Obama taking "fiscal cliff" fight to ...

Obama taking "fiscal cliff" fight to the public

There are 2428 comments on the CBS News story from Nov 30, 2012, titled Obama taking "fiscal cliff" fight to the public. In it, CBS News reports that:

President Barack Obama delivers remarks about extending tax cuts for middle class people during an event in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building November 28, 2012 in Washington, DC.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBS News.

gossamer

Roseville, MI

#866 Dec 8, 2012
individuals in 2013 wrote:
How is this going to end:? We can't go on spending forever and ever.
The Democrats and the liberals on this board don't seem to understand that we are going to go bankrupt. When Obama's term started the debt / GDP ratio was 44% now it stands at 73%. Our Debt has skyrocketed and it will continue to skyrocket with Obama as president.
Will anyone take a stand? All the liberals want to do is blame Bush. Its pathetic
Pointing it out to them only gets name calling and insults.

They justify everything with Bush did it or Bush was worse.
gossamer

Roseville, MI

#867 Dec 8, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah!
There you go, enough said.
Insults as usual.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#868 Dec 8, 2012
OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
Not your Messiah or Obama as he is demanding that the corporations pay
Gosh... demanding tributes from corporations...

This is where you really show us what for and find that link proving Obama is demanding a nickle from any corporation.

Five cents.
gossamer

Roseville, MI

#869 Dec 8, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's difficult to say if you are just a liar, or if you are just incredible ignorant.
I say it is a combination of both- that you lie out of instinct, but you don't know what in the hell you are talking about and it is in this ignorance that makes it hard to say where the tipping point is as to which is more.
BTW: Boehner not only gave Obama nothing, he really has nothing to offer.
Obama won, he is more popular today than on the day he was elected, he has a mandate from Americans to extend the tax cut to 98 percent of Americans, and if Bohner doesn't agree to this, Obama is going to bust it off in his azz, and Americans are going to blame the GOP.
Boehner is looking for some to save face. He has about a week.
Insults as usual.
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#870 Dec 8, 2012
gossamer wrote:
<quoted text>
Pointing it out to them only gets name calling and insults.
They justify everything with Bush did it or Bush was worse.
You got that right. They blame Bush for everything as they can take responsibility for nothing!
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#871 Dec 8, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Gosh... demanding tributes from corporations...
This is where you really show us what for and find that link proving Obama is demanding a nickle from any corporation.
Five cents.
I posted this article before, but here's the link.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-accepts-corporate...

"Obama OKs Corporate $$ for Inaugural
By Devin Dwyer | ABC OTUS News Fri, Dec 7, 2012

After the most expensive campaign in U.S. history, President Obama is dropping his principled objection to some forms of political fundraising to help pay for the post-election party.
ABC News has learned that the Presidential Inaugural Committee will accept unlimited corporate donations to help fund Obama's inauguration festivities next month, reversing a voluntary ban on the money he imposed on the inaugural four years ago and during the 2012 Democratic National Convention.
Obama will also allow individuals to contribute up to the legal maximum for the 2013 inauguration -$250,000 - lifting a $50,000 cap he voluntarily imposed in 2008, sources said.
The shift appeared to be driven by fundraising challenges in the wake of a multi-billion dollar campaign. Obama and GOP nominee Mitt Romney each raised north of $1 billion for the election cycle - historic highs - according to Federal Election Commission filings released Thursday.
Obama's 2009 inaugural celebration cost $47 million.
Officials said cost considerations for the 2013 festivities would mean less elaborate events than four years ago. There will not be a star-studded concert on the National Mall, for example, and there will be fewer inaugural balls.
A spokeswoman for the committee said Obama will still not accept donations from lobbyists or PACs, or allow any individuals or corporations to formally sponsor specific inaugural events, such as the parade.
"Our goal is to make sure that we will meet the fundraising requirements for this civic event after the most expensive presidential campaign in history," said Addie Whisenant. "To ensure continued transparency, all names of donors will be posted to a regularly updated website."
Whisenant told ABC News that the Inaugural Committee will "fully vet" all individual and corporate donors and that "contributions from those not meeting the vetting standard will not be accepted." Among those barred by law are foreign nationals and corporations; the committee says it will also reject funds from companies that have outstanding TARP payments.
Obama's reversal is not the first time he has dropped self-imposed campaign financing rules meant to "change business as usual in Washington." Earlier this year, Obama dropped his long-standing opposition to super PACs, giving his approval for top aides to support Priorities USA Action. During the 2008 campaign, he broke a standing promise to accept public financing for the general election."

