[TheRealVille]

You really seem incapable of waging a logical debate. The election had nothing to do with personal liberty and everything to do with people voting for government handouts. Over a million Obamaphones have been issued in Ohio alone. The election is just proof that freedom does indeed have a price for people who have done nothing to earn it.

BTW, it looks like the people of Michigan have elected a government that will soon make it the latest one to pass right to work legislation. Maybe the nightmare that liberals imposed on the Wolverine State and saddled it with one of the highest unemployment rates in modern history will soon be over.

I will quit challenging you to provide specific examples of how Republicans have robbed us of our personal liberty and to defend the many examples that I have cited in which liberals have passed legislation that restricts personal liberty. You are obviously not up to the challenge. Maybe you just realize how dishonest and unsupportable your position is. To offer the result of a presidential election as proof that Republicans are opposed to personal liberty is a pretty bizarre claim, even for you.:biglmao:

You say in one post that you are against personal liberties, then in another that republicans aren't against personal liberties. Make your mind up.

[Hoot Gibson]

You say in one post that you are against personal liberties, then in another that republicans aren't against personal liberties. Make your mind up.

Debating with you is a waste of any thinking person's time, RV. You prove it in post after post. Like I said, I am finished debating this issue with you because you are obviously not willing to contribute anything intelligible to the conversation.

[TheRealVille]

Debating with you is a waste of any thinking person's time, RV. You prove it in post after post. Like I said, I am finished debating this issue with you because you are obviously not willing to contribute anything intelligible to the conversation.

Blah, blah, blah...do you never get tired of repeating the same Democratic talking points? In what way are Republicans "getting in peoples personal business" and destroying personal liberties? Because most of us oppose legalizing marriage between homosexuals? Does that really have any impact on what consenting adults are free to do in their own bedrooms? No, marriage generally does not occur in one's bedroom.

Does opposing the subsidization of contraception and abortion impact what consenting American adults are free to do in the privacy of their own bedrooms? No it does not, except that those who cannot afford a condom should probably be abstaining from sex - but that should be their decision.

What about the legalization of drugs? Wait, I think that Obama and the Democrats took no action to repeal federal prohibitions against recreational drug use when they controlled Congress. Jurisdiction over marijuana and other drugs could have been ceded to the states if Obama had given up a couple of days of golf and just asked Harry and Nancy to go along with him. It never happened, did it?

I have listed many of the items on the Obama agenda that really do threaten our personal liberty, and you have refused to respond. Why don't you get off your talking points and offer some specifics about how Republicans are depriving you and others of your personal liberty and comment on the many ways that the liberal agenda has deprived us of our freedom?

Is the loss of freedom only a problem when the one robbing you of your liberty has a (D) after his name? Because that sure is the impression that you give.

:biggrin: Just a couple.

[jetpilot]

You really seem incapable of waging a logical debate. The election had nothing to do with personal liberty and everything to do with people voting for government handouts. Over a million Obamaphones have been issued in Ohio alone. The election is just proof that freedom does indeed have a price for people who have done nothing to earn it.

BTW, it looks like the people of Michigan have elected a government that will soon make it the latest one to pass right to work legislation. Maybe the nightmare that liberals imposed on the Wolverine State and saddled it with one of the highest unemployment rates in modern history will soon be over.

I will quit challenging you to provide specific examples of how Republicans have robbed us of our personal liberty and to defend the many examples that I have cited in which liberals have passed legislation that restricts personal liberty. You are obviously not up to the challenge. Maybe you just realize how dishonest and unsupportable your position is. To offer the result of a presidential election as proof that Republicans are opposed to personal liberty is a pretty bizarre claim, even for you.:biglmao:

It is done!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/m...story.html

[TheRealThing]

