• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

McConnell invites Obama to GOP lunch; president says no, thanks

Not really, it is the job of Congress to pass a budget. The President would like to be involved, but at the end of the day, he doesn't have a lot of involvement. Plus, he's delegated this off to Biden.

So if the Republicans really wanted to get it done, they could invite Pelosi and Biden. Pelosi, because she represents Dem leadership in Congress, and Biden because he's Obama's "guy" on this issue.

It's a show. The President getting involved would largely be for show, and this invitation was a show. Obama doesn't come out smelling like roses in the show, but this wasn't going to be a substantive discussion.

I have news for you, the President holds 1/3 of the votes required to pass the bill and even Biden has said it is time for the President to step in.

Besides, Presidents who are real leaders don’t leave everything for everyone else to hash out for him an then he signs it into law, real leaders jump into the fray and get their hands dirty.
 
I have no idea what the Democrats have agreed to cut. Do you?

By the way, spending increases to reduce the debt? Are you serious?

If they agreed to ANY cuts they have compromised more the the Republicans have.

And frankly I don't know what increases are being proposed, so don't know if they would be considered "investment", or just flushing money down the toilet.

But if they said something like we'll cut 5x here but we want to spend 1x here for y reason, that's still a cut of 4x, right?
 
A fairly superficial article....
 
McConnell has said his mission was the make Obama a one term President, I can't blame Obama at all.

I see, you think the President should act childish and take his toys and go home because someone said something mean about him?

You liberals really are deep aren’t you?
 
If they agreed to ANY cuts they have compromised more the the Republicans have.

And frankly I don't know what increases are being proposed, so don't know if they would be considered "investment", or just flushing money down the toilet.

But if they said something like we'll cut 5x here but we want to spend 1x here for y reason, that's still a cut of 4x, right?

I think you are missing the part where the Democrats are asking the Republicans to increase the debt ceiling. That’s what the Republicans are granting. If the Republicans say no, the Democrats will still need to cut spending.

I don’t think there is a Democrat in congress who doesn’t think we need to cut spending if we are going to raise the debt ceiling so cutting spending is not a concession by the Democrats. They already say we need to do it. The battle is over what gets cut, how much and such, not whether there will be cuts.
 
I see, you think the President should act childish and take his toys and go home because someone said something mean about him?

You liberals really are deep aren’t you?
I think President Obama should stand his ground. I can only guess what you would do, if somebody you trying work with and that person said their mission was to get rid of you. You think he's being childish, I couldn't give a rip what you think.
 
We want him to....2012 is tomorrow....and we are coming again, any questions?

I think President Obama should stand his ground. I can only guess what you would do, if somebody you trying work with and that person said their mission was to get rid of you. You think he's being childish, I couldn't give a rip what you think.
 
I think President Obama should stand his ground. I can only guess what you would do, if somebody you trying work with and that person said their mission was to get rid of you. You think he's being childish, I couldn't give a rip what you think.

You don’t care what I think? My feelings are hurt.

Here’s a reality check for you: You don’t become President of the United States if you get your feelings hurt because someone from the opposing party says that they plan to make you a one term President. You wouldn’t last a day in politics if that was how you think.

This is an extremely simplistic argument but feel free to try and make your case for why a President shouldn’t work with anyone who wants someone else to be President.
 
Haven't we seen this Lucy and Charlie Brown with the football thing before? I mean HW Bush made his read my lips speech then demos offered to cut spending if he raised taxes. He did, demos lied and well we know the rest.


J-mac
 
Haven't we seen this Lucy and Charlie Brown with the football thing before? I mean HW Bush made his read my lips speech then demos offered to cut spending if he raised taxes. He did, demos lied and well we know the rest.


J-mac

Yep, that’s why some Republicans are now demanding a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution.

LINK
 
I think most seniors get it.... Country defaults, they are screwed. Obama gives in to republicans so they will sign the deal, seniors are screwed.
 
I think most seniors get it.... Country defaults, they are screwed. Obama gives in to republicans so they will sign the deal, seniors are screwed.

That’s pure leftist propaganda.
 
First off, you are wrong about spending cuts alone and we aren’t talking about the deficit, we’re talking about the debt.

If you don’t have the meeting you have a 0% chance of reaching a compromise. If you have the meeting you have a chance. It’s called defeatist attitude and any leader who thinks that way isn’t a true leader.

If we raise the debt ceiling there is a jolly good chance there will be a big push by China to make the Yen the world standard in currency. If that happens, nothing would be able to save us then. Then we turn into 1930's Germany. The Democrats need a history lesson, $28,000 Marks for a loaf of bread.
 
Compromise to a "Progressive" means capitulation.
.

So on one hand, the Cons are crying that Obama won't talk to them.

On the other hand, "COMPROMISE MEANS THE END OF AMERICA!!!"

I wonder what's wrong with politics these days....
 
Posting an example of the Press Secretary defending the President against criticism from the left isn’t an example of leadership.

I can give you an example of his leadership but it’s way more fun to watch liberals squirm and try to think of an example on their own.

By the way, criticism is not leadership.

