Let's be reasonable people.

[dawg]

The Republicans control the house, so we *have* to compromise with them. One side gives a little, and then the other side gives a little back.

We agree to modest cuts in Social Security and Medicare. In return, they offer modest cuts in rich peoples tax rates.

That's fair, isn't it?

[Marrah_G]

1. .........

[elocs]

2. It may be a nice thought but Republicans don't believe in compromise

and they always get much more than they give.

[mmonk]

3. Like they compromised with us when we had the House?

[John Agar]

4. "We" control the Senate and the White House.

So in theory, THEY *have* to compromise with "us".

Except "we" control nothing.

Washington is controlled by corporate and monied interests.

"We" don't even factor into the equation.

[dawg]

5. Cool. None of the replies actually read my OP.

:rofl:

[mmonk]

7. Got me.

You sneaky person. Recommended.

[demmiblue]

6. "We agree to modest cuts in Social Security and Medicare."

Hell, no!

:thumbsdown:

Unrec to brazillion.

[dawg]

8. Sarcasm is lost on folks today.

:)

[demmiblue]

11. Got me!

Major insomnia last night.

Although, I probably would have missed it if I was well rested (the way it has been around here lately).

Well played!

:thumbsup:

[BeFree]

15. I had to read it three times

The first time I got it, then after reading some of the responses, I lost it. Now conflicted, I went back and read it again. Gotcha.

""Cuts everywhere. The pubbies offer to cut SS as long as we allow cuts in richies taxes.""

It is an interesting idea you have of making something appear when it really doesn't.
You should get a job in the M$M. <grin>

[rucky]

9. It's fair if our goal is to make friends with our enemies.

But if we're interested in the economic well-being of our citizens, then you endorse the best plan for that.

[Enrique]

10. modest cuts aren't enough!

the job creators need MASSIVE tax cuts, so they can create jobs! ;-)

[NNN0LHI]

12. No it is not fair

[pwb]

13. Boss, my salary can not pay my bills, could you lower my salary please?

I believe less money would help a lot. Thanks Boss

[SammyWinstonJack]

25. LOL

:evilgrin:

[JHB]

14. We're already reasonable people. The Republicans are not.

Thus, "fair" gets a pile of elephant dung on its head.

[geckosfeet]

16. ru series1!?

Cause if keep being "reasonable", eventually 1% of the population will own everything and we will all be poverty stricken slaves.

[msongs]

17. yes, they give 15% and "we" give in 85%, some compromise nt

[dawg]

21. No, they are giving as much as us.

They are willing to cut rich people's taxes by at least the same amount we are willing to cut spending on social programs. We cut and they cut.

What, you don't expect them to offer tax hikes do you?

[woo me with science]

18. Makes sense! Cuts all around!

The rich man gets his ice in the summer, the poor man in the winter.

[Strelnikov_]

19. I'm about done

This really, truly is unfuckingbelieveable.

The majority, by far, agree with increasing taxes on the rich.

But, instead, they decrease taxes on the rich under the guise of 'deficit reduction', and make up the difference by cutting programs that have the most impact on the middle and lower classes.

[dawg]

23. In case I didn't make myself clear.

I'm with you. The Senate is our only hope of blocking a watered-down version of this Gang of 6 monstrosity.

[Dr Fate]

30. Heads I win, tails you lose!

Now I get your OP- I admit that I jumped the gun too!

[edhopper]

20. The Gang of Six

CUTS taxes for the wealthy and hits the middle class.

[obxhead]

22. LOL. I love the replies to this thread.

OP was dripping with sarcasm. Thanks for the laugh dawg.

I got it at least. ;) Rec for the lol.

[dawg]

24. You win the reading comprehension award for the day.

The pity is that my little ruse was so believable. Up is down and black is white these days.

[Nye Bevan]

26. Mass subtle humor recognition fail here (nt)

[LaydeeBug]

27. and the CONSTITUTION,via the 14th AMENDMENT provides protection from the Republican Party and their

antics. The president should be ready, willing and able to do it. In fact, he swore an oath saying he would.

[VeryConfused]

28. A suggestion to be reasonable

is not going over well with this crowd.

[Dr Fate]

29. Let's be reasonable people. Obama & DEMS should be fighting for drastic cuts or in war spending.

The voters are behind this so the the GOP would *have* to compromise with DEMS on that. (Execpt DEMS never really even proposed it. To this moment, Obama keeps talking about slashing SS etc, not slashing war spending.)


We could have agreed to drastic cuts in military spending (as a majority of voters believe). The GOP says they oppose being in Libyia- why not put that on the table instead, for instance? Obama could claim that since he wanted a 3rd war, he is making a sacrifice by ending it. The GOP says they want to cut spending- so make it about war spending instead.

Could have happned that way if DEMS had the will to fight.

Let's be reasonable-They dont beleive in any of the above, so we never saw such a fight.

ON EDIT- sorry that my irony detector was off- I stand by these comments in a vaccum!