McConnell Admits GOP Nothing More than Hostage Takers in Debt Crisis

Interesting how you cannot even reference the original article. In stead you have to quote http://thinkprogress.org/economy/20...y-repeatedly-cites-gop-intrasigence-on-taxes/ and their left logic. I wonder what your honest opinion of the facts might be in stead of the leftist dogma.

 

I noticed something else interesting. You can't attack what I posted so instead you attack the source of the article which any idiot can see quotes the original source. I guess you just didn't want to deal with this sentence:

We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.”​

 

That about says it all.

 

Now please read the original report and tell me what the "this" that they have "changed our assumption on". It will put your quote on a little different light.

 

I know. I know. It is their previous assumption that the tax cuts that were supposed to expire last year will be allowed to expire next year.

 

Don't tell dr. moen. It will ruin his train of thought. OOPS! That is an oxymoron, isn't it? And I am still waiting for him to show me how Boehner managed to hide the word default in his statement to Laura Ingraham. But then I guess that is what happens when you only look at one side's slant of an issue.

 

Just like the Republicans held unemployment benefits hostage so that they could continue the Bush tax cuts during the lame duck session last December. It still comes down to Republicans screwing us all once again and blaming everyone else for their mistakes.

Did you like the Tea Party idiots cheering for the downgraded credit rating? Stupid aren't they.

 

Ummmm...correction...the Bush tax cuts are done & gone, you'll have to refer to the current cuts as "BO's Tax Cuts" since they were enacted on his watch.

 

Interesting how liberal lies beget Republican hostage takers.

BTW, what ever happened to BO's "tone down the rhetoric"? As the leader of the dips, all I can says is that it really isn't working too well. That can either mean that BO is not a leader or he lied to us. Care to take you pick?

 

One in the same, really. Good leaders don't have to lie and effective leaders unite, that's what seperates the good from the bad. BO's failure to lead in anything just proves what an underwhelming loser he is.

 

I like that silly Right-wing narrative that says if you throw out every conceivable road block and obstacle to success you can only blame the guy being targeted for not leading effectively when in reality if you actually worked with the guy for the good of the country instead of working against him strictly to advance your own agenda, we'd all be better off. It's a good narrative though. It works on stupid people anyway.

 

Anything is better than the left wing whacks who believe the only way we can prosper is to spend & tax then spend more & tax more when the situation worsens. It's unfortunate that there are still idiots and ideologues out there (and apparently in here) who still buy into that line of crap.

 

More patently false Right-wing nonsense from you. Surprise, surprise.

 

In what way?
If you can even pretend to claim BO & his minions don't resort to "spend & tax" when confronted with a situation you are more of a fanatical left wing dummy than I imagined.

 

I challenge you to look up and see just which presidents all the way back to Carter actually spent and taxed the most. Reagan raised taxes 7 of his 8 years in office and still doubled the debt. I will take way half of what Obama is responsible for just for being handed 2 wars that were never put on the books by Bush, an economy in the toilet, and a job market that was shedding 750,000 jobs a month the day he stepped into office. If anyone had a reason to ever spend money, he certainly did. Now, if you take the entire 14T dollar debt and assign each president the amount they walked out the door owing above what the debt was when they walked in, Republicans account for over 10T of the 14T. Hell, Bush had to barrow 51 billion to enact his first tax cut and off he went to add another 5T to the debt.

If you ever stepped back from the canned talking points and actually researched the nonsense you regularly spew, you might actually learn something. I won’t hold my breath. The stated goal of the GOP as far back as three decades ago was to spend the government into fiscal insolvency and withhold any and all revenue through taxation to bring the government to its financial knees. I haven’t seen anything from them that would disprove that stated goal. You don’t just shrink government by starving it of cash, you crush the middle class as a by-product. Why that is Ok with you is either a function of your indifference or your ignorance. Either way, it makes your opinion matter not to me.

 

Ah! So now it is back to the president's fault. When it looks good for you it is the presidents fault, but when it looks bad for you it is the house's fault. How appropriate.

Now, go back and figure who was in charge of the house when all of these monies were spent.

 

That's easy. In the period I was talking about, 1981 to the present, the Cons have been in charge 7 two-year terms and the Dems 9 two-year terms. Not a real big difference. However, during the same period, the White House was held by the Cons for 18 of those years and the Dems for 10 of those years. That is nearly two to one.

So even if you actually had some point to telling me to go back and see who was in charge during this spending spree, it is lost given the reality that the Cons have had power a large majority of the last 30 years and have probably done way too much damage. 10T in debt is directly due to the fact that the Cons have been conning people like you, low information voters, for far too long and unfortunately for the rest of us i.e. Labor, the damage may be permanent.

 

How convenient your memory is. I posted this answer before. During your time frame, USA ran up $13T in debt. It seems that while the democrats were in charge of the house we racked up about $11T. Think you can do the math and figure out how much the Republicans racked up?

 

OOPS!

 

Ah! So you're playing that game now. Never blame the Cons during any time when there are Dems at any level of government and then Blame the Dems when the Cons are in power. How convenient! You ARE a true believer aren't you?