Fiscal stalemate: A new proposal and more accusations
November 30th, 2012
08:42 AM ET

Fiscal stalemate: A new proposal and more accusations

Washington (CNN) – The White House and Congressional Republicans are squaring off in negotiations to avert the fiscal cliff, with each side accusing the other of blocking a deal.

For the first time we're getting a look at what the White House is offering to break the stalemate. Republicans consider it an overreach. Democrats make clear it's a first offer, to get specific on the numbers.

Full story

Topics: President Obama

soundoff (78 Responses)
  1. Kool-Aid Police

    More of the "fair share" talk. Let's just get it over with and eliminate the debt ceiling, hike takes and print money like there's no tomorrow. That's what Obama wants so let's move into the fast lane and speed up the inevitable collapse.

    November 30, 2012 at 9:55 am |
    • ddblah

      It's completely the other way around. If you don't borrow, you'd have to print a lot of money.

      November 30, 2012 at 10:55 am |
      • Howard

        Or ... have you ever considered the choice of cutting spending ??? ... you know, like we middle class Americans have to do, when we can't afford to spend what we don't have.

        November 30, 2012 at 1:53 pm |
  2. Kool-Aid Police

    The first family will be vacationing in Hawaii for the Christmas holidays at a cost of at least $4 million to taxpayers, according to a report from the Hawaii Reporter.

    November 30, 2012 at 10:40 am |
    • ddblah

      This kind of attack did not get you to white house. The election is over and it was a landslide.

      November 30, 2012 at 10:57 am |
      • John

        You consider retelling what is actually happening and being reported by the media as an "attack". Wow.

        November 30, 2012 at 11:17 am |
      • Kool-Aid Police

        My but you're a touchy little leftist, aren't you?

        November 30, 2012 at 1:08 pm |
      • ChrisTodd

        You consider just over 50% of vote in enough key electoral states a landslide? Wow.

        November 30, 2012 at 1:49 pm |
      • Howard

        Landslide ??? ... 51% to 49% is not a landslide. And, an incumbent, who spends a hundred million dollars to demonize his opponent ... and, spends a Billion dollars over all ... and, has the main stream media and Hollywood behind him ... who only wins by 51% did certainly not win by a landslide. Half of the country didn't, and doesn't want him. Also, This is America, so the citizens and political party who gets defeated doesn't have to stop voicing their opinions, and objections ... that policy only exists in a totalitarian society.

        November 30, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
      • Howard

        The obama stooges act as if a 51% to 49% win is a landslide, and a mandate. They even expect their opponents to keep quiet, and rubber stamp everything obama does. The obama stooges seem to have forgotten ... this is America, so the citizens and the political party which gets defeated, doesn't have to stop voicing their opinions, and objections ... what the obama stooges want only exists in a totalitarian society. Regarding their vitriol towards Mitt Romeny ... they've revealed themselves as kind of people who, after defeating their opponent, kicks them while their down, and spits on them.

        November 30, 2012 at 3:40 pm |
      • jean2009

        Electoral vote count:
        Barack Obama 332
        Mitt Romney 206
        Popular vote:
        Barack Obama – 65,229,840 ...50.91%
        Mitt Romney – 60,649,802....47.34%

        You forget there were a total of six other people running on the ballot in various states that racked up from 0.99% to 0.03% of the popular votes. The total popular vote was: 128,120,272 which means 2,241,630 people voted for neither the President or Mitt Romney.

        And Howard, the first family pays for their own vacation....and the taxpayers pay the cost for their security. that is just the way it has always been done regardless of who is can the whining.

        December 1, 2012 at 2:28 am |
      • Caramon

        Whether or not the election is a landslide is really up to opinion. The truth is most who voted for the President will claim it was a landslide. Those who voted against will claim it was not. Who cares. The election is over and the President won. However, according to Lionel and many others, the President cares about the 100 percent. Last time I checked, I belonged to that group. Does he care about my concerns or not?

        The President promised a balance approach to avert the fiscal cliff. Balanced means a dollar increase in revenue and dollar decrease in expense. I, as a member of the 100 percent, simply want to know specific cuts he intends to make to balance the revenue increases he asked for. Can anyone tell me what specifics he has offered?

