I would have never thought a liberal as big as Mathews is, would ever turn on his man crush. Obama is a dumb ass, if he's trying to get congress to go along with his idea's and he doesn't pursue them to discuss matters, then how in the fuck can he be mad at them?This guy needs to go

Really? You can do better than some old man complaining about "propeller head kids".

Problem with Obama is that he is not forceful enough in calling out bullshit Republicans pulling out. Compromise my ass, air all dirty laundry, go after these fuckers that would rather send country into default than raise taxes on rich from historical lows. Problem with this approach that country will likely burn in the process, but to hell with it, things cannot go on as they are now for much longer.

Still, my vote goes to Obama (unless Ron Paul gets nominated, but pigs would fly first) because rest of backward redneck hicks from the sticks that would be running would surely not only continue pillaging the country by letting lobbyists write all laws, but also set back social and human rights back another couple decades to appease biblethumpers. I am not crazy about some of Ron Pauls ideas (return to gold standard, his anti abortion stance and such), but at least he is guaranteed to rock the boat. We _need_ to rock the boat.

Not just ANY old man, but the one that was beating the Obama drum loudest during the last election!

About this tax thing. I'm going to say the tax system we're in is completely FUCKED in EVERY WAY! NOW you're saying were' paying historical lows on taxes. Well here's the tax brackets...

Tax Brackets
That's the lowest to highest. During the Clinton years, the last two brackets of 33% & 35% were 2% higher. Yet the same deductions and write-offs were present then as well. Also I should add, Clinton took the corporate tax from 35% to 27%. I don't think 2% is that much difference, considering how our economy has been trying to get out of the gutter. Like I said, the tax system is fucked, but to act like the top 3 brackets don't pay any tax's is pretty fucking dumb!

GE didn't pay tax's, where is your concern with that? Oh wait, that's one of Obama's advisers... I guess since he's the CEO of GE, they get a free pass aye?

I don't buy that you would vote for Ron Paul. Your hate for anyone near the right is seething from you and very easy to see. Also your unbelievably lack of common sense seems to wave bye,bye to you!

No doubt. You know the reason the republicans have backed out is Obama has said that anything they try to pass will be instantly vetoed when it hits his desk. He said this on national TV that he wount even read it just veto. That right there is screwed up. I mean what are you suposed to do as a member of the republican party in congress when someone says that well for the good of the county you do what you can and compromise to an extent because you have to not because you are forced to do something that is in fact better for the county and they just dont like it for one reason or the other but because if they dont compromise they nothing will get done and it will get even worse.

I call BS on this. Proof please.

Just in case you missed it...

Not just ANY old man, but the one that was beating the Obama drum loudest during the last election!

About this tax thing. I'm going to say the tax system we're in is completely FUCKED in EVERY WAY! NOW you're saying were' paying historical lows on taxes. Well here's the tax brackets...
Quote:
There are currently 6 marginal income tax brackets for each filing status:
10 %, 15 %, 25 %, 28 %, 33 %, and 35 %
Tax Brackets

That's the lowest to highest. During the Clinton years, the last two brackets of 33% & 35% were 2% higher. Yet the same deductions and write-offs were present then as well. Also I should add, Clinton took the corporate tax from 35% to 27%. I don't think 2% is that much difference, considering how our economy has been trying to get out of the gutter. Like I said, the tax system is fucked, but to act like the top 3 brackets don't pay any tax's is pretty fucking dumb!

GE didn't pay tax's, where is your concern with that? Oh wait, that's one of Obama's advisers... I guess since he's the CEO of GE, they get a free pass aye?

I don't buy that you would vote for Ron Paul. Your hate for anyone near the right is seething from you and very easy to see. Also your unbelievably lack of common sense seems to wave bye,bye to you!

Just in case you missed it...

I don't feel like debating you on tax issues in this thread, since there are couple already going that you can easily participate in.

I still stand on "biggest fan who?". There is no shortage of crotchety old man in this country, why is this one important?

Plus, where did Obama said "on national TV that he won't even read it [budget compromise bill] just veto" ?

