Boehner abandons efforts to reach comprehensive debt-reduction deal - The Washington Post

While I agree with much of your assertions, and agree that Dems or ( also ) culpable; those majority who have sold out, I disagree that they are ( just ) as culpable. The "stop spending" issue needs to be redefined and clarified as stop spending on those things which do not contribute to the prosperity of the people and the nation as a whole, such as funneling roughly a third of our national budget to enrich the few associated with the military industrial and law enforcement / penal / judicial / drug war complexes. There has never been a questioning about the taxes of those who are successful, but there is a questioning about the taxes of those who are successful from institutional theft, embezzlement, fraud, and predation of others, which include most of the very rich. Very few have created their wealth as honestly as Bill Gates, for example. Rockerfeller and Koch wealth, on the other hand, is crime against humanity money.

Expire the Bush tax cuts and the deficit is closed in ten years.

Please provide the math behind your statement.

The article is 90% the opinion of a lefty. But let's take this stat from the article ...

"Of these the tax cuts were by far the largest, adding up to $2.3 trillion over 10 years."

At this rate the deficit would be solved in about 65 years assuming there are never any increases in the budget, which would be an absurd assumption.

Thanks. Great comment .I hope if they don't put the Bush tax cuts on the table (and they won't) he uses the 14th admendment.

The House changed hands as a result of the election last November when the American people told the country they have had enough of the free spending and want the purse snapped shut. Your first sentence doesn't even make a bit of sense. I don't know what you want Obummer to do with the 14th Amendment. Congress, under Article 1, Section 8, not the president, has the power to borrow money on our countrys credit. Additionally the debt is authorized by law. Congress makes laws not the president. The debt issues is under the pervue of Congress only.

Follow up to Paratus directed at everyone else:

Under the Consitution only Congress has the authority to appropriate funds. The official budget is the one passed by the House, approved by the Senate and signed by the president.

The originator of the idea the president can use Section Four of the Fourteenth Amendment, Katrina vanden Heuvel is a pundit. She writes a opinion column. She does not cite any sources of expertise for her statement. She probably heard it at a cocktail party.The constitutional lawyers I've read said it's not possible.

Section Four of the Fourteenth Amendment does not provide the president authority to usurp Congress's authority. Section Eight states Congress, not the president has the authority to borrow money on the credit of the United States.

So your hopes and dreams of Obama going it alone are based on the knowledge of constitutional law of an opinion writer/career pundit repeated by the left wing media. Stop being lazy and do some research rather than being a gullible victim of everything the left wing media presents.

I believe many americans regret their vote in 2010. Where are the jobs they ran on. They are taking orders from the tea party. As far as the 14th admendment, several constitutional lawyers disagree with you. The president has the power.

Just another display of how Washington is disconnected from the people they claim to represent. I am so glad she approached him. Something should have been said and she did it. Good for her.

This is how Paul Ryan is. He is another dochebag from WI...sadly.

I agree cherry. I knew Boner would flip flop. He can't agree to raising the taxes on the rich. The teaparty won't approve.

the teabaggers are boner's brain.

Get informed. There are three deals on the table.

While you definitely have a point wynnmeg, reality is that most of the left are sell outs to the right, having facilitated corporate right serving legislation, and should be executed for treason instead of just being thrown out. If those in government who are supposedly serving the left were actually doing so, then they would have enacted comprehensive campaign finance reform, universal health care, and so much more when they controlled both houses of congress. Since they have demonstrated their primary loyalties to corporate right, what does it matter whether they are ousted or not? Either way, as it is, we'll experience the same outcome. The only difference would be the ILLUSION that someone in government is looking out for the left's interest if they are left in government.

They may have had the appearance of control but they never had control. There is absolutely nothing progressive about a "dixie-crat" they simply label themselves as Dems because they are not about to were the same label as that damned Lincoln. The Dixie-Crats" worked very hard against civil rights legislation at the federal level and then wrote much of the "Jim Crow" legislation when they lost that fight.

The GOP very effectively used the filibuster and the secret hold to prevent legislation from ever getting to the floor. Also, there were alot of deals made were the Dems would be able to protect programs that were important to them and then surprise, surprise once the Dems that were negotiating in good faith signed on their GOP partners went back on their words.

