Boehner to seek smaller $2 trillion deal (Boehner Folded Like a Cheap Tent)

AP via Yahoo ^ | July 8, 2011 | Andrew Taylor

[mwl8787]

Wrong. In the $4 trillion deal, the RATS were demanding $1 trillion or more in new taxes.

Boehner saw the trap and told the RATS to shove it.

We will have ups and downs over the next 3 weeks. Everyone should take a deep breath. Most important item is to match spending cuts dollar-for-dollar w debt ceiling increase.

[BradtotheBone]

That was GREAT!!!!

[Justice]

How exactly did Boehner fold?

[Justice]

Sounds like the house GOP stood firm on no new taxes. maybe it was the rats that had to cave here and agree to spending cuts without any new taxes. Correct.

[Smokin' Joe]

First it says "reduce the deficit by $4 trillion", then later it says "reduce the debt by $4 trillion. No wonder people are confused and glassy-eyed.

The government should do as we do when we run low on cash--cut spending. Unfortunately, the ones running things are the types to max their credit cards, their HELOC, and walk.

We need to get the irresponsible people out of our government.

[luvie]

BIG surprise....N O T!

WHEN will the Rs grow some!? I know...never.....

[Revel]

Good way of putting it.

[Lauren BaRecall]

The only way it would be a win is if the House does not raise the debt limit.

[ilgipper]

Jeez, folks. This is likely a good thing. He is walking away from the raw deal Obama was pushing. So far, this looks like a smart move. Take a small victory and set the stage for 2012

[tennmountainman]

I am with you.Never trust the Dems

Never underestimate RINO’s. If this “deal” passes it will be because Bonehead works around the conservatives by working with the RINO’s and Rats to pass it.

[Don Corleone]

"Despite good-faith efforts to find common ground, the White House will not pursue a bigger debt reduction agreement without tax hikes.

So stop the debt increase/tax increases and the government will HAVE to prioritize its spending. Not rocket science.

[cashless]

If the story stands and Boehner has reduced his demand, it is time for a new speaker and supporting staff. How many times do we have to say this Mr. Speaker, NO MORE REVENUE TALK! The problem is that they tried to negotiate in good faith with the arch Marxist and got their a$$ handed to them. Here is how they need to negotiate.

Mr. President we will accept 600 million per year in actual spending cuts and not reductions in spending for the next 10 years, no revenue increases in any shape or form and a balanced budget amendment. Get back to us when those conditions are met.

Then when they counter, you say: maybe you didn't hear when I said what I said earlier. I may be open to 500 million in cuts per year and making the Bush tax rates permanent but no revenue increases and the balanced budget amendment is non negotiable. Get back to me when you have enough votes to pass it.

When they counter, say sorry, the last election, the last two GDP numbers and the last two unemployment numbers reinforce our position. Get back to me when you have the votes lined up. The Idiot Elitist Establishment Republicans we have negotiating DO NOT negotiate from the position of strength we gave them. God knows I voted for conservatives and not Republicans. I WILL NOT hold my nose for Rommney, Huntsman or any other RINO or part of the problem like McCain or Dole. Had I known I was to be betrayed yet again, I would have stayed home in November. My Lord, when will they grow a backbone?

[God luvs America]

agree 1000%- there’s to much knee-jerk reaction in many of these threads rather than thinking it through...a shorter deal with no tax hikes is better for the GOP, and the country at this point, versus a longer deal which we know zero will not adhere to...