NYJetsFan.com Forums: Phone Tag And Wrong Numbers: The Collapse Of The Debt Talks - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

Jets fresh off the bye prepare to stomp Washington
azjetfan Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:07 PM) Dolphins have also fired their DC
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:24 PM) I am composed. 115 and I may see things differently but he has never pissed me off. He is just trying to make his point of view and I mine nothing more
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:25 PM) I just feel the rule is a very bad rule to give the offense the ball back for losing the ball in the endzone because of a batted ball and feel the NFL is far to offense firendly these days thats all
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:27 PM) I know many agree with that. I get that many changes have been made to limit things like brain damage and other injuries some season ending and career ending but defenses cant play hard like they used to and pathetic calls on defenses have ruinbed many games.
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:29 PM) Thats why brought up the Jets Fish game. The balls were clearly uncatcahable and a light tug on the jersey shouldn't be a pi. Whatever happened to the uncatchable ball rule?"
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:33 PM) and as far as that montage I did have ESPN on for 2 hours after the game because I wanted to see all the reactions and get a clear understanding of this old rule and I never saw a bunch of clips where flags were thrown for the play in question. So I asked for proof. If it was on ESPN it wasn't on ESPN1 maybe ESPN 2 ,3 or news. Its not wrong or brutal to ask for proof when he stated he saw it on ESPN I had the channel on and didn't see what he claimed he saw and still haven't seen any video of proof of his claims
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:36 PM) But as I said not mad at all. 115 and I are cool and always have been Ive never been mad at him in anyway. This is a fan forum and we dispute. If we all agreed on everything there would be no point of the forum. Disputes on stats and calls make things interesting, and makes each of use see things from different points of view
Jetsfan115 Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:56 PM) it was on whatever channel the game itself came on
Jetsfan115 Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:56 PM) and for the record I don't have any issue with anything rob said. I just disagree with it
Jetsfan115 Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:57 PM) I do think rules are too offense friendly, but I think in this case, when someone blatently breaks a rule ti should be punished
Jetsfan115 Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:57 PM) but then again pacman got away with ripping off a players helmet and didn't get a penatly
Jetsfan115 Icon : (08 October 2015 - 03:57 PM) refs need to be more consistent
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 09:04 PM) Hell yeah! Pac 12 AZ State Jaelen Strong. Not a Texans fan but and dont watch a ton of college football but do watch the Pac 12 for football and basketball growing up in Phoenix and also a Suns fan and liking the Cardinals since they moved to AZ .Was a Jets fan though before Az got the cardinals . Strong was really good for AZ State.
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 09:05 PM) Havent studied up on strong for the Texans but will have to since the announcers said he hasnt played much. I want to know if he has been injured or not performing. He has good hands and size
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 09:08 PM) I actually was debating on starting the Colts witth Jets D on bye week glad I dropped them. Wasn't much to choose from. Some decent defenses but bad matchups. took a chance on the Jags this week hoping they can shut down Tampa
ROBJETS Icon : (08 October 2015 - 09:10 PM) Oh and thanks for that 115. people took it wrong. we were simply debating our opinions with passion for our love of football with no animosity and people took it wrong. Easy to misunderstand texts
Jetsfan115 Icon : (09 October 2015 - 11:21 AM) yeah people don't realize it's ok to disagree on the internet without it being 2 people hating each other lol
RetireChrebet Icon : (09 October 2015 - 12:30 PM) I think if the defense touches a live football in the end zone, period, it should be ruled a touchback.
RetireChrebet Icon : (09 October 2015 - 12:30 PM) Talking about fumbles, not passes, of course.
RetireChrebet Icon : (09 October 2015 - 12:31 PM) That's the simplest way to combat any confusion about the rule.
RetireChrebet Icon : (09 October 2015 - 12:32 PM) If you don't like that rule, then don't fumble in the end zone your trying to score in.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (09 October 2015 - 02:21 PM) it's gotta be possession.
RetireChrebet Icon : (09 October 2015 - 04:03 PM) I know what the rule is. In proposing a rule change. Evidently, the way it is now is too complicated. If a defense touches a live football in the end zone it should be their ball at the 20. Problem solved.
RetireChrebet Icon : (09 October 2015 - 04:03 PM) I'm*
Jetsfan115 Icon : (09 October 2015 - 04:44 PM) what if the defense touches it whole trying tor ecover but doens't get it and the offense jumps on it first?
ROBJETS Icon : (09 October 2015 - 05:56 PM) You may not agree with it 115 but the way I look at it is if the offense recovered it it would be a touchdown. Its ok for a punter, qb, or rb ,etc. to deliberately take a safety so they dont get a punt blocked for a td or to avoid giving the ball up on the 1-2 yard line giving up a near definite td. An also those safeties by the O sometimes saves the game because giving up 2 instead of 7 keeps the game in reach at times.
ROBJETS Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:03 PM) Thats why I disagree with the rule. The offense gets the breaks of only giving up 2 points on O. but when fumbkling into the endzone and out it is always ruled a touchback even if the defender or O tries to recoiver the ball in the endzone and the ball goes out of bounds. Thats why I think batting the ball out of the endzone should still be a touchback instead of giving the ball back to the O that fumbled the ball into the endzone. Just dont feel that they should get a chance to get the ball back for an almost automatic td when they fumbled into the endzone just because of a batted ball. Its something that could litterally cause the defense that made a great play to lose simply because of a vbatted ball. Yet if they try to recover it it and it goes out its a touchback. I just feel its to game changing and a bad rule to give the O the ball back after they messed up bad because that play was the difference between a win and loss. The O fumbles so giving the O the ball back is like saying your great def play was worthless.
ROBJETS Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:04 PM) Just feel that its a bad rule since it would have almost definitely changed the game winner.
ROBJETS Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:08 PM) Just to many good rules for the O these days and to many bad rules for the D. this isn't college where offense dominates in most games. In the pros I want to see an equal playing field and not how its become so offensive friendly. Our own Jets have lost a lot of games on defensive calls alone after stopping the O. 3rd down and a mile and a penalty cost a 1st down and in many cases the game for us. Basically that's why I'm against the rule. I want an equal playing field in the pros nothing more.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:26 PM) Offense is in control of the ball, they should have that option. Both teams get to play offense it's not unfiar
Jetsfan115 Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:26 PM) a major defensive play is more game changing then a major offensive play too.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:26 PM) turnover ratio is better linked to win/loss then any other stat
Jetsfan115 Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:27 PM) even in your case the offense gives up 2 point and posession back with good field position and ball control
ROBJETS Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:33 PM) Lets just a agree to disagree on this topic. We both see the situation different and neither of us will budge on this. best we just let it go and see if the NFL starts enforcing the rule more or changes it at some point. Either way. All the coaches and players in the league now know the rule so I doubt it will deliberately happen again any time soon....but then again who knows...in the games there are a lot of stupid fouls out of frustration, taunting, etc.
ROBJETS Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:34 PM) And the fans and officials are now aware of a rule almost no one but the officials knew.
ROBJETS Icon : (09 October 2015 - 06:37 PM) Heck Im upset that we arent 4-0 right now with all thr mistakes against the Eagles and still almost coming back. I feel we need every win we can get especially with the Bills looking decent and always having to deal with the pats every year. Be nice to win the division for once. So tired of seeing the Pats win and get a bye almost every year.
MikeGangGree... Icon : (09 October 2015 - 11:12 PM) Why do the Jets DBs have to talk about the Giants WRs!!? Why can't they just worry about our own team.
MikeGangGree... Icon : (09 October 2015 - 11:13 PM) I think all jets fans remember the last time our DBs talked crap about a Giants WR..
MikeGangGree... Icon : (09 October 2015 - 11:13 PM) The jets should just worry about the Jets!!
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 10:29 AM) jets and giants players hang out all the time
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 10:29 AM) i'm sure they dont care lol
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 11:24 AM) well bills won, we need a win this week to stay inn 2nd
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 11:25 AM) at least miami is pretty much done but we have to compete with NE and buffalo still
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 11:26 AM) as santana said, it's probably all in fun. most of these guys in the NFL are friends with players form other teams. I'm sure some jets/giants players are friends with each other
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 10:31 PM) Vick = $$
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Phone Tag And Wrong Numbers: The Collapse Of The Debt Talks

