|
Replies: 49
| visibility 1
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
OK Obama supporters. No time for celebration. Let's
Nov 7, 2012, 12:31 AM
|
|
get to work. This is a serious question, not a smart-alec "my guy didn't win" post. Can any of my liberal friends explain to me how our current levels of spending by our federal government are sustainable? Because all indications are it will not change, and will likely get worse. I am pretty darn good in math, and the numbers simply just don't add up. Please enlighten me.
|
|
|
|
 |
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
They all say they'll get it from the rich.
Nov 7, 2012, 12:33 AM
|
|
I'm guessing they can't do math.
10 years left.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
They aren't.
Nov 7, 2012, 12:34 AM
|
|
Which is why we should cut defense spending, end the drug war, and increase revenue by building a stronger middle class.
Too bad Republicans will block any attempt at fixing the problem because it isn't politically expedient.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14751]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 22551
Joined: 5/14/03
|
i like you better as tb98***
Nov 7, 2012, 12:38 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
I gave him the rest of the night off.
Nov 7, 2012, 12:41 AM
|
|
Only a ####### moron would think we're the same person, by the way.
Which, as it happens, fits the current data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know-it-all [2004]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 2034
Joined: 5/27/10
|
Bingo.***
Nov 7, 2012, 12:42 AM
[ in reply to They aren't. ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [79508]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63301
Joined: 10/30/05
|
I completely agree with the drug war...
Nov 7, 2012, 12:45 AM
[ in reply to They aren't. ] |
|
Why no cuts to entitlements? I've got a cousin on food stamps who works 3 hours a day...#### him, and all the people like him.
Defense spending, we'll have to agree to disagree because given the state of the world and the fact that's a big part of our federal governments reason for existing, I don't see cutting defense...maybe marginally but definitely not big cuts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
Actual entitlements (read: NOT Medicare, SS, Medicaid)
Nov 7, 2012, 12:52 AM
|
|
are a very small part of the problem. There's just not much there to cut.
Put the "defense," back in national defense and stop gallivanting across the globe playing whack-a-mole and you can cut a good bit of defense spending.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [112162]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73987
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: OK Obama supporters. No time for celebration. Let's
Nov 7, 2012, 12:34 AM
|
|
ending the bush tax cuts for the wealthy on its own will balance the budget, congress has been holding this one hostage for the last 2 years which is why we face a fiscal cliff.
keeping ourselves out of a ground war and making investments now that will grow the economy for the long haul is out best hope, education, technologies, alternative energy strategies, etc..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2394]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 5533
Joined: 11/16/06
|
Ha ha.....
Nov 7, 2012, 12:34 AM
|
|
Your guy loses and we all have to be "serious". If Romney would have won, this place would be a crap storm of insults and hee haw high-fiving. How about this, BigDaddy, how about you bring the seriousness and explain to us if Romney would have won, how HIS numbers would have added up? You are the math man. Enlighten me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
That's not fair.
Nov 7, 2012, 12:36 AM
|
|
Nobody on the planet knew where Romney stood on anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [112162]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73987
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: That's not fair.
Nov 7, 2012, 12:37 AM
|
|
he stood for 5 trillion in tax cuts and two trillion in additional military spending, we knew that much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6226]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8863
Joined: 5/30/01
|
How are they sustainable?
