• 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!

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

MrVicchio said:
LOL.

Social Security is in a Lockbox, it's paid for, how can there not be money? Oh wait... there is not SS fund? It's all a lie?

Disgusting is the President threatening old folks to get his way.
Click to expand...

it's actually disgusting that republicans are completely unwilling to compromise. trust me, people see this. even some republicans see this.
 
donsutherland1 said:
Payments for Social Security come from payroll tax collections and liquidation of Treasury securities held by the Social Security Fund. Payroll tax revenue is not restricted to Social Security. The funds are treated as general revenue. Were the nation to fail to raise its debt ceiling, all revenue (including payroll tax revenue) would almost certainly be used to meet debt obligations ahead of everything else.
Click to expand...
if this comes to pass, and social security checks don't go out, let us see how fast republicans are bounced out of office on their collective ass in 2012.
 
liblady said:
it's actually disgusting that republicans are completely unwilling to compromise. trust me, people see this. even some republicans see this.
Click to expand...

See what? That the GOP admits we cannot afford this spending, and enabling MORE is just putting a temporary bandage on a problem that IS NOT GOING TO GO AWAY.
 
randel said:
if this comes to pass, and social security checks don't go out, let us see how fast republicans are bounced out of office on their collective ass in 2012.
Click to expand...

Bribing people for votes is the Democrat way.
 
PzKfW IVe said:
So are Democrats.
But, that's OK - right?
:roll:
Click to expand...
a deal had been put up by dems which came down to 3 dollars in cuts, for every 1 dollar in increased taxes...pretty sweet deal you ask me, getting 3 for 1.
 
randel said:
a deal had been put up by dems which came down to 3 dollars in cuts, for every 1 dollar in increased taxes...pretty sweet deal you ask me, getting 3 for 1.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they've offered those before, amazingly the 3 dollars in cuts never, ever materialize.

In 1982, President Reagan agreed to the same deal being offered the party today: three dollars in spending cuts for every dollar in tax increases to which he assented. As he ruefully told this writer more than once, he was lied to. He got one dollar in spending cuts for every three in tax increases.
Click to expand...
Pat Buchanan: An Establishment in Panic | CNSnews.com
 
randel said:
a deal had been put up by dems which came down to 3 dollars in cuts, for every 1 dollar in increased taxes...pretty sweet deal you ask me, getting 3 for 1.
Click to expand...
The Democrats are completely unwilling to comprimise on their demand that taxes be increased and certain entilement programs not be cut.
Either the complete unwillingness to comprimise is "disgusting", or it isn't.
 
PzKfW IVe said:
The Democrats are completely unwilling to comprimise on their demand that taxes be increased and certain entilement programs not be cut.
Either the complete unwillingness to comprimise is "disgusting", or it isn't.
Click to expand...

It's disgusting, but it's also tit-for-tat and what the country needs right now.

Pat Buchanan: An Establishment in Panic | CNSnews.com
Click to expand...

Treatises can't be replacements for arguments on a debate forum; that's too much information to answer in a single post.
 
Last edited:
PzKfW IVe said:
The Democrats are completely unwilling to comprimise on their demand that taxes be increased and certain entilement programs not be cut.
Either the complete unwillingness to comprimise is "disgusting", or it isn't.
Click to expand...
the democrats were willing to work with speaker boehner and republicans on 4 TRILLION DOLLAR DEAL...the dems have bent over backwards trying to get republicans onboard, the repubs are more interested in protecting the rich, than working on a deal that benefits the country as a whole.
 
Morality Games said:
It's disgusting, but it's also tit-for-tat and what the country needs right now.
Click to expand...
I am sure the person who originally brought this up disagrees with you, on both counts.
 
randel said:
the democrats were willing to work with speaker boehner and republicans on 4 TRILLION DOLLAR DEAL...the dems have bent over backwards trying to get republicans onboard, the repubs are more interested in protecting the rich, than working on a deal that benefits the country as a whole.
Click to expand...
None of this changes -anything- I said.
Either the complete unwillingness to comprimise is "disgusting", or it isn't.

According to your equivocations, "comprimise" is where "we stand our ground, and you then give ground to us."
 
PzKfW IVe said:
None of this changes -anything- I said.
Either the complete unwillingness to comprimise is "disgusting", or it isn't.

