Charlie Rose

robdverity  07/20/2011 04:02 PM Report

Here I thought it was Henry Paulson et al (admittedly continued by BO).

NeilMacCallister  07/20/2011 04:21 AM Report

I understand NOTHING of what you are writing, rob,..

Do you actually have a point to make?? ..What might it be??

President Obama is stealing you blind, ..do you have any response at all???

"Shuttered"?? .."imperfect"?? .."Anarchy"???

It sounds like you are desiring a LEADER for our nation.

Let's hope SOMEONE comes alomg.

robdverity  07/19/2011 05:24 PM Report

We need a progressive VAT, that escalates on luxury goods to (as an example) 200% on yachts etc.

In short we need class warfare (already declared by the big boys via the meltdown). We need merely to respond. Anarchy in short. They shuttered an (imperfect) but workable system. [Well, maybe not all that workable. Too susceptible to venality.]

NeilMacCallister  07/19/2011 04:23 PM Report

Sorry Sharkie, ..our current President is selling you into oblivion.

A knife is being pressed to your throat.

You go ahead and ask for "compromise".

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/19/2011 04:18 PM Report

Robert Reich nails it (remember what did Dick Cheney said about deficits?)

http://youtu.be/7CfN0Rf9VUI

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/19/2011 04:13 PM Report

The principle should be compromise not false conviction.

Ron Paul got it wrong: http://youtu.be/UUNIeOB0whI

NeilMacCallister  07/19/2011 01:13 PM Report

Sharkie, ..you just gave us the same kind of disorganized, disoriented, 'whirlwind-of nothings' which the Democrats have always used to stun, and then rob, the poor and everyone else!

Who is Steven Colbert anyway? ..is he some late night comedian??

Quit wasting your time and take another look at that Debt Clock!!

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/19/2011 03:50 AM Report

The Republicans Are Held Hostage By A Crook.

The reason Republicans won't move on increasing revenues is the pledge.

THE PLEDGE AND SIGNERS:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/atrfiles/files/files/Federal%20Pledge%20Signers%20112th%20Congress.pdf

Stephen Colbert signs the tax pledge:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/167408/may-14-2008/grover-norquist?xrs=share_c opy

236 House Members

41 Senators

13 Governors

1200+ State Legislators

Grover requires two witnesses and then puts the pledges in the safe.

Pledge does not have "under God" in it and the pledge has not changed in 25 years.

Raising taxes is never the right thing to do--even if you have to give up grandma (at the 5:18 point) http://www.hulu.com/watch/253986/the-colbert-report-grover-norquist

Grover is a crook and funneled money for Jack Abramoff to fund lobbyists but of course as a crook he skimmed his own cut. He hates government but through lobbyists creates his own government without any checks nor balances:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/24/AR2006062401080.html

Unlike Jack Abramoff, Grover has stayed out of jail but he still throws around money, enough to damage the country. Which of the pledge signers is still receiving Jack Abramoff type campaign contributions?

Why is it that Grover Norquist creates Republican Dogma?

Bill Maher on Grover:

http://rackjite.com/archives/7662-Bill-Maher,-Grover-Norquist-as-Bad-as-it-gets,-July-15-2011.html

charlizecourriers  07/18/2011 03:09 PM Report

Will Chuck's hair gardening make him a more believable pundit? Nothing he says makes him believable. More Good Democrats Club patter and as Hans knows, "boring!"

NeilMacCallister  07/18/2011 03:02 PM Report

Charlie Rose, and President Obama, here state their desire to "raise the debt ceiling, and reduce the deficit."

They claim that such an impossibility is "ambitious".

I insist that it is what it is: An exact statement of illogic and insanity.

It is a lie, ..and it is a mean one.

Please, Washington, just do your job, ..and quit butchering America's future.

REMant  07/18/2011 11:00 AM Report

I think the president is interested in a big deal because he believes the debt issue is running against him with the public, which it probably is, and there's nothing wrong with that, tho he was slow coming to it as Todd says, but increasingly this is being cast in political terms of default and govt shutdown as happened during the Clinton admin. I think rather that McConnell has led in bringing about this change. He has clearly broken with the Tea Party faction as he did regarding earmarks. He says it's because he's concerned about the GOP's image, but that doesn't say much about public discernment. Between him and Reid, this is beginning to look like the health care sausage. However, it won't likely matter what is done, because feeling about the economy will dictate the election, as it did in 1974, 1980, 1994, 2006, 2008 and 2010.

The debt limit was the place where those concerned about spending as a whole had to make a stand, as S & P also noticed, because limiting spending in the face of logrolling and so forth is impossibly difficult. The president, who has already had run-ins with zealots in his own party, must realize this as well. Secondly, while defaulting is possible, given the excess of bills over income, it is by no means necessary to add to those bills to keep it from happening. This is clearly what the Dems would like to have the public think, and which spooked McConnell. The public is being told the GOP doesn't want to pay our bills, as well as, that they are protecting the wealthy. But it wasn't true then and it isn't true now. The GOP didn't cause the financial crisis by themselves and Dems as well ran up the bills, and funnelled funds to Wall St. The Post, always a good barometer of admin opinion, shifted from dire predictions about the size of the debt to who will get the blame if nothing is done, but with the statements by the ratings agencies shifted back to how to get $4 trillion in cuts.