Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

McConnell and Boehner go on the offensive

Or rather, they speak a little more forthrightly.

And frankly, it’s refreshing.

— Though, to David Brooks, it’s a sign that they’re being held hostage by extremist bitter clingers who are too daft to appreciate the crease in Obama’s pant leg.

To which I say, just declare yourself a Democrat and get it over with.

29 Replies to “McConnell and Boehner go on the offensive”

  1. Joe says:

    Brooks and Frum would make a great gay couple. Someone should get those kids together.

  2. geoffb says:

    The Republicans are just “immoral” whereas the Democrats are just looking out for us their perceived political advantage.

  3. Alan Kellogg says:

    Why do they call themselves Democrats when they’re not really for democracy?

  4. LTC John says:

    Good. Now if they only spoke as forthrightly as our host does…

  5. Mikey NTH says:

    If Brooks declared himself a Democrat he would be one of many soft-left pundits and commentators and the competition for column inches and radio/tv gigs would be very stiff, so much so that he might just lose out. Whereas posing as a “reasonable” conservative and Republican he is much more rare and has an easier time collecting a paycheck and landing those sweet pundit jobs as an analyst on a cable tv show.

    You seriously cannot expect the man to cut himself that badly over mere principles, can you?

  6. happyfeet says:

    why is bumblefuck’s media so reluctant to actually explain the tax hikes he wants? CNN propaganda slut Jeanne Sahadi is supposed to be a reporter – here’s all she can offer by way of detail.

    First, he wants to get rid of some corporate tax breaks enjoyed by oil and gas companies as well as buyers of corporate jets.

    So what are the tax breaks, CNN propaganda slut? Would getting rid of them result in more oil produced or less oil produced? Which companies would be most affected? Would changing the tax treatment of jets make companies more likely or less likely to buy and maintain a company jet? What would the impact of these changes be on jobs? Could you maybe put some feelers out? Maybe someone in your newsroom has done the legwork there? Maybe you could send one of those *ALL* emails and just say hey does anyone have any idea what these tax breaks president bumblefuck wants to get rid of are all about?

    Let me know what you find out for so I can make an informed decision.

  7. sdferr says:

    Dr. K did the work for her a few days ago if I remember right, hf. Seems to me he concluded that the total haul to the government from the entire BarryFavoriteListofSpecialDuns would pay off 1/10% of the deficit if given 500 years of collection time, year on year.

  8. Joe says:

    Brooks and Frum could parlay being a “conservative” gay political couple into all kids of appearances on Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC. They would get invited to all the best cocktail parties. Celebrities world wide would let them use the pool cabanas and guest rooms. They could just stare at each other and smile whenever some lefty let slip with a “teabagger” comment.

    So long as they continued to criticize “bad” conservatives.

  9. geoffb says:

    KRAUTHAMMER: “I did the math on this. If you collect the corporate jet tax every year for the next 5000 years, you will cover one year of the debt Obama has run up”

  10. motionview says:

    Mitch said “deliberate deception.” We’re getting close. The words they are still straining to avoid: lie, liar.

  11. Let me know what you find out for so I can make an informed decision.

    They probably don’t pay her enough to ask those questions. speaking of which, who is paying you?

  12. geoffb says:

    Now the “CNN propaganda slut Jeanne Sahadi” needs to tell us just who is going to be hit with the other 99% of the Obama/Democrat Trillion dollar (is it one or two trillion lefty math being so esteem based) tax rate increase.

  13. Slartibartfast says:

    So what are the tax breaks, CNN propaganda slut? Would getting rid of them result in more oil produced or less oil produced? Which companies would be most affected? Would changing the tax treatment of jets make companies more likely or less likely to buy and maintain a company jet? What would the impact of these changes be on jobs? Could you maybe put some feelers out? Maybe someone in your newsroom has done the legwork there? Maybe you could send one of those *ALL* emails and just say hey does anyone have any idea what these tax breaks president bumblefuck wants to get rid of are all about?

    Either happyfeets all of a sudden found his shift key, or he’s put an unattributed block of text in his comment.

  14. Mikey NTH says:

    #13 Slart:

    I know. It made a lot of sense and was completely on topic.

    I did not see that coming.

  15. Slartibartfast says:

    We could restore him to his prior state by changing the subject to Sarah Palin, or maybe Pam Tebow.

  16. geoffb says:

    My email to the Speaker.

    “Thank you for standing firm against the tax increases that would destroy any chance of a recovery.

