djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,405
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 14, 2011 13:08:33 GMT -5
Not if Republicans fold first! They're itching to cave- give them a few more days... Paul is right. congress is ultimately responsible for the budget, not the president. Obama doesn't have to do a damn thing. it is not, as Boehner stated (speaking for Cantor) "the president's problem". i think the backup plan is already in place. and i think it will sail through next week. it won't be a "bold stroke". it will be another peicemeal half assed compromise.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,405
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 14, 2011 13:09:49 GMT -5
This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this,” he said. precisely. so now we have two sides that won't yield. the result will be that the debt ceiling will be raised with no strings attached, just like Obama wanted a month ago. ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,405
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 14, 2011 13:11:30 GMT -5
This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this,” he said.And I paraphrased his words by saying "This could ruin my presidency"......take your pick or continue to pick, choose or whatever.. i thought you said (or someone else did) "this will NOT ruin my presidency", which indicated that he cared more about reelection than not caving in. just the opposite is true......for now. ![8-)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/cool.png)
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 14, 2011 13:13:39 GMT -5
This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this,” he said.And I paraphrased his words by saying "This could ruin my presidency"......take your pick or continue to pick, choose or whatever.. i thought you said (or someone else did) "this will NOT ruin my presidency", which indicated that he cared more about reelection than not caving in. just the opposite is true......for now. ![8-)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/cool.png) Is this the one you are thinking about?? The president did say he was WILLING to sacrafice his presidency on this issue. I will be more curious to learn what happens today in the White House because Cantor and Obama need to talk this over or get together on what is important and not try to make each look like the bad guy...how can two parties negotiate anything when they are both so far apart and beginning to get so negative??
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 14, 2011 13:21:10 GMT -5
President Obama said: "This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this." You said he said "I am not going to let this ruin my presidency". Paraphrasing maintains the original meaning of what was actually said, or written. Your statement does not qualify as paraphrasing as your statement is the opposite of what the president actually said.
P.I. Associate Representative
Re: Obama to Cantor: "Dont call my bluff." « Reply #30 Today at 9:38 »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Obama said yesterday and I am paraphrasing " I am not going to let this ruin my presidency" which means I think that his presidency is on the line if our government defaults and the financial markets take a nose dive. So he will have to raise the debt ceiling by an Executive Order and if the Repubs don't agree then he can blame them and save his presidency...but what do I know??? I majored in Hockey and Beer Drinking so Politics is NOT my thing.. But did stay at a Holiday Inn and do use Spell Checker..
|
|
|
Post by bubblyandblue on Jul 14, 2011 13:23:26 GMT -5
I would cut loopholes and tax the crap out of anything that does not produce wealth via the employment of labor and capital to produce goods others will buy. Special privilege, special interests, predetory finances, speculative finances, derivatives, CDO's --- tax the crap out of it The government could have used its equity ownership and control of the banks to provide credit and credit card services as the “public option.” Credit is a form of infrastructure, and such public investment is what enabled the United States to undersell foreign economies in the 19th and 20th centuries despite its high wage levels and social spending programs. As Simon Patten, the first economics professor at the nation’s first business school (the Wharton School) explained, public infrastructure investment is a “fourth factor of production.” It takes its return not in the form of profits, but in the degree to which it lowers the economy’s cost of doing business and living. Public investment does not need to generate profits or pay high salaries, bonuses and stock options, or operate via offshore banking centers.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 14, 2011 13:23:56 GMT -5
it is too bad, actually. the GOP could have got $4T in deficit reduction over the next (10) years. instead, they are going to "settle" for about 1/3 of that. profoundly disappointing. but that is what dogmatism and lack of negotiation get you. shitty compromises that please nobody. I really don't understand how a 2T spending cut is better than a 4T spending cut in the eyes of republicans. I don't see how this is a win at all if they get their way. Sure, they get their no tax increases, but the country as a whole is 3T worse off as a result - not a win in my book.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 14, 2011 13:28:07 GMT -5
it is too bad, actually. the GOP could have got $4T in deficit reduction over the next (10) years. instead, they are going to "settle" for about 1/3 of that. profoundly disappointing. but that is what dogmatism and lack of negotiation get you. shitty compromises that please nobody. I really don't understand how a 2T spending cut is better than a 4T spending cut in the eyes of republicans. I don't see how this is a win at all if they get their way. Sure, they get their no tax increases, but the country as a whole is 3T worse off as a result - not a win in my book. I don't see how anyone wins in this mess...Obama looks weak, the repubs want to bring him down and ensure he is not re elected and the dems are all over the map on spending cuts and tax increases..this whole thing has turned out to be a mess and the media is only adding fuel to the fire with all of their opinion pieces about what a default will do to not only our economy but the world's economy..IMHO
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,626
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 14, 2011 13:30:09 GMT -5
.. And your point again is what??? If there is one someplace buried in that stuff?? Guy, you just need to understand that it is all about the perverse pleasure I get moving you from: To: .. ...his comments which were probably second or third hand... Every man needs a hobby. ;D
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 14, 2011 13:36:04 GMT -5
.. And your point again is what??? If there is one someplace buried in that stuff?? Guy, you just need to understand that it is all about the perverse pleasure I get moving you from: To: .. ...his comments which were probably second or third hand... Every man needs a hobby. ;D Yea but who wants to have nit picking ad nauseum and ingratiating yourself ad infinitum with Mods as a hobby?? I certainly don't ..But if that is your thing then be happy with it I guess?? Obama said "This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this." And I paraphrased his words to mean I think?? "I am not going to let this ruin my presidency". Are close enough for government work and time to look for another nit somewhere, someplacea and good luck looking at each and every word that I post here...but that has to be boring as hell IMHO
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 18, 2024 4:12:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2011 13:46:23 GMT -5
Wasn't this a West Wing Episode?
