It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by bknapple32
Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
The Republicans never had a real shot in this battle.
If we get to 1/1 with no deal, they will receive the majority of the blame. GOP has no option but to get as many spending cuts as they can in exchange for the Bush cuts expiration on people making 250K+
And there should be spending cuts... But lets face facts here. Obama won. HE won running on raising taxes on the rich. At some point, shouldnt the experiment of the 90's be repeated?
...[t]his rule requires them to strictly adhere to a fictional, toy version of the world and of the role of the President of the US within it. We did not see two candidates campaigning to be elected into a position of leadership, but two actors auditioning for the role of President in a play that takes place strictly in the past...
You see, they are auditioning for the role of someone who pretends to be “running” a country (whatever that means) that is itself not exactly running. It is by now defined by just two things: unstoppable inertia in the wrong direction, and a long list of broken promises. The federal government over which, if elected, they will pretend to “preside” (whatever that means) has two remaining choices: continue with the strategy of hemorrhaging debt and collapse in a few years once that strategy stops working, or don't continue with that strategy, and collapse now.
Originally posted by Wertdagf
The corporations wanted trickle down economics... And they got it under bush.
What they did with that time was lie, cheat, and steal as much as they could funnel into off shore bank accounts. These CEO's would gladly wipe their ass with the american flag if it was profitable. They would murder thier own employees to collect the insurance. Not a doubt in my mind that mitt romney and his ilk would favor the reinstatement of african american slaves if it reduced their labor costs.
Ie, just look at the republicans killing the bill to have an international un treaty that would implement disability coverages for disabled vets... Why?
Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by bknapple32
Ie, just look at the republicans killing the bill to have an international un treaty that would implement disability coverages for disabled vets... Why?
I heard that the UN Treaty also included the ability for a disabled child to be taken out of it's home and away from it's parents if someone didn't like the methods that the parents had chosen to treat their child.
Sounds a lot like the fear mongering death panels we heard so much about that never came to fruition.
Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by bknapple32
In what bizarro world is taking a tiny bit more money in, while spending many times what you take in, considered saving money? It's like stealing the kid next door's lunch money, while spending hundreds a day on crack with no job, and claiming it's saving money. It's like turning a faucet on drip into a fishtank with a hole in it, claiming you are saving the fish. I can't think of any more analogies right now lol.
Originally posted by Deetermined
I heard that the UN Treaty also included the ability for a disabled child to be taken out of it's home and away from it's parents if someone didn't like the methods that the parents had chosen to treat their child.