Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/jim-jordan-boehner-plan-wont-pass-house-on-republican-support-alone/2011/07/26/gIQAZqY1aI_blog.html “I am confident as of this morning that there were not 218 Republicans in support of this plan,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the chairman of the Republican Study Committee. The group comprises more than 170 House conservatives. Well.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Of the two bills, as shocked as I am to say this, Reid's is better based on the limited specifics for each. The Boehner/Obama agreement that was nearly done except for a 40B gap (and having both parties buy-in) was even better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 wow! how did boner get to where he is? the guy just screams sleazeball every time he opens his mouth or shows any body language. i wouldn't buy a craftsman screwdriver from him. and before you start, i have never been enamored with pelosi either. the recent "leadership" leaves much to be desired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share Posted July 26, 2011 wow! how did boner get to where he is? the guy just screams sleazeball every time he opens his mouth or shows any body language. i wouldn't buy a craftsman screwdriver from him. and before you start, i have never been enamored with pelosi either. the recent "leadership" leaves much to be desired. Well, come on now, really? I mean it's still a Craftsman screwdriver. If I needed one and he was offering at a resonable price, sure, I'd buy it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Of the two bills, as shocked as I am to say this, Reid's is better based on the limited specifics for each. The Boehner/Obama agreement that was nearly done except for a 40B gap (and having both parties buy-in) was even better. "House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) said "very few" Democratic representatives would back the Boehner plan, scheduled for a vote Wednesday." - WSJ Sounds like they're all negotiating in a vacuum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 "House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) said "very few" Democratic representatives would back the Boehner plan, scheduled for a vote Wednesday." - WSJ Sounds like they're all negotiating in a vacuum. But the Boehner plan out now is not the one he almost negotiated with Obama. It's the red meat Tea Party plan. Reid's plan is a little more down the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Conservatives in the House have to hold strong through all the propaganda bs. There will be no default. Enough revenue to cover it off. So no debt increases. Balance budget amendment. No tax hikes. Time to put a end to the same old same old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 But the Boehner plan out now is not the one he almost negotiated with Obama. It's the red meat Tea Party plan. Reid's plan is a little more down the middle. The WSJ article referred to opposition by consevative GOP & Dems to the same Boehner plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share Posted July 26, 2011 Conservatives in the House have to hold strong through all the propaganda bs. There will be no default. Enough revenue to cover it off. So no debt increases. Balance budget amendment. No tax hikes. Time to put a end to the same old same old. Balanced Budget amendment would lead to higher taxes. No way they would just cut spending that much. It's a very evil idea, but if it comes, it makes no one happy, that's a guarantee. With baby boomers retiring there will be a need for more health care spending Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Balanced Budget amendment would lead to higher taxes. No way they would just cut spending that much. It's a very evil idea, but if it comes, it makes no one happy, that's a guarantee. With baby boomers retiring there will be a need for more health care spending Your guarantee's mean nothing, because you know nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share Posted July 26, 2011 Your guarantee's mean nothing, because you know nothing. Feel better? And where is the "leadership" of your hero Paul Ryan at this time? Hiding from the tea party? Or is he leading the charge towards default? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Balanced Budget amendment would lead to higher taxes. No way they would just cut spending that much. It's a very evil idea, but if it comes, it makes no one happy, that's a guarantee. With baby boomers retiring there will be a need for more health care spending But that's a good thing, because higher taxes promote economic growth... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 President BO's Plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveinElma Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/jim-jordan-boehner-plan-wont-pass-house-on-republican-support-alone/2011/07/26/gIQAZqY1aI_blog.html Well.... A little worried your EBT card won't be loaded next week huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I happen to believe that the principles of a balanced budget amendment makes a whole hell of alot of sense. It is a mechanism that would be used to have the country live within its means. To my understanding, it isnt something that would be implented fully right away, I belive it would be a process to where the government would have a balanced budget within 10 years, meaning that there wouldnt have to be in draconian cuts that would harm the economy. It is beyond me why anyone would be opposed to a government that spends roughly about the same amount of the revenues they would generate. It is beyond me How can any rational non partisan person be against such a idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 It is beyond me why anyone would be opposed to a government that spends roughly about the same amount of the revenues they would generate. It is beyond me How can any rational non partisan person be against such a idea? What you write... It is beyond me why anyone would be opposed to a government that spends exactly the same amount of the revenues they would generate. It is beyond me How can any rational non partisan person be against such a idea? What Dave reads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Lets just keep printing more money. I would like it if they printed some with bottles of wine on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 (edited) Balanced Budget amendment would lead to higher taxes. No way they would just cut spending that much. It's a very evil idea, but if it comes, it makes no one happy, that's a guarantee. With baby boomers retiring there will be a need for more health care spending Why is raising taxes the default option? They can balance the budget by cutting the government back to realistic, efficient levels. By government I mean their overpaid workers. Redundant bureaucracy's. Non essential bureaucracy's (like the IRS which could be all but eliminated with a flat tax). And so on. How about the feds take a hit for once? Edited July 26, 2011 by Dante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share Posted July 26, 2011 What you write... What Dave reads. You support this idiocy? Lets just keep printing more money. I would like it if they printed some with bottles of wine on them. Money bad! The only good thing about a BBA would be that creeps like Reagan and Bush would be banned from passing budget busting tax cuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I wouldn't call that 'giving him the finger'...they feel it doesn't go far enough...when you give someone the finger, you basically say you are diametrically opposed to or offended by what the other participant is saying...click on the link in the article that says "expressed skepticism about or declined to weigh in"...it absolutely does not indicate him being 'given the finger' http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/jim-jordan-boehner-plan-wont-pass-house-on-republican-support-alone/2011/07/26/gIQAZqY1aI_blog.html Well.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts