Democrats Push Hard on Fiscal Deal

Nov 27, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Roll Call

Durbin spoke about the future of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid on Tuesday but said those discussions should not be part of the fiscal cliff plan.

Comments (Page 6)

Showing posts 101 - 120 of407
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#101
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Marine Corp Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
Again; here you are with the very rhetoric that your side spewed for the last 4 years that the American people rejected on Election Night. The definition of insanity is doing (or saying) the same thing(s) over and over again and expecting a different result.
Your silliness is so easily refuted: the Stock Market has climbed 3000 point under Obama, unemployment has dropped under Obama, Osama bin Laden is dead – killed by Obama, GM is alive thanks to Obama.
Your same old rhetoric does not match reality. You’re just a one trick pony that desperately needs to be put down… do you feel sticky, LOL!
<quoted text>
Hey idiot, that “ONE MORE SHOT” came on Election Night… obviously you didn’t get the memo… OBAMA WON; he proved to the American people that his ideas are better than anything your side had to offer, that’s why they re-elected him in a landslide.
<quoted text>
Wrong… Bush will always be blamed for all the bad, and Obama will get credit for all the good… to the victor goes the spoils; and that includes writing the history books.
<quoted text>
History is on your side alright… on Election Night you became History, LOL!
You are delutional, but that's typical for a black leftist.
mistermadison

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#102
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Good answer and thanks for not derogating. If goverment isn't the answer then what is, anarchy? What about mononpolies and anti-trust laws. Your argument sounds very well informed. So did the SCOTUS when it made corporations people and money speech. I mean it sounds good in theory but it's actually detrimental to us as a whole. At what point is the federal government supposed to intervene? Wouldn't madison think that the federal government has a resonsibility to ensure the super rich don't become the super powerful? And a minority controls the majority? Capital does not have more government granted priveledge than the proletariat. And the right says it wants reforms but they've offered no reformations other than slashing funding to the poor. Reforming should include a plan to stop entitlement abuse. And the right wants to pay for the cost of continuing the tax breaks by slashing federal funding. And what about the economic factor of the consumer driven welfare state we live in? Take away the consumer and then there's no demand. What happens then?
proudtobeamerica n wrote:
<quoted text>
What I am saying is that government is not the answer. Or do you believe that the bureacrats (Democrats and Republicans) that siphoned away the Social Security trust fund (which was the lie FDR told the American people to sell his idea-it was never a trust fund) are angels that we should continue to entrust our lives with? What happened to the trust fund? A ponzi scheme that would land most private citizens in jail. Any politician go to jail for breaking into the Social Security lockbox? The money is long gone. Replaced by IOU's backed by the Full Faith and Credit of the United States Government. A government 16 trillion in debt-not including the trillions in unfunded liabilities of SS, Medicaid and government pensions.
Progressives, unlike the Founders, believe that every need or want is a right. That idea has resulted in endless promises and spending that we can no loner sustain. It goes beyond life and liberty-they want to guarantee happiness. They do not see the connection between rights and responsibility. The social programs they create to guarantee these wants are fufilled have bankrupted this country. They believe your money belongs to the government and they will decide what you get to keep. Of course progressives believe others (that do not pay a dime in Federal taxes) can vote away other people's tax dollars without paying FEDERAL taxes themselves. So much for shared sacrifice. The classic example-the progressives will argue that the rich have too much, believing that they and they alone have the authority to determine how much is too much. To assure an equal outcome you must take away private property or capital from some and redistribute it to others who have not earned it. That is socialism-plain and simple. Rationalizing stealing all in the name of social justice and fairness.
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

mistermadison wrote:
Yes democrats keep pushing. Try to make these pathetic promisory "republicans" realize that cutting funding to the lower classes to secure the rich folks' tax breaks is a sad reflection on our country as a whole.
So, the liberals and the Democrats are going to tax everybody like their biggest tax bill so far which is Obamcare! Plus as we can see that the Democrats depend on their bribes and entitlements to secure their jobs instead of being for all Americans. Now, that is really sad especially when the Democrats middle class is the special interest group of "unions" instead of all the middle class. Remember, when the Democrats say "middle class" it is code words for unions.
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>If that were the criterion for dismissal, Topix would be exclusively leftwingers. No one to piss off? How boring!
However, IMHO topix favors the liberals and is always attacking the conservatives as they have their posts removed more often for no reason.
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105
Nov 30, 2012
 
