Skip to main content

View Diary: Meet Tonight's Biggest Loser: Grover Norquist (125 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Somebody's becoming irrelevant (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bronte17, Naniboujou

    but it's not Grover Norquist. He gets to suffocate the government by getting the blessing of Democrats on permanent tax cuts today and two months from now he'll get their blessing on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid cuts.

    •  We got higher taxes on rich people today. (14+ / 0-)

      I'm glad about that.

      I can't stand the fatalism about Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.  The Republicans will always try to do away with those, no matter what.

      If you want to protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, you will always have to fight for them.

      •  We got a *shifting* shore for rich folks (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jason Hackman, Creosote

        and they (or rather their tax lawyer) will have to recalibrate their stances.

        And the biggest of the corporations got tax avoidance written into this deal. And offshoring and outsourcing are still the names of the game.

        Furthermore, Obama says he has now lived up to and completed his campaign promise to raise taxes on "rich people."

        So, he's done with revenue. Game set. You can't get any more apples from that tree. The next leg will be hacking away at the liabilities.

        Barack Obama, in a statement to reporters at the White House, hailed it as a fulfilment of his election campaign promise.

        "The central premise of my campaign for president was to change the tax code that was too skewed towards the wealthy at the expense of working, middle-class Americans. Tonight we have done that," he said.

        And, of course, he rolls out the tiresome phrase of "bipartisanship" for the spending cuts... as if that policy approach is successful.
        Already the Republicans are gearing up for fresh confrontations as early as next month over spending cuts and the debt ceiling.

        Obama called instead for a more bipartisan approach on issues such as spending cuts.

        One may live without bread, but not without roses.
        ~Jean Richepin
        Bread & Roses

        by bronte17 on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:52:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry you can't stand the fatalism (0+ / 0-)

        but what I can't stand is the sacrifice of these pillars of our social contract because a Democratic President has a fetish for bipartisanship and a lack of testicular fortitude. How can you trust Obama to fight to protect them when he offers them up for cuts so quickly and willingly?

        •  Except these pillars of our social contract (0+ / 0-)

          haven't been sacrificed.  If you're worried that they might be, as I am, then it would be far more useful to continue to fight it instead of acting like something has happened that hasn't.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site