Romney 2012?

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Democrat, incoming House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, a Republican, said they will vote against the plan tomorrow. Andy Stern, former president of the Service Employees International Union, also will vote no, said spokeswoman Christine Bonanno. Earlier, Representatives Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, and Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat, said they were opposed.

Other proposal backers are by Senator Judd Gregg, a New Hampshire Republican; Senator Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat; David Cote, chairman of Honeywell International Inc.; Ann Fudge, former chief executive officer of Young & Rubicam Inc.; former Congressional Budget Office Director Alice Rivlin, along with Bowles, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, and Simpson, a former Republican senator from Wyoming.

Twelve of the commission’s 18 members were appointed equally among Democrats and Republicans in Congress and six were named by the president, including Simpson and Bowles.

In April 2012, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers sought to resurrect the plan, though their proposal was overwhelmingly defeated. House Republicans moved away from their “no-new-taxes” stance and embraced pro-growth tax reforms (without specifics) and passed Ryan’s 2011 multiyear debt-reduction plan.

Senator Kent Conrad, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Budget Committee and a Simpson-Bowles member, introduced the commission’s report as his panel’s budget blueprint for a Senate vote. Senate leaders again deferred voting on a federal budget until after the 2012 election. A frustrated Conrad said: “We are facing a fiscal train wreck at the end of this year. It is time to move off of fixed positions.”

Quote:

The 2011 Simpson-Bowles report

It's just the same warmed-over GOP message, repeated as a panacea for all problems, no matter what they look like: lower taxes, everything will be great!

So, yeah. You're totally wrong on this one. However, I have quite often seen right-wingers bring this up over the years without acknowledging this fact, because the recommendations of the report (which was authored in large part by fiscal conservatives) match their own policy goals.

Senator Kent Conrad, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Budget Committee and a Simpson-Bowles member, introduced the commission’s report as his panel’s budget blueprint for a Senate vote.

bi-partisan committee, but it's the GOP message?

in that case, the Democrats are in more of a mess than I'd thought

Cycloptichorn wrote:

So, yeah. You're totally wrong on this one. However, I have quite often seen right-wingers bring this up over the years without acknowledging this fact, because the recommendations of the report (which was authored in large part by fiscal conservatives) match their own policy goals.

so Conrad brought it back because ... ?

Quote:

Senator Kent Conrad, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Budget Committee and a Simpson-Bowles member, introduced the commission’s report as his panel’s budget blueprint for a Senate vote.

April 2012

http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/17/news/economy/bowles-simpson/index.htm

But that doesn't invalidate my original statement in the slightest.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

But that doesn't invalidate my original statement in the slightest.

I think it supports McG's read of a number of Obama supporters.

ehBeth wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

But that doesn't invalidate my original statement in the slightest.

I think it supports McG's read of a number of Obama supporters.

That we are 'mindless robots?' We're simply going to have to disagree on that one, then. The fact that a few Conservative members of the Dem party occasionally agree with Republicans on certain policies doesn't mean that the rest of us who don't, don't have very good arguments for why we don't.

And I don't get a lot of traction when asking the opposing side to discuss the liberal sides of arguments either, I must say. It's hardly a one-way street.

I would also add that his 'read' on us Obama supporters isn't especially supported by the fact that he has a habit of accusing people of not reading articles that he clearly hasn't read himself, and presenting information that he doesn't really know anything about. The first thing I would have done before discussing Simpson-Bowles on A2K would have been to hit Wikipedia and read up on it some. But he couldn't be bothered to do that, and then doubled down on the Derp when I called him on it.

Cycloptichorn

When you state "That's as far as I needed to read to know that I was looking at some bullshit." Why would I expect that you had read it?

Lets look in on the experts and what they have to say...

WASHINGTON — Rep. Nancy Pelosi was emphatic. Mitt Romney’s refusal to release more than two years of his personal tax returns, she said, makes him unfit to win confirmation as a member of the president’s Cabinet, let alone to hold the high office himself.

Sen. Harry Reid went farther: Romney’s refusal to make public more of his tax records makes him unfit to be a dogcatcher.

They do not, however, think that standard of transparency should apply to them. The two Democratic leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives are among hundreds of senators and representatives from both parties who refused to release their tax records. Just 17 out of the 535 members of Congress released their most recent tax forms or provided some similar documentation of their tax liabilities in response to requests from McClatchy over the last three months. Another 19 replied that they wouldn’t release the information, and the remainder never responded to the query.

And how many years have you released your tax records for?

If you expect someone else to do it, you should be willing to do the same thing.

bi-partisan committee, but it's the GOP message?

So, if cy isnt willing to release his returns, then he shouldnt demand anyone else do it.