Great posts Navy

Happy Valentine’s Day

Do you think the will mend their fences with GOProud?

I mean it's like a rendezvous with DeNile, a knife, or a meat Axe.

A $3.73 trillion spending blueprint that pledges $1.1 trillion in deficit savings over the next decade through spending cuts and tax increases is not enough for the GOP/ TEA PARTY. The President saide he would go over the budget with a scapel. Boehner says use a meat Axe.

Fewer People Want Spending to Grow, But Most Cuts Remain Unpopular
[snip]
For the most part, however, there is NOT a great deal of support for CUTTING spending, though in a few cases support for reductions has grown noticeably.

When it comes to health care, 56 percent of Democrats favor increased spending compared to 22 percent of Republicans. Forty-seven percent of Republicans want to decrease spending compared to 8 percent of Democrats.

-- On unemployment aid, 47 percent of Democrats want to increase it compared to 11 percent of Republicans. Half of Republicans want to cut it, compared to 11 percent of Democrats.
President Obama’s overall job rating has ticked up: 49% approve of Obama’s job performance while 42% disapprove.

Fully 65% say Obama and GOP leaders are not working together on the important issues facing the country; an almost identical percentage (67%) expressed this view at the beginning of last year. As was the case a year ago, far more of those who say the two sides are not working together BLAME REPUBLICAN LEADERS (31%) than the president (19%).

http:/people-press.org/report/702/">http://people-press.org/report/702/">http://people-press.org/report/702/http://people-press.org/report/702/

Boehner said the budget plan President Obama “will continue to destroy jobs by spending too much, borrowing too much and taxing too much.” Really? What does Boehner plan to do boo hoo or work with our President? Speaker Boehner the Amerian people support less cutting and “NO” tears and fears.

Egypt’s Nile Revolution proved through unity the “Yes We Can” spirit works and so we too can work together. Social networking and non violence was the battle ground for the Egypyions. We connot go down the rabbit whole.We are the lions.

Holla Gop/TeaBaggers can you hear it now?

Barry’s new budget is a REALLY bad joke on the American people. Call him the “Trillion Dollar Man” for yet another planned Trillion dollar deficit. It’s really too bad Barry couldn’t figure out a way to sell deficits at a profit. He would be a very rich man because God knows he is an expert at producing them.

Four straight years of Trillion plus dollars in deficits and his big new idea is to save $100 Billion a year for the next 10 years?? It would be Hillaryously funny if it wasn’t so pathetic.

From MSNBC.com:

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is sending Congress a $3.73 trillion spending blueprint that pledges $1.1 trillion in deficit savings over the next decade through spending cuts and tax increases.

Obama's new budget projects that the deficit for the current year will surge to an all-time high of $1.65 trillion. That reflects a sizable tax-cut agreement reached with Republicans in December. For 2012, the administration sees the imbalance declining to $1.1 trillion, giving the country a record four straight years of $1 trillion-plus deficits.

Senior administration officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity in advance of the formal release of the budget, said that Obama would achieve two-thirds of his projected $1.1 trillion in deficit savings through spending cuts including a five-year freeze on many domestic programs.

"Votes are no longer won by candidates based on their merit and ideology; they are being bought by “Special Interest Groups” such as the Koch Brothers, Karl Rove and the US Chamber of Commerce to name just a few."

__________________________________________

And George Soros, labor unions, and rich Hollywood celebrities to name a few more.

How is $1.1 trillion in savings over 10 years a bad joke? Oh, that's right - the budget doesn't screw over enough of the middle class, so it must be a bad idea by default.

Of course, I highly doubt you even read the whole article before heading to your keyboard.

Obama's budget submission will likely dominate political discussion this week. Maybe that's why the administration chose to release their proposals for overhauling the federal government role in housing on Friday. That way, they can at least momentarily avoid the bigtime heat they will surely be getting from the left on this issue. But as the great Joe Louis once said, "you can run, but you can't hide."

The main features of the administration proposals would make any Republican proud:

- require larger down payments and higher fees for home loans
- reduce the number of borrowers getting government backed loans
- eliminate Fannie and Freddie and put private firms at the center of the mortgage market

These are all terrific ideas. The housing market has been distorted for generations because of government interventions that effectively reduce the real economic cost of buying a home. Those distortions played a key role in the economic meltdown. And one aspect of the administration proposals that's really cool is that they implicitly acknowledge the role government housing policy played in that meltdown.

Here's what Barry Zigas of the Consumer Federation of America had to say about all this:

"The administration today has laid out a series of options that could lead to the abandonment of a nearly 70-year commitment to affordable homeownership by working American families."

The mindset embodied by that statement is at the heart of not only this problem, but the entire culture of entitlement in this country as well. The fact of the matter is there is no free lunch, and there are costs associated with any government policy that purports to make things in our lives more "affordable" whether it be housing or health insurance for the uninsured. But in these difficult fiscal times, there is just no sane argument for government to continue to spend scarce dollars on anything but the most basic of government functions. Regardless of whether people feel "entitled" to those dollars or not.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/11/AR2011021106712.html

Now we see the true colors of Obama, as if we didn't already know them. A $1.6 trillion dollar deficit for the 2011 budget, and the snake-oil salesmen Obama is trying to sell this as a path to deficit reduction. Now even Obama's Treasury Department is telling him that interest rates for servicing the debt will jump from $185 billion to $554 billion in 2015. Obama is going to have to explain exactly how tripling the interest payments on the debt is "deficit redution".

