: Like a dog chasing their Tail! Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows!

The Real Royal King said:
Some people have high standards. Sorry that embarrasses you.

that is totally ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense.

the problem is some people don’t know how to spend/live within their means.

Hence the housing crisis….

There’s nothing wrong with a pie that has only 7 apples. But I shouldn’t have to pay for your apples because you WANT 12 apples in your pie. There is nothing wrong with high standards, if you can afford them. There is a problem with having high standards when borrow to live that high life.

Pablo said:
What is it when one party puts the country another trillion dollars in debt via a failed program? How is that less than 8% unemployment rate that trillion was supposed to buy working out for you?

Honestly, I don’t have the financial background to discuss that in depth. It occurs to me that this economic crisis has been years in the making so maybe expecting us to recover in two years and blaming most of it on this admin is unrealistic. I think there’s plenty of blame for both parties and I suspect our giant financial institutions have far too much influence. They can not only buy political influence they actually have political clout themselves because they can have such a broad effect on our economic welfare.

As I said, I don’t have the expertise, but I know there are good reasons for antitrust laws. What’s happened since the bail outs both Bush and Obama is that many smaller financial institutions have failed and been scooped up by the giants giving them even more influence. The exact opposite of what is good for us IMO.

All the while Bank of America gets to screw over people with mortgages because to stop them might hurt our recovery. Great ain’t it? If the bailout was necessary to keep us from an even bigger recession I think we needed to make more demands for our money and maybe break up the giants that made it nessecary by being too big to fail. Instead they were allowed to get bigger.

There is a problem with having high standards when you have to borrow to live that life.

cjd ohio 1 said:
cosmos, you are one of the few on here that debates reasonably

I try, thanks for noticing. I can be a sarcastic prick sometimes, but it’s usually in fun. Nothing wrong with a little trash talking if it doesn’t get to mean spirited.

Dan, are you saying that the GOP wants middle class taxes to go up, and that those procedural votes prove it? You are truly dishonest. I see that hasn’t changed.

true, gordon and king are ones that cant take a little shit

Pablo said:
Dan, are you saying that the GOP wants middle class taxes to go up, and that those procedural votes prove it? You are truly dishonest. I see that hasn’t changed.

The GOP does want taxes to go up… except for the rich. Where have you been the last few months?

sarainitaly said:
that is totally ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense.

the problem is some people don’t know how to spend/live within their means.

Hence the housing crisis….

There’s nothing wrong with a pie that has only 7 apples. But I shouldn’t have to pay for your apples because you WANT 12 apples in your pie. There is nothing wrong with high standards, if you can afford them. There is a problem with having high standards when borrow to live that high life.

Well, you’re not paying for anything in Amerika, are you? Why the whine?

Here’s the thing I see that liberals are upset about in this fight. I believe most Dems would accept a compromise of raising the cut off dollar amount. A million dollar figure was already suggested. Obama didn’t step up to fight for even that. Maybe he believes a protracted fight would go past the end of the month and hurt the middle class and the unemployed , and then when the new congress and Senate comes in no gains would be made. In truth, he may be right.
What I see is that the Dems are actually in a good political position to make the GOP own the potential harm for the middle class and the unemployed. They could use the million dollar figure to say, “look, we’re willing to compromise, and we want to address the economy and the national debt , which the GOP also recognizes as a major problem. In the meantime the GOP is willing to allow tax rates on the working middle class go up, in order to defend a few percentage points for millionaires. I have a hard time believing they would have lost that fight had they come together to fight it.

Pablo said:
Dan, are you saying that the GOP wants middle class taxes to go up, and that those procedural votes prove it? You are truly dishonest. I see that hasn’t changed.

That isn’t what I said, so take your accusations of dishonesty and shove em.

gordonbloyershow said:
Maddow is another lib that thinks she is smarter than everyone else. She is loved by the libs that all think they “understand” everything that the rest of the peons don’t get. LOL. If everyone wasn’t so dumb she would have huge ratings. LOL. FACT, YOU are dumb and don’t know it.

