The question for House Republicans is now simple. What is worse, the cliff of the deal? At least the cliff has spending cuts. The deal will probably pass. But we need to HAMMER spending. HAMMER AND HAMMER AND HAMMER!!!! Spending is the problem. We cannot collect enough taxes to pay for the spending. We must own the spending argument. The other thing we must do is pull this into perspective. The deficit is over a trillion per year. The revenue is shown as 600 billion, but that is over 10 years. So this deal even at its best only raises enough revenue to cover about 5% of the deficit.

I business it is important what you measure because it will drive the results that you get, and the behaviors of people to achieve the measurements. A failing in government for a long time has been the key metric of the number of home owners. By simply pushing to have more home owners as a measure of success people made all sorts of bad decisions to boost up the number of home owners resulting in lending practices that cannot be sustained. Lending policies back in the day were based on actuarial analysis, not on political fairness. The change resulted in the mess we are dealing with today. Unfortunately the fixes are being made by the same political fairness guys, not the people who understand the boundaries of sustainable loan policy.

Killing sprees are the unfortunate act of deranged people. Deranged people who when programmed by their culture lash out in ways that their culture romanticizes. Like it or not, our cultural predisposition in our fantasy life (movies, games) to settle our problems by going on a shooting spree becomes an acceptable course of action for the deranged members of society who seek a solution to their own problems that will be noticed and embraced by the society they feel detached from and seek the notice of.

Funny how one side can be responsible for the divide. Funny how it is the "Conservative" side which by definition is trying to hold onto those things which work best. While the other side defined as "Progressive" and set on change for the sake of change is not responsible. So which side is doing the dividing?

I had a feeling this would happen. The President's proposal is worse than the Fiscal Cliff. So if we don't go along he says we are obstructing, and if we go along we are making things worse. At least the cliff mandates spending cuts. It is time for the Republican Party to buy a 15 minute prime time slot and spell all of this out. Explain how the choices are "bad' and "worse" and that they have offered compromise on A, B, C etc and were turned down flat by the President. The sad part is I don't think the President gives a damn. He is using the crashing economy as a political weapon, and he has so demonized the Republicans that they will be held to blame by the media even though all of this is happen by his will. Bad President.

The middle class exists because of living wage jobs. It exists because of productive employment. You get paid for adding value to society, not for relying on government. The only way to grow the economy is to unleash the power of business and industry through simple and unobtrusive regulation, lower taxes, and advantageous trade agreements. When the government helps to provide those conditions a miracle of economic growth happens.

AMEN!

AMEN!

Wise investor. Political *liquid applying feminine hygiene product*.

Please please please... rule it out, Newt. Please. How about we make you the official moderator of all Republican presidential debates?

Even if you believe we "got stuck with him" we lost because of turnout. President Obama got 10 million fewer votes. Turnout lost this election because there are too many people who would rather go over the cliff with Obama than have had Romney come in and begin fixing things.