Did you read the article? Paul Ryan is arguing for a bailout in 2003, arguing that the bailout will create jobs and ensure that X amount of current jobs are retained, etc. In essence he is making the very same argument that Obama has been making. Further, Paul Ryan voted for every spending bill that GWB put in front of him: Tax cuts for the wealthy, Medicare part D, More tax cuts for the wealthy, Iraq and Afghanistan, TARP, the auto bailout.....every last one of them. Then we have Republicans who admit to meeting on inauguration day to discuss ways to make Obama a one term President. They never had any intention of negotiating with Obama on a serious level, just enough to make the American public think that they gave a shit. This is why we never had an agreement reached during the debt ceiling negotiations last summer. Obama and Boehner had a 4 trillion dollar deal worked out in principle, by anyone's definition, Republican or Democrat. But when Boehner went back to the Republican caucus in congress they told him no way, there would be no deal. Want to know why? because it would have helped the economy recover more quickly and would, in essence, hand the election to Obama. How many more examples do you need, Pride? Because every last one of those votes that Paul Ryan cast while GWB was President are examples of the Republican party's hypocrisy. Every piece of legislation that Mitt Romney signed into law (Romney Care) are examples of the Republican party's hypocrisy.
I agree with you. Ryan is a neo-con, and is terrible, but can you calm down on the partisan hackishness? The Bush tax cuts benefitted everyone. I saw my tax liabilities go down by 75%, and I ain't rich. That is a bold accusation. Do you have any proof? Even if that is true I think its great. Partisan gridlock is what this country needs.
Exactly, and the President is currently trying to extend those tax cuts to the middle class and only raise taxes on top income earners. Where I disagree with Obama and the dems is that $250,000 should be the threshold. I personally believe that it should be $372,000 because that is actually where the top income bracket begins and this would also help to exclude the very few mom and pops that would be affected. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...ampaign_n_1452899.html?utm_hp_ref=email_share here is a link describing the meeting I spoke of. why do you think partisan gridlock is good? it is the sole reason that our credit rating was downgraded last year and also the sole reason why we do not have a comprehensive debt and deficit reduction package.
then I cannot help you my friend. you have not offered a single shred of evidence to support your argument.
dems didn't create this gridlock, Pride. dems definitely didn't live up to their billing from 08-10 but make no mistake about who is not negotiating in good faith. if this is all you have to defend your party's position, then you have nothing. you cannot even offer support for your side of the debate.