Congressman Jason Chaffetz reads Obama's issued statement.

Is this what you're looking for?

Rep. Jason Chaffetz



"Short time ago The President issued administration policy statement saying that he would veto cut, cap and balance."



Maybe I don't understand Cut Cap and Balance bill, so please explain to me how is it budget compromise bill?

"Cut, Cap and Balance" was the proposed bill from the right for establishing some rules regarding government debt while increasing the debt ceiling back in August, and what Wolfgang was referring to when he said that B.O. said he would "veto it without reading it." I think.

As to it being said on national television, I have no idea.

My understanding of "Cut, Cap and Balance" that it was attempt to amend constitution without super majority. Obviously, Obama would and should veto such bill. He would certainly read it or have it explained to him, and it certainly not a budget bill in any definition of budgeting.

Still, Wolfgang's point was that Obama was not willing to compromise as a matter of principle, when exactly opposite is/was the case.

So where's the President's proposed balanced budget? Since the little retards in Congress can't seem to do it? A leader is supposed to lead, if his subordinates can't get it done he's to step in and get it done. I thought that's what a leader is supposed to do! Apparently Obama missed the class on definition of a leader!

Obama's commitment to bi-partisanship is really puzzling, especially when clowns on the right are outright hostile and do everything possible to be party of "No!".

Still, budget bills have to originate in Congress. It isn't Obama's job to write them, actually exactly opposite is the case - he is not allowed to initiate spending bills.

Are you familiar with separation of executive and legislative branches of the government?

He doesn't have to write them, bring in the leaders of both parties and compromise... is that to much? The left doesn't want to compromise neither does the right. But a leader finds a compromise, that's what leaders do! Is their a law against that too?

Show me Obama's compromise. As I recall, he said he would veto whatever the right voted on and they ended up passing exactly what Mr. Compromise wanted. Is that what you call a compromise, giving B.O. what he wants like a spoiled child yelling in the candy store?

Slap your head all you want, but once again you've been asked for something specific and you refuse to participate.

I am not going to dignify your question with an answer because:

a) this has nothing to do with a thread's original topic and I am tired of changing subjects more often than flipping channels during commercials. If you want my answer put some work into it and start new thread and formulate coherent opinion.

b) your assertion that Obama is acting partisan, when he is taking heat from his own party about bipartisanship, is laughable.

c) you are not looking to get informed, rather waiting for "gotcha" moment you can focus on

d) answering your question in comprehensive manner is a lot of work

So you are saying that Obama could not find one member of his party willing to introduce his preferred legislation?

You never give a direct answer to a question anyway. So why start now!

Translation: You never tell me what I want to hear regardless how loudly I shout.

Obama criticized for compromise from the Left. I tend to agree, there is no point negotiating with irrational opponents.

Finally, honesty.

Another Keynesian, surprise surprise.

Why would you even say that? You think I have a hidden agenda and that's why you won't answer something?

Campaign funding, I agree with you on that. If you like Ron Paul's domestic plan, then we agree on those issues. So you're either arguing just for arguments sake, or you really don't believe in the things Ron Paul wants to do. At first my biggest issue with Ron Paul was his foreign policy issues, But I'm starting to understand it better the more I find out his stance. There's a lot of mis-information about him and his foreign policy.

So which is it, do you really think Ron Paul's policies are correct? Even cutting Government and Spending? Can you give a definitive answer?

I don't agree with timing of many Ron Pauls suggestions. Aside from really out-there stuff like golden standard (that he recently moderated on) I agree in principle with his approach - cut wars, budget within our means and that should include both social and military spending and audit the fucking fed. Still, cutting in the middle of recession will only deepen and prolong the recession.

Why would you think that? The spending he has planned to cut is non critical spending.. so all the money and human capital freed up would go right back into the real economy. It would also reduce entropy levels in govt administration.

Its the recipe to get out of the recession. If we continue following the same basic path Japan did after their bubble burst, like them, we will be looking at multiple decades of stagnation.