Nov 7, 2012, 12:38 AM
|
|
How about ZERO percent interest rates? Borrow forever at that rate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [79508]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63301
Joined: 10/30/05
|
At least he had a decent business record***
Nov 7, 2012, 12:40 AM
[ in reply to That's not fair. ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1813]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2419
Joined: 9/24/07
|
That's the problem though, people were voting purely
Nov 7, 2012, 1:35 AM
|
|
on potential. Let's be honest, Mitt offered no real, tangible solutions, just talk. Now I can understand why people want to buck the status quo, certainly, and Romney has the business acumen. Problem is, his suggested policies just don't match up with reality. Trickle down economics don't work. We've proved this time and time again. Bush-era taxation policies are not sustainable. If Romney would have just backed off of this stance and distanced himself a bit from the psycho-religious neocon side of the party, he probably could have won. If he ran on a true platform of true fiscal responsibility and an honest desire to cut into the debt, he would have put forth a plan that includes a tax hike (preferably by repealing the Bush tax cuts, or some other kind of increase only felt by top-earners and NOT the middle class) and other tangible cuts in which the numbers actually add up! Not fuzzy math and hyperbole! But of course, if he did that it wouldn't make the base nor the corporate interests in his back pocket happy, now would it? Obama ain't no fiscal saint, but he's better than Mitt. This guy doesn't have a clue what it's like for folks in the middle. He says he does, but he doesn't. The guy owns dressage horses for god sakes. He dresses mega expensive horses up like dolls. C'mon man...he's so out of touch it's ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
"The guy owns dressage horses for god sakes"
Nov 7, 2012, 1:45 AM
|
|
I don't give a #### if he owns purple unicorns. What the hell does it matter if he owns horses? I can agree with part of your post. "If he ran on a true platform of true fiscal responsibility and an honest desire to cut into the debt,..." but we don't need a tax hike, we need to cut spending.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1813]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2419
Joined: 9/24/07
|
I agree, it's a bit of ad-hominem on my part.
Nov 7, 2012, 1:57 AM
|
|
It shouldn't matter what level of success Mitt Romney came from, or has obtained. If his substantive ideas are rooted in sound economic policy, then that's immaterial to his financial standing. Problem is they aren't.
I agree that it weakens my argument to resort to ad-hominem, but isn't it a bit disconcerting to you that he has never had to work a day in his life for prosperity he didn't already have? Don't mistake what I said--I know he has worked very hard in his arena. What I mean is that it's very easy to take risks when you have no penalty in failure. This man has been loaded his entire life. He has no idea, no clue, what it's like to worry about being able to put food on the dinner table for your wife and kid the next week; where that money is going to come from. Doesn't that bother you, just a bit? It does for me, but I'm at least able to separate that bias to some extent and look at him objectively as candidate--something that many people on this forum are incapable of doing for Mr. Obama.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
No, doesn't bother me a bit.
Nov 7, 2012, 2:11 AM
|
|
Well, it would if he were the only one. But it seems there are so many people towing that line and thinking that Obama (or the democratic candidate du jour) are some kind of made from nothing, gotten to their level on their own, kind of crap. When nothing could be further from the truth. It just so happens that my thoughts align more with the conservatives than the liberals, especially fiscally. I just want the government to get out of my dang way, and I KNOW that I stand a better chance of that with the republicans than I do the democrats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
He is the only one I heard that mentioned
Nov 7, 2012, 12:40 AM
[ in reply to Ha ha..... ] |
|
Cutting spending during the entire campaign. There is no way that our spending levels are sustainable. If Romney had the the chance to cut spending like he said he would, at least we would have a chance. With Obama's spending there is no way we don't go bankrupt. Well, I should say, considering your lack of an argument for your guy, I can only assume this. But thanks for nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2394]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 5533
Joined: 11/16/06
|
I'm not in the mood to argue. I'm in the mood to celebrate
Nov 7, 2012, 12:44 AM
|
|
no Romney, and especially NO PAUL RYAN. I'm sure you would feel the same way had the guy you wanted to see won. Apparently, you are in the mood to go ahead and continue the bad attitude that is epidemic of the GOP party. Just a doom gloom group of people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
Not doom and gloom, just living in the real world.
Nov 7, 2012, 12:49 AM
|
|
But thanks anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2394]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 5533
Joined: 11/16/06
|
Tell me, Big Daddy, since you are so interested in being
Nov 7, 2012, 12:52 AM
|
|
serious, and I've asked this a few times over the last year to not much fanfare, but tell me, how has your last four years been dramatically changed by Obama's Presidency? You personally. You are in the real world. Tell me about the crapstorm your real world has faced under Obama. I got one or two actual stories from people before, none from the regulars that live on this board day to day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
Sure.
Nov 7, 2012, 1:18 AM
|
|
For the record, I didn't say it was time to "get serious" I said I have a serious question. I hope you understand the difference.
