SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (40752)1/28/2010 3:38:03 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
They voted for what you said, and what I said. They aren't contradictions, so your "false" statement is itself false.

Well not really. They didn't vote against a bipartisan proposal. If the Republicans voted against it in lockstep than by definition it wasn't bipartisan.

But they did vote against "proposal for a deficit reduction commission which would have been tasked with coming up with a set of policy prescriptions to reduce the chronic federal deficits".

And that proposal counts allowing our current taxes to increase as no change, so it has a default built in preference for that tax increase.

Also it doesn't require previously approved spending increases to be "paid for".

Since we have a lot of previously approved spending increases, and since taxes are scheduled to go up, any commission with these rules has a bias towards tax and spend.

Switch that around and I'd support it, and I bet you'd get a lot of Republican Senators to support it as well.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News