Aestu wrote:
You're seeing what you want to see. You cling to your pathetic, ignorant ideology in an effort to pretend your walnut-sized brain is of normal volume by subscribing to the only version of reality simple enough to fit inside then posture and BS in a sad effort to pretend that you're smart enough to understand what is really going on.
I think this proves the adage about thieves expecting others to steal from them. You're the very nitwit you describe in your witless little tirade, but hey, it's the holiday season and I'm feeling charitable, so while you do your little

I'm just gonna let that slide and point you to another "
right wing editorial" that says:
MSNBC wrote:
Monday, Boehner sent a letter to Obama that proposed unspecified spending cuts of $1.2 trillion, and new tax revenue of $800 billion, to be achieved through changes to the tax code, while lowering tax rates for the rich. The Speaker was responding to an administration proposal, offered Friday, that would include far less in spending cuts, and would raise $1.6 trillion in tax revenue by upping rates on the richest Americans.
Just as Republicans had dismissed that proposal, the White House quickly rejected Boehner’s, saying it “does not meet the test of balance.”
I didn't realize Dan Pfeiffer was a republican legislator, but you may be right about him being self-interested...I mean, who isn't self-interested?
Boehner had no choice but to pull the offer. Unlike President Obama, he can't negotiate unilaterally, because he has to convince the other members of his party to vote the way he wants, which is something he still can't do even after removing representatives he knew would oppose him from key (and highly desired) committee seats. If you want to say republicans pulled the deal this time, that's fine, but the original offer, the counter-offer to President Obama's starting proposal, was rejected by the Executive...maybe if I link some more "
right wing editorials" you'll finally be able to admit that. Unfortunately, despite evidence to the contrary from even your most beloved of sources, I expect you to continue to cling to the sad ideology you've been spoon fed in an effort to pretend your pea-sized brain is of at least average volume by substituting a version of reality twisted enough to fit inside your warped mind before continuing to posture and throw fits in a feeble effort to convince us to take part in the delusion that you're even remotely as clever as you'd like to think you are.
Your Pal,
Jubber
EDIT: Yeah, so while I'm...what is it so far? A "retard with a walnut-sized brain," I believe it was. Is that right? I at least know that the following isn't going to happen:
Aestu wrote:
Boehner will be leaving the Senate chamber feet-first one way or another.
You know, because Boehner isn't a member of the Senate. He's the motherfucking Speaker of the motherfucking House of goddamn Representatives. You should know that, you fucking retard.
Your Pal,
Jubber