mistermadison wrote:
How is it that "progressive policies" got us into this mess? I say it was the quick fix of supply side "reaganomics" that is no longer viable and has more to do with our current problems than handouts or entitlement abuse. When corporations are people and money equals speech there has to be an equalizer. The majority will have to step up and assert itself over the special interest of big money.<quoted text>
So, you are for the destruction of our country? Sorry to break your little heart, but corporations are made up of people as so far have had no proof that any corporation is captained by extra-terrestrials. Yes, some corporations have been given unfair breaks and benefits, but is more due to greed and corruption which go for both Democrats and Republicans. However, you are right that the majority of Americans will have to step up and assert themselves over the special interest of big money/ UNIONS to protect Americans.
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Ghosts Of Benghazi Four wrote:
<quoted text>Indeed. Democrats got us murdered. We haunt them, but they still have no conscience.
Yeah, Obama cares less about them as he cares less about most Americans!
mistermadison

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#107
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you are for the destruction of our country? Sorry to break your little heart, but corporations are made up of people as so far have had no proof that any corporation is captained by extra-terrestrials. Yes, some corporations have been given unfair breaks and benefits, but is more due to greed and corruption which go for both Democrats and Republicans. However, you are right that the majority of Americans will have to step up and assert themselves over the special interest of big money/ UNIONS to protect Americans.
sorry charlie, unions are NOT people. And if corporations are people (or made up of individuals) why should those individuals have two "personhoods". Each individual should have rights. An individual should not have a right to any additional personhood. One voice. Not you as a person AND your corporation as a person. Pick one.
mistermadison

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

unions are NOT people they don't have nearly as much license as corporations. Also, unions by nature are much more democratic than crony-captalist corporations. And if corporations are people (or made up of individuals) why should those individuals have two "personhoods". Each individual should have rights. An individual should not have a right to any additional personhood. One voice. Not you as a person AND your corporation as a person. Pick one.
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

mistermadison wrote:
<quoted text>sorry charlie, unions are NOT people. And if corporations are people (or made up of individuals) why should those individuals have two "personhoods". Each individual should have rights. An individual should not have a right to any additional personhood. One voice. Not you as a person AND your corporation as a person. Pick one.
Sorry again, but UNIONS are people. Greedy and caring about themselves people and nobody else, but people nonetheless.
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#110
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

mistermadison wrote:
unions are NOT people they don't have nearly as much license as corporations. Also, unions by nature are much more democratic than crony-captalist corporations. And if corporations are people (or made up of individuals) why should those individuals have two "personhoods". Each individual should have rights. An individual should not have a right to any additional personhood. One voice. Not you as a person AND your corporation as a person. Pick one.
Democratic? I guess you forgot about Prop 32 where the unions paid $70 million to defeat the bill where union member could make choices for themselves. The unions made sure they bought the election because they could not let their member able to make up their own mind instead being forced to pay their union dues for Democrats. I have spoken to many union members that said to get the job they were forced to join their union (no choice there) and they had no choice to see how their union dues were spent if they had a choice of a non-UNION DEMOCRAT to vote for whether it be an Independent or Republican. They were force to contribute to the Democrats whether they liked it or not. That is not very democratic-sounding to me and to other normal thinking people.
proudtobeamerica n

Staten Island, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#111
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Marine Corp Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
Again; here you are with the very rhetoric that your side spewed for the last 4 years that the American people rejected on Election Night. The definition of insanity is doing (or saying) the same thing(s) over and over again and expecting a different result.
Your silliness is so easily refuted: the Stock Market has climbed 3000 point under Obama, unemployment has dropped under Obama, Osama bin Laden is dead – killed by Obama, GM is alive thanks to Obama.
Your same old rhetoric does not match reality. You’re just a one trick pony that desperately needs to be put down… do you feel sticky, LOL!
<quoted text>
Hey idiot, that “ONE MORE SHOT” came on Election Night… obviously you didn’t get the memo… OBAMA WON; he proved to the American people that his ideas are better than anything your side had to offer, that’s why they re-elected him in a landslide.
<quoted text>
Wrong… Bush will always be blamed for all the bad, and Obama will get credit for all the good… to the victor goes the spoils; and that includes writing the history books.
<quoted text>
History is on your side alright… on Election Night you became History, LOL!
The House of Representatives is still in the hands of Republicans.
Press the rewind button loser. Nothing will get done. The people voted for gridlock and that is what they will get. Enjoy!!!

