"Oh, by the way, now that the election's over..."

[_krose]

The projected revenue from Obama's tax hike on "the rich," the pocket change of $823 billion (by Washington's standards) will cover about 16% of projected federal deficits out ten years. That's it.

So how much deficit reduction is accomplished by not raising any taxes?

The mad, drunken spending of the political class - the real origin and causal factor in the existence of the federal debt itself - has not, and will not be addressed, until the fiscal cliff becomes a yawning abyss - exactly as Obama and his cronies have so long hoped would eventually come to pass.

What are you saying? You do realize that large spending cuts are precisely what constitutes most of the so-called "cliff," don't you?

So if Obama wants the "cliff" to become an "abyss," you must mean he wants much more in spending cuts.

You talk as if the result of going off the "fiscal cliff" would be more deficit spending, when the fact is that doing nothing (allowing the temporary tax cuts to expire as they were supposed to, and letting the automatic spending cuts take effect) would severely reduce deficits.

[_Kevin Graham]

The projected revenue from Obama's tax hike on "the rich," the pocket change of $823 billion (by Washington's standards) will cover about 16% of projected federal deficits out ten years. That's it.

So how much deficit reduction is accomplished by not raising any taxes?

The mad, drunken spending of the political class - the real origin and causal factor in the existence of the federal debt itself - has not, and will not be addressed, until the fiscal cliff becomes a yawning abyss - exactly as Obama and his cronies have so long hoped would eventually come to pass.

What are you saying? You do realize that large spending cuts are precisely what constitutes most of the so-called "cliff," don't you?

So if Obama wants the "cliff" to become an "abyss," you must mean he wants much more in spending cuts.

You talk as if the result of going off the "fiscal cliff" would be more deficit spending, when the fact is that doing nothing (allowing the temporary tax cuts to expire as they were supposed to, and letting the automatic spending cuts take effect) would severely reduce deficits.

Exactly, which is why I hope they do nothing for the time being. Let the tax cuts expire, and then later try to pass tax cuts strictly for the middle class. Then dare the Republicans to block it. When they do, it will prove once and for all that they really don't care about tax cuts for Americans. They only care about tax cuts for their wealthy constituents. They are political whores, nothing more.

[_Robert F Smith]

. . . I hope they do nothing for the time being. Let the tax cuts expire, and then later try to pass tax cuts strictly for the middle class. Then dare the Republicans to block it. When they do, it will prove once and for all that they really don't care about tax cuts for Americans. They only care about tax cuts for their wealthy constituents. They are political whores, nothing more.

Excellent points, Kevin.
However, as usual, you are not radical enough.
The Republicrats make a great show of disagreement over minutiae as we are all being pushed and jostled down the road to oblivion by entrenched special interests.

Too bad Dennis Kucinich is not President.
Bob