She’s a hell of a lot smarter than you XD. Ever think maybe YOU are the one that doesn’t realize how dumb he is?

Do you read books or do anything associated with intelligence? Or do you just sit on your couch switching from fox news to foxnews.com?

Maddow could probably make you piss yourself you’d look so stupid. .. and knowing most conservatives she could probably kick your ass too xD.. Maybe you can stomp on her head like the Tea Party protesters a few months back.

This little man is never satisfied by what Barry does.

Jon Martin said:
The GOP does want taxes to go up… except for the rich. Where have you been the last few months?

Find me ONE Republican official that endorses a middle class tax hike. Just ONE.

I’ve been paying attention. You?

Jon Martin said:
The GOP does want taxes to go up… except for the rich. Where have you been the last few months?

Jon that’s not the case. Both the Dems and the GOP agree that tax rates for the vast majority should not go up. The difference is the Dems have proposed a cut off point that means tax rates will go up for couples earning over $250,000. The GOP has insisted the tax cuts be extended for everyone.

Jon Martin said:
The GOP does want taxes to go up… except for the rich. Where have you been the last few months?

You are a fool. The GOP wanted taxes to go up on NO ONE.

But you, an Obomabot, have to lie about it.

That’s nothing new; you libs always have to include lies in your arguments.

CosmosDan said:
That isn’t what I said, so take your accusations of dishonesty and shove em.

Really? Let’s review:

CosmosDan said:
It was Obama who gave average Joes an additional tax cut when he took office and liberals who are defending tax cuts for the middle class, while the GOP is fights to save tax cuts for millionaires.

Pablo said:
The GOP doesn’t want tax hikes on anyone, right? So, that’s not really an honest representation of the situation, is it?

CosmosDan said:
It is since it was a Democrat who suggested a change in the cut off point to one million and the GOP rejected it insisting on tax cuts for everyone, which at that point, meant they insisted millionaires be given them as well. This after spending two years railing about the problem of our national debt.

The GOP wants the tax cuts to remain for the middle class. Who are liberals defending the middle class tax rate from? It isn’t the GOP, but you’re saying that they are. That is a lie.

Dan, there’s 4.68 million individuals that make over 200 thousand per year. 3.757 million make 200 to 500 thousand which represents 80% of the supposed fat cats that are banking all the money. Don’t you think it’s disingenuous to be painting the picture that we’re giving a break to this unbelievable amount of millionaires and billionaires. This to me ,and I’m talking about the 80% , is what I’d consider to be the ”small” businessman group. They contribute in a major way in this economy. In 2014 when healthcare mandatory coverage or fines hit these ”small” business owners won’t have to worry about their taxes, most will drop down under the 200 thousand threshhold. We are complaining that the banks won’t take any risk and it’s crippling the country. What happens when the small business owners take the same route?

cjd ohio 1 said:
no offense, but then she can pay more taxes if she wants, donate the money to the government, rachel is saying everyone should feel like me and want to pay more taxes

That’s true, or give it to a charity. She’s a political commentator , that’s her job, so naturally she’s going to argue her position. She’s asking the same question a lot of Dems are asking, about whether Obama compromised too much to soon.

The Real Royal King said:
Well, you’re not paying for anything in Amerika, are you? Why the whine?

RRk: *stomping foot* “i can’t make a good argument to save my life so i will just throw personal attacks and insult and sound like a lunatic, as usua!l” *stomp stomp*

shows just how little you know, rrk.

Fact: Liberals on this site debate the same as liberals do the world over like the video on this site.
http://frontpagemag.com/2010/11/04/how-leftists-argue/
Liberals just don’t get it!

Pablo said:
Really? Let’s review:

The GOP wants the tax cuts to remain for the middle class. Who are liberals defending the middle class tax rate from? It isn’t the GOP, but you’re saying that they are. That is a lie.

You’re dead wrong. You’re so determined to find fault with me it’s affected your reading comprehension.
Both the GOP and the Dems agree that the middle class agree that the we should retain the lower tax rates for the middle class and nothing I said indicated other wise. The difference is the GOP wants to extend lower tax rates for the wealthy as well while the Dems disagree.

