Unemployment jumps to 9.8%

[BT]

i doubt he vetoes it. Raising taxes for the "rich" is still raising taxes and the next cycle he comes up for election. He's in enough trouble as it is and the only people who will really complain are the class warfarists.

[sirs]

We're talking Obama here.  His arrogance is tangible.  He ramrodded Obamacare and a whole host of other far left policies into this country's economicstructure, without a hint of concern to the electoral outrage that was clear for all to see.  You actually think he'll adopt a mindset of "my bad....I made a mistake, I'll defer any vetos"

As I said, whachoo smokin, Bt?

[BT]

You actually think he'll adopt a mindset of "my bad....I made a mistake, I'll defer any vetos"

Yeah I do, if that lack of veto enhances his chances of being elected to a second term.

So do you really think he is a one and out type of guy?

[sirs]

if that lack of veto enhances his chances of being elected to a second term.

I recall a certain quote along the lines he'd rather be a good 1 term president, than a mediocre 2 term one.  Did he mispeak?

So do you really think he is a one and out type of guy?

He said it, not me.  It's largely HIS policies he'd be rebuking.  Given his current and previous track record, I don't see that happening, in any way, shape, or form.

You actually think he'll adopt a mindset of "my bad....I made a mistake, I'll defer any vetos"

Yeah I do

Well, I'm amazed if you actually believe that.  I guess we'll wait to see which one of us is right

[BT]

It's largely HIS policies he'd be rebuking.  Given his current and previous track record, I don't see that happening, in any way, shape, or form.

So GITMO is closed, is it?

DADT is a thing of the past?

All the troops are home from IRAQ?

ObamaCare isn't even ObamaCare, it's PelosiCare.

Look Obama is no more Evil than Bush was Evil.

The big difference is that Obama's politics are different than Bush's. No reason to hate the guy. No reason for ODS.

[sirs]

The policies he wanted completed, and not yet a done deal have already been discussed adnauseum.  It's one of the reaons his poll #'s are tanking, as the left doesn't think he's liberal enough, despite his track record that indicates such.  He can't get elected without his base and the moderate middle.  Currently he has no middle, and has alienated much of the base.  You think him rebuking his own policies are going to bring the base out in 2012??

Gimee some of that stuff you're smoking



and PS, I don't and never have "hated the guy".  That'd be yet another one of your erroneous labels you're trying to place on me

[BT]

Gimee some of that suff you're smoking

This from the guy who turns a million into a billion at the stroke of a key. This from the guy who goes off on a rant from a spoof article about a field trip to a slaughterhouse. This from a guy who rails about government spending yet has no clue as to government accounting practices. Next thing ya know your drivers license renewal fee is just another word for tax.

Yet i'm the guy supposedly smoking illicit substances.

Project much?

[sirs]

Gimee some of that suff you're smoking

This from the guy who turns a million into a billion at the stroke of a key.

A simple error, that was quickly corrected

This from the guy who goes off on a rant from a spoof article about a field trip to a slaughterhouse.

Again, error.  Plane has credibility around these parts.  Even he was fooled in his originating of it

This from a guy who rails about government spending yet has no clue as to government accounting practices.

That would be your error

Yet i'm the guy supposedly smoking illicit substances.

As it relates to actually believeing (vs my simple errors that were corrected) Obama would actually allow some of his signature "accomplishments" be (got a hold my laughter here) overidden by congress in the 1st place....yea, that'd be you

[BT]

And yet NY Times Columists seem to think it quite plausible:

Sometime over the next couple of weeks, President Obama issues a statement that reads: ?Over the past several months, Republicans and Democrats have been fighting over what to do with the Bush tax cuts. I have my own views, but it?s not worth having a big fight over a tax code we all hate. Therefore, I?m suspending this debate. We will extend the Bush rates for everybody for one year, along with unemployment benefits. But during that year we will enact a comprehensive tax reform plan.

?The plan we will work on this year will look a bit like the 1986 reform plan. We will clean out the loopholes. We will take on the special interests. We will lower rates and make the tax code fair.? 

[sirs]

Well, nice that you can now be compared to the NYTimes.  Because we know just how credible and "fair" they are     

(p.s.  extending the Bush tax cuts or not, was not an "accomplishment" I'd be referring to.  That's basically Obama doing nothing, as they would have expired with or without him, without Congress stepping in.  Accomplishments are predicated on policies he pushed...actually ramrodded down our throats.  Obamacare come to mind)

[BT]

Well, nice that you can now be compared to the NYTimes.  Because we know just how credible and "fair" they are

Apparently consistency is not your strong suite.

meanwhile townhall.com is the paragon of impartiality. as if.

Either way i was talking about the tax cut extensions and ways to relieve the uncertainty on main street. and by extension abate the unemployment situation. Not sure why you would change the subject of the debate unless you had nothing to add to the current tangent.

[sirs]

Funny...I don't recall every claiming Townhall was an unbiased source.  Chalk that up to another erroneous assumption, on your part, I suppose.  The subject was regarding Obama policies, and his supposedly rebuking any such if the veto option was applicable.  You're the one that went the Bush Tax cut tangent

[BT]

Funny...I don't recall every claiming Townhall was an unbiased source.

So then you don't object to being compared to townhall columnists even when they get it wrong? That seems to be a change in your accountability standards.

And where did i claim NY Times impartiality. It was an op-ed ...we have been down that road before. Yet now i am to be compared to the NY Times?

Extending the tax cuts will break the logjam on growth quicker than any repeal or stoppage of PelosiCare and any other agenda item on Obama's wish list.

Ask anyone who runs a business.

[sirs]

Funny...I don't recall every claiming Townhall was an unbiased source.

So then you don't object to being compared to townhall columnists even when they get it wrong?

When a post I'm presenting from them is shown to be wrong, abosolutely

That seems to be a change in your accountability standards.

Another erroneous assumption

And where did i claim NY Times impartiality.

Never did.  It was just funny that you not only pick a piece that had very little with the point being made, but it was from the NTimes to boot.

Extending the tax cuts will break the logjam on growth quicker than any repeal or stoppage of PelosiCare and any other agenda item on Obama's wish list.

Never claimed it wouldn't.  Merely that it had precisious little to do with Obama refuting his own policies.  And at this point, this largely irrelevent tangent is merely speculation as well....op-ed as you noted

Ask anyone who runs a business.

Don't need to, since I was never in disagreement of the premise

[BT]

When a post I'm presenting from them is shown to be wrong, abosolutely

So are you claiming Brooks is wrong? If so based on what?