HOWEVER, WE CAN READ AGAIN HOW OBAMA IS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY THE CORPORATIONS, IMO. "After the most expensive campaign in U.S. history, President Obama is dropping his principled objection to some forms of political fundraising to help pay for the post-election party.
ABC News has learned that the Presidential Inaugural Committee will accept unlimited corporate donations to help fund Obama's inauguration festivities next month, reversing a voluntary ban on the money he imposed on the inaugural four years ago and during the 2012 Democratic National Convention.
Obama will also allow individuals to contribute up to the legal maximum for the 2013 inauguration -$250,000 - lifting a $50,000 cap he voluntarily imposed in 2008, sources said." MAYBE THAT IS WHERE $250,000 DEFINES YOU AS RICH COMES FROM. HUM? LOL
OH NO YOU Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#872 Dec 8, 2012
gossamer wrote:
<quoted text>
Insults as usual.
\
AS usual.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#873 Dec 8, 2012
OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted this article before, but here's the link.
Post it 50 times.

BUSH took corporate donations for his inauguration.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#874 Dec 8, 2012
OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
Obama will also allow individuals to contribute up to the legal maximum for the 2013 inauguration -$250,000
I see...

So it is a legal donation?

Like donations that Bush took for his inauguration?

Oh my...

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

#875 Dec 8, 2012
Village Mystery wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you joking? I specifically referred to WHY I made the king reference and that is because of the FACT that Obama's followers are claiming some kind of dictatorial mandate because "WE WON!!!" while they completely ignore the existence of the Congress and State governments.
And yes, I was complaining about the Patriot Act - so now what? I'm consistent and you are a partisan hack......so what do you say now? What are they saying at the trough?
The fact that you're upset because someone states the obvious is irrelevant. Yes, Obama won the election and yes, we also have a Congress and Senate. I don't see your point. Because you complained about the Patriot Act, I am a partisan hack??? Explain the logic behind that statement. As far as being at the trough; if you're insinuating that I am a pig, well, you are entitled to an opinion. If, however, you are saying that you think I am suckling from the governmental teat, maybe you need to do a little more research.

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

#876 Dec 8, 2012
OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
Believe me Obama will be doing the same if he has not already. It looks like Obama is following right after GW Bush in his "king" plans.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/27/natio...
"Patriot Act provisions extended just in time.
He's a two-term president, period. How would he become a king or a dictator? The idea is preposterous on the face of it and you lessen yourself by furthering the silly notion.
Liberty Warrior

Indianapolis, IN

#877 Dec 8, 2012
We're going over this fiscal cliff no matter what and politicians in DC will still demand more increases in spending. We've been plummeting downhill for a long time. The fiscal cliff isn't the only problem facing the United States right now. At some point in the first quarter, the country will again hit the "debt ceiling" - the same issue that roiled the markets in the summer of 2011.

“To Eff The Ineffable”

Since: Nov 12

Wailuku

#878 Dec 8, 2012
OH NO YOU Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted this article before, but here's the link.
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-accepts-corporate...
"Obama OKs Corporate $$ for Inaugural
By Devin Dwyer | ABC OTUS News Fri, Dec 7, 2012
After the most expensive campaign in U.S. history, President Obama is dropping his principled objection to some forms of political fundraising to help pay for the post-election party.
ABC News has learned that the Presidential Inaugural Committee will accept unlimited corporate donations to help fund Obama's inauguration festivities next month, reversing a voluntary ban on the money he imposed on the inaugural four years ago and during the 2012 Democratic National Convention.
Obama will also allow individuals to contribute up to the legal maximum for the 2013 inauguration -$250,000 - lifting a $50,000 cap he voluntarily imposed in 2008, sources said.
The shift appeared to be driven by fundraising challenges in the wake of a multi-billion dollar campaign. Obama and GOP nominee Mitt Romney each raised north of $1 billion for the election cycle - historic highs - according to Federal Election Commission filings released Thursday.
Obama's 2009 inaugural celebration cost $47 million.
Officials said cost considerations for the 2013 festivities would mean less elaborate events than four years ago. There will not be a star-studded concert on the National Mall, for example, and there will be fewer inaugural balls.
A spokeswoman for the committee said Obama will still not accept donations from lobbyists or PACs, or allow any individuals or corporations to formally sponsor specific inaugural events, such as the parade.
"Our goal is to make sure that we will meet the fundraising requirements for this civic event after the most expensive presidential campaign in history," said Addie Whisenant. "To ensure continued transparency, all names of donors will be posted to a regularly updated website."
Whisenant told ABC News that the Inaugural Committee will "fully vet" all individual and corporate donors and that "contributions from those not meeting the vetting standard will not be accepted." Among those barred by law are foreign nationals and corporations; the committee says it will also reject funds from companies that have outstanding TARP payments.
Obama's reversal is not the first time he has dropped self-imposed campaign financing rules meant to "change business as usual in Washington." Earlier this year, Obama dropped his long-standing opposition to super PACs, giving his approval for top aides to support Priorities USA Action. During the 2008 campaign, he broke a standing promise to accept public financing for the general election."
HOWEVER, WE CAN READ AGAIN HOW OBAMA IS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY THE CORPORATIONS, IMO. "After the most expensive campaign in U.S. history, President Obama is dropping his principled objection to some forms of political fundraising to help pay for the post-election party.
ABC News has learned that the Presidential Inaugural Committee will accept unlimited corporate donations to help fund Obama's inauguration festivities next month, reversing a voluntary ban on the money he imposed on the inaugural four years ago and during the 2012 Democratic National Convention.
Obama will also allow individuals to contribute up to the legal maximum for the 2013 inauguration -$250,000 - lifting a $50,000 cap he voluntarily imposed in 2008, sources said." MAYBE THAT IS WHERE $250,000 DEFINES YOU AS RICH COMES FROM. HUM? LOL
I missed the "demand" part too. A lot about changing his mind about accepting contributions but no demands.