Until Obama was elected, I enjoyed a good job with benefits, and received a nice raise every year. Since Obama was elected, my job changed to a sub-contractor type of job. No benefits. I haven't had a raise in three years. I'm not on the bread line. But I have been living paycheck to paycheck every month for this time. My family has two cars with combined mileage of 420,000 miles. Obviously they are nothing special but they get us from here to there, but if one of my cars dies, I am afraid that our family will not be able to make it on our own. I don't want to live off of the government dole. It is against everything I believe in, which is personal freedom to do the best for ones self free from government interference. But until the economy gets better and I can find a better job, I will live life on this razor. I have a roof over my head and clothes on my back, so I know there are plenty of people in this country that have it worse than me. I am thankful for the things I have, but desire the government to get out of my f@cking way. My life has not been easy. Maybe not a crapstorm, but not easy. So you can go #### yourself, and take your big government with you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: Sure.
Nov 7, 2012, 1:32 AM
|
|
So it's a wash.
I lost my high-paying corporate job in January 2008, when the recession was really starting to hit the financial industry.
What did I do? My family and I moved from SC to MA where I worked for 3 years as a carpenter to make ends meet. Before I took that job, I exhausted my unemployment benefits and tried like no other trying to secure a job in the various financial industries. At 29, I was either too qualified, too expensive or not qualified enough for any job I interviewed for. I am currently in law school on a scholarship.
I know what its like to live on the edge. We currently have two residences (wife and son live 150 miles away, can't move because of school for him/care for him/wife's job while I obtain a better education. This wouldn't be possible without student loans, my 2 part time jobs and my wife's work as a social worker at a residential school for troubled adolescents.
It's not about suckling off the government's teat. For every person suckling at the benefits that Obama brings, there will be a company suckling at the ideals of Romeny and the Republicans.
I am doing this for me, for my family, and above all because I am able to do so under the Obama administration.
I am glad there is someone like Obama in the Oval Office, someone who is looking out for the middle class and someone who is looking out for me and my situation specifically. Tax breaks for corporations won't bring my job back, it is up to me to find the path for my family to regain what we once had. Romney is not the person to do that for me and my family, Obama is. Breaks to big business won't, and don't create growth and jobs. A helping hand to those who are willing to work for a better future will, because without demand there will be no growth. There will be no demand without a better situated middle class.
And I voted for Johnson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
It's not a wash to me.***
Nov 7, 2012, 1:46 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1813]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2419
Joined: 9/24/07
|
Good luck in the future to you
Nov 7, 2012, 1:47 AM
[ in reply to Re: Sure. ] |
|
But that was a wasted vote for Johnson. Obama isn't the savior we thought he'd be, but he is the much lesser of two evils. At least he has the right ideas regarding wealth redistribution. If it was up to Mitt, the income disparity would just keep growing and growing. The only sane policy is to heavily tax the extreme top-earners and mega-corps and put that money back into the middle class in the form of low tax rates and entitlements to help ease the burden.
I will most likely lose my job (or at least, my current assignment) as a result of Obama getting elected. I work for a defense contractor. I know it will be OK though, because an economy with a strong middle class means there will be demand for commercial products and expendable income. I will find a job in Obama's economy. Romney offered no vision. No future. Just hyperbole. Funneling more money into top-earners does nothing but pad their wallets. Obama already has a progressive stance when it comes to small businesses, which are the true job creators. We'll all be fine. Republicans need to lay off the Fox News and step off the ledge. All of our budgetary problems won't go away overnight, but Obama will set us down the path. I suspect we won't be out of the debt mess for another 10-12 years at least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: Good luck in the future to you
Nov 7, 2012, 1:57 AM
|
|
I've voted 3rd party in every election. 2000 in NY, 2004 in MA, 2008 in SC (though I did vote Edwards in the primary, I lived in Seneca, and we had a nice chat one afternoon) and 2012 in MA again. My vote has never counted in the Presidential election.
I am of the belief that to make an incremental change, one must take an extreme stance and compromise back to a sustainable solution, and that is the way I vote.
