GOP taking charge, is eager to move on Keystone XL, taxes

as long as the country is 48% dem, 48% repubs and 4% other... were gonna have a two party system

and unless the two parties can get along, sadly nothing will get done

 

Pretty much it in a nutshell, and billions and billions of dollars are spent annually by the invisible hand to see to it it stays that way.

 

FreshAir wrote: “... unless the two parties can get along, sadly nothing will get done.”

JoeSixpack replied: “... and billions and billions of dollars are spent annually by the invisible hand to see to it it stays that way.”

The government accomplishes plenty, it’s just never in the interest of the country. This is the part of the OP that caught my attention:

Here’s why they want to lift that ban:

Personally, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that overproduction was intentional. As it were, we’re enjoying lower fuel prices for now. The representative cited pretends he’s all about jobs, well, doesn’t cheap energy costs help stimulate the economy? Here’s more about the law they want to get rid of, beginning with a comment from Gerald Ford back in 1975:

Industry leaning sources say all the opposite, that prices won’t go up, that moving more crude offshore will create jobs & that the geopolitical environment back in the ‘70s is no longer relevant. Quite a difference between what our representatives said back then & what they're saying now. Readers may this to be of interest:

So the domestic glut even has the Saudis slashing their crude oil price to the U.S. If Republicans were really about stimulating the economy & providing average Americans some relief, the last thing they would do is gut this law. Other sources note that the problem isn’t about consumer consumption, but that the shale oil is light crude & much of the country’s refineries are equipped for heavy crude. But that seems easily foreseeable & thus, the overproduction was avoidable. The Republicans could favor to expand refining capacity instead, which would at least keep the law intact & create some jobs. My bet is that they’ll act in the interests of big oil.

 

I mean the one he and his fellow Dems enacted in 2008, where they didn't get all the spending they wanted because Bush wouldn't sign it, and 2009, the one they held up until Obama was elected because they knew Bush would refused to sign on to their spending again, increasing spending almost 30% in just those two years. I mean the $161B deficit he and his fellow Democrats inherited from Bush and the Republicans which they ran up to $1,400B in just two years.

But then you knew what I meant so why did you ask?

 

No it was mostly Reid who did not allow bills to even get voted on and when he did like Obama's budgets they didn't get filibustered they got defeated.

But thanks for confirming what weak leaders Reid and Obama are.

The tanking was over before it even went into effect, it was the recovery it was supposed to stimulate, it fell on it's face and the only thing he ever offered was more of the same.

Yet true, how many times did he meet with Boehner and McConnell to work things out?

 

They didn't want to cut taxes and gut regulations and cut off the poor.

I confirmed no such thing.

False as I've proved.



Yet true, how many times did he meet with Boehner and McConnell to work things out?[/QUOTE]

 

By the time GOP congressmen and senators stop biting each other on the neck, if they ever do, they will be too exhausted to tackle lawmaking.

They have been growling, prowling zombies too long, stumbling around achieving nothing. They are totally leaderless and rudderless.

Bring on the clowns!

 

Which one are you referring to? The Net Investment tax of 38% for those making over $200,000 with capital gains, the additional medicare tax of .9% for those making over $400k, the shared responsibility payment, the medical device tax, or the limited FSA of $2500.

 

Defunding the EPA can take care of the radical leftist deindustrialization of the nation. It is time to end the EPA.

 

Elections have consequences. A one-sixth black president said that. What I hope the Republicans give in return for approving the pipeline is individual freedom and liberty to the American people.

What do you mean that both parties are in equal control?

 

Maybe what we need is a law that say the coal companies cannot sell any energy to leftists. If you are a radical. authoritarian statist, you should have to pay more for energy. Leave the rest of us alone. If you voted for democrats in the past three elections you should enjoy the fruits of your radical agenda and simply do without energy.
Your first few lines of this post tell me that you are a radical, authoritarian statist.

Let's hope the Republican congress can restore some individual liberty to American citizens.

We must also continue the fight to have an Article V convention of states to reign in the massive federal government with a dozen or so new Liberty Amendments.

 

My distinct feeling was that it was the 2003 tax bill, but I could be wrong.

As for tax cuts, that is why I am a firm believer in specific, targeted tax cuts instead of broad based income tax cuts. The wealth distribution effect has been very detrimental to the Midwest and to the southern states. And the continued broad based tax cuts along with sbroad based spending cuts other than the military will allow the economy to grow at the most inefficient rate and put downward pressure on wages.

 

I hope to see a restoration of individual appropriations bills. I want to see every leftist program defunded. If the president vetoes the budgetary bills then let the portions of government with no budget simply close their doors.