The fight is , would the GOP allow all the Bush tax cuts to expire if they didn’t get their way? I honestly don’t know, but in this fight that’s the leverage the Dems have, or had. If that happened that IMO would place most of the responsibility for those middle class tax rates on the GOP. Since there was a compromise discussed that the cut off point be marked at one million , and the GOP rejected that compromise, that means, that the GOP is defending tax cuts for millionaires.
It’s a fact that the Dems are defending the low tax rates for the middle class, and I never explicitly said the GOP wants to raise taxes on the middle class. I knew that was not the case, although one member did propose letting all tax cuts expire, that isn’t a party position. It’s also a fact that the GOP is fighting for tax cuts for millionaires.
Evidently you read something implied in my phrasing that I didn’t actually say, but rather than just ask for clarification, which I would have given , you couldn’t resist accusing me of some imagined dishonesty.
So one again, take your accusations and shove em.

Obama continuing a Bush policy seems to be a common trend eh? This is what is also known as “George Bush was right”.

*pop*

Elaine B said:
Blow it out your butt!! Oh…. you would have to get the stick out of it first!!! Have a nice evening!!!

how old are you? 13? stop being truant and go to school.

CosmosDan said:
It was Obama who gave average Joes an additional tax cut when he took office and liberals who are defending tax cuts for the middle class, while the GOP is fights to save tax cuts for millionaires.

Who are liberals defending middle class tax cuts from, Dan? You lie!

gar said:
Dan, there’s 4.68 million individuals that make over 200 thousand per year. 3.757 million make 200 to 500 thousand which represents 80% of the supposed fat cats that are banking all the money. Don’t you think it’s disingenuous to be painting the picture that we’re giving a break to this unbelievable amount of millionaires and billionaires. This to me ,and I’m talking about the 80% , is what I’d consider to be the ‘’small” businessman group. They contribute in a major way in this economy. In 2014 when healthcare mandatory coverage or fines hit these ‘’small” business owners won’t have to worry about their taxes, most will drop down under the 200 thousand threshhold. We are complaining that the banks won’t take any risk and it’s crippling the country. What happens when the small business owners take the same route?

Thanks for the stats. I assumed the million dollar cut off point proposed was largely for show .
From what I’ve read, and it hasn’t been extensive, the % of small businesses in those categories that actually have potential jobs is a lot smaller than the GOP is representing. My understanding is that individuals and small firms can all be categorized as small businesses. I worked for and with a lot of small businesses over the years and I have a real respect and appreciation for the entrepreneurial spirit and understand how important it is to our economy. what I’d like to see is how many of those stats you quoted do realistically represent potential jobs. We can’t realistically deal with our giant debt without raising taxes somewhere can we?
IMO, a single payer system was the better way to go and eventually relieve small businesses of the burden of health care. The small business I worked for a year ago had it’s rates go up 20% and that had nothing to do with anyone but the insurance company. They eventually negotiated a few % points lower which was still a substantial hike.

I’m sorry but it is just HILARIOUSLY ironic that the Tea Party movement is supporting the GOP, RAISING TAXES for people that aren’t rich.

And you all support it!

WBAHHAHAHAH..

Oh my god, it’s like I’m living in a book or something.

“Today the poor people came out to support higher taxes for the poor and lower taxes for the wealthy.”

Welcome to 1984. Double-think is already here.

What a coup for Republicans “can you believe it, we don’t even have to make a case to increase taxes on middle-class people anymore, we just say that the democrats are trying to raise taxes and the idiots support whatever we want! Bwhahaha! Smellings, pour me another 300 year old glass of wine into my gold-platted cup, , making money on the backs of the poor sure is fun! It’s good to be king!”

Pablo said:
Who are liberals defending middle class tax cuts from, Dan? You lie!

They are defending them from the tax cuts that are set to expire. Now you’re insisting you’re right even after I’ve clarified, so shove your bogus accusations and kiss my ass on your way by.

