Qtec
07-18-2011, 09:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">GOP's hard right shift in debt talks may put deal at risk
Turning right with a vengeance, Republicans will bring to the House floor Tuesday a newly revised debt-ceiling bill <span style='font-size: 14pt'>that is remarkable for its total absence of compromise </span>at this late date, two weeks before the threat of default.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59223.html#ixzz1STGgRes7
</div></div>
Interesting fact.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But Republican congressional leaders still want a 10-year, $1.8 trillion cut from nondefense appropriations and have added a balanced-budget constitutional amendment that so restricts future tax legislation that even President Ronald Reagan might have opposed it in the 1980s.
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Indeed, much of the deficit-reduction legislation signed by Reagan would not qualify under the new tea-party-driven standards.</span> And even the famed Reagan-Tip O’Neill Social Security compromise — which raised payroll taxes — passed the House in 1983 well short of the 290 votes that would be required under the constitutional amendments being promoted by the GOP.
</div></div>
Amazing.
Q
Turning right with a vengeance, Republicans will bring to the House floor Tuesday a newly revised debt-ceiling bill <span style='font-size: 14pt'>that is remarkable for its total absence of compromise </span>at this late date, two weeks before the threat of default.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59223.html#ixzz1STGgRes7
</div></div>
Interesting fact.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But Republican congressional leaders still want a 10-year, $1.8 trillion cut from nondefense appropriations and have added a balanced-budget constitutional amendment that so restricts future tax legislation that even President Ronald Reagan might have opposed it in the 1980s.
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Indeed, much of the deficit-reduction legislation signed by Reagan would not qualify under the new tea-party-driven standards.</span> And even the famed Reagan-Tip O’Neill Social Security compromise — which raised payroll taxes — passed the House in 1983 well short of the 290 votes that would be required under the constitutional amendments being promoted by the GOP.
</div></div>
Amazing.
Q