Here is my big concern. The GOP and Conservative Democrats together have systematically dismantled our civil liberties and our justice system. Revolution will cost actual blood at this point and I see many who are willing to "Rage" at the machine so to speak but I do not believe they would sacrifice blood for even one minute. So they begin a Revolution and when it gets really painful and dangerous they turn tail and run. This will then play into the Conservatives hands and they will use it to cow the people even more.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. advanced the cause of people of color much more than the Black Panthers or Malcomn X ever did.

Well said...couldn't agree more.

good info, it makes sense. i never heard the expression dixie-crat, lol. i shall remember it though. granted, the Rep machine is as far reaching as an octopus and as lethal as a weasel, and should be trusted less than one.

i wonder if it was King alone that precipitated those achievements. I do not believe that the British would ever have left India just because Gandhi was willing to sit in jail for years. If it wasn't for the consequent disruptions all over India, and the international outcry over British extremism at the same time, would they have given India up? I don't believe that it was because Mandela sat in jail for years that apartheid was ultimately addressed as it was. Without considerable activism and international pressure Mandela would probably have died in jail under apartheid law.

Revolt and revolution can manifest in many forms without bloodshed, as Anonymous has demonstrated. One thing that we can't count on is effective international support in the effort, I surmise.

your correct of course. I was not actually saying that Dr. King, Gahndi, or Mandela did it alone. What I was trying to express is that revolution demands blood and sacrifice and I question whether the American people who know that our government has been hijacked and how, have the stomach for what the demands will be. I believe that the government in all 50 states and the federal government are all set up to really suppress the people in painful and deadly ways. Could this generation stand before police and soldiers and take the beatings and the killings that are sure to follow, and are they willing to go to prison for their beliefs?

agreeing again....peaceful mass movement can force any hand and the powers that be know this. Fortunately for them we argue the difference of Dem or Rep rather than realize it is us that must affect the change the systems won't allow and we are caught up in sideshows.

For hope of a future for my children I would stand up to violence, but with peaceful methods. Violence only begets itself. Without arms we can pressure these bonds til they break if we stop participating and put stress on the fragile structures imposed on us.

I certainly hope you are right.

I am by no means promoting armed insurrection at all. What I am saying is that I think the state will be the ones doing the killing, just like what was done to those that stood up for civil rights.

Thank you tl. A great comment. Voters had better listen.

I know exactly what you mean and fear that is a possibility.

that is a big question wm! I posted a quote Mr. Bradley trotted before me by Sam Adams, to the effect that it doesn't take a majority to effect change, but rather it takes a minority who is willing to relentlessly raise enough hell that their issue must be addressed.

yeah, i feel you. republicans are not really the problem. the problem, and the enemy, are the corporate powers which hypnotize, brainwash, scam the world.

So if all of us who are upset with Obama swallow it and vote for him again and he gets another 4 years in the WH -- is it going to be more of the same? Or will the reptards and oligarchs put the screws to the Dems and Obama even more? Or are they going to get tired of playing this game, and give up?
I don't want to lose anymore than I already have; I don't want this country to lose anymore; and I sure as hell don't want the millions, MILLIONS out there that don't have jobs to lose anymore than what they've already lost, so how do we strike a happy medium and start heading this country in the right direction WITHOUT taking to the streets?

Power to the Peons NOW!

The Republicans will keep the House. The early analysis is the Republicans will win at least four Senate seats due to the nature of the traditional politics of those seats. This would give the Republicans a 51-49 majority. If the economy doesn't improve and Obama loses Republicans could coattail about five more Senate seats.

There are more people pissed off about the money being spent by government than people who believe the way people on this site believe. There isn't going to be a blood in the streets, take back the money revolution. There's a vocal take back our government revolution. This revolution is being fought at the polls. The first shots were fired in the November 2010 elections.

Kick the traitors out.

Thank you. It was the republicans that walked out. It takes a retard to want the economy to tank.

we can send them to iran (LOL)

Excellent suggestion! But I really don't hate the Iranian people so much that I would want to saddle them with this pond scum :-)!

Power to the Peons NOW!

It takes a retard to want the economy to tank.
Yepper, that's a reptard for ya :-)!

Power to the Peons NOW!

Exactly! But truth be told, I wasn't thinking in terms of 'kicking them out' -- more like 'moving' them out (as in body bags)!

Power to the Peons NOW!

Obama appointed a bipartisan committe on the budget more than a year ago. Then he proceeded to ignore their recommendations.