In response to:

Both Sides Must Give Ground To Avoid Fiscal Cliff

true liberal Wrote: Nov 19, 2012 8:12 AM
Everyone has the cliff defined wrong. You do not go over the cliff by not extending the debt limit. You go over the cliff by INCREASING the debt. If the GOP had any backbone, they would call the bluff and let the debt hit its limit and AUTOMATICALLY cut the budget.
BigOlBear Wrote: Nov 19, 2012 8:21 AM
I agree. At 24% of GDP, the government already has confiscated far more than it's "fair share." Doesn't really matter where it comes from ... a tax on one of us is a tax on all of us. The fiscal cliff couldn't be any worse than the liberals' solution. This entire argument is based on a false premise ... that compromise is always a good thing. It's not. If you and I want to meet for lunch but we live on opposite sides of the river, do we compromise and meet in the middle? There are times when you have to hold to your principles and, right now, the House is our only firewall against a complete socialist takeover.
In his first formal press conference in months, Barack Obama showed that getting re-elected can increase a president's confidence and combativeness. He staked out tough stands on several issues, especially on the looming budget negotiations.

Looking ahead to the "fiscal cliff" on Dec. 31, when the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire and sequestration cuts government spending sharply, Obama demanded $1.6 trillion of increased revenues as part of any budget bargain.

That's twice the number he and Speaker John Boehner agreed on in the grand bargain talks in the summer of 2011.

Those talks fell apart when Obama telephoned Boehner and raised his demand...