According to your equivocations, "comprimise" is where "we stand our ground, and you then give ground to us."
Click to expand...
perhaps you should read through some of my posts, as i have called for compromise from both sides to get a deal that benefits the whole...do some reading bud.
 
randel said:
perhaps you should read through some of my posts, as i have called for compromise from both sides to get a deal that benefits the whole...do some reading bud.
Click to expand...
So you then agree that the Dems unwillingess to comprimise is also disgusting.
:clap:
 
PzKfW IVe said:
I am sure the person who originally brought this up disagrees with you, on both counts.
Click to expand...

The Republicans never compromised with Obama when they had the advantage and momentum. Obama is giving them the same treatment.

The problem with 'compromise' as a routine aspect of politics is that everyone has to support it consistently in order for it to become routine.

Colloquially called: Rope a dope.

Best way to fight it? Don't buckle - don't raise the debt ceiling --- let Obama dangle.
Click to expand...

That doesn't fix their lack of an edge in public perception.
 
Last edited:
PzKfW IVe said:
So you then agree that the Dems unwillingess to comprimise is also disgusting.
:clap:
Click to expand...
how much compromise do you need? offering 3 dollars in cuts for every dollar of new taxes? the dems have attempted compromise, the republicans have not....
 
randel said:
how much compromise do you need? offering 3 dollars in cuts for every dollar of new taxes? the dems have attempted compromise, the republicans have not....
Click to expand...

The polarity influences people's judgment so that compromises don't seem like compromises.

Again:
The Democrats are unwilling to comprimise -- but that's OK -- right?
Click to expand...

In a way. The side that has to compromise "the most" is the one that has the most to lose from not compromising.

The way the debate is understood by the American people, that is the Republicans.
 
Last edited:
PzKfW IVe said:
So you then agree that the Dems unwillingess to comprimise is also disgusting.
:clap:
Click to expand...
interesting read...Republicans' no-tax purity problem - CNN.com


snip

Alas, the "who" part is the real problem. The Republican party has evolved, before our very eyes, into a purist, anti-tax troupe that cares more about its no-new-taxes mantra than deficit reduction. It has defined itself downward, to borrow Pat Moynihan's phrase: from a big-tent, fiscally conservative party into a coalition narrowly and blindly carved to fit a political bumper sticker.

How else to explain the GOP's refusal to even consider a potential deal cooked up by the president and House Speaker John Boehner? When the Democratic president even considers a $4 trillion plan that counts $3 in spending cuts for every $1 of tax increases, serious-minded GOP deficit cutters would normally rejoice.

snip
That's because Republicans have moved beyond politics and into theology: Offered an exchange of billions in taxes for trillions in deficit cuts, they could not see their way beyond their no-tax religion. A definitional moment, to say the least.

It comes as no surprise, but it disappoints all the same. More than 230 House Republicans -- along with 40 GOP senators -- all signed a no-tax pledge. Back in 2008, John McCain refused to sign one, rightly arguing that no president should lock himself into that box

snip

But how about a pledge to keep the country running, not to mention a pledge to try and reduce the deficit? Whatever happened to that? Republicans are fond of claiming that Obama does not pay homage to the notion of American exceptionalism. But how can you level that claim when your party is happy to let the nation default on its debts? (Or, as GOP presidential wannabee Tim Pawlenty put it, "I hope and pray and believe they should not raise the debt ceiling.") Is that what Tim Pawlenty really prays about?
 
randel said:
how much compromise do you need? offering 3 dollars in cuts for every dollar of new taxes? the dems have attempted compromise, the republicans have not....
Click to expand...
How did I know you'd try to equivocate some more, to avoid having to say that the Dem's unwillingness to comprimise is "disgusting"?

Your post is either abject ignorance, or a lie.
- They demand that taxes be raised
- They refuse to allow for the idea that certain entitlements be cut
They refuse to comprimise.
 
Morality Games said:
In a way. The side that has to compromise "the most" is the one that has the most to lose from not compromising.
The way the debate is understood by the American people, that is the Republicans.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your equivocations.
 
PzKfW IVe said:
How did I know you'd try to equivocate some more, to avoid having to say that the Dem's unwillingness to comprimise is "disgusting"?

Your post is either abject ignorance, or a lie.
- They demand that taxes be raised
- They refuse to allow for the idea that certain entitlements be cut
They refuse to comprimise.
Click to expand...

apparently you don't understand the meaning of the word 'compromise'...perhaps you should google it? read up on it? study the term and its meaning?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom