"The debate looks to be about higher revenues and rates, not a true compromise" This is not a compromise at all. A compromise is when BOTH sides give something. This deal is 0bama coming to the Republicans demanding both higher taxes and more spending. 0bama is following Alinksky's Rules for Radicals by the book. You demand 100% and settle for 30%, which is better than what you had before. And you give nothing in return. And Boehner is too stupid to see thru it.
Right after the election, it was all peaches and cream and conciliatory common-ground language when President Obama met with congressional leaders to discuss the fiscal cliff. Of course, the president campaigned on tax hikes for the rich, by which he meant raising top income-tax rates and extending the Bush tax cuts for incomes below $200,000. And the president’s first meeting post-election was with his union and liberal-interest-group supporters, all of whom want to raise the top rates and then some. But instead, the newly reelected president spoke about “new ideas,” as long as they provided a balance of spending cuts and...
- Former loathsome nanny-state mayor confuses blogger with second awesome move this summer Mary Katharine Ham 18 minutes ago
- Video: Army Medal of Honor recipient breaks gavel at New York Stock Exchange Mary Katharine Ham 58 minutes ago
- Senate analysis: What does “success” look like for the GOP in 2014? Guy Benson 1 hour ago
- Could a Republican president gut ObamaCare without action from Congress or the Supreme Court? Allahpundit 2 hours ago
- Rubio: Immigration reform won’t happen for another 10 years unless border security comes first Allahpundit 2 hours ago
- Watch the most infuriating interview on the Israel-Gaza conflict yet Noah Rothman 3 hours ago