Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., outlined proposal for higher taxes

For all the conservative partisans in the audience, here is a prime example of how the political class... the whole political class (left, right, progressive, independent, socialist, communist) are not concerned with your wishes. What did the Tea Party really accomplish? Nothing more than helping sign up more members of the political class that is now in Washington screwing you. Hey conservatives... these are your Tea Party favorites.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sidestepping controversy, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., declined to take sides Monday on a proposal for higher taxes backed by fellow Republicans on Congress' supercommittee, yet expressed confidence the panel would agree on a deficit-reduction plan of at least $1.2 trillion by a Nov. 23 deadline. A proposal for $300 billion in higher taxes has stirred grumbling within the ranks of congressional Republicans, for whom opposition to such measures has been political bedrock for more than two decades. One prominent conservative, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, said in a published commentary during the day that "our economy will have an even tougher time catching its balance if Washington" raises taxes.

Separately, officials said that Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., who outlined the plan last week in a closed-door meeting of four Republicans and three Democrats, has encountered criticism from fellow conservatives despite strong credentials as an opponent of higher taxes. " There's been a little bit, but it's been pretty muted," his spokeswoman, Nachama Soloveichik, said of the response.

Cantor's spokeswoman turned aside several emailed requests for the majority leader's views on the proposal. She said he hadn't seen the plan, and she referred to his comments at a news conference earlier in the day when he told reporters, "I'm not going to be opining as to any reports, hypotheticals or anything connected with their work." Despite that pledge, Cantor was bullish in predicting agreement before the deadline and adding that a fallback requirement to cut $1.2 trillion from domestic and defense programs wouldn't be triggered.

http://hosted2.ap.org/apdefault/3d281c1 ... 1c49b4760d

Go ahead folks... keep taking sides... conservative and liberals... keep chasing your partisan phantoms... let the scum in Washington pull your strings, tell you they are working for you, keep you busy with all your little partisan squabbles... while the whole bunch of them are robbing the country blind. Even Occupy Someplace is simply a diversion, set up to keep the level of confusion and deflection high, like throwing smoke in your face, in hopes that you will be too busy protesting (or holding Tea Party meetings) to pay attention to the real crimes.

:can't hear

I am listening to Hugh Hewitt, he is steaming.

Trial balloon? I was listening to Hugh earlier too and I just think we have to compromise here. Cut spending 3X for every tax increase? Right now if the Right doesn't compromise, nothing will get done before the next election. We can maybe kick the can down the road for another year.

It won't last long if it passes. It will all change is we vote in Newt, Perry or Cain. The taxes will change. Romney will leave it that same.

Science Chic wrote:

The Viking wrote: It won't last long if it passes. It will all change is we vote in Newt, Perry or Cain. The taxes will change. Romney will leave it that same.

You're fooling yourself if you think that one politician voted into the White House will make a difference or change anything. The corruption is so deeply rooted that nothing short of a massive public movement will change things.

Yes, and it started in 2010. It will continue in 1012. Wanna come along. I think I know what the next post will say. My answer is, "BAD DOG"

No, actually, it started in 2000...

It started in 1932.

No, actually, 1932 was the natural response to the robber-barons and 1%'ers of the day screwing the lower and middle classes.