[abraxas21]

That much seems rather obvious in foreign policy issues and also in some internal affairs. To the latter point, if he fails to get an agreement for the Fiscal Cliff, what would the yanks think of him?

No doubt the two main parties will put the blame on the other but, at the end, the president as the leader of the nation should be the one willing to make his voice heard and promote a deal for the country across all parties.

[Mae]

Obama is lacking in everything as far as I'm concerned! And you would be amazed at the number of politicians in the country that don't even care, if the country goes over the Fiscal Cliff. In fact, many have been quoted as saying they would be happy if that did happen!

[Naudio Spanlatine]

Agree with Mae in everything she said.

Im sorry but this man was not made for us to have as a president. Period!

[Echoes]

[Alex999]

yeah, Bring back that Bushy thing ... he was da best at everything. He was able to 'think'.

[abraxas21]

Originally Posted by Echoes

interesting video about these drones but i'm not surprised. only idiots think that terrorism isn't directly linked and fueled by foreign intervetion and death (not to mention terror itself) into the nations of the so called terrorists.

on the other side of the road, there are the idiots who think obama is interested in peace. obama, like any true top democrat, is a sold out hawk at heart. that was evident to see since the times in which he was a senator. probably even earlier but i didn't bother to check.

[Litotes]

I'm not sure why this "fiscal cliff" is so bad. The US has an enormous budget deficit. Even after the cliff they'd still be in deficit. Seems to me some real tightening would be a good idea. It's not going to get easier building budget surpluses later, seeing as the working age % of the population is decreasing steadily.

And the cliff might be the only way to get tax increases through, in light of the Republican hatred of all such increases, plus the only way to cut entitlements seeing as the Democrats hate such cuts with equal passion. Both things are undoubtedly necessary if the budget is ever going to get balanced. Which it will surely have to. You can only other people's money for so long before noone's willing to foot the bill anymore.

It will also be easier once they've gone over, because then they can discuss tax breaks and entitlement increases instead of the opposite.

[Mae]

Originally Posted by Litotes

I'm not sure why this "fiscal cliff" is so bad. The US has an enormous budget deficit. Even after the cliff they'd still be in deficit. Seems to me some real tightening would be a good idea. It's not going to get easier building budget surpluses later, seeing as the working age % of the population is decreasing steadily.

And the cliff might be the only way to get tax increases through, in light of the Republican hatred of all such increases, plus the only way to cut entitlements seeing as the Democrats hate such cuts with equal passion. Both things are undoubtedly necessary if the budget is ever going to get balanced. Which it will surely have to. You can only other people's money for so long before noone's willing to foot the bill anymore.

It will also be easier once they've gone over, because then they can discuss tax breaks and entitlement increases instead of the opposite.

That is exactly what those politicians I was talking about are saying! However, the real problem with the cliff is if something doesn't get decided soon who takes the big hit. The American "Middle Class" which has taken so many hits already it almost doesn't exist any more! The U.S. is becoming a country of rich people and poor people. When a country's "Middle Class" gets wiped out leaving only rich and poor is when class conflicts start to come into that country. We may have some time to go yet in the U.S. before that actually happens, but the clock is ticking on that also!

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by Mae

That is exactly what those politicians I was talking about are saying! However, the real problem with the cliff is if something doesn't get decided soon who takes the big hit. The American "Middle Class" which has taken so many hits already it almost doesn't exist any more! The U.S. is becoming a country of rich people and poor people. When a country's "Middle Class" gets wiped out leaving only rich and poor is when class conflicts start to come into that country. We may have some time to go yet in the U.S. before that actually happens, but the clock is ticking on that also!

Middle class? What I read about this didn't specify the middle class (what's left of it) would take the brunt of this. But your information is surely better than mine, being closer to the centre of the action.

Champions of the middle class are - unfortunately - often hard to find. Everyone is focusing either on the poor or on the rich....

[Mae]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Middle class? What I read about this didn't specify the middle class (what's left of it) would take the brunt of this. But your information is surely better than mine, being closer to the centre of the action.

Champions of the middle class are - unfortunately - often hard to find. Everyone is focusing either on the poor or on the rich....

Oh so right you are everyone does tend to focus on the poor or on the rich. So that is why the middle class is the one to take all the hits! I mean think of it just the words themselves "middle class" does that even sound like something anyone would want to champion?

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by Mae

Oh so right you are everyone does tend to focus on the poor or on the rich. So that is why the middle class is the one to take all the hits! I mean think of it just the words themselves "middle class" does that even sound like something anyone would want to champion?

Well, not being a politician, and having no desire to be one, I can't say much about how they think. I often disagree with them, though. And not just one side. The entire spectrum. In the US, the problem - as reported here in Europe - mainly consists of people wanting centre politics but having to choose between hard left and hard right. Most congressmen fight their battles in the primaries, because the election as such is a foregone conclusion. So winning does not imply appealing to a majority of the public, but a majority of their party. Hence you get people far from the real centre, unwilling to compromise. Is this how it's described on your end also?

[Kat_YYZ]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Middle class? What I read about this didn't specify the middle class (what's left of it) would take the brunt of this. But your information is surely better than mine, being closer to the centre of the action.

Champions of the middle class are - unfortunately - often hard to find. Everyone is focusing either on the poor or on the rich....

The middle-class takes the brunt because if the rich (business owners) have to pay more tax, they will just cut people's benefits and/or lay people off to keep up their profit margins. They will make others pay for it. There's not much anyone can do about it. A lot of bailout money/tax breaks that went to companies in order to create/save jobs just ends up as CEO bonuses and stuff like that, while the job cuts are still made. They will find a way to make the little guy pay regardless of how it's structured.

Obama really doesn't have much to do with it, unless he wants to go totally rogue and try to overhaul the whole system.

[Roger the Dodger]

Wonder what Buddy Holly thinks of Obama's leadership?

[HKz]

Regardless of what you think of Obama, he is what we got and we have to as a nation help and support him.. I mean would you rather want Romney who couldn't even win votes from his own state? Or maybe Bush right...? However, I wouldn't mind Clinton running again.

[Lee]

Obama wants to keep the tax break for families making less than $250,000 a year. But the republicans staunchly against it. The news interviewed a man who owns two flower shops and had income over $250,000 a year and with Obama's plan, he would have to pay $8,000 more tax a year. He said this would make him lay off employees. Not because his business would slow down but only because he has to compensate having to pay more tax. it does not matter that he will not suffer much from paying $8,000 more. He does not care someone works for him will suffer a lot more because of his selfishness AND THIS IS THE POLICY OF REPUBLICANS. It's OK the peasants are paid peanuts for hard work while the rich gets richer.

There are employers who are in the same situation and do not mind paying more but their voices were ignored by Mr. Boehner and his fellow Republicans.