Thank God the people were not foolish enough to give the House of Representatives to the Democrats. Checks and balances. Obama's agenda is stuck. Nothing will get done. LOL

Since: Oct 08

.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#112
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Marine Corp Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a LOSER, and the President of the United States is still the Black guy named Barack Hussein Obama…
DEAL WITH IT, LOL!
Obamaroid is bi=racial or as you compassionate liberals would say...an oreo...deal with it, LOL

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#113
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

mistermadison wrote:
Yes democrats keep pushing. Try to make these pathetic promisory "republicans" realize that cutting funding to the lower classes to secure the rich folks' tax breaks is a sad reflection on our country as a whole.
You do know that Obama has offered no compromise to the debt or the cliff don't you. When is he going to man up and lead.
proudtobeamerica n

Staten Island, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

mistermadison wrote:
Good answer and thanks for not derogating. If goverment isn't the answer then what is, anarchy? What about mononpolies and anti-trust laws. Your argument sounds very well informed. So did the SCOTUS when it made corporations people and money speech. I mean it sounds good in theory but it's actually detrimental to us as a whole. At what point is the federal government supposed to intervene? Wouldn't madison think that the federal government has a resonsibility to ensure the super rich don't become the super powerful? And a minority controls the majority? Capital does not have more government granted priveledge than the proletariat. And the right says it wants reforms but they've offered no reformations other than slashing funding to the poor. Reforming should include a plan to stop entitlement abuse. And the right wants to pay for the cost of continuing the tax breaks by slashing federal funding. And what about the economic factor of the consumer driven welfare state we live in? Take away the consumer and then there's no demand. What happens then? <quoted text>
Try to really answer this very simple question. What is the rationale and where is it in the Constitution that supports the idea that part of every dollar you earn belongs to someone that has not earned it merely because that person has needs or wants?

Does another person have a right to the fruits of someone else's labor merely because they feel entitled to it? If so how does one maintain the incentive to produce if their labor really does not belong to them?

Is the less gifted individual or the less responsible individual entitled to the earnings of another? If so what corresponding obligation does the recipient of those unearned dollars owe to the individual whose property is given to them? Do not they have a corresponding obligation to the provider to behave responsibly?

Every need and want cannot be guaranteed by a moral government. The mechanism used by government to guarantee the impossible promise of a life without fear of want or need is always the same.
Rationalize taking from those that have earned it and giving their income to those who have not. Redistribution of wealth no matter what spin one puts on the anticipated goal is just another method of rationalizng stealing. Sounds alot like tyranny.
Rob Johnston

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#115
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

okimar wrote:
President Wimpy Obama will gladly give you spending cuts Tuesday for tax increases today.....
Haven't we heard this from the left more than a few times in the last 30 something years?
Show me a liberal and I'll show you a liar. Its in their DNA....
POTUS got a mandate from the American people to transform America into a Cuban style Collectivist morass of hopelessness and despair. The American people didn't Stop him. We Voted for our economy to fail, our extinction level debt to soar when we didn't bother to Vote to stop him.