Now, if you want to talk about legislators deserving of the people's contempt, we could start with the architect of the government spurred housing bubble, Rep Barney Frank (D) Mass and his equally complicitous runnin buddy Senator Chris Dodd (D) Conn. Dodd was responsible for fanning the flames with his role as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Dodd proposed a program in June 2008 that would assist troubled sub-prime mortgage lenders such as Countrywide Financial in the wake of the United States housing bubble's collapse. Frank, in 2003, while the ranking minority member on the Financial Services Committee, opposed a Bush administration proposal, in response to accounting scandals, for transferring oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from Congress and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to a new agency that would be created within the Treasury Department. The proposal, supported by the head of Fannie Mae, reflected the administration's belief that Congress "neither has the tools, nor the stature" for adequate oversight. Frank stated, "These two entities ...are not facing any kind of financial crisis ... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing [Wiki]

These geniuses then were allowed to author the Dodd-Frank legislation which has since proven to present perilous waters to navigate, for American businesses. According to findings of the Cato Institute, the approved legislation known as Dodd-Frank, was only a framework for as many as 1200 new rules and regulations to be launched from. To date, only about 300 have gone through the approval process. It takes 24 million man hours a year to manage only 200 of those rules and regs. Doing the math we see we are potentially staring at 144 million man hours a year just to administrate whatever is coming our way through this open ended legislation. Two thirds of the the rules and regs haven't even been dreamed up yet.

No wonder American industry is in idle right now. Between just two nighmare pieces of legislation, ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank, managers no longer have a way to predict business models. But, McConnell is the butt of jokes coming from the left. Republicans are the problem and Dems are our saviors if you ask them. After watching America turn her back on a man of tremendous integrity and a proven record of public service, a true patriot in the person of Mitt Romney, I would say it's safe to say perilous times are upon us. I had hoped the people had awakened during the last election cycle, sadly I now believe the majority has instead chosen to loot the US treasury with the help of glassy eyed liberal democrats. 2014 is new line in the sand, "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country" Patrick Henry

[vector]

let me see in 2008 we elected thne first black president i would have never believed it would happen in my lifetime then in 2012 unemployment at 8% 5 trillion in new debt and he still get's elected and you still don't believe there is nothing wrong with the republican party

:yawn:

[Hoot Gibson]

:biggrin: Just a couple.

Gay marriage has been illegal for centuries and when Obama ran for president in 2008, he was opposed to it himself. Yet, you voted for him. You are nothing but an Obama parrot. If he's for it, then you are for it. Personal liberty means nothing to Obama or to his supporters. As I pointed out, Obama could have changed federal drug laws and he did nothing. Yet, you hold him blameless for you not being able to get high legally. Your logic escapes you. :lmao:

[Hoot Gibson]

let me see in 2008 we elected thne first black president i would have never believed it would happen in my lifetime then in 2012 unemployment at 8% 5 trillion in new debt and he still get's elected and you still don't believe there is nothing wrong with the republican party

:yawn:

You apparently did not read the posts that I made today, in which I strongly criticized Republicans. Or, maybe you read them and did not understand them because I failed to include any pictures.

[jetpilot]

let me see in 2008 we elected thne first black president i would have never believed it would happen in my lifetime then in 2012 unemployment at 8% 5 trillion in new debt and he still get's elected and you still don't believe there is nothing wrong with the republican party

:yawn:

The thing most "low-information" voters find wrong with the Republican party is they don't give away near enough free sh!t. This country needs an enema. I'm convinced it will take a full-blown depression with people starving in the streets (and they will because half the country is totally helpless and dependent on the government) to give the country a fresh start.

Vector, you probably don't know this because the government doesn't mail news clippings with welfare checks, but Detroit is declaring bankruptcy. They have had Dem mayors since 1962. I keep reading how Obama saved the auto industry. These Dems are a disgrace and will bankrupt anything they get ahold of for any period of time.

[TheRealThing]

The thing most "low-information" voters find wrong with the Republican party is they don't give away near enough free sh!t. This country needs an enema. I'm convinced it will take a full-blown depression with people starving in the streets (and they will because half the country is totally helpless and dependent on the government) to give the country a fresh start.

Vector, you probably don't know this because the government doesn't mail news clippings with welfare checks, but Detroit is declaring bankruptcy. They have had Dem mayors since 1962. I keep reading how Obama saved the auto industry. These Dems are a discrace and will bankrupt anything they get ahold of for any period of time.

Good post. The wake up hasn't occurred for most but, there is one thing I know that many will not admit. People on the take will see the country fall long before they give up the first freebie.

