View Poll Results: Did Democrats cause the super committee to fail on purpose?

Voters
71. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, they actually thought a trillion dollar tax hike in a recession was reasonable

    9 12.68%
  • No, it was a bi-partisan failure

    28 39.44%
  • Yes, the plan from the beginning was to fail

    34 47.89%
Page 36 of 38 FirstFirst ... 263435363738 LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 372

Thread: They did it on purpose

  1. #351
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,137

    Re: They did it on purpose

    I'd like to get back to the original idea in the OP. That Democrats deliberately torpedoed the Supercommittee.

    The attitude here is "If they'd just agree with Republicans, it would have worked." If they agreed with Republicans, wouldn't they be Republicans? I don't know about you, but I'd rather have two parties than one. Truth be told, I'd rather have three than two, but I still think two is superior to one.

    Of the one party states in history, most of them were not places where I'd want to live. The Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Iraq under Saddam...

    I say "Thank God we don't all have to agree." They still have to find a way to work together to get stuff done, but right now there's little spirit for compromise on either side.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  2. #352
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,706

    Re: They did it on purpose

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    I bet its far more common among us who carry most of the load. I suspect you don't know many of us who are in that group. and its hardly fascist. fascist is making people subservient to the state-as you propose

    people who have to pander to the masses to get elected aren't going to say stuff that pisses off the lowest common denominator.
    First - You have not demonstrated that are carrying any load other than what was bestowed upon you that gave you a major head start and advantage over others.

    Second, - so your extremist beliefs are something you believe are shared more widely that would otherwise be indicated by those who publicly advocate for them? I do not doubt that is true. I also do not doubt that it no way mitigates or excuses the extremism of those same views.

    Third - as to fascism - ideologies like that do not simply become transplanted from one part of the world to the other intact and without changes due to he culture and institutions they want to thrive in. A type of American fascism is and would be no different. In fact, I have little doubt that those who are pushing it like ALEC, and those who would at least find themselves doing the Toadie Tango or the Sycophant Shuffle to their tune would dare not admit it publicly. That of course, fits right in with your previous admission about more people holding those extremist views that might otherwise be obvious.

    Fourth - your admission that this is being kept on the down low so as to not anger the masses, is refreshing. And is duly noted at the same time..
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  3. #353
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: They did it on purpose

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    I'd like to get back to the original idea in the OP. That Democrats deliberately torpedoed the Supercommittee.

    The attitude here is "If they'd just agree with Republicans, it would have worked." If they agreed with Republicans, wouldn't they be Republicans? I don't know about you, but I'd rather have two parties than one. Truth be told, I'd rather have three than two, but I still think two is superior to one.

    Of the one party states in history, most of them were not places where I'd want to live. The Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Iraq under Saddam...

    I say "Thank God we don't all have to agree." They still have to find a way to work together to get stuff done, but right now there's little spirit for compromise on either side.
    Your right about the torpedo but the one siting in the committed was Kyle, and he carry's an R around with him.
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  4. #354
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,647

    Re: They did it on purpose

    "It takes two to tango."
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  5. #355
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

    Re: They did it on purpose

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    noticed that your post was unable to challenge Karl's illustration of fascism, and its current proponents within the USA
    instead, it whined about something else entirely
    that's because Karls definition had nothing to do with reality

  6. #356
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

    Re: They did it on purpose

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    First - You have not demonstrated that are carrying any load other than what was bestowed upon you that gave you a major head start and advantage over others.

    Second, - so your extremist beliefs are something you believe are shared more widely that would otherwise be indicated by those who publicly advocate for them? I do not doubt that is true. I also do not doubt that it no way mitigates or excuses the extremism of those same views.

    Third - as to fascism - ideologies like that do not simply become transplanted from one part of the world to the other intact and without changes due to he culture and institutions they want to thrive in. A type of American fascism is and would be no different. In fact, I have little doubt that those who are pushing it like ALEC, and those who would at least find themselves doing the Toadie Tango or the Sycophant Shuffle to their tune would dare not admit it publicly. That of course, fits right in with your previous admission about more people holding those extremist views that might otherwise be obvious.

    Fourth - your admission that this is being kept on the down low so as to not anger the masses, is refreshing. And is duly noted at the same time..

    where you constantly fail is your assumption that those who are wealthy and thus seen as targets for your income redistribution nonsense are wealthy because the government GAVE them some advantages and therefore the government should be able to loot them for as much as the rabble wants.

    and your comments about the rich-which we have all seen-such as the one where you say the rich should beg on their knees to keep what they have earned-is far far more extreme than anything I have said which is mainly in line with the beliefs of those who both founded this country and made it great.

  7. #357
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,077

    Re: They did it on purpose

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    NO CP - you got it dead wrong. Your link clearly states that the majority of the decrease was due to the recession.
    no - one source said that probably most in that state were. irrespective, each of the three sources I gave you were to describe the dynamic of the trend. the history of that trend is seen in the larger pool of data on revenues - namely, that significantly higher marginal tax rates in the past have not produced higher revenues.

    you mention the Clinton taxes and the Bush tax rates. I noticed you failed to mention the percentage of revenue increase under each. Why was that?
    because both come from the same thing - growth in GDP. though of course it is worth noting that Clintons' boom years came after he cut the capital gains tax rate.

  8. #358
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,706

    Re: They did it on purpose

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    where you constantly fail is your assumption that those who are wealthy and thus seen as targets for your income redistribution nonsense are wealthy because the government GAVE them some advantages and therefore the government should be able to loot them for as much as the rabble wants.

    and your comments about the rich-which we have all seen-such as the one where you say the rich should beg on their knees to keep what they have earned-is far far more extreme than anything I have said which is mainly in line with the beliefs of those who both founded this country and made it great.
    First, that is not at all my premise - so you fail on that.

    Second, it is good for man to humble himself and give thanks for his blessings. People have been doing that for thousands of years. What makes you so different or special that you do not need to give thanks for all that you have and living in the greatest nation in the world at this time?
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  9. #359
    User
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-11 @ 12:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9

    Re: They did it on purpose

    The super committee was doomed to failure for the simple fact was that Obama wanted to show the U.S. population what upper echelon politics has devolved into. He wanted to put a face on the gridlock that ensued after the 2010 elections. He got 12, on both sides, yeah he could have put an independent 13th person in there, but where is the fun in that.

  10. #360
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,077

    Re: They did it on purpose

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    I'd like to get back to the original idea in the OP. That Democrats deliberately torpedoed the Supercommittee.

    The attitude here is "If they'd just agree with Republicans, it would have worked." If they agreed with Republicans, wouldn't they be Republicans?
    that is not the attitude. the attitude is "Republicans offered a position that was halfway between what they wanted and what the Democrats wanted". specifically, republicans started from a position of no revenue increases, democrats started from a position of $1 Trillion in revenue increases, and so Republicans offered $500 Bn in revenue increases. Democrats then insisted again on their original bargaining position of $1 Trillion. so, the attitude is, why can't democrats meet republicans in the middle on revenue?

Page 36 of 38 FirstFirst ... 263435363738 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •