Obama ‘Abruptly’ Walks Out of Debt Talks

[rlg94086]

No and He even said render unto Caesar. He also spoke who the righteous should most care about in Matt 25:35-46. I know He said elsewhere something about a camel and the rich and an eye of a needle.** But I don’t recall Him saying in those Matt 25 passages to be as concerned about the rich paying more tax**. But I’ll go back and take a look. I might be a liberal and I know there was a thread about liberals and the Bible. But I have my Bible right here. Peace.

In fairness, I don’t recall Jesus saying anything about the poor not paying taxes, or across the board taxation, etc. Other than “render unto Caeser…,” I’m pretty certain Jesus never mentioned taxation policy. Do we even know if the person who asked Jesus the question was rich or poor? Did the Romans tax across the board? If it was important, one would think Jesus would have taken that moment to address the situation. Instead, He just said, in essence, “pay your taxes.”

 

[rlg94086]

We should all appreciate the irony of that, but once we’re done laughing, i think the responsible thing to do is raise it. It was the responsible thing to do when he was running for president to. Generally it just shows that the main interest of a politician running for office is making the incumbant look bad.

It should be raised, but the spending cuts should be placed as conditions. What is the point of having a debt limit, if it is just going to be raised every time you hit it? Kind of silly, don’t you think?

 

[rlg94086]

Uh because that’s what compromise is. Democrats agree to some cuts they might prefer not giving up. And in return Republicans agree to revenue increases for greater shared sacrifice from the rich and corporate elites that they don’t want to do.

Why isn’t Obama compromising by accepting a deal without tax increases? One can point the finger either direction when it comes to “compromise.”

 

[SamH]

Like how PP performs far more cancer screenings than abortions?

And no other health care service can do a PAP smear? Surprising enough that service is covered in areas where no PP exists and in areas where PP does exist.

 

[SamH]

Why isn’t Obama compromising by accepting a deal without tax increases? One can point the finger either direction when it comes to “compromise.”

The budget Obama presented didn’t have tax increases (the one rejected by 100% of voting Senators). It only became an issue when Republicans wanted spending cuts. It was only then that tax increases became all important.

 

[kimmielittle]

I’m a cradle Catholic and I’ve never met folks like some on here in my whole life. Catholics are generally NOT like this.

Some even stoop to sending obnoxious emails???

Thankfully, we don’t all stoop to that level.

I could go on and on and on. . . . . . . .

So no, the real Church isn’t like this. You should go meet some REAL Catholics at your local church and see how beautiful the faith is.

.

hmmm…Very charitable

This is truly offensive and obnoxious.

 

[SamH]

You surely have heard about the power the minority has in the Senate, fillibusters, Presidentail vetos, and 2/3 to override.

Surely you’ve heard about the consequences of elections? The American people are demanding that the government lower spending, When you become a minority and continue to defy the will of the people you’ll become a smaller minority. Expect bipartison support for conservative measures when it dawns on Senators (on both sides) how hard the wind is blowing.

 

[kimmielittle]

Like how PP performs far more cancer screenings than abortions?

Care to prove that claim? PP can’t.

 

[SamH]

Anyway because individuals and faith groups haven’t been able to do it all themselves, is where a govt role can come into play. And I seriously doubt the Lord would turn away any help for the poor He could get. But that is my faith. God bless you in yours and peace.

Actually faith groups did it pretty well in this country for almost 150 years before Johnson seized upon the issue to garner votes. It was only when the “Great Society” programs kicked in that the poverty rate in the US essentially quit dropping, out of wedlock births started to increase and opportunities for advancement began to disappear.

Helping the poor became a tax issue instead of a charitable issue. And we all see how that is working out.

 

[CMatt25]

What compromise did he work out with republicans?

You do realize I imagine that there were not 60 Senate Democrats and 60 is needed to cut off efforts to block legislation.

"President Obama held an unexpected news conference Tuesday afternoon to defend the tax cut deal he made with Republican leaders on Monday. Democrats of all stripes are angry about extending the Bush tax cuts to Americans earning more than $250,000. But Obama said he had little choice, since Republicans were effectively holding middle-class tax cuts “hostage.”