[TheRealVille]

Good post. The wake up hasn't occurred for most but, there is one thing I know that many will not admit. People on the take will see the country fall long before they give up the first freebie.

Hint: Get out of peoples business, and you might have more people vote with you. I know I would vote republican if you guys dropped some of your social issues.

[TheRealThing]

You really seem incapable of waging a logical debate. The election had nothing to do with personal liberty and everything to do with people voting for government handouts. Over a million Obamaphones have been issued in Ohio alone. The election is just proof that freedom does indeed have a price for people who have done nothing to earn it.

BTW, it looks like the people of Michigan have elected a government that will soon make it the latest one to pass right to work legislation. Maybe the nightmare that liberals imposed on the Wolverine State and saddled it with one of the highest unemployment rates in modern history will soon be over.

I will quit challenging you to provide specific examples of how Republicans have robbed us of our personal liberty and to defend the many examples that I have cited in which liberals have passed legislation that restricts personal liberty. You are obviously not up to the challenge. Maybe you just realize how dishonest and unsupportable your position is. To offer the result of a presidential election as proof that Republicans are opposed to personal liberty is a pretty bizarre claim, even for you.:biglmao:

It is facts like this that I find to be the most revealing about our nation. It isn't a case of people not being able to understand that the dems are using my own money ,to buy the votes needed to stay in power and at the same time control me and others that love freedom and equality of opportunity. As Ohio goes so go American presidential elections. Chicagoland politics, complete with thousands of the 'dead' and other forms of fraudulent votes being cast with the complicitous winks of poll workers, and one million ObamaPhone toters of the 'get even minorities', of Ohio, all of America has been disenfranchised.

A few things need to happen before we have another presidential election. Voter ID needs to happen and voter registration needs to happen. No more ID-less, unregistered, walk-ins should ever be allowed to vote. The consequences are just too extreme. College students should be no exception, parents know how to get their children registered to vote. The national shame of disenfranchising American Servicemen needs to stop altogether too. And, let's not forget the democrats scheme to get more than one illegal vote from those willing to break the law for money such as in the case of Freddie Johnson; "CLEVELAND - A man at the center of a voter-registration scandal told The Post yesterday he was given cash and cigarettes by aggressive ACORN activists in exchange for registering an astonishing 72 times, in apparent violation of Ohio laws." The democrats will do whatever they have to, to stay or get in power, nobody should doubt that.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/politics/it...BFNPZVnGMM

If I was the republican minority leader I would go along with whatever tax hikes the dems want in exchange for the voting law changes above.

[TheRealThing]

Hint: Get out of peoples business, and you might have more people vote with you. I know I would vote republican if you guys dropped some of your social issues.

Right back at ya. The road to enlightenment was too rough, to just give up on so I can be one with the "immoral majority."


Matthew 7:13-14 (KJV)
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

[TheRealVille]

Right back at ya. The road to enlightenment was too rough, to just give up on so I can be one with the "immoral majority."


Matthew 7:13-14 (KJV)
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

You are example #1 of why the republican party is dying. hh:

[TheRealThing]

You are example #1 of why the republican party is dying. hh:

I'm honored.

[MiddlesboroAlumni]

You are example #1 of why the republican party is dying. hh:

Notice how we as a nation are dying along with it? hh:

Funny, isn't it?

[TheRealVille]

Notice how we as a nation are dying along with it? hh:

Funny, isn't it?

Maybe you all should rethink getting in line with his type.

[Hoot Gibson]

Notice how we as a nation are dying along with it? hh:

Funny, isn't it?

Great post. Unfortunately, people often watch the quality of their own lives decline because of government actions and fail to connect the dots. The nation is full of cities like Detroit, which have been devastated by decades of rule by liberal Democrats, and the voters in the poorest neighborhoods in the country vote for Democrats overwhelmingly.

Americans voted FDR into office four times and most Americans still do not understand that his policies made the Great Depression worse.

When government actions rob people of freedom, security, and hope, they are easily motivated to vote out of fear and resentment. That is the Obama formula for "success."

[MiddlesboroAlumni]

Maybe you all should rethink getting in line with his type.

