New Taxes + a growing deficit

[coyotejoe]

Your taxes will increase but that won't reduce the deficit because they will still spend more than the new taxes generate in revenue. This article predicts the deficit will exceed 4 trillion over the next ten years. I don't believe that, since this past year's deficit was 1.33 trillion and there is no reason to think 2013 will be any better. I'm thinking it will be more like 6 trillion over the next four years, and that's if nothing "bad" happens. We are already so deep in debt that any solution will have to be very painful but painful or not we can't just keep printing and borrowing money. As they say "when you find yourself in a hole, first stop digging".
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/02/despite-deal-taxes-on-most-americans-will-go-up/

[DDZ]

C. Joe, 2013 won't be any better. This government is incapable of cutting their size or the spending. We are in deep enough debt as it is now, that I don't ever see us recovering from it. Actually its impossible with what we have for leadership.
I'm sure someone will come along, and post up another chart showing us how the rich don't pay their fair share, like that has something to do with our mountain of debt.   

[BUGEYE]

If breathing were not an involuntary action, liberals would suffocate.  they don't have the brain-power to remember to breathe, let-alone balance the budget.

before I forget, Clintons balanced budget was due to a republican congress.

[two-blocked]

I realize that insects breath differently than humans but you may still want to get checked for hypoxemia. 
 
Who was president during the last balanced budget? And before him? Hint: Democrat.
 
Dwight Eisenhower was last Republican President to preside over a balanced budget. He had a balanced budget in 1956 and 1957. Since then, there have been two presidents to preside over balanced budgets, LBJ in 1969 and Clinton in 1998 through 2001. During the last 40 years there have been five budget surpluses, all five were under Democratic Presidents: 1969, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.

[coyotejoe]

You know, this is just typical. We see an obvious problem and no one poses any solution we just argue about whether Republicans or Democrats are more to blame, blame Bush, blame Obama. The bastards are ALL to blame, they are ALL lying, low life, scum sucking vermin. YOU DIP (censored word) are the problem, you vote for one or the other every year after year and so you get one or the other year after year and you are too dense to see that there is absolutely no difference. Our elections are just a rat race, no matter how you vote a rat is going to win.

[BUGEYE]

. YOU DIP (censored word) are the problem, you vote for one or the other every year after year and so you get one or the other year after year and you are too dense to see that there is absolutely no difference.

I don't know of anyone at this site who voted for Romney in the primary.  but when he got the nomination, most voted for him rather than obama.
So my question is, am I a DIP (censored word) for voting against obama??
I'm going to assume your man was Ron Paul, since that's the direction that lots of ugly words originate.  if RP had got the nomination, he probably would have gotten more votes than Romney. (I would have voted for him)
but he didn't get it so some of us tried our best to keep obama out of the whitehouse.
Is calling people a DIP (censored word) or dense the way to make them believe in anything you say? ?
I'm getting behind the constitution party.  I will do everything I can to further their beliefs by voting for them in the primaries.  but if they are not on the ballot in the general election, I will vote republican then as long as the platform stays the same.  I will not call other conservatives ugly names if I lose.
If all else fails, there is another option that the founders considered when they penned the 2nd amendment.

[coyotejoe]

I call a spade a spade and anyone who still votes Republican or Democrat I call a dip crap. How may times do you have to be lied to and betrayed before you get a clue? Do you like where we are now? If so thank the Republicans and Democrats both for putting us here and thank the dip (censored word) who keep voting for them. There is no difference, there is no "lesser evil", they are ALL evil.
I interpret your last sentence as a reference to armed rebellion. That is not yet needed, there is time for a peaceful voters rebellion. There are nearly as many Democrats fed up with the lack of choice as Republicans and taken all of the fed up together they far outnumber the remainder of either party. Less then half of all eligible voters actually vote. Some say this is a sign of apathy and laziness but it could just be that they don't believe it matters since they don't see one party as being really better than the other. Ron Paul brought out young people who otherwise would not vote. The Tea Party at first showed some promise as an alternative but soon became just a wing of the Republican party but it shows there is a lot of interest in an alternative.
 
As for armed uprising, it is ridiculous to pretend there could ever be an armed uprising among sheeple who haven't even the guts to vote for a third party. Oh no, we dare not take the chance. Well when you got nothing you got nothing to loose.

[Dee]

Well coyotejoe, I would disagree with your remark that there nearly as many Democrats fed up as Republicans.That is unless you were out of country for this last election, and not yet noticed that Obama is still here.
What I think you really have is a VERY SLOW awakening of TRUE CONSERVATIVE VOTERS, rather than the "pseudo conservatives" you see here, and other places. The "qseudo conservative", THINKS he's a REAL conservative, but a REAL conservative, will not compromise with foolishness.
I also disagree with you on the Tea Party. The Tea Party is trying to change the Republican party from within, and REPUBLICAN QUESDO CONSERVATIVES are demonizing them, as HOLDIN UP THE CONGRESS, when in fact they are tryin to PRESERVE THE CONSTITUTION. They were elected to VOTE "AGAINST" NON-SENSE, and "FOR" GOOD SENSE, and that is what their doin, so everyone is unhappy with them for "HOLDIN UP THE SINKIN OF THE SHIP".
In the last "UNCIVIL WAR", the United States Government came down here and pretty much shot the place up, killin about a million innocents. Another "UNCIVIL WAR" will be much worse. Hell, most folks now a days can't check their own oil, or change a flat, much less shoot it out with a government more than willin to shoot'em or lock'em up.
I think you and I, and a few others are gonna watch this play out , and not be very happy with the end result, while everyone else keeps doin what they've always done, and sayin it would work if we would just help'em. They don't really need any help though. It's goin down hill fast enough with the way their doin it by themselves.

[coyotejoe]

You're right Dee, I well remember how the Tea Party delegates got it from both sides for being "unreasonable obstructionists" standing in the way of progress and unity. On the rare occasion a Tea Party delegate got the chance to reply they made the perfectly valid point that they were fulfilling campaign promises and doing what they were elected to do and if Washington finds that outrageous that says a lot more about Washington than about the Tea Party. If you're trying to stop the train from leaving the tracks obstruction is just what is needed. But where was the Tea Party in this last election?

[Dee]

Better question. Where were the voters? And an even better question. Why would anyone WANT to be a Tea Party Congressman or Senator? The whole country says that the Tea Party is the problem. I think America "collectively" needs to go off the cliff. Maybe the sudden stop at the bottom will jar some sense into the American voter. This lessor of has got to end somewhere.

[BUGEYE]

Ron Paul brought out young people who otherwise would not vote.

Yes he did, because they wanted legal dope, and when he didn't get the nomination, they all turned to obama.

[coyotejoe]

Perhaps you can cite the study which supports your conclusion? Otherwise you're just blowing hot air.
 I don't know how many Ron Paul supporters voted for Obama but considering how Ron Paul delegates were railroaded out of the Republican National Convention and the RNC's own rules were suspended to deny Ron Paul even the opportunity to speak at the RNC I am certain than many of them will never again vote for such an obviously corrupt party. The RNC showed us politics as usual and showed itself to be a stinking rotten bucket of slime, not that I am pretending to hold the Democrat party in any higher esteem, they all stink.