Poll: GOP to blame if "fiscal cliff" talks fail

[phins_4_ever]

There hasn't been a SINGLE budget approved since Obama took office. We have been on a Continuing Resolution spend plan that continues to get kicked down the road every single session of Congress.

You can argue about Continuing Resolution but the only ones were the 2011 budget and the 2013 budget. Eventually the 2011 budget passed too. Let me repeat it: all budgets passed since Obama took office.
The only one on a Continued Resolution currently is the 2013 budget which will, just like the 2011 budget, eventually pass.

2010: passed (see right box on link)

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


2011: continued resolution, final budget passed on April 15, 2011


2012: passed on November 18 and December of 2011

Budget legislation passed

On November 18, 2011, the first appropriations bill was enacted, the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012. It combined the three appropriations bills for Agriculture, Commerce/Justice/Science (CJS), and Transportation/Housing and Urban Development (THUD), and also contained a continuing resolution providing funding for other departments until December 16, 2011.
<sup>To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.</sup>

On December 15, 2011, a deal was reached on the remaining nine appropriations bills, which were combined into the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012. One point of contention was that an earlier draft of the bill supported by Republicans contained
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, which had been relaxed by the Obama administration in 2009. These restrictions were removed in the enacted bill at the insistence of the Obama administration. A separate Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2012 was also included in the package, as well as a
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
which offset the increased disaster funding by imposing a 1.83% across-the-board spending cut to all discretionary programs except Defense and Veterans Affairs.
<sup>To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.</sup>
Two more continuing resolutions were also passed, one extending the deadline by one day so that the Senate could vote on the package, and one until December 23, 2011. The two appropriations bills were enacted on December 23, 2011, but the concurrent resolution failed in the Senate.
<sup>To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.</sup>

On December 17, 2011, the Senate passed legislation to extend the
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
cut which had been
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
during the FY2011 budget negotiations. That legislation had reduced the rate from 6.2% to 4.2% for the 2011 calendar year only. The initial 2012 extension was for two months, rather than the full-year extension which had been sought; the legislation also extended
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
as well as a measure preventing a drop in
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
; the spending for these was offset by enacting new fees on
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
and
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
. Points of contention included a Democratic plan to fund the tax cut with a new surtax on income over $1 million, which was dropped in later stages of negotiation, as well as attempts by Republicans to insert language which would speed the approval of the
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, which had recently been delayed by the Obama administration.
<sup>To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.</sup>
The bill was initially rejected in the House, whose leaders insisted on a full-year extension, despite the fact that the Senate had already adjourned for the year. However, after criticism from other Republicans that the impasse would harm their prospects in the upcoming
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, the House leadership on December 23, 2011 announced that it would pass the Senate bill in return for Democrats promptly beginning negotiations on a full-year extension. The bill, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2011, was passed by the House and signed by the President later that day.
<sup>To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.</sup>

The tax cut extension for the remainder of the year was passed as the
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
on February 17, 2012, by a vote of 293–132 in the House and 60–36 in the Senate. The bill also contained a further extension of unemployment benefits and the Medicare reimbursement rates. The cost of the tax cut was not offset by spending cuts, but the other provisions were offset by cuts in federal healthcare and pension programs. Republican support for the bill was motivated by a desire to not oppose a tax cut in an election year. Some Democrats criticized the bill for directing spending cuts at federal employees rather than generating funds by increasing taxes on the wealthy or closing tax loopholes.
^{To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.}

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[phins_4_ever]

So.......for the last 230+ years, every US President has managed to sign off on a budget EXCEPT for this one......but you want to blame the GOP alone. Heres a clue for ya....51% Obama vs. 47% Romney does not reflect a mandate, rather a lack of options. Leaders know where and when to compromise. You think Reagan and O'neil or Clinton and Gingrich didn't understand that? Obama refuses to bend, even though Boehner has about as much backbone as Gumby. I don't know why you want to excuse Obama from his responsibilities so bad.......NEITHER side works for us. When will that get thru to people?

BOTH sides have failed us...but we keep putting them back in Washington expecting something different. Who is crazier, them or us? And isn't it funny we refer to our elected officers as "them", when they're supposed to by, of and for "us" ?

So when the popular vote in 2004 was 51-48 and Cheney declared a mandate he was really lying? Especially in light that Bush/Cheney won with 286 electorates while Obama/Biden won 331 electoral votes. Now you add to the fact that the popular vote margin was nearly 5 Million in 2012 while the mandate claiming Bush/Cheney had 3 million vote margin.

The right is always shifting and twisting and bending.

[MoFinz]

So when the popular vote in 2004 was 51-48 and Cheney declared a mandate he was really lying? Especially in light that Bush/Cheney won with 286 electorates while Obama/Biden won 331 electoral votes. Now you add to the fact that the popular vote margin was nearly 5 Million in 2012 while the mandate claiming Bush/Cheney had 3 million vote margin.

The right is always shifting and twisting and bending.

Yeah, Cheney was wrong........the only true mandate? Washington, with 100% of the electoral vote, both times.

You seem to think blaming the GOP or blaming the Dems will somehow justify outrage. How about we agree BOTH sides are screwing all of us sans lube and maybe FIX the F'ing problem.

[Spesh]

Yeah, Cheney was wrong........the only true mandate? Washington, with 100% of the electoral vote, both times.

You seem to think blaming the GOP or blaming the Dems will somehow justify outrage. How about we agree BOTH sides are screwing all of us sans lube and maybe FIX the F'ing problem.

How about we correctly identify who is causing the problems in the first place and understand that not all faults are equal.