I will never back down from what I believe in. Some of the wishy washy Republicans may/have to "keep up with the times".

The more liberal we get, the worse off we become. All you have to do to see that is wake up and look around.

[MiddlesboroAlumni]

Hint: Get out of peoples business, and you might have more people vote with you. I know I would vote republican if you guys dropped some of your social issues.

What a silly statement.

Is that really all that's holding you back? I've said before that I don't believe you stand for anything. I really don't think you know what you believe in.

[MiddlesboroAlumni]

The simple-minded lefty's need to stop focusing so much on getting control of America. Because while you fools gain your control, America loses control!

[TheRealVille]

The simple-minded lefty's need to stop focusing so much on getting control of America. Because while you fools gain your control, America loses control!

You guys with your Reagan and Bush have proven that you don't know squat about what it takes to run a country, so let someone else in the drivers seat.

[MiddlesboroAlumni]

You guys with your Reagan and Bush have proven that you don't know squat about what it takes to run a country, so let someone else in the drivers seat.

:thatsfunn Someone else is in the drivers seat and look where we're headed.

Oh, RV. You are always a bundle of fun.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Of course you have to include that devil Ellen DeGeneres...keep ignoring all the great things she does for people though and hate her because she's gay. Smh..

True to form and not unexpectedly, you missed the point. The airheads who appear on and fill the audience of her television show are the best indicator that the intellectual level of the typical follower of her program is embarrassingly low. When one calls the American voter "informed", the best rebuttal is to request that that person watch her and her minions.

The fact that she is a homosexual, I'm sure, makes her more "charming" to some. As for her "great things", I am unaware of them. I assume they deal with the typical liberal causes.

[WideRight05]

You guys with your Reagan and Bush have proven that you don't know squat about what it takes to run a country, so let someone else in the drivers seat.

Bush you can at least formulate an argument against, but Reagan? Just what has Obama done for this country to where you can make an argument that he's a better president than Ronald Reagan? Better yet, what has he done that makes him a better president than any past United States president, other than getting re-elected?

[Wildcatk23]

True to form and not unexpectedly, you missed the point. The airheads who appear on and fill the audience of her television show are the best indicator that the intellectual level of the typical follower of her program is embarrassingly low. When one calls the American voter "informed", the best rebuttal is to request that that person watch her and her minions.

The fact that she is a homosexual, I'm sure, makes her more "charming" to some. As for her "great things", I am unaware of them. I assume they deal with the typical liberal causes.

Wow, Liberal causes? Here is just a few of the MANY Charities & foundations supported by Ellen.

Children's Health Fund
Clothes Off Our Back
Feeding America
Love Our Children USA
Stand Up To Cancer
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Yep all these are liberal causes. I guess us liberals should take pride in caring for those less fortunate and that need help.

Acts 20:35
In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”

Proverbs 19:17
Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed.

Ellen cares for people because she is just a hell of a person. Not because it makes her look good.

[TheRealThing]

Wow, Liberal causes? Here is just a few of the MANY Charities & foundations supported by Ellen.

Children's Health Fund
Clothes Off Our Back
Feeding America
Love Our Children USA
Stand Up To Cancer
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Yep all these are liberal causes. I guess us liberals should take pride in caring for those less fortunate and that need help.

Acts 20:35
In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”

Proverbs 19:17
Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed.

Ellen cares for people because she is just a hell of a person. Not because it makes her look good.

Harry Rex did have a point 23. I remember when Kathy Lee Gifford's reputation was smeared by a human rights group called the National Labor Committee. Charges against Lee were that child labor was used in Honduras sweatshops in the manufacture of a Walmart based clothing line bearing her name. Kathy Lee was subjected to tremendous scrutiny by the NLC as they worked feverishly to besmurch her reputation by making it seem like she was guilty of hypocricy in Honduras, while her charity work and donations got zero mention. Knowing what we know about the business activities of Walmart, it is much more likely that the business side of the Kathy Lee clothing line was set up and managed by Walmart, and Kathy Lee was guilty only of recieving royalties for lending her name to the clothing line.