        December 1, 2012 at 2:04 pm |
      • jean2009

        Caramon...George W. Bush won an election with a lot smaller plurality and he claimed he had a mandate, and had won considerable political capital that he planned to spend to have his way.

        Currently sixty percent of the people have stated they want tax rates to go back up to Clinton era rates on the wealthy. In a Democracy the majority should rule. Taking care of the best interest of 100% of the people does not necessarily mean the 40% are going to get their way, when what they want is not fair, not helpful, and not in the best interest of others.

        According to Secretary of Treasury who was interviewed this morning...a detailed plan for what the president is requesting was presented to Congress...but per usual the GOP doesn't want to either admit it was presented, or state in reply what they will agree to. They have played this same game repeated for the last 4 is time for the GOP to come honestly to the table

        December 2, 2012 at 12:59 pm |
      • Caramon

        Jean, so what. Bush is not the President. Why do you continually justify what President Obama does with well Bush did it? According to Gallup after the election...

        Forty-five percent of Americans now say they favor reducing the federal budget deficit with an equal balance of tax increases and spending cuts, up from 32% last year. At the same time, the percentage favoring an emphasis on spending cuts is now 40%, down from 50% last year, while the percentage in favor of reducing the deficit primarily through tax increases is unchanged at 11%.

        The only thing I have seen brought to the table by Geithner was 400 billion in cuts to be determined. This with a request for 1.6 T in revenue increases. However, I will wait to hear more about this new proposal before passing any judgement. As long as it is dollar for dollar, the GOP should agree.

        December 2, 2012 at 1:36 pm |
    • Howard

      While 'Middle Class' Americans are tightening their belts this Christmas ... the Obama's once again enjoy a multi-million dollar holiday vacation ... paid for from the taxes squeezed out of the pay check of hard working citizens.

      November 30, 2012 at 3:43 pm |
      • jean2009

        Howard I bet it makes your head spin to think due to President Obama that currently Chevrolet is selling automobiles at the rate of one new vehicle every 6 seconds.

        BTW How is the Canadian move working out for you?

        December 3, 2012 at 1:42 pm |
    • mgrgurich

      Where were you when the GOP was cutting taxes inthe face of 2 new wars and putting everything on the credit card? Entitlements did not create the mess and shouldn't be scapegoated to fix it

      December 1, 2012 at 1:34 am |
  3. Boomer in Mo

    I would love to horse trade with you people. You don't know the art and I would take you every time.

    November 30, 2012 at 11:12 am |
  4. acdcguy

    Over five thousand years ago, Moses said to the children of Israel ,
    "Pick up your shovels, mount your asses and camels, and I will lead
    you to the Promised Land."

    Nearly 75 years ago, (when Welfare was introduced) Roosevelt said,
    "Lay down your shovels, sit on your asses, and light up a Camel, this
    is the Promised Land."

    Today, Congress has stolen your shovel, taxed your asses, raised the
    price of Camels and mortgaged the Promised Land!

    I was so depressed last night thinking about Health Care Plans, the
    economy, the wars, lost jobs, savings, Social Security, retirement
    funds, etc .... I called a Suicide Hotline.

    I had to press 1 for English.

    I was connected to a call center in Pakistan . I told them I was suicidal.

    They got excited and asked if I could drive a truck......

    Folks, we're screwed.

    November 30, 2012 at 11:49 am |
    • B.

      I think that you should take them up on the offer..

      November 30, 2012 at 1:08 pm |
    • Cynthia L.

      Seeing as there are mucho-plenty of trucking jobs open for those seeking employment, and 2.1 million job openings for those with math/science degrees among others, I'm guessing acdcguy is happy looking through the trash for plastic bottles to cash in instead. He's at least – RECYCLING. Press 2 for Pakistani.

      December 1, 2012 at 10:33 am |
  5. B.

    The Republicans have obviously forgotten Who won the Election and the overwhelming support for the Presidents proposals involving taxes!

    Impeach McConnell for dereliction of responsibility. He has Not learned a thing, and is responsible for the Most nonproductive congress in our history!

    November 30, 2012 at 1:05 pm |
    • Caramon

      The debate over this issue appears to be between Boehner and the President. Were exactly do you McConnell involved with this process?