Semantic games to try and be right when you clearly aren’t won’t work. You claim to be an honest guy and I believe you are. Be honest enough to admit a mistake , or shut up about it.

Jon Martin said:
I’m sorry but it is just HILARIOUSLY ironic that the Tea Party movement is supporting the GOP, RAISING TAXES for people that aren’t rich. And you all support it! WBAHHAHAHAH.. Oh my god, it’s like I’m living in a book or something. “Today the poor people came out to support higher taxes for the poor and lower taxes for the wealthy.” Welcome to 1984. Double-think is already here. What a coup for Republicans “can you believe it, we don’t even have to make a case to increase taxes on middle-class people anymore, we just say that the democrats are trying to raise taxes and the idiots support whatever we want! Bwhahaha! Smellings, pour me another 300 year old glass of wine into my gold-platted cup, , making money on the backs of the poor sure is fun! It’s good to be king!”

Fact: Hide your wallets a Kleptomaniac is lose posting on Mediaite!

Point of order!

Why do people say the republicans didn’t compromise?

They did!

As I recall they did not ant to extent jobless benefits, and reinstating the estate tax… (yes at a lower amount but still)

nunspa said:
Point of order!

Why do people say the republicans didn’t compromise?

They did!

As I recall they did not ant to extent jobless benefits, and reinstating the estate tax… (yes at a lower amount but still)

You are correct. That is a compromise. On the singular issue of extending tax cuts , they did not, correct?

CosmosDan said:
I’m not sure what your point is on the motto thing but E Plluribus was our first motto when the country was founded and wasn’t changed until 1956 when everyone was afraid of the godless communists.

So a president that was born after it became our motto doesn’t know it is our motto? It has only been our motto ALL his life.

Of couse if Palin had made that mistake it would prove she was a idiot and unqualified to be president, I get it.

CosmosDan said:
They are defending them from the tax cuts that are set to expire.

What in the everloving fuck does that even mean? Everyone wants to keep the middle class tax cuts. There is nothing and no one to defend them from. You lie.

@Pablo: The “no compromise” stance was that they’d let the tax cuts expire for everyone, if they were not also extended for the upper income brackets. In the latter days of the midterm campaigns and in the days immediately after, various members of the freshmen class were asked if they’d be willing to sign-on for one that just benefited the middle class and most said something along the lines of “if that’s the best we can get”, but the Republican leadership nixed it by saying “no compromise”.

Pablo said:
What in the everloving fuck does that even mean? Everyone wants to keep the middle class tax cuts. There is nothing and no one to defend them from. You lie.

You’re redundant and boring with your semantic bullshit. Piss off. If you truly need to latch onto word use and phrasing to make me out a liar that’s pretty pathetic. but it’s your call pal.

Magister said:
@Pablo: The “no compromise” stance was that they’d let the tax cuts expire for everyone, if they were not also extended for the upper income brackets. In the latter days of the midterm campaigns and in the days immediately after, various members of the freshmen class were asked if they’d be willing to sign-on for one that just benefited the middle class and most said something along the lines of “if that’s the best we can get”, but the Republican leadership nixed it by saying “no compromise”.

And that was the question in the fight. Were the republicans seriously prepared to let all the tax cuts expire, effectively raising the taxes on the middle class, just because they couldn’t keep the same tax rates for the wealthy. The question isn’t did they want to see a tax increase for the middle class, they didn’t. The question is were they willing to let it happen if the fight came to that. I doubt it.

What is also likely true is that there are several other issues that they would have vigorously blocked had they been pushed on the tax cut issue, and lost. It seems to be, give us a victory here and we’ll give you one there.

gordonbloyershow said:
So a president that was born after it became our motto doesn’t know it is our motto? It has only been our motto ALL his life.

Of couse if Palin had made that mistake it would prove she was a idiot and unqualified to be president, I get it.

Had to bring up Palin huh? OKay Gordon.
I really don’t give a crap about her gaffes Obama’s. I just didn’t see a point for that being brought up in this thread about this subject.