So, why is Ellen DeGeneres adored and bragged up by our society and the liberal media, while Kathy Lee is reviled and villainized? Simple, Kathy Lee was openly christian and Ellen DeGeneres was openly homosexual. The problem is as fundamental as it is easy to explain, people prefer evil over good in America these days.

John 3:19 (KJV)
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.


Isaiah 5:20-24 (KJV)
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:
23 Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!
24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.


Good as her deeds of generosity may be, and no doubt Ellen is working hard to prove what a great person she is, despite her stigmatic shortfall, or sexual misorientation. The problem in her case is that no matter what man may say about her life, God is none the less her final Judge, and it is He that will judge her. All the good deeds she could ever amass will in no wise matter at the judgement, only whether or not she has accepted the sacrifice of the Son of God for the remittance of sin.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Wildcat23 missed the point just as did his liberal cohort. My point was that, if you watch her program for five minutes (a true ordeal for anyone with an IQ above 40), you would get a good look at the level of intelligence of the average voter in this country- particularly the women. It is no wonder that "cool" beats "competence" and "jive" beats "accomplishment".

If the homosexual gives to worthy causes, that is fine. Since the beneficiaries of her/his gifts seem to be so well known, I assume she/he toots her/his own horn. Liberals have always been good at giving one dollar in order to get one thousand dollars of credit for it. At least, unlike liberals in government, it is likely that she/he used her/his own money.

[Wildcatk23]

Lacking GOP support, Republicans yank ‘fiscal cliff’ ‘Plan B’


In a stinging setback for Republican House Speaker John Boehner, a lack of support from inside his own party for his “fiscal cliff” fall-back plan forced him late Thursday to cancel a much-trumpeted vote on the measure.

“The House did not take up the tax measure today because it did not have sufficient support from our members to pass,” Boehner said in a written statement released after an emergency meeting of House Republicans.

The measure, dubbed “Plan B,” would have let Bush-era tax cuts expire on income above $1 million annually, while extending them for everyone else. It appeared that Boehner faced a rebellion from conservatives opposed to any tax hike, while House Democrats starved the bill of their support, making passage impossible.

Boehner’s dramatic defeat cast fresh doubt on efforts to avert the “fiscal cliff” and spare Americans across-the-board income tax hikes come Jan. 1. Those increases, coupled with deep automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect the same day, could plunge the fragile economy into a new recession. Talks between the speaker and President Barack Obama were at a stalemate, according to aides on both sides.

After the cancellation of the vote, Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor announced on Twitter the House "has concluded legislative business for the week. The House will return after the Christmas holiday when needed."

Boehner’s “Plan B” had aimed to shift any blame for going over the "fiscal cliff" to Obama and Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid. Polls show a narrow majority of Americans say they would hold the GOP responsible if a deal is not reached to avert the "cliff."

“Now it is up to the president to work with Senator Reid on legislation to avert the fiscal cliff,” the speaker said. He pointed to House passage of Republican bills that would stop all of the tax increases and replace the automatic cuts. “The Senate must now act.”

The vote had initially been scheduled for 7:30 p.m. But House Republican leaders’ vote counting showed up coming up short. Rather than suffer a defeat in a floor vote, they pulled the bill.

Earlier, the White House had pressed Boehner to stick with negotiations with Obama and threatened to veto “Plan B,” which top Senate Democrats mocked as “dead on arrival” in the upper chamber.

“Instead of taking the opportunity that was presented to them to continue to negotiate what could be a very helpful, large deal for the American people, the Republicans in the House have decided to run down an alley that has no exit while we all watch,” Obama press secretary Jay Carney told reporters.

Carney also indicated that communications, even at the staff level, were on hold.

One early sign of trouble for Boehner came in a too-narrow-for-comfort vote victory on the second part of his plan, which would have replaced the automatic cuts in defense and domestic spending–the so-called “sequester”–with a Republican alternative. That measure passed by a 215-209 margin.

Before that, lawmakers had defeated a Democratic attempt to derail the process by a 179-243 margin.

The “Plan B” push had pitted Boehner against conservative groups like the anti-tax Club for Growth and Heritage Action–which warned lawmakers the results would go on their permanent records.