      November 30, 2012 at 1:21 pm |
    • Howard

      In case you've forgotten ... this is America, so the citizens and thei political party which gets defeated, doesn't have to stop voicing their opinions, and objections ... what you want only exists in a totalitarian society.

      November 30, 2012 at 2:04 pm |
    • jpmichigan

      We also voted for more compromise. Obama stated, he would work with the Republicans not ditate to them, because he won. Same President returns to the White House, the one who lacks leadership and governing skills, he has learned nothing in 4 years. He stated re-elect me so I can continue what I began, well he sure is , and its not all good.

      December 1, 2012 at 1:15 pm |
      • jean2009

        And we did re-elect him and you move on and quit nursing sour grapes.

        December 2, 2012 at 1:02 pm |
      • Caramon

        So, what you are saying is that once re-elected, the President can do anything he wants despite what was promised during the campaign.

        December 2, 2012 at 2:06 pm |
      • jean2009

        Caramon The President told everyone during the primaries, during the campaign, that if elected taxes on those making over $250,000 would go back up to the Clinton era rates....that was never a secret. Plus, in recent polls 60 % say they want the tax rates to go back up to Clinton era rates for those making over $250.000. Now, I personally am negotiable on the $250,000 and would not complain if that number would creep up to $300,000 or $400,000, but then for the GOP to suggest that would remove most of their bargaining shield.

        I'll suggest that, if you will suggest the $1 of cuts for every $1 of Tax increases, I will suggest they raise the amount where the higher tax-rate kick in, but the President stated during the campaign $2.50 in budget cuts to every $1 in tax revenue increases....and he wasn't talking about the inaccurately labeled sham budgets brought to the House and Senate by Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C) and Jeff Sessions (R-Al) and disingenuously called the President's budget.

        December 3, 2012 at 11:16 am |
      • Caramon

        President stated during the campaign $2.50 in budget cuts to every $1 in tax revenue increases. Last I heard, Giethner gave 400 billion in cuts. There will need to be 4T in cuts to meet the pledge of 2.5 to 1 since the President has asked for 1.6 T in revenue increases. All I am asking for is to see specifics on the cuts. Please note that I am not asking about sham cuts offered by Giethner to be determined at a later date. So far, no one has been able to provide specifics.

        December 3, 2012 at 11:29 am |
      • jean2009

        Caramon ...
        Answer this the Republican's claimed in 2011 they had a list of cuts that would cut $2.5 Trillion from Federal spending over 10 years...which included neither SS or the far the legislation hasn't been brought to the floor of either body (House/Senate).

        Source Fact Check: "About Those "Republican Cuts" Aug. 28, 2012.

        It was called the "Spending Reduction Act of 2011 sponsored by Rep. Jim of the sticking points are the "house gratuity for members of congress" which is equal to a full year's salary to the widow/widower, and another provision that would allow congress to fire members with seriously delinquent taxes which at the time were a total of $1 billion in unpaid taxes. In other words it was a go nowhere bill.

        December 3, 2012 at 12:03 pm |
      • Caramon

        congress to fire members with seriously delinquent taxes which at the time were a total of $1 billion in unpaid taxes. Why is this necessarily a bad thing? Why should any member be delinquent in taxes? Member of what?

        December 3, 2012 at 12:14 pm |
      • jean2009

        Firing people with serious delinquent taxes is one thing, but the bill with its massive cuts to transportation, infrastructure, and everything that has made this country great..... would have unemployed hundred and thousands of people. Go look up the "Spending Reduction Act of 2011" I would suggest looking at the comments of one poster at "The Hillbilly Reports"

        "But that is not all. Looking at the summary of some of the things this proposal would do reads like a wet dream for the greediest and least patriotic among us and an American nightmare for many of the rest of us. Just look at some of the ideas and cuts designed to insure that the wealthy do not have to invest in the country or people that made them wealthy: "

        Caramon I can talk at you forever, but I don't think you are any less entrenched than John Bonehead.

