I know right wing talk radio did not want to see a compromise, but now what happens? Wall Street was down for the day when they knew a deal couldn't be hammered out.
Automatic pilot, heading for the rapids?
Another year without a voted on budget?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
That's what was supposed to happen. Obama's whole re-election campaign is based on running against a do nothing Congress (Republicans). If the Super Committee had reached an agreement the campaign would be back to square 1.
The Defense budget gets cut... Social Security, Medicare and Medicade are protected... The teahadists have shot themselves in the foot with an Uzi once again... And Obama says he will veto any GOP attempt to restore the automatic cuts to the Defense Department. The point of the exercise was to make it painful if they didn't do their job.
Good... The Party of NO has a 100% record... And the Dems will cram it down their throats next year....
No, `both sides’ aren’t equally to blame for supercommittee failure
Here’s why the supercommittee is failing, in one sentence: Democrats wanted the rich to pay more in taxes towards deficit reduction, and Republicans wanted the rich to pay less in taxes towards deficit reduction.
Any news outlet that doesn’t convey this basic fact to readers and viewers with total clarity is obscuring, rather than illuminating, what actually happened here.
I agree with those who have argued that supercommittee failure doesn’t really matter all that much, and that the obsession with the deficit is itself misguided and makes solutions to the actual crisis at hand — unemployment — far less likely to happen.
But since the press is going to be obsessing over the supercommittee’s failure for days to come, and since we will be inundated with reams of bogus false equivalence reporting about it, it’s worth stating as clearly as possible what really transpired.
And so: Any news outlet that doesn’t leave readers and viewers with an absolutely clear sense that the primary sticking point was over whether the rich should see their contribution to deficit reduction increase or decrease is letting down its customers.
Says it all... The difference between more cuts for the 1% at the expense of the 99%, or less... Spin it all you like, but that's what it comes down to.
Will President Obama be the ONLY politician willing to make the cuts that Congress agreed on? Are these politicians AWARE that they actually have to cut spending, as they promised the American people?
Obama vows to veto efforts to gut automatic spending cuts
President Obama said Monday that he would veto any attempt by Congress to eliminate the automatic spending cuts triggered by the failure of the deficit supercommittee.
The law creating the supercommittee said that if it failed to reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion, across-the-board cuts to defense and domestic spending totaling that amount would occur in 2013. Some members of Congress have already said they would look for ways to soften the impact of the automatic cuts.
neptunechimney wrote: More smoke and mirrors. The cuts are not scheduled to kick in until 2013.
The real winners will be determined next November. Will Obama win by attacking the Republican Congress for doing nothing? Or will the Rpeublicans take over goverment because Obama has spent too much gas spinning the tires while the US economy is still stuck in the ditch?
Or per the Wall Street Journal and Dem pollsters, will Hilary win and bring in a fresh crowd of OWS inspired polticians who are tired of the current system?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.