#1 User is offline   Chaos Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 3,176
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 July 2011 - 12:52 PM

Phone tag and wrong numbers: The collapse of the debt talks
By Carrie Budoff Brown | Politico


As he had done often during their weeks of budget talks, President Barack Obama tried to get House Speaker John Boehner on the phone late Thursday, but never heard back.

The silence continued into Friday, and White House aides began to wonder. It never took this long for the president to get his phone calls returned, particularly from Boehner. After all, the two chatted regularly, forging a working relationship over the many weeks of debt-ceiling negotiations — two men who were each trying to lead their parties someplace they didn’t really want to go.

Obama finally heard from Boehner’s office at 3:30 p.m. Friday: Expect a call in two hours.

No, the president responded, how about right now?

Not possible, Obama was told, the speaker isn’t available.

It was then that the White House knew the president wouldn’t be announcing a grand bargain on the debt and deficit anytime soon. Maybe never.
The speed with which the the latest round of negotiations collapsed — from signs Thursday morning that Obama and Boehner were nearing a deal to a complete breakdown late Friday — was a stunning reversal in the long effort to reach a compromise between the Democratic president and congressional Republicans. It left the country’s credit rating in jeopardy and the president more than a little peeved.

“I couldn’t get a phone call returned,” Obama said Friday, as if still not quite believing it himself. “I’ve been left at the altar now a couple of times.”

Boehner’s aides say the reason he didn’t call back was simple: They didn’t have anything more to discuss. Obama had pressed for more revenue in the package, and Republicans just weren’t going to go for it, Boehner said Friday.

“Sometimes it’s good to back away from the tree and take a look at the forest,” Boehner said. “And yesterday afternoon, after the president demanded more revenue in this package, I came back … away from the tree to take a look at the forest.”

If there’s any short-term political gain, it might go to Obama, who sounded fed up Friday night recounting his half of the story, painting Republicans as ideological purists bent on cutting popular entitlement programs to protect the wealthy. And Obama made clear who was boss — summoning Boehner and other congressional leaders to the White House Saturday morning.