        December 3, 2012 at 12:53 pm |
      • Caramon

        Jean, you would be dead wrong. But I doubt that you would admit it. If you have read some of my previous posts you would find I have openly criticized the lack of leadership among the GOP especially the past couple of weeks. I have also complimented the President at several times including the response to Sandy and the meeting with Romney. In past elections I have voted across the aisle in many local and state elections including one governor named Richard Celeste. Do you remember him?

        Yet, you claim I am brainwashed. Certainly not something I would expect from a person with your experienced years.

        I often ask questions because I don;t know the answer. I have agreed on several occasions with comments made by december. I have even apologized for being wrong. Can you say the same?

        I have never heard you even have a small disagreement with the Democrats or anything positive to say about the Republicans. Apparently everything the Democrats do is perfect.

        December 3, 2012 at 1:15 pm |
      • Caramon

        Maybe the problem Jean is you are too busy talking AT me.

        December 3, 2012 at 1:18 pm |
  6. Protect American Jobs

    We need our elected officals to Start Protecting American Jobs and do whatever it takes to bring back the jobs they let go. We need leaders who will actually stand up for the American people. Returning private sector jobs to American Citizens will provide income tax revenue to OUR Government versus our government having to pay unemployment benefits to those who would be jobless instead.

    We may have to pay a bit more for products made here in the USA by US citizens, but at least we'll still have jobs and a future for our children.

    The bottom line is that “Our Government” has to protect domestic industry and the jobs that those industries provide. If they do that, the rest will take care of itself.


    We The People?

    Wouldn't it be More Productive if Our Elected Leaders Started Working Together as AMERICANS for AMERICANS and AMERICA, instead of just bickering, stalling and posturing for the next election as democrats and republicans! The American People have had it with this unproductive BS! The way that both parties having been operating for years just stinks! Neither party has really been looking out for the best interests of the US Citizens who elect them and who they're supposed to represent.

    Both parties have sold out the bulk of the American citizens, who they're supposed to represent, by allowing the "out-sourcing" floodgates to open wider and wider without taking any sensible measures to stem the tide.

    It shouldn't be all about Democrats or Republicans! It should be about Americans, especially our elected officials, doing the right thing for our country and its citizens. All the single-minded, left versus right, ideological one dimensional bull has got to go!

    Both parties need to start working together and actually start doing something to fix the real problems in our country like "out-sourcing", illegal immigration, the out of control costs of health care insurance and our reliance on foreign fuel. If they don't start working together making progress by the next election, American citizens should run a nation-wide campaign to vote out all incumbents regardless of party to send the message.

    November 30, 2012 at 1:14 pm |
  7. Dan B

    A ludicrous break in the stalemate. Obama wants socialism with these tax rates. Boehner is right to criticize. I do think the House should try and pass something because God knows the Senate won't

    November 30, 2012 at 4:39 pm |
    • Cynthia L.

      Senate has agreed to pass it, just waiting on the DO NOTHING AGAIN CONGRESS. It has literally made itself the laughing stock of history as no Congress in our nation's past has gotten so little done. So true and so-so sad. The saddest thing is they have been able to collect excellent healthcare benefits and a pretty decent salary from the taxpayers. The New Year calender Eric Cantor's office just release has them only working for 3 months in 2013. What a gig.

      December 1, 2012 at 10:43 am |
      • jpmichigan

        Where have you been? The House passed 3 budgets and the President failed to have any votes in the Senate on his budget. Houses work and passes budgets, while Mr. Reid and the Democrats don't even bring those budgets to the Senate to be discussed, let aolone voted on. I say the Democratic Senated hasn't done its job for 4 years now. The Democrats are stalling progress. refusing debates on budgets passed by the House.

        December 1, 2012 at 1:11 pm |
      • jean2009

        jpmichigan...Don't come on here with that piece of baloney. Do some research.

        The president's actual budget was never brought to the floor of the House -Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R – S. C.) brought a mock sham alternative budget he called the President's budget to the floor, and that is what was voted down by 414-0. Are you actually so dense that you believe that not one Democrat would have voted for the President's actual budget?

        And Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Al) pulled the same stunt in the Senate 99-0...A GOP attempt to thumb their nose at the White House while mooning the American electorate. How immature!

        Source read: "House and Senate Unanimously Reject President's Budget – Or Do They?" at the ABC News Political Punch site..