For example, Nancy Polasi leaving a energy debate close to half a decade ago is not nearly as severe as the entire Republican party refusing to negotiate in good faith immediately before a devastating deadline that could harm the American people and destroy the economy.

There is a difference between a papercut and a severed limb.

[TheWalrus]

Yeah, Cheney was wrong........the only true mandate? Washington, with 100% of the electoral vote, both times.

You seem to think blaming the GOP or blaming the Dems will somehow justify outrage. How about we agree BOTH sides are screwing all of us sans lube and maybe FIX the F'ing problem.

Do you have a solution that most of the people in this country would agree to that would actually fix it?

[GoFins!]

Hitting the cliff will do more good in the long run than kicking the can down the road to grow larger.

[MoFinz]

How about we correctly identify who is causing the problems in the first place and understand that not all faults are equal.

For example, Nancy Polasi leaving a energy debate close to half a decade ago is not nearly as severe as the entire Republican party refusing to negotiate in good faith immediately before a devastating deadline that could harm the American people and destroy the economy.

There is a difference between a papercut and a severed limb.

Lets re-focus you a little bit. The dems walking out of a debate regarding Holders impeachment THIS YEAR has not been addressed by you at all. You focus on one example and ignore the other.

Blame is irrelevant. Its like saying your brother started it. Your parents dont care, they just want the BS stop. Who is more at fault is a laughable simple minded argumant. Youre not seeing the forest for the trees. I dont give a good damn who's more at fault...theyre all at fault as far as this debate goes. Open your eyes man. Act like you have some common sense. Stop playing school yard whose to blame more games. Make them be accountable. Get off the knob of the 2 parties and demand what our founders deemed our God given right to a better country.

---------- Post added at 02:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:22 PM ----------

Do you have a solution that most of the people in this country would agree to that would actually fix it?

I'll offer one if anyone wants to have a serious, civilized debate, understanding there will have to be a certain amount of give and take on both sides. Statesmanship is not like MMA, theres no shame in conceding something. Down the road, you will get concessions made to you.

[Spesh]

Lets re-focus you a little bit. The dems walking out of a debate regarding Holders impeachment THIS YEAR has not been addressed by you at all. You focus on one example and ignore the other.

Blame is irrelevant. Its like saying your brother started it. Your parents dont care, they just want the BS stop. Who is more at fault is a laughable simple minded argumant. Youre not seeing the forest for the trees. I dont give a good damn who's more at fault...theyre all at fault as far as this debate goes. Open your eyes man. Act like you have some common sense. Stop playing school yard whose to blame more games. Make them be accountable. Get off the knob of the 2 parties and demand what our founders deemed our God given right to a better country.

Ok, despite saying it was just an example, we can go with Democrats walked out on the Holder situation. Who cares? What in gods name does that have to do with the fiscal cliff? Its this sort of excuse making that our elected officials use to justify not governing.

You make multiple posts justifying the lack of compromise because "that side did stuff years ago" and then make a post saying you dont care who's at fault. You cant have it both ways. What happened with budgets, Benghazi, energy debates, Fast and Furious, etc, is all irrelevant to the Fiscal Cliff. Yet, your the one thats brought those subjects up.

Not all faults are equal. There is a difference between direction and degree. Republicans are easily more to blame for this situation. Democrats might have leaned in the direction of non-compromise but the degree in which Republicans have traveled in that direction is incredible. Im all for our representatives being held accountable. I just wish members from the party of personal responsibility would actually hold themselves responsible once in a blue moon.

[MoFinz]

Ok, despite saying it was just an example, we can go with Democrats walked out on the Holder situation. Who cares? What in gods name does that have to do with the fiscal cliff? Its this sort of excuse making that our elected officials use to justify not governing.

You make multiple posts justifying the lack of compromise because "that side did stuff years ago" and then make a post saying you dont care who's at fault. You cant have it both ways. What happened with budgets, Benghazi, energy debates, Fast and Furious, etc, is all irrelevant to the Fiscal Cliff. Yet, your the one thats brought those subjects up.

Not all faults are equal. There is a difference between direction and degree. Republicans are easily more to blame for this situation. Democrats might have leaned in the direction of non-compromise but the degree in which Republicans have traveled in that direction is incredible. Im all for our representatives being held accountable. I just wish members from the party of personal responsibility would actually hold themselves responsible once in a blue moon.

Look....i'll type this out as slow and deliberate as i can to assist your comprehension.
Y o u h a v e b e e n g i v e n e x a m p l e s o f o b s t r u c t i o n a n d l a c k o f c o o p e r a t i o n b y b o t h s i d e s

You want to assign different levels of blame. You want to ignore how the dems obstructed when Bush was in office. You ignore that while they were contentious opponents, Clinton and Gingrich and Reagan and O'neil could at least work together. There is no such thing as a little pregnant. On Maury, out of all the guys on stage, only one can be the baby daddy. BOTH sides own this debacle. Get it through your thick skull. It doesn't matter who's "more" to blame in your opinion. They are ALL leading you down the primrose path.
One more time....get off the knob and THINK. You worry about whose to blame, meanwhile, the the lemmings are approaching the fiscal cliff, and if one goes over, they ALL go over....and drag us and our countrys economy down with them. If that happens, all the blame in the world doesn't mean a damn thing. We ALL will suffer with a real recession, inflation and unemployment.

Then you can argue about who is MORE miserable

[TheWalrus]

I'll offer one if anyone wants to have a serious, civilized debate, understanding there will have to be a certain amount of give and take on both sides. Statesmanship is not like MMA, theres no shame in conceding something. Down the road, you will get concessions made to you.

Well, rather than get into details right away, let's try to establish a broad framework. What, in theory, do you think the ratio of spending cuts to revenue increases should be?