Which thread exactly? As far as the facts go the majority of Democratic senators voted for the Iraq War./
[/QUOTE]
I was merely giving it as an example of a "sacred cow (along with Medicaid for Dems and military spending for the Republicans).
The President and the Speaker are closing in on a deal:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/22/us/politics/22fiscal.html?_r=1&hp
It is substantially of course the Gang of Six plan.
The deal will be real when the vote is taken the debt ceiling is raised. I expect this “deal” to fall through by the weekend.
I don’t know, I’m kind of bored of this and want to move on to the next crisis.
I’m thinking one of the one of the republicans on one of the armed services committee can use their clearances to get access to a nuclear bomb, and threaten to blow up Washington DC. Then we’ll get some “bipartisan compromises” which look suspiciously close to the republican agenda to avert the crisis that, well, let’s be honest, will somehow be all be Obama’s fault.
This post is only slightly hyperbolic.
This has as much Republican support as say the Banking reform bill last year which gained about half a dozen Republican votes.
Based on fabricated intelligence from the Bush Administration. Let it drop, son.
Never mind
I’ve read that both parties have denied this.
Bankruptcy comes to mind; legal, quicker, and much more simple. You should have not trouble understanding that.
It says as much in the article itself.
Unfortunately, you are mistaken. Debt limit increases are not undertaken in appropriations bills – they are separate pieces of legislation. I’m happy to provide you with citations for recent debt limit increases, and I can assure you that they were not in appropriations bills.
Again, you are mistaken as to your first sentence. I think the problem may be that you do not appreciate the difference between the budget, a budget resolution, an appropriations bill, and other legislation.
The budget is merely a proposal from the President. It is not law. A budget resolution is a blueprint of spending and revenue passed by Congress, but it is not law – but it can be used to initiate new legislation to increase the debt limit, but just because a budget resolution isn’t balanced does NOT generate an increase in the debt limit. Finally, an appropriations bill is law, but it only provides for expenditures, not for tax changes or issuance of debt.
But let me say one thing clearly: the absence of the Gephardt Rule makes no difference whatsoever this year, as I explained in post 67.
Well at the end of the day, my vote will ultimately go to this guy. You only need to click on the link and you’ll see his face.
… Then why say they’re “closing in on a deal” when they both say they aren’t?
Jesus H Christ. The vote was to authorize the President to have the option to go to war so the President would have a credible threat. It was not a clear cut resolution to go to war nor a declaration of war. I would really appreciate it if you wouldn’t keep throwing this meme out, thank you very much in advance.
It’s often said “You’re entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.”
But this isn’t really true. Senators really did vote; that’s a fact. Curtis would be happy to apply his intelligence to refute disagreeable facts; in this case he doesn’t need to think – he’s got a “fact” on his side. 
The themes of 1984 (War is Peace; Ignorance is Strength; etc.) have come true in today’s America. In the 2004 election “facts” made the war hero into a shirker and the shirker into the man who did his duty. (I wonder about Curtis’ views on that.)
This is a pretty dramatic misstatement.
While the Federal Reserve Ssystem (not Federal Reserve Board; the FRS is the organization, the FRB is the board that governs it) is technically a private corporation, the people who run it are, by law, appointees of the government, its authority comes from U.S. federal law, and the government pockets all the profit. So to call it “independent of the Federal Government” is, frankly, simplification to the point of just being wrong.
Posted by Susann:
If you are in debt and spending more than your income, and if you already maxed out all of your credit cards and if you already have taken out a second and a third mortgage on your home, the simple, obvious, best, solution out of your problem is to **reduce spending. **
Nope. In fact, bankruptcy inevitably leads to reduced spending. And I am talking about real cutting, reductions way more bigger than anyone is currently dreaming of.
Bankruptcy is not an alternative to cutting spending. Bankruptcy necessitates reduced spending. What bankruptcy does is FORCE a family, or a country, to cut spending, because nobody will lend to you anymore, because the banks and everyone else will stop lending to you. Going bankrupt changes makes the situation worse by reducing your choices, bankruptcy effectually requires spending to be cut no matter what else you would like to do. Once a country goes bankrupt it no longer has a choice, it therefore MUST spend less because it simply cant borrow as much.
Spending too much, going into excessive debt, knowingly borrowing more than you can ever pay back, can not go on forever. Sooner or later you run out of people willing to lend to you, and once people stop lending to you it will become impossible to do anything except cut spending.
Thus reducing spending is not only the simplist, most obvious, best solution, but in fact, sooner or later **reducing spending is inevitably the ONLY option in the long term. **
Nothing else (besides reducing spending) being talked about even matters. Everything else being discussed besides cutting spending is entirely worthless and will not avoid world-wide economic catastrophe, the Greatest World Economic Depression in world history, and it is coming sooner than most people expect.
When the United States goes bankrupt, when the United States runs out of lenders, when the United States debt is more than what the rest of the world even has, then Reduced Spending, MASSIVELY!!! reduced spending, WILL! happen. It is unavoidable.
You should have no trouble understanding how bankruptcy affects credit.
The idea of the United States being on the verge of bankruptcy is the 2011 version of the 1953 fear that the Reds were going to invade our cities and brainwash us through Hollywood movies written and directed by non-WASP kind of people.
Pure hysterical paranoid nonsense.
I know I’ll get modded for this, but you are such an utter moron in every thread you participate in it borders on criminal.
Your point of comparing the “Hollywood” “1953 red scare” with a very real United States debt problem, is not comparable. Not at all.
I am sorry to inform you, the massively huge and worsening debt of the United States IS!!! real. It may already be unfixable. The debt even at current levels is beyond what the United states can pay. The danger of the United States defaulting on its debt is already almost a certainty.