        December 3, 2012 at 11:36 am |
      • Caramon

        It has happened before. Was it the budget submitted by the President in 2011?

        The Senate voted unanimously on Wednesday to reject a $3.7 trillion budget plan that President Obama sent to Capitol Hill in February. (source, the Hill)

        Of course, Harry Reid and the other Senate Democrats could actually submit their own budget, couldn't they?

        December 3, 2012 at 12:00 pm |
      • jean2009

        Caramon as I have told you before the President's actual budget proposals have never been presented in the House during talks for the 2010-2011- 2012, or 2013 Budgets. that is why they have had to come up with Spending Bills.... It has all been games and nose-thumbing by that GOP controlled body.

        December 3, 2012 at 1:00 pm |
      • jean2009

        Cynthia, according to the news the Senate are waiting for the GOP House members to quit being Prima Donna's, let John have time to find a hankie, lather on some more orange suntan lotion, quit exaggerating the doom and despair, and come to the table and get to he's "flabbergasted"....while the rest of us are appalled. We've been talking this move for 4 years..while they stalled in a bid to make a president a one term president. So their game didn't pan out, they lost.....time to bite the bullet.

        Caramon after 4 years of mulling this in the public eye....everyone knows exactly where and what the President's proposal includes.

        December 3, 2012 at 1:36 pm |
      • Caramon

        Jean, I didn't ask about the House. I asked about the Senate. Did the Senate unanimously vote down the Presidential budget for 2011? Yes or no will do.

        everyone knows exactly where and what the President's proposal includes. Yes, everyone knows and none of you have yet to give any specifics.

        December 3, 2012 at 1:51 pm |
    • Caramon

      No Cynthia, the Senate has agreed to vote for tax increases. The President promised a balanced approach. This means one dollar increase in taxes for a dollar decrease in expenses. This is the compromise we were promised. What specific things has the President offered to cut to meet his part of the balanced deal? Remember I said specific, not 400 billion to be determined at a later date.

      December 1, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
      • jean2009

        The only problem is the GOP wants $2.50 in cuts for every $1 in tax increases.

        "House has repeatedly asserted that they believe in $2.50 in spending cuts for
        every $1 in taxes hikes." – Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama)

        You should contact your Representative and tell him/her a $1 for $1 deal is fine with you.

        December 2, 2012 at 1:09 pm |
      • jean2009

        Oh the Secretary of Treasury stated this morning on a talk show that he had presented the House with a detailed plan (on paper) of what the President has requested and how the cuts will be made.....the GOP just doesn't want to come back and give a plan of what they want and what their proposal is.

        December 2, 2012 at 1:12 pm |
  8. Dan B

    That or Republicans should just back down and when our credit rating gets downgraded again they cannot be blamed.

    November 30, 2012 at 6:08 pm |
  9. judy

    if we go over the fiscal cliff the fault will lie solely with the repos and their crazy ideas and cowardly response to grover. You will not change the minds of people like howard who find commies behind every door. He still lives in the cold war. acdc is to busy swinging both ways to know whats going on. When repos are backed into a corner all they can do is attack. That is what lost them the election they made up so may stories and had so little substance that how could people vote for these loonies. Look at the people this party attracts. Can there be any doubt that they are a bunch of crazies. To the repos 47% of us do not even count . Any party that would run a guy like mitt sure doesn't care about people in general. And after listening to the repos that post it is obvious that they are bigots who don't care either. Some grand ol party more like greedy ol pigs

    December 1, 2012 at 10:26 am |
    • Caramon

      Judy, on many occasions during the campaign, the President has called for a balanced approach to the impeding fiscal cliff. What does balanced mean? To me it simply means a dollar increase in revenue and a dollar decrease in expense. The President has called for 1.6 T increases in revenue. Now he should provide 1.6 T decrease in expenses. Has he offered this? If not, then what has he offered? Is this a balanced approach?

      What would you cut in order to reduce spending by 1.6 T? I know Jean would cut defense. Yes, it should also be on the table. The GOP has asked for a balance approach with specifics on spending cuts before agreeing to tax increases. Why is this greedy?

      December 1, 2012 at 11:11 am |
    • Ray E. (Georgia)

      You are so easy and predictable Judy. If your thinking was correct, there would be no Fiscal Cliff.