I'm not a huge Obama fan, especially things like the ACA (I'm in favor of a single payer system having lived in MA under the system that will soon be country wide, but now is not the time or place for that discussion). However, I do agree that he is the "lesser of two evils", and until I find myself in a battleground state, I will not vote on that principle alone.
I echo everything else in your post. Just wanted to clarify my positions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1813]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2419
Joined: 9/24/07
|
I see. I can sympathize with that.
Nov 7, 2012, 2:06 AM
|
|
I had a few co-workers do the same, with the same thought. However, I live in a battle ground state (FL), where votes actually matter, so I was a bit miffed by their actions.
I truly question the premise though. I just don't think the third party candidate will ever get noticed, even with 5% of the vote, but I suppose if the right person comes along with the right message at the right time...
I really wish a movement would take hold that started us down the path of getting the corporate money out of politics. I believe that's where all the problems stem from. If there was some external pressure that really enacted some meaningful change with regards to campaign funding, lobbying, elected officials in charge of regulation that had a past or currently vested interest....those kinds of things, I think we'd see some real progress instead of just Team A vs Team B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: I see. I can sympathize with that.
Nov 7, 2012, 2:17 AM
|
|
I think we're just going to agree ourselves to death here.
I'd probably have voted Huntsman had he been the Republican Nominee. But to me, this election was about social issues. I have the job/economy stuff trending in a positive direction for my family, and I see the greater trend across the country going that way as well.
Citizens United will be a decision that will haunt the electorate for many years to come, and I don't envision a reason or basis to overturn it other than a direct challenge, which the court is not too keen on doing. Scalia did a good job in that opinion narrowly defining the issue and deciding as such. The Supreme Court is slow to change, and absent a Constitutional Amendment, the law decided within that case will be on the books for a generation, if not more.
But I do take my vote seriously even though it doesn't count in the greater election, and even without making a dent, the major parties will take notice when a guy like Johnson or Goode makes enough of a difference to prevent them from winning. Perot did just that for the Republicans in the 90s.
It's just nice to have the guy you would prefer win, actually win, while still taking a personal stance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2394]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 5533
Joined: 11/16/06
|
Yeah, I have no idea why he telling me to go F myself.
Nov 7, 2012, 1:50 AM
[ in reply to Re: Sure. ] |
|
I can relate pretty heavily to what he is saying. I guess he is assuming I'm either well off or one of those free loading Democrats that live off checks. I have no idea, but when I hear stories like that, at least I get where the dislike from Obama comes from. Sorry, sir, but so many in your party have Muslim issues with Obama, birth certificate issues with Obama, etc. etc. that I've became a bit skeptical and jaded with why people have problems with the man. Best of luck to you and your family. We are in the same boat alot more than you probably want to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
Two answers.
Nov 7, 2012, 2:04 AM
|
|
You assume I am living some great life, otherwise you wouldn't ask the crapstorm question, or you are a dammn idiot. You want to say we are in the same boat but you have no idea what boat I am in, so I stand by my original statement that you can go f u c k yourself.
I don't care what religion Obama is, I don't care where he was born. I believe that he wants all Americans to be "the same" which in his world means bringing down the top performers to the level of the ones that don't perform. I don't want Obama's government to do anything of the sort for me. I want to do it on my own, and for the government to get out of my way. How is this hard to understand?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2394]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 5533
Joined: 11/16/06
|
Well, in short, BigDaddy, I'm living on that same virtual
Nov 7, 2012, 2:13 AM
|
|
razor that you are talking about. The first ten sentences of your original response I can completely relate to. I didn't assume you were living a great life, nor did I imply it. I just know you were bitching about Obama so I wanted to get an insight on where your angst about him comes from. There is nothing hard about anything you wrote to understand. I get where you are coming from. Sorry you are in a real kiss my ### confrontational kind of mood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
Well, one of the reasons I am in a real kiss my ###
Nov 7, 2012, 2:21 AM
|
|
confrontational kind of mood, is because Obama got re-elected. Make no mistake, I am not holding Romney or any other potential Republican candidate to be as some kind of savior. I do believe, however, that he was a better option than Obama. All I know is after Bush took office, spending went sky high. After Obama took office, it went higher. Now that Obama has been re-elected, it is projected to continue to grow to the point where we will not meet our obligations. And the more the government gets involved in my life, the worse it gets. And Obama wants to push his agenda of bigger government and get "more involved" in my life so hopefully you can see why I am getting a little testy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6149]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6931
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2394]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 5533
Joined: 11/16/06
|
One thing you can count on from GOP folks. They are horrible
Nov 7, 2012, 1:10 AM
|
|
winners and even worse losers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know-it-all [2004]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 2034
Joined: 5/27/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
So instead of answering his question you posed a question
Nov 7, 2012, 12:50 AM
[ in reply to Ha ha..... ] |
|
about something that we know now didn't in fact happen?