“To Eff The Ineffable”

Since: Nov 12

Wailuku

#879 Dec 9, 2012
Liberty Warrior wrote:
We're going over this fiscal cliff no matter what and politicians in DC will still demand more increases in spending. We've been plummeting downhill for a long time. The fiscal cliff isn't the only problem facing the United States right now. At some point in the first quarter, the country will again hit the "debt ceiling" - the same issue that roiled the markets in the summer of 2011.
The "debt ceiling" is just congress voting to pay bills they've already accumulated in excess of the old debt ceiling. Holding it hostage for some kind of deal is like a man telling his wife that he won't pay the mortgage unless she does that "special thing" for him.
With similar results too.
titonton divaunte pants

United States

#880 Dec 9, 2012
antiobamanationist wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, thank God you had enough sense to not vote for him and to not be duped by his lies.
I'm glad I don't make over 250,000 dollars per year. I sure don't want to be punished for being rich! On the other hand, I'm sure glad my employer is rich enough to pay me weekly.
if you work for a corporation like me, obama and all of congress will make damn sure they have enough money to pay us. Though I think giving corporations a reduced tax rate will probably prompt them to move overseas where labor is still cheaper.
titonton divaunte pants

United States

#881 Dec 9, 2012
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>As i recall, rich people were doing just fine under clinton.
You sound so weak, being glad your employer is rich enough to pay you.
I, On the other hand, am happy that i can market my skills to employers who may have use for them.
you are a worthless used up old sycophant. Enjoy spending my ssi payments....
titonton divaunte pants

United States

#882 Dec 9, 2012
Mykro wrote:
<quoted text>No, I'm not a libertarian. But some of their points I do agree with. I just brought up some of their points because the teabaggers like to think they line up with them. The bagger nuts really have no idea what the libertarians stand for.
you can't be serious. If you do you have the worst reasoning ever...
titonton divaunte pants

United States

#883 Dec 9, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't heard?
The GOP lost the election.
It was in all the papers!
something that's not in all the papers.. 15 million registered republicans didn't even want to vote!
titonton divaunte pants

United States

#884 Dec 9, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess you forgot about the TWO recessions and the TWO wars and forgot that Bush was handed a budget SURPLUS that would have paid off ENTIRELY the federal deficit.
Trickle down economics doesn't work.
Never has.
don't forget all the dems. That voted for it too.
But I'm sure obama is going to reduce the debt. That's why they raised the debt limit. His only makes sence when democrats are in office. Raise the debt limit to lower the debt. You can still blame bush in 4 years if you really want.
titonton divaunte pants

United States

#885 Dec 9, 2012
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>It isnt rocket science Honey!
Obama will let the Tax cuts expire, and then have congress introduce a bill restoring the cuts for the middle class! If repubs CHOOSE to reject middle class tax cuts at that time....its all on them
Perfect strategizing
they know it has to be done and want republicans to take the heat. The truth is you can't lower corporate taxes and raise taxes on the brackets proposed without increasing the deficit. Obama knows, dems know, republicans know. They aarent going to bite the hand that feeds them. Its going to be us. Republicans should just lay down on this and surrender it all to the president and his party. But they wont.
Obama could veto it. That won't happen either. Just like the stimulus that still hasn't worked, this will need passed "urgently" to avoid the "cliff" when in november all dems could talk about is a "recovery". Damn a lot can happen in a month I guess. " we are in a recovery! Follow us its right over the edge of this cliff..."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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 Donald Trump: We're Going to Build a Wall and M... (Oct '15) 4 min Coulter Geist 40
News GOP House intel chairman met source on White Ho... 5 min CodeTalker 21
News Gray Matters: Be healthy, avoid geezer jokes (Feb '09) 10 min Coulter Geist 79
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... 11 min fast freddie 7,624
News GOP controls federal government but struggles t... 14 min CodeTalker 40
News Americans spent an estimated $17 billion on amm... 14 min payme 91
News O'Reilly says he's distracted by congresswoman'... 17 min CodeTalker 16
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 27 min Grey Ghost 1,509,846
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 32 min Just call me Abe 3 262,596
More from around the web