      December 1, 2012 at 11:12 am |
    • Dave eddleman

      You're right on 1 thing. The GOP stomped all over their ying-yang nominating Romney. Unfortunately, the common GOP'ers really don't have a say on their candidate. The well-connected and right wing nuts get that say, which is why you had moderate republicans (like me) and conservative democrats force to choose the lesser of the evils, Obama. I did it solely because I want balance in DC. I do not want either party to jam through legislation, be them "fat cats" wanting to get fatter or bleeding heart liberals willing to throw money we're borrowing from china into "green projects" and regulations to "save the planet" at the expense of costing 10's of 1000's of Americans jobs, especially when our global competitors don't give a tinker's D about pollution. Save the planet is a noble thing, but our economy is facing a total meltdown Americans will have a pretty country that we very well could be starving to death in if we don't both Increase tax revenue and reduce spending.

      I don't see it matters if we get the revenue from the tax on over $250K or or by a $50k deduction limit. The deduction limit actually gets more revenue and only people with over $250K incomes will have that many deductions. But Obama truely needs to bring his exact cuts into the bill. The must be passed in the same bill. Obama demanding $1.6 T in increases but for only $400B in cuts, written or not, won't fly. "I'll gladly pay you tuesday for your smorgesboard today" is what we've been doing for 10 years and what got us to where we're at..

      Same token, The GOP's offer is as ludicris as Obama's. They offer $800B in taxes for $1.4 T in cuts? It was meant to be as ludicris as Obama's on the flip side. They need to meet somewhere in the middle. Whoever refuses to hammer down something like this will be responsible for for sending us over the Cliff, and if neither makes a reasonable offer, we should go over it the cliff. Except for 1, the federal agencies that will take the cuts are pretty much useless and a waste of money anyway

      December 4, 2012 at 2:04 am |
    • Dave eddleman

      Few people know what defaulting on a National Debt does to a country. I got to see it 1st hand. Did you notice that we started having an Illegel Alien problem here about 30 years ago? Mexico defaulted on their debt in 1982. Their Peso devaluated from 3:1 USD to 300:1 USD in 2 weeks. I moved to the border of Mixico in 1984. I had an employee there who's father owned 3 "Pollo Loco" restuarants (KFC equivilents) in Mexico. Imagine this happening to you. You've got $250,000 in the bank. You see the persident say we can't pay our national debt because the "rich bankers" stole it, so he needs to nationalize the banks, audit, and recover the money. You try to go get your money the next day.The banks are closed. They open 2 weeks later, and you pull out your $250,000. The Doallar hasn't been traded in the last 2 weeks because the banks were closed. When the stock market opens, those USD's have 1/100th of their buyng power. Since all goods have a international value, their value isn't changed, however, it takes 100 TIMES the amount of USD's in your pocket to buy the same items you bought yeasterday for 1/100th of the price. You had $250,000 worth of buying power 2 weeks ago. You now have $2,500. Mexico still won't release the death toll from starvation that 1st year.

      December 4, 2012 at 2:27 am |
    • Dave eddleman

      If you think that $3.50 / gallon for gas is expensive, try $350/gallon. Gas in mexico was $1.29 in USD's in 1985. It went from 3.87 pesos/gallon to 387 peso/gallon. And their gas literaly stunk too. Too high a sufur content. Oh, welfare/ food assitance/ social services are gone too. Mexico tried printng more money to subsidize themselves, however, since their money had no international value, the more they printed, the more the peso devaluated. They scrapped the old peso for the new in 1996. Since the value by that time was 1000:1USD, they just knocked 3 zeros off it.

      To hedge against this, people should have fixed rate loans. Variable APR's are tied to the fed prime. as the fed crashes, the APR will equal to the Prime X (devaluation %) + (your actual interst rate markup). This would make payoff of a $100,000 home a payoff of $ 10,000, 000, so if you got a variable, you better pay it off the day this happens.