Makes complete sense man, good job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56284]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31693
Joined: 8/27/02
|
Ugh, do I have to identify as an Obama supporter?
Nov 7, 2012, 12:36 AM
|
|
Ok, fine.
Our current level of spending wasn't going to change no matter who won. Spending is done by Congress, not the president.
The economy was poised to improve no matter who won.
That doesn't answer your question. The answer is neither candidate was going to make spending sustainable, so smoke 'em if ya got 'em.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21223
Joined: 12/22/98
|
Lol, I think you have done that previously. But that's ok,
Nov 7, 2012, 12:47 AM
|
|
nobody is perfect. For the record, I said spending by our federal government, not the president. I understand spending is done by the congress, but the president has a lot to do with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56284]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31693
Joined: 8/27/02
|
Hey, I voted for Gary Johnson.***
Nov 7, 2012, 1:21 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14751]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 22551
Joined: 5/14/03
|
why even attempt to get serious
Nov 7, 2012, 12:36 AM
|
|
Answers from this crowd. All I know at this point are a couple things. Chris Christie, don't even bother entering your fat ### in the 2016 beauty contest. Next, there is a real chance the supreme court shifts radically left for a generation with a rubber stamp senate. So we need to appeal to minorities fine, don't compromise on issues. Marco tubular / mia love 2016.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10171]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 17654
Joined: 11/30/98
|
you should have ask your PUB friends when Bush was in office***
Nov 7, 2012, 12:37 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14751]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 22551
Joined: 5/14/03
|
but but but george washington
Nov 7, 2012, 12:40 AM
|
|
My god man
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
Please enlighten me why George W Bush and the Repub…..
Nov 7, 2012, 1:11 AM
|
|
Congress cut taxes while carrying out two wars? Do they think money grows of trees? Or did they think it was ok to depend on their buddies, the Communist Chinese to pay for two wars?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40970]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42973
Joined: 11/30/98
|
What are we doing with the huge surplus
Nov 7, 2012, 1:19 AM
|
|
from ending the iraq war? Why do you refer to them as Bush tax cuts? Bush has been gone a long time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
Ya Big Dummy, as Fred Sanford would say, the tax cuts…..
Nov 7, 2012, 1:37 AM
|
|
were passed by Bush and the Republican congress. And ending the Iraq War didn't create a huge surplus. Where did you get that idea from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
If you're spending money, then quit, while getting money
Nov 7, 2012, 1:41 AM
|
|
still then there should be a surplus (+) of money.
Of course unless you start spending it on something else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
Did spending too much money without enough coming in...
Nov 7, 2012, 1:50 AM
|
|
bother you while President Reagan, President George HW Bush, and George W Bush were in office?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40970]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42973
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Absolutely. Republicans spend almost as much as
Nov 7, 2012, 4:35 AM
|
|
democrats. Bush spent almost half as much as Obama is spending per year. Bush spent way too much money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3396]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3045
Joined: 10/22/07
|
They are not.
Nov 7, 2012, 7:05 AM
|
|
But tax revenues will continue to increase as the economy improves & Bush cuts are allowed to expire for some. The costs associated with the war winding down and private industry stabilizing will continue to decrease. That will help.
It would be good to take on entitlement reform now, but democrats lack leadership on the issue, and republicans don't have consensus or a willingness to compromise. As I've said many times, the lack of progress on this is the fault of congress. If you really care about it, write your congressman and tell him to work across the aisle to get something done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 49
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
