Title: Boehner Extends Olive Branch on 'Fiscal Cliff' (tax increases) Source:
CNBC URL Source:http://www.cnbc.com/id/49731550 Published:Nov 7, 2012 Author:Reuters Post Date:2012-11-07 17:54:49 by Hondo68 Ping List:*The Two Parties ARE the Same*Subscribe to *The Two Parties ARE the Same* Keywords:want you to lead, a balanced approach, will include higher taxes Views:97889 Comments:133
House Speaker John Boehner offered Wednesday to pursue a deal with a victorious President Barack Obama that will include higher taxes "under the right conditions" to help reduce the nation's staggering debt and put its finances in order.
Getty Images
Speaker of the House John Boehner
"Mr. President, this is your moment," Boehner told reporters, speaking about the "fiscal cliff" that will hit in January. "We want you to lead."
Boehner said House Republicans are asking Obama "to make good on a balanced approach" that would including spending cuts and address government social benefit programs.
"Let's find the common ground that has eluded us," Boehner said while congratulating the president on winning a second term. (Read more: Obama Re-elected as Crucial Ohio Goes His Way.)
The Ohio Republican spoke a day after the president's clear re-election victory. He said conditions on higher taxes would include a revamped tax code to make it cleaner and fairer, fewer loopholes and lower rates for all.
The speaker noted that during one-on-one budget talks with the president in the summer of 2011, Obama had "endorsed the idea of tax reform and lower rates, including a top rate of lower than 35 percent," the present top rate.
Boehner did not specify what loopholes House Republicans might consider trimming. Nor did he take questions.
His comments were generally along the lines of proposals by vanquished Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney that also were vague on specifics. Still, the speaker's comments signaled a willingness to enter into talks. He suggested Congress could use its upcoming lame-duck session to get the ball moving on such a compromise.
"We can't solve the problem of our fiscal imbalance overnight...This is going to take time," he said.
Poster Comment:
He's ready to be lead to Obama's lame duck a$$, so he can kiss it.
I have long believed and promoted the idea that their should be a "None of the Above" check box on each ballot,and anytime "none of the above" got the most votes the parties that ran the other candidates had to dig into their own pockets and pay for another election to pick a candidate.
I can practically guarantee you that we would get better candidates with a policy like that in place.
A wise man once said,"If you wish to live your life as a good man,try to be the man your dog thinks you are."
The ten short term demands of the Communist Manifesto:
1.Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2.A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3.Abolition of all right of inheritance. 4.Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5.Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6.Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7.Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8.Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9.Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country. 10.Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form and combination of education with industrial production.
his lies on abortion, gun rights, small government. He would have put his hand the bible and sworn to uphold the Constitution...when in reality, everything he has done shows his disdain for freedom...
He said he changed his mind on abortion. That troubled me. Maybe he was lying. I can't prove it. So I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one. Since he would have no affect on it anyway.
On guns. I disagree with the assault weapons ban. I think it to be unconsittutionaly. I don't agree but I can see how reasonalbe good people might want to put some restrictions on guns because they honestly think that it would be in societies best interest. Romney would have been a first term President. The Republicans were not going to pass any gun control legislation. Furthermore at worse he is a tie with Obama. Now Obama is re elected and going to the UN to push gun control.
He wasn't perfect. He was better than Obama no doubt....NONE!
7.Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
I must have missed this one. Maybe you can provide me with a link. Please.
10.Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form and combination of education with industrial production.
I guess it could be said he is for this one.
Are you against free education for our kids? Pretend the schools are good.
I'm not for factory labor. Unless it is a kid working for his folks.
I'm sure idiots like stone would complain that we MUST choose between the best of the shit-bags, because they're still ELECTABLE...
No you can do what you want. You think Obama is to the right of Romney. So you are happy. At least Obama is anti Jew. That is what really matters to you.
I am not claiming he did. The subject of Communism came up and I posted the 10 planks of Marx's manifesto. How about free, compulsory, government controlled education?
Ok thanks for supplying the list and some common sense. The common sense being you never said he was a communist.
Free public education is addressed in post 84.