But even a victory for Boehner would have been mostly symbolic.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid offered the “fiscal cliff” equivalent to Monty Python’s “dead parrot” sketch, dismissing "Plan B" as a “pointless political stunt,” declaring that Boehner’s efforts were “non-starters in the Senate” and insisting that “House Republicans know that the bill has no future.”

“If they don’t know it now, tell them what I said,” Reid said. “It’s time for Republicans to get serious” about negotiating with Obama. (Anyone still think the parrot is just resting? No. 2 Senate Democrat Dick Durbin bluntly declared “Plan B” to be “dead on arrival.”)

Reid also announced that the Senate would be back at work on Dec. 27. (Earlier, Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said representatives would not leave town immediately after the "Plan B" vote.)

Boehner shrugged off Reid’s comments.

“After today, Senate Democrats and the White House are going to have to act on this measure,” he told reporters. “And if Senate Democrats and the White House refuse to act, they’ll be responsible for the largest tax hike in American history.”

Boehner had declared himself “hopeful” that he and Obama can reach a broader deal and insisted he was “not convinced at all that when the bill passes the House today it will die in the Senate.”

The White House, which had already leveled a veto threat, blasted “Plan B” in a blog post as “nothing more than a dangerous diversion” that scraps funding for services like Meals on Wheels, which reaches some 1.7 million elderly people, as well as child care programs and initiatives that help homeowners prevent foreclosure.

Some analysts had noted that Obama and Boehner were just a few billion dollars apart and that “Plan B” could turn out to the be the legislative vehicle for any final compromise deal.

“We will have to be here the 27th no matter what happens,” Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer said. “If there’s no agreement we have to be here to try and hammer out something. If there is an agreement it’ll take several days to write it up–our poor staffs will have to be doing it during the holiday–and then vote on it the 27th.”

Democrats argued that Obama’s latest offer to Boehner included a sizable concession. The president said Monday that he’d accept rates going up on household income above $400,000, rather than $250,000, the number he cited throughout his reelection campaign.

Obama's new proposal also calls for raising $1.2 trillion in new tax revenues on individual income–down from $1.4 trillion in his previous proposal and $1.6 trillion in his opening gambit–coupled with about $1 trillion in spending cuts. The president’s proposal includes about $130 billion saved by adopting lower cost-of-living adjustments for Social Security, something liberal Democrats oppose.

Republicans charged that the president was relying on dodgy math by including interest that won’t have to be paid on the national debt thanks to the savings–even though Boehner has embraced that accounting maneuver in the past.

Early in the day, Boehner himself had rejected charges that “Plan B” showed that he feared he would be unable to rally enough Republicans behind a more comprehensive deal.

“Listen, the president knows that I’ve been able to keep my word on every agreement we’ve ever made,” he said.

Yahoo.con

[Wildcatk23]

Lacking GOP support, Republicans yank ‘fiscal cliff’ ‘Plan B’


In a stinging setback for Republican House Speaker John Boehner, a lack of support from inside his own party for his “fiscal cliff” fall-back plan forced him late Thursday to cancel a much-trumpeted vote on the measure.

“The House did not take up the tax measure today because it did not have sufficient support from our members to pass,” Boehner said in a written statement released after an emergency meeting of House Republicans.

The measure, dubbed “Plan B,” would have let Bush-era tax cuts expire on income above $1 million annually, while extending them for everyone else. It appeared that Boehner faced a rebellion from conservatives opposed to any tax hike, while House Democrats starved the bill of their support, making passage impossible.

Boehner’s dramatic defeat cast fresh doubt on efforts to avert the “fiscal cliff” and spare Americans across-the-board income tax hikes come Jan. 1. Those increases, coupled with deep automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect the same day, could plunge the fragile economy into a new recession. Talks between the speaker and President Barack Obama were at a stalemate, according to aides on both sides.

After the cancellation of the vote, Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor announced on Twitter the House "has concluded legislative business for the week. The House will return after the Christmas holiday when needed."

Boehner’s “Plan B” had aimed to shift any blame for going over the "fiscal cliff" to Obama and Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid. Polls show a narrow majority of Americans say they would hold the GOP responsible if a deal is not reached to avert the "cliff."