      December 4, 2012 at 2:44 am |
    • Dave eddleman

      Last bit of advise for those who think adding to the Debt is "free" money. If you succeed in continuing to stack on $15,000,000,000,000/year, the default will happen no later than 2017, very probably earlier, hence the "Fiscal Cliff" (where we can't even pay the daily interest we are paying now on the debt to the international community, putting us in default)

      Have a nice home, well insulated, with a small fixed-rate mortgage. Have a wood stove for heat, good natural air flow for AC, at least 5 acres for gardens/animals, no closer that 25 miles from the nearest major city, and significant self protection, preferably dogs and legal firearms. Starving people are desperate people.

      You can call me paranoid. I'll die happy one day if that assessment proves to be correct. I have a beautiful home, beautiful children, am well employed, and I hope this country offers my children get the same opportunities as I had, however, if it doesn't, we'll be fine anyway. Will you?

      December 4, 2012 at 3:05 am |
      • Dave eddleman

        Correction on the stack "15,000,000,000,000" should be 1,500,000,000,000. Ridicule me if it makes you feel better. If you did any research on my facts, you should be ridiculing me out of fear. if you didn't and are ridiculing me anyway, you're doing it from ignorance, which is what I would expect.

        December 4, 2012 at 3:36 am |
  10. Lance D.

    Hillary Clinton's concern about new Israeli homes being built on the West Bank, "hindering progress towards a two-state solution," is a nausiating joke. Following her after-though detour visit with Netanyahu and Mosry, after drinking French wine with Obambi-Poo in the far East, and the explicit "NO" to U.N. step towards recognition of Palestinian statehood, neither "Pale Face Pig," weakened Obambi-Poo nor Rice-a-roni can stake claim to credit for positive Mideast movement. Just keep the "Outside Dollars" flowing.

    RE: Roland Martin "Show then who's the boss," have you seen Susan Rice's husband? One big Canadian right? (wink). Susan must love very big dominant men. No doubt he has made her beg for mercy more than once in the bedroom. All Roland has to worry about is how "Boston Hot Lips" Deval Patrick dominates Obambi-Poo - Big Bird's Berkshire Love Nest? That should be more than enough to make the manhood of Roland Martin's imagination sqeal. The GOP will do the right thing, in the right way at the appropriate right time for the good of America. Notice that the boxing gloves in the W.H. dining room were red? Don't ask what is in those black folders in the desk. Larry Flynt says, "You probably do not want to know, so keep it moving big boy" (wink)

    December 1, 2012 at 10:44 am |
  11. Dan B

    You are so wrong Judy. If the Democrats have their way and Republicans vote present, how is it their fault? I'm all for trying your idea because when it fails Republicans can do to Obama what you all did to Bush.

    December 1, 2012 at 11:03 am |
  12. Ray E. (Georgia)

    Aw, Yes,
    From time to time some of you folks mention Trickle Down Economics. Now the Good News. The Bottom is going to move closer to the top. The Bad News, there are going to be less to move. There are going to be a lot more drop into FoodStamp Heaven. The Libs want you to think there is a Pot of Gold at the end of that Rainbow. It is just over the Cliff.

    Me, i don't worry. I spend my summers on the French Reveria and my winters in the South Sea Islands and bask in the Tradewinds.

    December 1, 2012 at 11:09 am |
  13. jpmichigan

    Obama urges the American people to put pressure on the Republicans to allow the tax increase on the wealthy. Well I encourage the American people to put pressure on the President and his Democrats , to FOR ONCE sit across the table from the Republicans and try to negotiate and comprmise a solution to this problem, instead of dictating what to do and or else . What happen to the President that was re-elected, has he not learned anything from the last 4 years,or is his plan for us to go over the cliff to give him the money need to spend, spend, and spend some more. We were warned that Obama would not change, even though he spewed compromising rhethoric, and changes on the Hill, same old rhethoric from 2008, with the start of the same lack of leadership and governing skill shown now for 4 years.

    December 1, 2012 at 1:04 pm |
    • B.

      Unfortunately for you, Americans voted for the President in overwhelming numbers and also agree with his policies that we need a balanced agenda of Revenue, and Cuts which apparently Republicans do not get yet..

      He Won the Election..

      December 1, 2012 at 6:17 pm |
    • Caramon

      So B, what cuts specifically does the President intend to make?

      December 1, 2012 at 9:51 pm |
  14. Dan B

    If the president doesn't learn to cooperate than his midterm election will be disastrous, just like 2010.