Rightwing Logic:

rightwingers criticizing rightwingers = leadership
leftwingers criticizing leftwingers = not leadership

IOKIYAR
 
I think most seniors get it.... Country defaults, they are screwed. Obama gives in to republicans so they will sign the deal, seniors are screwed.

Oh, I know. Let's start senior islands, maybe in space, so once they've outlived their usefulness, they can retire to some logical "Out of sight, out of mind" place and be euthanized once they become too expensive to maintain.
 
Oh, I know. Let's start senior islands, maybe in space, so once they've outlived their usefulness, they can retire to some logical "Out of sight, out of mind" place and be euthanized once they become too expensive to maintain.

Govt run islands for seniors? That sounds a little too much like socialism. The wingnuts will never go for it.
 
Govt run islands for seniors? That sounds a little too much like socialism. The wingnuts will never go for it.

But we have to dispose of them/us somehow (I'm 53, my day is coming). I do like the space station idea. Safer than here. :)
 
But we have to dispose of them/us somehow (I'm 53, my day is coming). I do like the space station idea. Safer than here. :)

I think they'd be more likely to go for something like a Cage Fighting to the Death for seniors. They can make money by selling the tv rights. The "Keep the govt hands off of my Medicare" crowd will eat it up,
 
I think they'd be more likely to go for something like a Cage Fighting to the Death for seniors. They can make money by selling the tv rights. The "Keep the govt hands off of my Medicare" crowd will eat it up,

In wheelchairs? /scoff It will never happen. Besides, they'll have to be out-of-sight, so nobody will feel guilty for shipping them off to begin with.

And of course it goes without saying that they can choose to be euthanized at any time of their choosing.
 
I think you are missing the part where the Democrats are asking the Republicans to increase the debt ceiling. That’s what the Republicans are granting. If the Republicans say no, the Democrats will still need to cut spending.

I don’t think there is a Democrat in congress who doesn’t think we need to cut spending if we are going to raise the debt ceiling so cutting spending is not a concession by the Democrats. They already say we need to do it. The battle is over what gets cut, how much and such, not whether there will be cuts.

No ****?

But there is no "compromise" if the Republicans raise the debt ceiling. In the past, they've known that you simply had to do it to protect the economy - only in the new Tea Party reality is it even a thought that perhaps we should just go ahead and destroy the markets by not paying our debts.

Indeed, this is the first vote that Republicans have decided not to do it. Before that, they had the common sense to see that it was a necessity.

Only in the whacktastic Tea Party-ruled land we exist in now is it not common sense.

The only ones tying requirements to the debt ceiling vote are Republicans. And in doing so, they are holding our nation (and my retirement accounts) hostage.
 
No ****?

But there is no "compromise" if the Republicans raise the debt ceiling. In the past, they've known that you simply had to do it to protect the economy - only in the new Tea Party reality is it even a thought that perhaps we should just go ahead and destroy the markets by not paying our debts.

Indeed, this is the first vote that Republicans have decided not to do it. Before that, they had the common sense to see that it was a necessity.

Only in the whacktastic Tea Party-ruled land we exist in now is it not common sense.

The only ones tying requirements to the debt ceiling vote are Republicans. And in doing so, they are holding our nation (and my retirement accounts) hostage.

Good post, but I have to add that Obama is fool for playing the republicans game. If he wasn't such coward, he woujld demand an up and down vote on raising the ceiling, with no conditions.
 
No ****?

But there is no "compromise" if the Republicans raise the debt ceiling. In the past, they've known that you simply had to do it to protect the economy - only in the new Tea Party reality is it even a thought that perhaps we should just go ahead and destroy the markets by not paying our debts.

Indeed, this is the first vote that Republicans have decided not to do it. Before that, they had the common sense to see that it was a necessity.

Only in the whacktastic Tea Party-ruled land we exist in now is it not common sense.

The only ones tying requirements to the debt ceiling vote are Republicans. And in doing so, they are holding our nation (and my retirement accounts) hostage.

First, Republican have voted against raising the debt limit multiple just as the Democrats and Obama have so you should spend a little more time doing some fact checking before trotting out unfounded assumptions in the future.

Second, this problem was created by Republicans and Democrats alike. Blaming the Tea Party has become a lazy out for those who wish to continue down this untenable road of American economic destruction. We cannot continue to just keep raising the debt ceiling. Every economist admits to this, even Geithner.

The issue currently being fought is whether or not taxes should be increased and more government spending included in the raising of the debt ceiling. Adding government spending while trying to reduce government spending is prototypical Washington insanity.

Increasing taxes as a part of the debt reduction at least has some plausibility, an in my mind will be required in the future, but is a terrible idea right now because the economy is too fragile and tax hikes will harm our meager economic recovery.

As for who is tying requirements to the vote, both parties are. Hopefully you aren’t such a homer for one side or the other that you can’t see this obvious fact.
 
Good post, but I have to add that Obama is fool for playing the republicans game. If he wasn't such coward, he woujld demand an up and down vote on raising the ceiling, with no conditions.

They already tried that and even the Democrats in Congress rejected it resoundingly.
 
Back
Top Bottom