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 14, 2011 13:49:18 GMT -5
P.I., the president said, in essence, he didn't care if it brought his presidency down, he would not yield on this issue. That's the polar opposite of "I'm not going to let this ruin my presidency." That's not close, even for government work! Nobody looks at every word you say on this board, much to your consternation, I'm sure. To do so would probably make one blind. However, when you say something that's absolutely untrue, and someone sees it, they're most likely going to comment on it. Deal with it.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 14, 2011 13:50:02 GMT -5
Wasn't this a West Wing Episode? If it wasn't, later, it should have been! ;D
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 14, 2011 13:50:45 GMT -5
Wasn't this a West Wing Episode? Not really this is the real thing Ma'am
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 14, 2011 13:53:16 GMT -5
Have they made the 4 Trillion deal public, so I can read it?
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 14, 2011 13:59:59 GMT -5
I stand by what I said or implied:
Obama said "This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this."
And I paraphrased his words to mean I think?? "I am not going to let this ruin my presidency". Are close enough for government work
"to bring my presidency down" or "to ruin my presidency" are similar in meaning and intent...IMHO
And if not close enough for government work then close enough for paraphrasing without any intention to mislead
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 14, 2011 14:05:24 GMT -5
Stand as you wish, P.I. That's how we're judged here, since there's nothing but our own words.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 14, 2011 14:08:46 GMT -5
Who steals my purse steals trash: ’tis something, nothing;
’Twas mine, ’tis his, and has been slave to thousands:
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him
And makes me poor indeed.
This quotation from Shakespeare’s Othello
Or translated for those who are not into Shakespeare, I think what I post is the truth or close enough to it for this board..and if one is so blinded by hate they can sometimes read into something that i post that is not there..
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Jul 14, 2011 14:28:53 GMT -5
Who steals my purse steals trash: ’tis something, nothing;
’Twas mine, ’tis his, and has been slave to thousands:
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him
And makes me poor indeed.This quotation from Shakespeare’s Othello Shakespere would be a lot easier to read if it 'twas written in English!! ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png)
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jul 14, 2011 14:36:25 GMT -5
it is too bad, actually. the GOP could have got $4T in deficit reduction over the next (10) years. instead, they are going to "settle" for about 1/3 of that. profoundly disappointing. but that is what dogmatism and lack of negotiation get you. shitty compromises that please nobody. I really don't understand how a 2T spending cut is better than a 4T spending cut in the eyes of republicans. I don't see how this is a win at all if they get their way. Sure, they get their no tax increases, but the country as a whole is 3T worse off as a result - not a win in my book. Because Obama plans to get all $4 trillion in tax increases and in savings from not having our troops at current levels in Afghanistan for the next ten years. There are two main problems with Obama's scam: 1. People aren't going to pay taxes just because Obama raises them. Productivity will decline, less taxes will be collected overall-- as ALWAYS happens, and the result won't be 'savings' or increased revenue-- it'll be more borrowing, more spending, and an economy that continues to self-destruct. 2. Nobody was assuming our troops would be in Afghanistan at current levels for the next ten years anyway- so this is completely phony. The Republicans in the House are serious. They are showing the leadership this issue demands. Obama is playing games. The Republican proposal involves REAL cuts. Obama isn't interested in REAL cuts.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,405
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 14, 2011 14:56:16 GMT -5
I really don't understand how a 2T spending cut is better than a 4T spending cut in the eyes of republicans. I don't see how this is a win at all if they get their way. Sure, they get their no tax increases, but the country as a whole is 3T worse off as a result - not a win in my book. I don't see how anyone wins in this mess...Obama looks weak, the repubs want to bring him down and ensure he is not re elected and the dems are all over the map on spending cuts and tax increases..this whole thing has turned out to be a mess and the media is only adding fuel to the fire with all of their opinion pieces about what a default will do to not only our economy but the world's economy..IMHO actually, i think the Democrats have been surprisingly consistent, or at least Obama has. he wanted tax increases along with spending cuts. and i think the GOP has been really consistent, too. they wanted cuts without tax increases. unfortunately, that consistency helped neither.