Our kids all love Obama and are willing to sacrifice their personal freedoms in support of Big Brother. They are fine with mediocracy and Class Warfare leading to a lifetime of living with less for their families. We failed to raise them to stand on their own.
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rob Johnston wrote:
<quoted text>
POTUS got a mandate from the American people to transform America into a Cuban style Collectivist morass of hopelessness and despair. The American people didn't Stop him. We Voted for our economy to fail, our extinction level debt to soar when we didn't bother to Vote to stop him.
Our kids all love Obama and are willing to sacrifice their personal freedoms in support of Big Brother. They are fine with mediocracy and Class Warfare leading to a lifetime of living with less for their families. We failed to raise them to stand on their own.
No mandate, but a barely eked out win according to popular vote. Once the college kids realize that Obama sold them up a creek with college debt and no jobs, then they will be going down the hwy trying to get him out of office.
Rob Johnston

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#117
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
No mandate, but a barely eked out win according to popular vote. Once the college kids realize that Obama sold them up a creek with college debt and no jobs, then they will be going down the hwy trying to get him out of office.
You overestimate today's America.

Americans abandoned all reason and common sense and voted for the guy most likely to wave to them from a Gay Pride Float...the Economy be damned. It's all about priorities.

We ALL need to stop arguing and Embrace the Disgrace. America bought into the far left's mantra of Class Warfare. The majority of voters voted to be less than and deprive our kids of their shot at the American Dream when we chose Obama over Romney.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118
Nov 30, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
However, IMHO topix favors the liberals and is always attacking the conservatives as they have their posts removed more often for no reason.
For no reason, my arse! Conservatives, at least the ones on Topix, tend to be the most extreme, crude, and bigoted fools imaginable. Many of their slimiest posts deserve to be removed.

As to your assertion that Topix favors liberals, you are delusional. Mindless, revolting righties predominate on Topix.
proudtobeamerica n

Staten Island, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#119
Nov 30, 2012
 
mistermadison wrote:
Good answer and thanks for not derogating. If goverment isn't the answer then what is, anarchy? What about mononpolies and anti-trust laws. Your argument sounds very well informed. So did the SCOTUS when it made corporations people and money speech. I mean it sounds good in theory but it's actually detrimental to us as a whole. At what point is the federal government supposed to intervene? Wouldn't madison think that the federal government has a resonsibility to ensure the super rich don't become the super powerful? And a minority controls the majority? Capital does not have more government granted priveledge than the proletariat. And the right says it wants reforms but they've offered no reformations other than slashing funding to the poor. Reforming should include a plan to stop entitlement abuse. And the right wants to pay for the cost of continuing the tax breaks by slashing federal funding. And what about the economic factor of the consumer driven welfare state we live in? Take away the consumer and then there's no demand. What happens then? <quoted text>
Another way to look at it so that even Marine Corp Pat can understand it is this way.

What responsible parent would encourage their child to take the toys of another child by explaining to his or her child that the child that has more toys or better toys doesn't deserve them? That taking a toy from the other child is ok because it is ok to be jealous and to dislike the other child for having the toys? Would such a parent encourage their child to steal the toys because their child desires, needs or is jealous of those toys? Now imagine if that child earned that toy by spending his or her allowance? More justification to take the toys? Why, because the child without toys needs or wants them but doesn't want to do chores to EARN an allowance?

Better yet, imagine on payday instead of the government withholding your taxes before you recieved your paycheck you recieved the entire check instead. All your pay-no taxes withheld. All the money is sitting in front of you at the kitchen table. Every dime you worked for that week is right in front of you.
There is a knock on the door on payday. All the people that did not work for that check show up at your house to take the piece of the check your government feels they are entitled to. The single mom that doesn't make responsible decisions and never worked hard a day in her life takes a pile of money off the table and tells you she needs clothes for her kids. Another person comes in and says you owe them healthcare and since you have money you should pay for it. Another says she needs money for birth control. And so on and so on. Of course the piece that gets taken for your retirement whether you like it or not, good old Social Security, you may not get back, and even if you do, if you die all the money you put in-well it doesn't go to your kids to goes back to the government. The conga line of the needy and the entitled keep coming in taking from the pile until the government decides they are done with you. What is left they and they alone allow you to keep. How much of your income are you going to surrender to those that have not earned it but feel entitled to it?

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#120
Nov 30, 2012
 
OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
No mandate, but a barely eked out win according to popular vote. Once the college kids realize that Obama sold them up a creek with college debt and no jobs, then they will be going down the hwy trying to get him out of office.
Operation Geronimo, is Obama's plan to drive us off the cliff. Get your parachute ready.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 101 - 120 of407
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••