Liberal Progressives, mad because there won’t be as much money as they would like to feed the entitlement crowd? Go figure! Compromise is the cesspool politicians live in. Compromising on issues that are, at their core, corrupt is not a compromise, it’s a sell out! That’s exactly what the November elections were about. Apparently, Washington is counting on our short term memories to carry on business as usual. The current tax rates are absurd. Not only should the Bush tax rates be kept, they should be reduced further. This government has become nothing more than a giant scam.

Magister said:
@Pablo: The “no compromise” stance was that they’d let the tax cuts expire for everyone, if they were not also extended for the upper income brackets. In the latter days of the midterm campaigns and in the days immediately after, various members of the freshmen class were asked if they’d be willing to sign-on for one that just benefited the middle class and most said something along the lines of “if that’s the best we can get”, but the Republican leadership nixed it by saying “no compromise”.

I thought they just compromised. And of course, with just a couple of exceptions, the newly elected freshmen aren’t in play yet.

Rachel is criticizing Obama? Obviously, she fears having a black man in the White House. There can be no other reason.

@CosmosDan: While I would’ve also appreciated if, if President Obama had called the Republican’s bluff as my previous links indicate, economists appear to be heralding the stimulus package that was included in the compromise and when you get down to it, the cuts for the upper brackets are just a small part of the $900b package.

@Pablo: I seemed to recall some of the freshmen being asked, but the question was widely asked and they were doing a lot of the interviews, so I may simply recall them more than the others.

writer said:
Rachel is criticizing Obama? Obviously, she fears having a black man in the White House. There can be no other reason.

lol…good catch.

Well, well, well. Right now, House liberals are blocking a vote that would extend those middle class tax cuts. That’s some defense of them! Obama is calling them sanctimonious and saying they’re working against the interests of the American people.

Magister said:
@CosmosDan: While I would’ve also appreciated if, if President Obama had called the Republican’s bluff as my previous links indicate, economists appear to be heralding the stimulus package that was included in the compromise and when you get down to it, the cuts for the upper brackets are just a small part of the $900b package.

true, and Jon Stewart pointed out that there are only a few working days left for this congress, {8?} so I think part of the issue is getting it done before the end of this session so those just getting by and those about to lose their unemployment are taken care of, so in that sense, I understand what he’s saying.

I’ve rad some liberals are vowing to block it, and I think that’s a bad political call. If you block it once your president has brokered a deal, the weight of responsibility shifts when it comes to “who is hurting middle America?”

It would appear that Ms.Maddow’s biggest fallowing may be on right here on Mediaite. Short clips of her ranting are fun to watch and comment on but, a steady diet of watching her full show could be detrimental to your mental health. It’s obviously warped her!

CosmosDan said:
I’ve read some liberals are vowing to block it, and I think that’s a bad political call. If you block it once your president has brokered a deal, the weight of responsibility shifts when it comes to “who is hurting middle America?”

I chalk that up to political posturing. Of course it could theoretically cost something to get them onboard, but right now I’d say that they’re trying to play to the Kos crowd, the hosts on MSNBC and all of those 20-something bloggers who are making noise, but in the end like Obama, they’ll take what they can get.

Dan says, the small business I worked for a year ago had it’s rates go up 20% and that had nothing to do with anyone but the insurance company. Are you kidding me? The reason for the hikes were for the ”Good” parts of the healthcare kicking in and insurance companies factoring in the hits they’re going to take. Many have gone out of business or into consolidating because they think they’ll be gone in a few years. Just like the credit card companies this administration allowed insurance companies a head start to make corrections on our dime. Do we need to raise taxes? Maybe we can address this question after we privatize certain losers like the P.O., shut down agencies like energy, and start paring down entitlements especially Social Security . Do you think my 1 yr. old daughter cares if her retirement age is 73 when her life expectancy will be in the 90′s? Hopefully Paul Ryan will have discussions with the American Public in a way that people understand that some medicine will be needed to cure our problems.I hope the radical left holds up this bill because the public will see who the real party of self interest is and who can’t compromise.

gar said:
Are you kidding me? The reason for the hikes were for the ”Good” parts of the healthcare kicking in and insurance companies factoring in the hits they’re going to take. Many have gone out of business or into consolidating because they think they’ll be gone in a few years

I didn’t explain the timing. The rate hike was months before anything kicked in and perhaps before health care was passed. I remembered it because when later on the rates went up everyone was blaming it on the Health care plan and I thought of the 20% my company had already been hit with.