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Jul 14, 2011 15:04:22 GMT -5
Obama: "I've reached my limit. This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this," according to a Republican aide. The very existence of the US is on the line. It's the country vs. Obama and our front line is the GOP. You mean the same GOP (Boehner, Cantor, McConnell etc) who rubber stamped every single spending frenzy bill that GWB wanted from 01 to 06?? That GOP is on the front line? Thats funny. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 14, 2011 15:13:18 GMT -5
I really don't understand how a 2T spending cut is better than a 4T spending cut in the eyes of republicans. I don't see how this is a win at all if they get their way. Sure, they get their no tax increases, but the country as a whole is 3T worse off as a result - not a win in my book. Because Obama plans to get all $4 trillion in tax increases and in savings from not having our troops at current levels in Afghanistan for the next ten years. Do you have a link, because I didn't read anything to indicate this. What I read said that these Obama is suggesting cutting social programs to reach this goal, although it is pissing off dems. If it is only cuts to troops in afghanistan that were going to be reduced anyway, then why can't republicans meet the 4 trillion mark also?
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 14, 2011 15:15:41 GMT -5
"to bring my presidency down" or "to ruin my presidency" are similar in meaning and intent...IMHO And if not close enough for government work then close enough for paraphrasing without any intention to mislead Yeah, those statements have similar meanings. However, you add the additional words & suddenly 1 means he doesn't care if he brings down the presidency with his stand & the other means that he won't let this ruin his presidency. The two complete statements have complete opposite meanings the way I interprete them.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,405
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 14, 2011 15:17:45 GMT -5
"to bring my presidency down" or "to ruin my presidency" are similar in meaning and intent...IMHO And if not close enough for government work then close enough for paraphrasing without any intention to mislead Yeah, those statements have similar meanings. However, you add the additional words & suddenly 1 means he doesn't care if he brings down the presidency with his stand & the other means that he won't let this ruin his presidency. The two complete statements have complete opposite meanings the way I interprete them. agreed. it is no biggie, PI. i think you misquoted the president, and that is fine. we all agree what he said is that he IS willing to let these talks take down his presidency, right?
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 14, 2011 16:46:10 GMT -5
...but the question remains: what MUST be done? ...a compromise does not a solution make... with a negotiation strategy like that, i can forgive Obama for giving up. ...what negotiation strategy? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) ...and, fwiw, POTUS doesn't need to be "giving up" at his job unless he wants to resign... I haven't heard any talk of that... have you? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png)
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,405
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 14, 2011 16:49:25 GMT -5
with a negotiation strategy like that, i can forgive Obama for giving up. ...what negotiation strategy? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) ...and, fwiw, POTUS doesn't need to be "giving up" at his job unless he wants to resign... I haven't heard any talk of that... have you? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) don't go all literal on me.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 14, 2011 16:56:32 GMT -5
...what negotiation strategy? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) ...and, fwiw, POTUS doesn't need to be "giving up" at his job unless he wants to resign... I haven't heard any talk of that... have you? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) don't go all literal on me. ...um, this is a message board... all I have is your words... so, what did you mean? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png)
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 14, 2011 16:59:08 GMT -5
Negotiation requires compromise. When parties negotiate, they're doing so because they're unable to agree on an issue, or issues. If you can't agree, you're going to have to end with a compromise in order to come to any sort of solution. Am I speaking a foreign language, or something? It's hard for me to understand why this concept is so difficult.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,626
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 14, 2011 17:38:15 GMT -5
... It's hard for me to understand why this concept is so difficult. I think you would understand the difficulty of some to comprehend it if you had grown up with male genitalia. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/charmed.png)
|
|