    Please make sure that all Americans know that we need not default on August 2nd if the debt ceiling is not raised. There is income to pay the debt interest and other expenses. And that what gets paid is a decision totally on the back of the President.

    Making those spending decisions for political advantage, as some on the Democrats side are calling for doing, is a despicable action.

    Hang tough on your end and we shall do the same on ours.”

  17. Squid says:

    Did Sahadi decide not to abort a baby? That’s the only thing I can think of that would explain things.

  18. geoffb says:

    by changing the subject to Sarah Palin,

    Okay*.

  19. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Okay Slart –just remember you asked for it:

    Sarah Palin: porn centerfold

    You know you want to click that link.

  20. geoffb says:

    Heh, great minds think alike as they say.

  21. Slartibartfast says:

    standing firm

    What? No mention of penetrating the opposition’s…oh, I give up.

  22. mojo says:

    TOBO: Tired Of Bending Over

  23. Slartibartfast says:

    Oh, I had already read that article, Ernst. You made me click it again, though.

    God bless America!

  24. happyfeet says:

    I think America is a lot underestimating how desperate their coward president is to have something fresh to blame America’s failshit economy on.

  25. sdferr says:

    McConnell goes himself one better, substituting a solid proposal for his mere words of recognition of the facts about Obama. “Step up to the dinner plate, President Obama,” says McConnell, “your peas await you.”

    • The initial legislation would authorize the President to submit a request to Congress asking to increase the debt limit by $700 billion and would require submission of a plan to reduce spending by a greater amount.

    • Upon receipt of the President’s request, the debt limit would be provisionally increased by $100 billion to provide breathing room and avert an August 2nd default.

    • The House and Senate would have 15 days to disapprove of the request.

    • Within three days of the President’s request, it would be in order for the House and Senate to introduce a joint resolution disapproving of the President’s request.

    • Under expedited consideration of the Resolution of Disapproval, the resolution would be placed directly on the Senate calendar; the Motion to Proceed to the resolution would be privileged; there would be 10 hours of debate and passage would require a simple majority.

    • If either chamber defeats the resolution, the remaining $600 billion increase would be allowed.

    • If both chambers pass the resolution, it would be sent to the President for a veto or signature.

    • If vetoed, debate on an override would be limited to one hour.

    • If the veto is overridden (which would require a 2/3 vote) in both chambers, then the request would be denied and the provisional $100 billion increase revoked.

    • If the veto is sustained in either chamber, the remaining $600 billion increase would be allowed.

  26. Dave in SoCal says:

    Those evil Republicans and their damned scare tactics:

    Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3

    Yes he can. His Treasury Secretary has complete authority to choose exactly what gets paid and what doesn’t. And with the average $200 billion monthly revenue coming in, he has enough to make the debt payments as well as make all SS, Medicare and Medicaid payments, as well as covering all military pay (active duty and veterans). Only the federal employees and bureaucrats would be screwed.

    As summed up nicely here.

    Yes, he is a lying, desperate shitbird he is.

  27. Squid says:

    Have you guys seen the full text of McConnell’s speech? It’s a thing of beauty. Honestly, I didn’t think he was capable of such straight talk.

    “If you think that the federal government isn’t big enough, then the only responsible thing to do is to support higher taxes. For those who are honest about that, I appreciate their candor.

    “But for those of us who don’t think the federal government should be in charge of banks, the auto industry, the housing business, the student loan business, health care, and regulating everything else under the sun, we’re not about to further enable that model of government by shaking down the American people for more money at a time when they can least afford it.”

    More like this please, Mitch!

  28. Squid says:

    “It’s no secret how to solve our entitlement crisis either. Any one of the people involved in these discussions could write it out on the back of an envelope.

    “But it’s also no secret that Democrats would rather demagogue any solution Republicans propose in next year’s election than join us in seriously reforming them, despite what some Democrats started to say once it became clear that Republicans wouldn’t agree to a plan that raises taxes.

    “We all saw the news stories yesterday about how senior Democrats have been worried that reforming Medicare now would make it harder for them to campaign against Republicans later. Evidently, they’d rather save their own jobs than save these programs from insolvency.”

    Seriously, Mitch, keep giving this speech ’til the networks have to give it coverage. Don’t let up!

  29. Danger says:

    9. geoffb posted on7/12 @ 12:36 pm

    Most people rely on Google but some like Bing; Me, I’d recommend you just geoffb it!

Comments are closed.