...

[trenchfoot]

Some Liberals are among the most conservative people I know

Well this should be interesting in any event. It's possible, maybe, sorta, that the Republicans will actually be forced to get their act together as they have two years to demonstrate that with a majority in both houses they can bring reasonable legislation to a vote. I'm not holding my breath, but if the RNC wants the White House in 2016 they are going to have to make some changes. We'll see.

Agreed. After the sense of euphoria wanes, and the urge to over-react and over-reach via "mandate of the people" gets checked by the actual situation in Washington, it's going to be a sobering reality check for the Repubs knowing they have to prove themselves capable of getting things done despite Obama still sitting in the White House.

The Repubs will now be center stage/up front and held accountable for their deeds and won't be able to rely on their skill at pointing to others for why things are the way they say they are.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I wasn't aware Obama has unilateral power to seize money from corporations.

No, but where was the Democratic Congress going after Apple? Oh they weren't. Too much money comes from them.

Your own is corrupt too.

 

[dank69]

No, but where was the Democratic Congress going after Apple? Oh they weren't. Too much money comes from them.

Your own is corrupt too.

The difference being that Dems are corrupted towards the few corps that contribute to them and are for the people otherwise, while GOP is corrupt toward the few corps that contribute to them and are for all corporations against the people anyway.

 

[Texashiker]

I wasn't aware Obama has unilateral power to seize money from corporations.

Ever hear of this thing called "taxes"?

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/04/09/460519/major-corporations-no-taxes-four-year/

26 of the 30 companies continued to enjoy negative federal income tax rates. That means they still made more money after tax than before tax over the four years!

– Of the remaining four companies, three paid four year effective tax rates of less than 4 percent
(specifically, 0.2%, 2.0% and 3.8%). One company paid a 2008-11 tax rate of 10.9 percent.

It must be nice to rake in billions in profit, and have a negative tax rate. Please explain how not raising taxes on companies who pay no taxes is good?

That tax money could have been used to build roads, provide internet to rural areas, or even send millions of people to college.

Democrats had their chance for 2 years, and they sat on their hands.

Tax the hell out of those companies, then use that money to slingshot this nation into a full economic recovery.

 

[dank69]

Ever hear of this thing called "taxes"?

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/04/09/460519/major-corporations-no-taxes-four-year/



It must be nice to rake in billions in profit, and have a negative tax rate. Please explain how not raising taxes on companies who pay no taxes is good?

That tax money could have been used to build roads, provide internet to rural areas, or even send millions of people to college.

Democrats had their chance for 2 years, and they sat on their hands.

Tax the hell out of those companies, then use that money to slingshot this nation into a full economic recovery.

Someone already explained to you that the Dems actually only had three months, not two years, but did you listen? No, you just continue to troll.

 

[Texashiker]

Someone already explained to you that the Dems actually only had three months, not two years, but did you listen? No, you just continue to troll.

Do you need a super majority to pass a law?

 

[thraashman]

Do you need a super majority to pass a law?

With the minority that was in Congress that filibustered more in 6 years than all previous Senate minorities in history combined had including the first time in history that a minority leader filibustered his own proposal, yes.

 

[Genx87]

The difference being that Dems are corrupted towards the few corps that contribute to them and are for the people otherwise, while GOP is corrupt toward the few corps that contribute to them and are for all corporations against the people anyway.

Do you understand how ridiculous what you said sounds?

 

[dank69]

Do you understand how ridiculous what you said sounds?

Are you saying you don't think the GOP always sides with corporations and the Dems usually side with the people? Look at minimum wage, EPA & regulations, etc.

 

[dank69]

Do you need a super majority to pass a law?

You need a super majority to get past the GOP filibuster, yes. Keep on trolling though.

 

[Genx87]

Are you saying you don't think the GOP always sides with corporations and the Dems usually side with the people? Look at minimum wage, EPA & regulations, etc.

Yes that is what I am saying. You sound like the kid who knows Santa isnt real but still believes in the Easter Bunny. The democrats are for the people except when they arent is basically what you said.

As for your examples. You understand a lot of these regulations are to the benefit of large established players in the market right? Those are not middle class or small business friendly at all. Walmart would love to force mom and pop competition to pay 15\hour to some teenager. Easiest way to drive away the competition. Get local govt to enact a massive barrier of entry into the market while saddling current players with unsustainable costs.

 

[emperus]

Keep the corporate mandate. Remember that part of the law? The part that obama kept postponing?

You know, the part of the aca that would make companies provide healthcare for employees?

Its ok, I bet you forgot about that part of the law because obama postponed it.

Does the president have the authority to postpone a law? I thought obamas job was to uphold and enforce our laws through the justice department?

But then again, that might be why republicans won control of both houses, because obama is ignoring laws.

Your post is my point exactly. Republicans aren't even sure what they are for or against.