I sent my kids to private school until last year when it got to expensive.
Both men do not offer anything more than a false choice given to the voters to pacify them.
The ironic part, is that the pacification of sheeple like stone is so effective, that even after "his" candidate was beaten like a God-damned drum, he continues to insist that mcRomneystain was an electable alternative...
Talk about delusional...
The total # of registered voters (election 2012) was ~197 million voters.
Barack Obama: 60,652,238 = 30.8% Mitt Romney: 57,810,407 = 29.4% NONE OF THE ABOVE: ~77,000,000 = 40%.
The U.S. government no longer has the consent of the people.
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
You are being dishonest or your memory isn't that good.
Seriously, you've gone off the deep end, much as goldi, the Israel-firster fat- bitch, has...
You're making up shit about other people, that should be easy to substantiate (IF they were true), and then look like a complete loon because they're not.
You then act as though you're the ONLY honest person on the forum, when it's obvious that you're the biggest liar here... And yet you have the balls to claim you're a "Christian," and honest, and all that...
If your purpose is to drive everyone off your forum, so they don't have to tolerate your blatant hypocrisy, you're doing a damn fine job of it...
Whatever.
I don't know what your game is, but it's clear that you've lost your moral compass, and any semblance of credibility with regard to much of anything.
Whatever.
I was impressed with your "Galt" article this morning... thought, 'hey, that's COOL, I like it.' But tonight, your emotions have taken over, and your behavior is borderline 'hysterical.'
In real life, I'm not known as one to sugar-coat the truth, because I've neither the time nor patience for emotional sugar-coating of facts... And I'm used to dealing with the consequences of this approach. So if telling you the truth is what gets me booted from here, than I fine with that. At the end of the day, you'll be rimjob-jr., echo-chamber and all. Pfft.
The total # of registered voters (election 2012) was ~197 million voters.
Barack Obama: 60,652,238 = 30.8% Mitt Romney: 57,810,407 = 29.4% NONE OF THE ABOVE: ~77,000,000 = 40%.
The U.S. government no longer has the consent of the people.
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
You are being dishonest or your memory isn't that good.
Seriously, you've gone off the deep end, much as goldi, the Israel-firster fat- bitch, has...
You're making up shit about other people, that should be easy to substantiate (IF they were true), and then look like a complete loon because they're not.
You then act as though you're the ONLY honest person on the forum, when it's obvious that you're the biggest liar here... And yet you have the balls to claim you're a "Christian," and honest, and all that...
Again you don't know what you are talking about.
It is well documented that I am not for Bush and voted against him in 2004 just like Brian S.
My moral compass is just fine. For the most part anyway.
I was impressed with your "Galt" article this morning... thought, 'hey, that's COOL,
Thank You.
You misunderstand me. I like things to be accurate. You guys called Romney a communist. He isn't. That is ludicrous. He is a very successful Capitalist. I voted for Romney because he offered my kids a better future with less debt then Obama. You can whine like a broken record that they are the same all you want. But it isn't true. I like accuracy. They may be similar on some things but certainly not all things. Great differences on lots of things. You know that and I know that. So it is you who is lying when you say they are the same. If you want to be honest you should say they are to much alike or something like that.
I saw this site Willard had drawn up in a hubris filled notion he could not lose.
The Republicans have a problem in that in terms of popular vote, they have lost five of the last six elections.
Until they learn to offer a real choice that is meaningful and serves the public interest, they are doomed to continue to be a marginalized entity.
The only thing I appreciate about this is it helps show what a joke the popular election of a true leader of the people is in this country. Those in the 'club' run things, and not the simulated leader in the fishbowl called the oval office.
Romney is out of touch and delusional, Obama is strange and an egomaniac.
And neither is meant to be true leaders in any sense of pulling the real strings of power.
On your first point I looked back up and it was sneakypete that said that. So that doesn't make me a liar but mistaken. But you have said that it would be better of Obama is re elected. Your reason if I am remember correctly was that Romney would have a friendly congress to get things done with.
Your other times calling me a liar are also inaccurate. So watch your mouth. I'm tolerant but not forever.