Elaine B said:
Also, all they know how to do or say is negative shit.

Hilarious!

Elaine B said:
What a sad bunch of people with such small minds.

And you of course are a genius.

Nothing the Left hates more than allowing productive people to keep more of their own earnings. They gripe and moan about it, but we already saw how successful the Left was with its Keynsian stimulus boondoggle, which destroyed a trillion dollars in wealth and created ZERO economic growth and led to ZERO increase in jobs. Far better to rely on tax cuts, which spurred the economy under Kennedy in the 1960s, Reagan in the 1980s and Bush earlier this decade. After the last Bush tax cuts, may I remind you, government revenues increased by almost $800 billion annually over a four year period — the largest increase in history. Tax cuts work in spurring the economy — the track record is absolutely clear on that front. Obama is finally pursuing a policy that will create economic growth — and of course a tax-and-spend liberal like Maddow goes ballistic.

felixw said:
Nothing the Left hates more than allowing productive people to keep more of their own earnings. They gripe and moan about it, but we already saw how successful the Left was with its Keynsian stimulus boondoggle, which destroyed a trillion dollars in wealth and created ZERO economic growth and led to ZERO increase in jobs. Far better to rely on tax cuts, which spurred the economy under Kennedy in the 1960s, Reagan in the 1980s and Bush earlier this decade. After the last Bush tax cuts, may I remind you, government revenues increased by almost $800 billion annually over a four year period — the largest increase in history. Tax cuts work in spurring the economy — the track record is absolutely clear on that front. Obama is finally pursuing a policy that will create economic growth — and of course a tax-and-spend liberal like Maddow goes ballistic.

You said “Nothing the Left hates more than allowing productive people to keep more of their own earnings.” Yes! They hate success so they must tear it down and then they must destroy the behaviors that lead to success.

Their goals in life are not like more traditional people’s goals. More traditional people (mostly conservatives) measure success as when things are better or can get better.

Modern Liberals/Progressives don’t work like this. They measure success as when things are “equal.” So they must tear down success.

Evan Sayet says it like this: they have to tear down everything that is good, successful and right while elevating everything that is evil, failed and wrong. They do this so things are forced to be “equal.”

In the Modern Liberal/Progressive mind, when everything is “equal”, all of our societal problems will go away. No more arguing, no more fighting, no more war, no more poverty, no more injustice, etc.

It’s Utopian, but it can never work. It can never work because in order to force everything to be ‘equal”, they have to treat people unequally!

This is why they need to control everything and this is where the Socialism comes from.

Our logic bounces off them because we’re trying to make things better and they hate it!

Now Rachel is the racist. BOOOHOOO!!
Add angry lesbians to the list of people we Democrats no longer want voting for our party along with whites, old people, christians and business owners.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHA
HAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHA

the real john t said:
What’s the matter Gordo Blowhard, are you jealous that Maddow has a show on a major cable network and probably a pretty nice income? When all you did was have a cheesy little show on a not known station that you had to lease time on. Then when they booted your sorry ass, you had to go making your YouTube video show in your mommy’s basement. Now tell me who’s the one that doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

By the same logc you have employed here, Glenn Beck must be the most erudite scholar known to man since his show pummels Jason Bigg’s show EVERY single night of the week. In fact Jason can bring in BathTub’s viewers and they still don’t make a pimple on Beck’s ample behind.

So according to this line of thinking……..who does know what they are talking about, dipstick?

Obama should just say to hell with all these liberal pundits.Who the hell is gonna challenge obama in 2012.Obama will always have the minority vote.Lets just say if obama loses to another democrat in 2012,the minority community will not go out and vote for them.The way the democratic party is looking today the independents have bailed on them , so there only hope is the minorty community.