U.S. Politics - Page 533 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Cafe > General

General Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5321  
Old 11-29-12, 20:45
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,096
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Where's the President's plan? You know, the leader of the country? The commander-in-chief? El Presidente? King Obama?

Where's his plan?

A lot of talk out of the WH. Tax now, cut later, which means cut never.
You do realize that it's a congressional issue, don't you? It's up to the Ds and the Rs to hash out a deal. The Ds have made it plain that they're willing to cut entitlements if the Rs are willing to raise rates on those above $250k (and even that figure is on the table). Obama has said that he's willing to continue the Bush tax cuts for everyone other than those above $250k and that everything is on the table, including entitlements (though again, no one has said a word about the big pink elephant, defense). So far the Rs have offered in return...exactly nothing of substance.
Reply With Quote
  #5322  
Old 11-29-12, 20:47
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,096
Default

But I thought Obama was destroying business in the US?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...g-boom/309166/
Reply With Quote
  #5323  
Old 11-29-12, 20:50
BroDeal BroDeal is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Above 5000 feet
Posts: 12,937
Default

Sweet! Run a company into the ground then get paid bonuses to handle the liquidation. Only in America.

----

NEW YORK — Hostess Brands Inc. is asking for a judge's approval to give its top executives bonuses totaling up to $1.8 million as part of its wind-down plans.

The maker of Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Ho Hos says the incentive pay is needed to retain the 19 corporate officers and "high-level managers" during the liquidation process, which could take about a year. Two of those executives would be eligible for additional rewards depending on how efficiently they carry out the liquidation. The bonuses would be in addition to their regular pay.

The bonuses do not include pay for CEO Gregory Rayburn, who was brought on as a restructuring expert earlier this year. Rayburn is being paid $125,000 a month.
Reply With Quote
  #5324  
Old 11-29-12, 21:08
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloCity View Post
You do realize that it's a congressional issue, don't you? It's up to the Ds and the Rs to hash out a deal. The Ds have made it plain that they're willing to cut entitlements if the Rs are willing to raise rates on those above $250k (and even that figure is on the table). Obama has said that he's willing to continue the Bush tax cuts for everyone other than those above $250k and that everything is on the table, including entitlements (though again, no one has said a word about the big pink elephant, defense). So far the Rs have offered in return...exactly nothing of substance.
Sure. That's why the negotiations are going on between Obama and Boehner.

Maybe this might be a good time for Obama to lead? Nah. He's still campaigning.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5325  
Old 11-29-12, 21:13
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,096
Default

If this is true, I can't wait until 2016.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories...63.html?hp=r12

Quote:
But it now seems that one of their chief standard-bearers in 2013 will be a national conservative firebrand who has aligned himself with some of his party’s most controversial causes: Virginia Republican Ken Cuccinelli.
Best of all, his nickname is "Cooch". That's even better than "Mitt".
Reply With Quote
  #5326  
Old 11-29-12, 21:14
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,096
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Sure. That's why the negotiations are going on between Obama and Boehner.

Maybe this might be a good time for Obama to lead? Nah. He's still campaigning.
Because Obama signs the bill and he's not going to sign a bill he doesn't agree with. He does, ultimately, have final say. Power of the veto. But it's up to the Ds and the Rs to come up with the bill itself.

Last edited by VeloCity; 11-29-12 at 21:16.
Reply With Quote
  #5327  
Old 11-30-12, 03:29
BroDeal BroDeal is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Above 5000 feet
Posts: 12,937
Default

Uh-oh. It looks like Pat Robertson may be forced out of the Republican party. He sounds suspiciously like a RINO.

---

"Washington (CNN) – Televangelist Pat Robertson challenged the idea that Earth is 6,000 years old this week, saying the man who many credit with conceiving the idea, former Archbishop of Ireland James Ussher, “wasn’t inspired by the Lord when he said that it all took 6,000 years.”

The statement was in response to a question Robertson fielded Tuesday from a viewer on his Christian Broadcasting Network show "The 700 Club.” In a submitted question, the viewer wrote that one of her biggest fears was that her children and husband would not go to heaven “because they question why the Bible could not explain the existence of dinosaurs.”

“You go back in time, you've got radiocarbon dating. You got all these things, and you've got the carcasses of dinosaurs frozen in time out in the Dakotas,” Robertson said. “They're out there. So, there was a time when these giant reptiles were on the Earth, and it was before the time of the Bible. So, don't try and cover it up and make like everything was 6,000 years. That's not the Bible.”

Before answering the question, Robertson acknowledged the statement was controversial by saying, “I know that people will probably try to lynch me when I say this.”

“If you fight science, you are going to lose your children, and I believe in telling them the way it was,” Robertson concluded."
Reply With Quote
  #5328  
Old 11-30-12, 04:14
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloCity View Post
Because Obama signs the bill and he's not going to sign a bill he doesn't agree with. He does, ultimately, have final say. Power of the veto. But it's up to the Ds and the Rs to come up with the bill itself.
So, you agree then. He's not a leader.

History won't be kind to his clown. The really good news is by the time this history is written, we'll all be history.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5329  
Old 11-30-12, 04:34
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,218
Default

Awesome.

So Geithner goes to the R's looking for a deal, wants guarantees they will back tax increases in exchange for a new..... stimulus.

Not only are there no cuts, Timmy wants to increase taxes and increase spending.

Awesome. How liberal.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5330  
Old 11-30-12, 14:19
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,218
Default

Krauthammer nails it. So much for dems and good faith negotiations. Balanced approach? Smoke and mirrors and always has been.

Quote:
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: It's not just a bad deal, this is really an insulting deal. What Geithner offered, what you showed on the screen, Robert E. Lee was offered easier terms at Appomattox, and he lost the Civil War. The Democrats won by 3% of the vote and they did not hold the House, Republicans won the house. So this is not exactly unconditional surrender, but that is what the administration is asking of the Republicans.

This idea -- there are not only no cuts in this, there's an increase in spending with a new stimulus. I mean, this is almost unheard of. What do they expect? They obviously expect the Republicans will cave on everything. I think the Republicans ought to simply walk away. The president is the president. He's the leader. They are demanding that the Republicans explain all the cuts that they want to make.

We had that movie a year-and-a-half ago where Paul Ryan presented a budget, a serious real budget with real cuts. Obama was supposed to gave speech where he would respond with a counter offer. And what did he do? He gave a speech where he had Ryan sitting in the front row. He called the Ryan proposal un-American, insulted him, offered nothing, and ran on Mediscare in the next 18 months.

And they expect the Republicans are going to do this again? The Republicans are going to walk on this. And I think they have leverage. Yes, for Congressional Democrats it will help them in the future if Republicans absorb the blame because we will have a recession. But Obama is not running again unlike the Congressional Democrats. He's going to have a recession, 9% unemployment, 2 million more unemployed, and a second term that's going to be a ruin. That is not a good proposition if you are Barack Obama.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...walk_away.html
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:58.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.