"Well, first of all, he’s offering sort of a reality check. He’s telling Democrats, look, the choice he faced was not their preference of tax cuts for the middle class versus the tax cuts all the Republicans wanted, it was - the Republicans have made it clear, if the rich didn’t get their tax cuts, no one would.

npr.org/2010/12/07/131884437/Obama-Defends-Tax-Cut-Compromise

Unemployment benefits were in play too.

 

[CMatt25]

Why isn’t Obama compromising by accepting a deal without tax increases? One can point the finger either direction when it comes to “compromise.”

Knowing Obama he might in the end. But what is it you don’t understand about shared sacrifice and how those who can afford to pay more, should?

 

[SamH]

"President Obama held an unexpected news conference Tuesday afternoon to defend the tax cut deal he made with Republican leaders on Monday. Democrats of all stripes are angry about extending the Bush tax cuts to Americans earning more than $250,000. But Obama said he had little choice, since Republicans were effectively holding middle-class tax cuts “hostage.”

You need a better source than Obama. He also said this about extending the current tax rates:

"Question from Scott Ferguson via Chuck Todd to Obama: “Explain how raising taxes on anyone during a deep recession is going to help with the economy.”

Obama’s answer: "First of all, he’s right. Normally, you don’t raise taxes in a recession, which is why we haven’t and why we’ve instead cut taxes. So I guess what I’d say to Scott is – his economics are right. You don’t raise taxes in a recession. We haven’t raised taxes in a recession.”

Todd reminded Obama that he had promised to raise taxes on “some of the wealthiest” Americans.

Obama responded by reiterating his opposition to tax hikes during a recession and making an argument about timing. “We have not proposed a tax hike for the wealthy that would take effect in the middle of a recession. Even the proposals that have come out of Congress – which by the way were different from the proposals I put forward – still wouldn’t kick in until after the recession was over. So he’s absolutely right, the last thing you want to do is raise taxes in the middle of a recession because that would just suck up – take more demand out of the economy and put business further in a hole.”

Apparently it wasn’t in the interest of comprise but the fact that a tax increase would hurt the economy even more that his failed policies already had.

 

[CMatt25]

And no other health care service can do a PAP smear? Surprising enough that service is covered in areas where no PP exists and in areas where PP does exist.

There are women who depend on PP for primary care.

 

[rlg94086]

Knowing Obama he might in the end. But what is it you don’t understand about shared sacrifice and how those who can afford to pay more, should?

Those who can afford more do pay more. 50% pay nothing. What is it you don’t understand about shared sacrifice. Those who pay nothing…or actually receive an earned income tax credit aren’t sharing anything are they?

 

[kimmielittle]

There are women who depend on PP for primary care.

Hmmm let’s see do I go to my county health clinic or the Euthanasia / abortion provider.

PP does not provide “Primary Care”. Care to provide evidence?

 

[SamH]

Knowing Obama he might in the end. But what is it you don’t understand about shared sacrifice and how those who can afford to pay more, should?

Please define shared sacrifice and how it applies here.

I mystified how raising the tax burden on some to others can enjoy their largeness is somehow “shared sacrifice”.

Its more like wanting someone else’s money is called ‘need,’ wanting to keep your own money is called ‘greed,’ and ‘compassion’ is when politicians arrange the transfer.

 

[CMatt25]

Surely you’ve heard about the consequences of elections? The American people are demanding that the government lower spending, When you become a minority and continue to defy the will of the people you’ll become a smaller minority. Expect bipartison support for conservative measures when it dawns on Senators (on both sides) how hard the wind is blowing.

Right like in 2006 and 2008 too. The winds and the electorate that turns out change frequently in America. Actually though there are polls too showing “the American people” support a tax increase for the wealthier top few percentages. But then that’s only if one defines “the American people” by something other than conservatives or Tea Party believers. Polls have also shown cutting SS or the Ryan plan to end Medicare as we know it, was not all that popular with “the American people”.

 

[SamH]

There are women who depend on PP for primary care.

PP is not able to provide primary care, their services are much to limited in scope to do so.

 

[kimmielittle]

PP is not able to provide primary care, their services are much to limited in scope to do so.

Exactly Most of the time a Doctor isn’t even on premises

 

[SamH]

Right like in 2006 and 2008 too. The winds and the electorate that turns out change frequently in America. .

Because the Republican party wasn’t listening, they were spending money like drunken fools. When the democrats took over they started spending like drunken Kennedies.