    December 1, 2012 at 3:26 pm |
  15. B.

    Wining the Election apparently didn’t change One thing with the Republicans.They are standing firm on all of the – same ole hard core stances they had before the election and expecting to get their way again!

    I hope that the President has a Political Baseball Bat up his sleeve this time, Americans are getting sick of this endless intransigents by the Republicans, Big-time!

    December 1, 2012 at 6:09 pm |
    • Steveo

      True Obama won reelection, True also Boehner and Canter was re-elected too. Why do you think that was?

      December 1, 2012 at 8:52 pm |
      • jean2009

        Look at their gerrymandered districts....a convicted republican axe murder couldn't lose an election in those districts.

        December 2, 2012 at 12:44 pm |
      • Steveo

        Really Jean? Why couldn't it simply be, they just won a fair election? My point is they were sent back to DC by their electorate! Anyway, what we need is for the folks we elected to sit down and seriously negotiate this thing out! Nobody is going to get everything they want out of this. Neither the GOP or the Dems. A whole lot of hard working folk are going to get pitched pretty hard if we don't get this worked out!

        December 2, 2012 at 8:54 pm |
      • jean2009

        Steveo ....Tell that to John Bonehead....he is the one who is avoiding coming to the table. The ball is in his court, and he is still pandering and stalling.

        December 3, 2012 at 1:39 pm |
  16. Dan B

    Americans are tired of the lack of cooperation by the Democrats

    December 1, 2012 at 7:36 pm |
  17. mgrgurich

    The game is pawn stars. Obama is the guy who walked in with an old musket and asked for twice what it is worth. Now it is time for Boehner to offer half what it is worth so we can negotiate to a price in the middle. If Boehenr refuses to negotiate The President gets to keep the musket.

    December 2, 2012 at 1:56 pm |
  18. judy

    anyone catch the sunday talk shows? I think the cuts the president wants to make where layed out pretty clearly.

    December 2, 2012 at 6:06 pm |
    • Caramon

      Examples please.

      December 2, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
      • jean2009

        The cuts are real they were presented in written is just that Bonehead wants to cry and whine some more...and let the GOP buffoons, in Congress, keep on spinning, and not coming in earnest to the table.

        December 3, 2012 at 11:39 am |
      • Caramon

        That is not what I asked. I asked for specifics. Do you know what they are?

        December 3, 2012 at 12:01 pm |
      • jean2009

        Candy Crowley -"State of the Union" 12-2-2012- 9:00 A.M to Noon. Maybe you should try another source than FOX.

        Secretary Geithner stated the President's position very clearly...and believe me after looking at some of the items the Republicans had proposed in the Spending Reduction Act of 2011 (but never had the nerve to bring to the chamber floor) I'm sure anything presented by the Treasury Secretary and the President would make a lot more sense. Most of what is being proposed pretty much follows the Simpson -Bowles Commission Report which was bipartisan sponsored ...even that the GOP wouldn't agree to due to Paul Ryan and Grover Norquist being opposed..

        December 3, 2012 at 1:19 pm |
  19. Dan B

    The cuts are crap. There are no real cuts.

    December 2, 2012 at 6:18 pm |
  20. mgrgurich

    To put this in terms of a family budget the GOP (daddy) bought a new car (wars) and an iphone (bank bailout) and took a voluntary paycut (tax cuts). Now the payment is due and he is asking the kids to eat less(cut food stamps) and go without electric lights and grandma can live in the chicken coop(entitlement cuts) so he can make his car payment and keep his iphone data plan

    December 3, 2012 at 1:31 am |
  21. Ray E. (Georgia)

    Well now Folks,
    It is well known the Liberal's want to do great things! The only problem they want to do it with other people's money. So far they have spent (borrowed) over 16 Trillion dollars. Now, they want about a trillion two more a year to do what? More good things! Just think, a lot of you voted for, More Good Things! Hey, you ain't going to pay for it, right? That is for the uh, Rich People that supply, (In Red Ink) to the Liberals to do, Good Things.

    December 3, 2012 at 10:19 am |
  22. Dan B

    Perfectly said Ray

    December 3, 2012 at 10:36 pm |