1.) There is no ACA without the mandate.
2.) And that corporate mandate you are now talking about I'm sure is the same mandate republicans were railing about. You the job killing mandate that would force companies to fire and not hire new employees?

 

[dank69]

Yes that is what I am saying. You sound like the kid who knows Santa isnt real but still believes in the Easter Bunny. The democrats are for the people except when they arent is basically what you said.

As for your examples. You understand a lot of these regulations are to the benefit of large established players in the market right? Those are not middle class or small business friendly at all. Walmart would love to force mom and pop competition to pay 15\hour to some teenager. Easiest way to drive away the competition. Get local govt to enact a massive barrier of entry into the market while saddling current players with unsustainable costs.

Small businesses can fuck over people as well. You know that, right?

 

[spacejamz]

Obamacare is law. A law that the Republicans voted on and approved. It's not going anywhere.

and yet when the Democrats in Congress voted to approve the military action against Iraq, it is still all Booooossh's fault....

 

[Genx87]

Small businesses can fuck over people as well. You know that, right?

So the answer is to have the party of the people enact legislation that lets bigger business fuck people over?

Just admit the Easter Bunny doesnt exist. The Democrats are not the party of the people because of their corporate backers.

 

[Texashiker]

You need a super majority to get past the GOP filibuster, yes. Keep on trolling though.

This is when the president needs to act like a leader, get both parties together and work out a compromise.

But guess what, obama is no leader.

1.) There is no ACA without the mandate.

Yes there is.

2.) And that corporate mandate you are now talking about I'm sure is the same mandate republicans were railing about. You the job killing mandate that would force companies to fire and not hire new employees?

Companies will continue to hire.

All your doing is fear mongering.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Until LTCG taxes are progressively bracketed nothing will change.

Republicans want tax code reform. I image all things are possible if Democrats will agree to reforms which are revenue neutral overall. I won't hold my breath.

 

[dank69]

So the answer is to have the party of the people enact legislation that lets bigger business fuck people over?

Just admit the Easter Bunny doesnt exist. The Democrats are not the party of the people because of their corporate backers.

How does raising minimum wage not fuck big business?

 

[dank69]

Republicans want tax code reform. ...

I believe that when my shit turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.

 

[dank69]

This is when the president needs to act like a leader, get both parties together and work out a compromise.

But guess what, obama is no leader.




...

How is Obama supposed to get the GOP to raise taxes when they all take an oath to never raise taxes?

 

[hal2kilo]

Agreed. After the sense of euphoria wanes, and the urge to over-react and over-reach via "mandate of the people" gets checked by the actual situation in Washington, it's going to be a sobering reality check for the Repubs knowing they have to prove themselves capable of getting things done despite Obama still sitting in the White House.

The Repubs will now be center stage/up front and held accountable for their deeds and won't be able to rely on their skill at pointing to others for why things are the way they say they are.

It's weird, but I find it to be more fun and challenging to be on the losing side. It was also horrible seeing the liberals on this forum hooting, hollering, and basic nah, nah nahing as they gloated over some of the wins in the last election. Frankly, I find it embarassing.
Anyway, it's time to roll up the sleves and get back to work on the message for the next election.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I believe that when my shit turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.

Republican’s Tax Plan Awkwardly Aims at Rich
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/07/b...-tax-proposal-that-targets-the-rich.html?_r=0

House GOP tax plan would cut top rates but also hit high earners with a surtax
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...1ac868-9d92-11e3-9ba6-800d1192d08b_story.html

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/tax_reform_executive_summary.pdf

 

[skimple]

the dems can still filibuster in the senate as far as legislation is concerned. I'd say very little will get through.

Its statements like this that concern me.

How could you not know that the Democrats changed the filibuster rule in the Senate last year?

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/s...-approve-changes-filibuster-rules-f2D11634344

This was a fundamental change in the way the Senate has operated for 200 years.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Its statements like this that concern me.

How could you not know that the Democrats changed the filibuster rule in the Senate last year?

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/s...-approve-changes-filibuster-rules-f2D11634344

This was a fundamental change in the way the Senate has operated for 200 years.

The most significant change since 1975 iirc.

 

[fskimospy]

Republican’s Tax Plan Awkwardly Aims at Rich
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/07/b...-tax-proposal-that-targets-the-rich.html?_r=0

House GOP tax plan would cut top rates but also hit high earners with a surtax
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...1ac868-9d92-11e3-9ba6-800d1192d08b_story.html

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/tax_reform_executive_summary.pdf

Did you read your own links on this? It's not actually revenue neutral, it depends on magical thinking and the elimination of unspecified tax breaks (that are left unspecified because if you look into what would need to be eliminated its impossible), and it doesn't even have any backing from the Republican Party as a whole.

It's just like the Ryan plan, it's not a serious proposal. So yeah, dank was right.