“Now it is up to the president to work with Senator Reid on legislation to avert the fiscal cliff,” the speaker said. He pointed to House passage of Republican bills that would stop all of the tax increases and replace the automatic cuts. “The Senate must now act.”

The vote had initially been scheduled for 7:30 p.m. But House Republican leaders’ vote counting showed up coming up short. Rather than suffer a defeat in a floor vote, they pulled the bill.

Earlier, the White House had pressed Boehner to stick with negotiations with Obama and threatened to veto “Plan B,” which top Senate Democrats mocked as “dead on arrival” in the upper chamber.

“Instead of taking the opportunity that was presented to them to continue to negotiate what could be a very helpful, large deal for the American people, the Republicans in the House have decided to run down an alley that has no exit while we all watch,” Obama press secretary Jay Carney told reporters.

Carney also indicated that communications, even at the staff level, were on hold.

One early sign of trouble for Boehner came in a too-narrow-for-comfort vote victory on the second part of his plan, which would have replaced the automatic cuts in defense and domestic spending–the so-called “sequester”–with a Republican alternative. That measure passed by a 215-209 margin.

Before that, lawmakers had defeated a Democratic attempt to derail the process by a 179-243 margin.

The “Plan B” push had pitted Boehner against conservative groups like the anti-tax Club for Growth and Heritage Action–which warned lawmakers the results would go on their permanent records.

But even a victory for Boehner would have been mostly symbolic.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid offered the “fiscal cliff” equivalent to Monty Python’s “dead parrot” sketch, dismissing "Plan B" as a “pointless political stunt,” declaring that Boehner’s efforts were “non-starters in the Senate” and insisting that “House Republicans know that the bill has no future.”

“If they don’t know it now, tell them what I said,” Reid said. “It’s time for Republicans to get serious” about negotiating with Obama. (Anyone still think the parrot is just resting? No. 2 Senate Democrat Dick Durbin bluntly declared “Plan B” to be “dead on arrival.”)

Reid also announced that the Senate would be back at work on Dec. 27. (Earlier, Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said representatives would not leave town immediately after the "Plan B" vote.)

Boehner shrugged off Reid’s comments.

“After today, Senate Democrats and the White House are going to have to act on this measure,” he told reporters. “And if Senate Democrats and the White House refuse to act, they’ll be responsible for the largest tax hike in American history.”

Boehner had declared himself “hopeful” that he and Obama can reach a broader deal and insisted he was “not convinced at all that when the bill passes the House today it will die in the Senate.”

The White House, which had already leveled a veto threat, blasted “Plan B” in a blog post as “nothing more than a dangerous diversion” that scraps funding for services like Meals on Wheels, which reaches some 1.7 million elderly people, as well as child care programs and initiatives that help homeowners prevent foreclosure.

Some analysts had noted that Obama and Boehner were just a few billion dollars apart and that “Plan B” could turn out to the be the legislative vehicle for any final compromise deal.

“We will have to be here the 27th no matter what happens,” Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer said. “If there’s no agreement we have to be here to try and hammer out something. If there is an agreement it’ll take several days to write it up–our poor staffs will have to be doing it during the holiday–and then vote on it the 27th.”

Democrats argued that Obama’s latest offer to Boehner included a sizable concession. The president said Monday that he’d accept rates going up on household income above $400,000, rather than $250,000, the number he cited throughout his reelection campaign.

Obama's new proposal also calls for raising $1.2 trillion in new tax revenues on individual income–down from $1.4 trillion in his previous proposal and $1.6 trillion in his opening gambit–coupled with about $1 trillion in spending cuts. The president’s proposal includes about $130 billion saved by adopting lower cost-of-living adjustments for Social Security, something liberal Democrats oppose.

Republicans charged that the president was relying on dodgy math by including interest that won’t have to be paid on the national debt thanks to the savings–even though Boehner has embraced that accounting maneuver in the past.

Early in the day, Boehner himself had rejected charges that “Plan B” showed that he feared he would be unable to rally enough Republicans behind a more comprehensive deal.

“Listen, the president knows that I’ve been able to keep my word on every agreement we’ve ever made,” he said.

Yahoo.com