the left is much more abrasive and deceitful in their comments but all the politicians need to pound sand
Why do people act like compromise is all important??
I want to drive over the cliff at 50 MPH.
You don't want to drive over the cliff at all.
Let's compromise and go over at 25 MPG....
For once I agree with you Compromise on some issues is a good idea...compromising on EVERY issue is stupid.
The problem with the lack of compromise in politics isn't an unwillingness to compromise on important issues though, it's an unwillingness to admit that not every issue is that important. It's smart to not "compromise" on driving off the cliff, but it's stupid to argue that EVERY issue is like driving off the cliff.
Exactly. Parties in power have a responsibility to govern based on the issues they ran on to get elected. The thing is, that inside of that is the responsibility to govern. Attempting to render the government nonfunctional on a repeated basis, pushing for a default on our sovereign debt, etc, etc all over cuts to spending that don't even address our long term fiscal issues should be simply unacceptable.
It's smart to not "compromise" on driving off the cliff, but it's stupid to argue that EVERY issue is like driving off the cliff.
Which was healthcare? Compromise there was no solution at all.
Your post here is a perfect example of the intellectual dishonesty of the right and you in particular.Government spending IS a form of taxation because you have to pay for all spending/borrowing sooner or later.
Spending/borrowing is at an ALL time high.
Are you suggesting that the problem is that we aren't spending enough?
Please define what enough would be?
BTW if spending is the solution then why did the economy take off in the 90s when spending was cut?
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-poll-economy-20110906,0,7564041.story
Not surprising that what's best for the country isn't as important to Democrats as forcing their own political beliefs on others.
Obama has already proven himself to be worse than Bush, and now Democrats want him to be even worse than he was before.
Ooh! Another one! Tell us more about 'the left'!
They are big believers in global warming, are you a believer?
Actually the left has shown no willingness to cut spending.Your post here is a perfect example of the intellectual dishonesty of the right and you in particular.
The point of the thread is COMPROMISE. The accusation is that the right is unwilling to compromise on RAISING TAXES. You made a spurious analogy between raising taxes and driving off a cliff. And when I proved that your analogy was specious, you now change the subject by questioning "how much the government spends."
Both left and right want to cut spending. But it is only the right that is unwilling to compromise on raising taxes. The right is intransigent, not the left. The right is being ideologically rigid without a shred of evidence to back their position.
Actually the left has shown no willingness to cut spending.
The right had to drag them kicking and screaming to get the cuts during the debt ceiling debate. And then Obama turns around with a new $400 billion in spending.
And my about spending was that we are spending more money than at any time in our history and we are not getting results for that spending. We have pilled up $4 trillion in debt in 3 years with Obama and our reward is another recession.
Perhaps we should try something other than tax and spend?
Actually the left has shown no willingness to cut spending.
The right had to drag them kicking and screaming to get the cuts during the debt ceiling debate. And then Obama turns around with a new $400 billion in spending.
And my about spending was that we are spending more money than at any time in our history and we are not getting results for that spending. We have pilled up $4 trillion in debt in 3 years with Obama and our reward is another recession.
Perhaps we should try something other than tax and spend?
Perhaps we should try something other than tax and spend?
Actually the left has shown no willingness to cut spending.
The right had to drag them kicking and screaming to get the cuts during the debt ceiling debate. And then Obama turns around with a new $400 billion in spending.
And my about spending was that we are spending more money than at any time in our history and we are not getting results for that spending. We have pilled up $4 trillion in debt in 3 years with Obama and our reward is another recession.
Perhaps we should try something other than tax and spend?
But we are also heading into another recession.
After 4 years of Obama we will probably be in the same spot economically as we were when he took office.
Why would we want to keep following his policies at that point?
It is a complicated concept that essentially says that all spending is taxation.What taxes are you talking about?
Regulation and anti-business stance.Because not only has it never been made clear just how Obama is causing our current economic woes, but it's even less clear what solutions the Republicans have for the problem. Giant spending cuts will help the budget of course, but the explanation of how cutting government spending will help us out of a recession seems suspiciously absent.
Regulation and anti-business stance.
The Obama administration is a wet blanket thrown over the economy.
Too much uncertainty, too much fear over what they will do next, too many anti-business decisions. Companies are afraid of what Obama is going to do next so they are hunkering down and waiting for him to go away.
It is a complicated concept that essentially says that all spending is taxation.
ie. We have to pay for the spending at one point either now or in the future.
So when spending goes up you are in effect raising taxes too.
Also, when you are spending and borrowing at high levels the government is taking money out of the economy by essentially sucking up all the credit.
And even if you don't believe or follow those concepts the fact is that we are spending at an all time high and we are not getting anything in return.
The evidence of the last three years suggests that adding $1 trillion a year in debt isn't doing anything to help the economy and that perhaps we should look at doing something different.
Of course it is all far more complicated than just the above. But what isn't complicated is the fact that Obama has been in office for nearly 3 years and the economy is in the same place where it started. His policies and ideas are failing and he has more than enough time to at least start showing progress.
The second quarter of Reagan's third year in office saw 10% GDP growth. The same period for Obama shows 1.3% growth.
Reagan's policies worked, Obama's don't.
Why don't you explain to us the procedure by which you determine which scientific theories you believe or reject? And in particular, why don't you provide us with the abundance of peer-reviewed evidence that convinces you the MMCC is invalid?