“We have run out of time,” Obama said. “And they are going to have to explain to me how it is that we are going to avoid default.”

His hasty appearance Friday night in the White House briefing room capped a 24-hour period in which Obama went from believing he was on the cusp of an agreement to literally waiting by the phone and ultimately losing the opportunity to seal an historic deficit-reduction deal worth more than $3 trillion.

“I think that one of the questions that the Republican Party is going to have to ask itself is can they say yes to anything? Can they say yes to anything?” Obama said. “I mean, keep in mind it’s the Republican Party that has said that the single most important thing facing our country is deficits and debts. We’ve now put forward a package that would significantly cut deficits and debt. It would be the biggest debt reduction package that we’ve seen in a very long time.”

The negotiations broke down over the same issue that has stalled bipartisan cooperation for months, and tied American politics in knots for the last three decades: taxes.

From the White House’s perspective, Obama and Boehner were on track for a deal Thursday morning. And even though they were furious at the prospect, Democratic congressional leaders thought the same. They were put on notice late Thursday night to expect an announcement as early as Friday morning that Obama and Boehner had agreed to a framework, with plans to release details Monday and hold a House vote by Wednesday.

By that point, Obama had made nearly-unthinkable concessions for a Democratic president.

He agreed to $1.2 trillion cuts in discretionary spending, and almost $250 billion in cuts to Medicare, including changing the eligibility age, eliminating certain supplemental insurance policies and cutting back on some health provider payments. He agreed to a new inflation calculator that would affect Social Security recipients. And he committed to changes to Social Security in order to make the program solvent.

There were just a few outstanding issues, senior administration officials said.

Republicans had proposed rolling back portions of Obama’s prized health care law if Congress failed next year to enact the entitlement and tax changes. Obama, however, wasn’t going for it.

They needed to come to terms on depth of the cuts to Medicaid.

And Obama had wanted an additional $400 billion raised through tax reform, arguing that Boehner was bleeding Republican support and would need to bring more House Democrats on board.

The president spoke with Boehner by phone from the White House Thursday afternoon about the increased revenues, saying if the speaker objected, there were probably other options.

Just get back to me, Obama told Boehner before they hung up.

“He was very open with the speaker, (saying) ‘I understand you may not be able to come up on the revenue and if you can’t, I’m open to doing something else,’” a senior White House official said Friday.

The White House always viewed the details as in flux: as the amount of cuts rose, Obama sought to balance that politically with more revenues. White House aides say the push for $400 billion in additional revenues was never intended to be a make-or-break demand, but more along the lines of hoping for some give on Boehner’s part.

Boehner, however, considered the pitch as an attempt to move the goalposts late in the game.

Boehner was willing to accept a revenue baseline of about $800 billion above what taxes would be if all the current Bush-era tax breaks were extended, a real concession on his part. At a White House meeting last Sunday, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner signed off, Republicans said, on the Boehner proposal — which was a concession in turn by the administration since it had shot for a higher target.

With that potential compromise in place, Boehner felt encouraged to proceed with the talks. But circumstances changed, Republicans said, after the bipartisan Senate “Gang of Six” announced its proposal Tuesday which assumes substantially more new revenue for deficit reduction than the president had sought.

Boehner and Cantor already told the president when he first raised it that they wouldn’t move the revenue target, Republican officials said.

“I do trust him as a negotiator, but you have to understand, every step of this process was difficult,” Boehner said after he ended negotiations. “Dealing with the White House is like dealing with a bowl of Jell-O.”

The speaker spent Thursday night and Friday talking with staff, other Republican leaders and the rank-and-file about the next steps, which is why the president didn’t hear from him, aides said.

Back at the White House, senior administration aides, unaware that the negotiations were in their final hours, spent much of Friday working through technical details with top House Republican staff.

“We expected they were going to work through it,” a senior administration official said. “They were meeting on the Hill all morning.”
But by the time Obama and Boehner connected at 5:30 p.m., House Republican aides were already briefing Hill reporters on why the talks had collapsed.

#2 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,169
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 23 July 2011 - 01:21 PM

No matter who you support in these issues, it is nice to see Polititions standing for there beliefs and making good on there pre- election promises.
Posted Image

#3 User is offline   SecondHandJets Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7,492
  • Joined: 28-November 05
  • Gender:Male

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 23 July 2011 - 09:39 PM

LMAO. Can someone please explain to me how the Dow is over 12,000? If I'm an investor, I'm pulling my money out of anything that has a remote connection to the US government and shorting the shit out it.

#4 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,169
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 23 July 2011 - 10:41 PM

View PostSecondHandJets, on 23 July 2011 - 09:39 PM, said:

LMAO. Can someone please explain to me how the Dow is over 12,000? If I'm an investor, I'm pulling my money out of anything that has a remote connection to the US government and shorting the shit out it.

If your in for the short term gains that is probably a great move. It will drop soon and you can buy cheap. Thats what I am doing with my wells stock. Once the earnings report comes out Wells will drop. Then I will pounce,
Posted Image

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users