Durbin: "Fiscal cliff" solution unlik...

Durbin: "Fiscal cliff" solution unlikely before election

There are 51 comments on the Reuters story from Jul 29, 2012, titled Durbin: "Fiscal cliff" solution unlikely before election. In it, Reuters reports that:

The U.S. Congress is unlikely to resolve looming tax and spending issues before the November 6 elections, a top Senate Democrat said on Sunday, but lawmakers are working on a proposal to tackle the issue after the elections.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Reuters.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
voteearlyvoteoft en

Virginia Beach, VA

#42 Aug 2, 2012
Cat74 wrote:
Republicans in the House proposed 34 jobs bills, if the Democrats wanted jobs they could have compromised somewhere. The new Rpublican President, with a Republican House, and Senate will provide, and sign a jobs bill.
Provided they don't eat their own like the Dems did when they had all 3......
Cat74

Palatine, IL

#43 Aug 2, 2012
Hopefully the Republicans learned what the Democrats didn't, and that is the way to relection is to save this country from total bankrupcy, cut taxes to promote production, and new tax money, and cut spending across the board, not just in the military.

“Sustainability Now!”

Since: May 08

Vadnais Heights

#44 Aug 4, 2012
xnutmegger wrote:
<quoted text>
Duh !
Well job bills spend money and budgets give the details on funding or not so pardon my common sense as job bills cost money and budgets are all about money.
Thank you for this great example of the Reductio Ad Absurdum logical fallacy.

Perfect!

“Sustainability Now!”

Since: May 08

Vadnais Heights

#45 Aug 4, 2012
voteearlyvoteoften wrote:
<quoted text>
Selective Outrage Alert!
Every opposition party has the goal of making the opposition president a one-term president.
And there has been action, well at least until the House's bills reach the Senate.
But I always forget, to a Dem bipartisanship and compromise means doing what they say........
Please consult the nearest mirror!

Every opposition Party naturally wants to reclaim the White House. No Party has made, until now, a public proclamation to that effect -- and backed it up with endless and rigid opposition to EVERY economy-related bill proposed by the sitting President.

Instead of ANY compromise, BOTH parties think that the Other should "come around" without any need to accommodate.

“Sustainability Now!”

Since: May 08

Vadnais Heights

#46 Aug 4, 2012
Cat74 wrote:
... cut taxes to promote production...
Why haven't you noticed that the Bush Lite tax cuts did NOT promote production? They only promoted a gigantic deficit, coupled with concentrating wealth even more heavily at the top bracket.

Why can't Republicans learn from their mistakes? Ten years of national experience should be a clue!
voteearlyvoteoft en

Virginia Beach, VA

#47 Aug 6, 2012
Madaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Every opposition Party naturally wants to reclaim the White House. No Party has made, until now, a public proclamation to that effect -- and backed it up with endless and rigid opposition to EVERY economy-related bill proposed by the sitting President.
Bull

This is nothing new, in words or in tactics.

And if the Pres was a little less rigid himself, maybe there would be less opposition to his proposals.

Selective outrage at its finest!

“Sustainability Now!”

Since: May 08

Vadnais Heights

#48 Aug 6, 2012
voteearlyvoteoften wrote:
<quoted text>
Bull
This is nothing new, in words or in tactics.
And if the Pres was a little less rigid himself, maybe there would be less opposition to his proposals.
Selective outrage at its finest!
Yeah, he was SO RIGID he reversed his position, and signed off on extending the Bush Lite tax cuts. So TOTALLY rigid!
voteearlyvoteoft en

Virginia Beach, VA

#49 Aug 6, 2012
Madaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, he was SO RIGID he reversed his position, and signed off on extending the Bush Lite tax cuts. So TOTALLY rigid!
That was then, and he's not extending those cuts now, is he?

“Sustainability Now!”

Since: May 08

Vadnais Heights

#50 Aug 6, 2012
voteearlyvoteoften wrote:
<quoted text>
That was then, and he's not extending those cuts now, is he?
Of course not! That would be STUPID.
voteearlyvoteoft en

United States

#51 Aug 6, 2012
Madaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course not! That would be STUPID.
Right, it's an election year after all, and he sure can't run on his record......
Cat74

Elgin, IL

#52 Aug 6, 2012
No Obama cannot run for reelection on his miserable record. He needs to start a shooting war, and he is running out of time. We don't want to go to war over Iran, and Obama has as good as promoted Iran having the bomb. He really cannot do much of anything at this point.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 1 min WeDeserveBetter 332,327
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 min dirtclod 168,520
News Juan Williams: The pollution of politics 3 min Mexican Lottery W... 9
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 7 min Jacques Ottawa 191,893
News Charleston church shooting coverage criticized ... 7 min Goose 394
News IMF to help Ukraine with up to $18 billion bailout (Mar '14) 9 min Agents of Corruption 8
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 10 min USAsince1680 1,250,258
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 12 min American Lady 186,005
News Governors vow to fight SCOTUS ruling on gay mar... 13 min American_Infidel 467
News Texas Sen. Ted Cruz not backing down on same-se... 2 hr LeDuped 60
More from around the web