Obama, in the face of having to show leadership to rein in the federal governments out of control spending, has once again voted "Present".

"It's a slow train wreck coming and we all know it's going to happen," said Bret Barker, an interest-rate analyst at Los Angeles-based TCW Group Inc.

Actually it's a high-speed train to our county's financial ruin.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-14/geithner-quietly-tells-obama-debt-to-gnp-cost-poised-to-increase-to-record.html

Excellent posts, USN and Bev. It annoys Conservatives to hear "where are the jobs", protesting that there hasn't been time. Perhaps if they weren't wasting time attacking the rights of everyone disliked by Cultural Conservatives and trying to shut down the social safety net they'd find the time to do what the majority of voters actually had in mind for them.

This budget issue is really not that difficult. It's a choice between America as we know it and America as Conservatives would remake it. It's the social safety net vs the new aristocracy. It's adults who realize spending must be brought to reasonable levels vs the temper tantrums of those who'd use it as an excuse to cut the programs we all depend on without actually reducing the deficit. It's the knowledge that stimulus must be withdrawn carefully vs the mindset that brought us the massive recession of 1937 by slashing spending too much for a still weak economy.

GMJ: How is $1.1 trillion in savings over 10 years a bad joke?

The increase in interest payments on the debt alone will consume those "savings" 3x's over each year. That makes this so-called trillion dollar "savings" a complete joke.

GREAT Post, Navy and Beverly. Thanks

Want to read a really good article on Obama's budget proposal?

Try this one

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-14/obama-to-submit-3-7-trillion-budget-republicans-promise-to-oppose-plan.html

This year's deficit is now projected to be $1.6 trillion, as opposed to the $1.4 trillion projection of just a few weeks ago. ( where have I heard that $2 billion figure before? Oh, never mind).

He proposes "cuts"- but the devil is in the details. That is because his spending increases far outweigh his cuts. It is like telling your spouse that you are cutting your household budget by cutting your grocery spending, but you are also planning to increase your entertainment spending.

This budget, folks, is DOA.

By the way, pay attention to some of the more interesting proposals- the ones the administration hopes you will not notice. Take the "Doc fix"- which was left out of HCR so that CBO could score it "correctly"- that is, that it would cut spending. I guess leaving health care costs out of a health care bill makes sense in D.C.- in the corporate world, such book cooking would land you in Federal prison.

Maybe that is something to be addressed by this congress- application of generally accepted accounting rules to bills submitted to CBO for scoring. That would make all kinds of common sense.

It would save a lot of trouble- not to mention money.

FR: Bottom line: Presidential budgets are more political documents than anything else, and this budget is by someone who wants to win re-election. Now we wait for the GOP’s counter-offer.

I see we're back to grading the President on a curve. The country needs true leadership to resolve the crushing debt of the country, but again the media gives Obama a complete pass on his lack thereof. Going forward, I guess getting Obama re-elected in the prime objective of the media, and to he** with the people and the country that will suffer for it.

Neither party is being serious about about cutting spending. Until everything is on the table across the board nether can be acceptable.

If we are to use the premise that cutting spending is important, then we need to address waste in the government right off the top. Both parties are showing about 1 Trillion in spending cuts, lets say 100 Billion per year.

If we need to weed out waste then lets get out of Afghan - 100 Billion savings per year, Roll back the tax cuts for the2% another 150 Billion per year in savings (these cuts do nothing to create jobs nor do they substantially help the economy), cut DOD 10%, get rid of the waste, fraud, redundant programs and those that no longer work, Billions more saved. Do the same with Medicare and Medicaid, more savings.

We should be looking at 2X - 3X this 100 Billion per year. Anything less is just more rhetoric and CYA and they (both dems and reps) cannot be taken serious.

WSJ Report out today that major economists predict that the economy is on track to increase at a rate faster than what has been seen since 2003.

JoAnnaSmith1

Joanna your as animated as you are out of touch,

so i will ask you President Joannasmith1, please submitt you budget to the american people and cut the 1.2 trillion in 1 year you have said the republicans want to do over 5 years.

please use a excel spread sheet and please detail you budget, since you and steve thing you can do it better.
Please, submitt you budget, Joanna and steve. lets see how smart president Obama is and how Dumb you are?

Let's see...

President Obama projects cutting deficit spending over 10 years by $1.1 trillion...his debt commission would cut $4 trillion over the same period.

The deficit for this year alone is projected at $1.6 trillion...the highest annual deficit ever.

Next year, the projected deficit is $1.1 trillion...the exact same amount President Obama expects to cut over 10 years...that's right, OVER 10 YEARS.

The CBO has estimated 10 year deficit totals ranging from $7 trillion to a whopping $12 trillion.

No one should be impressed by spending cuts totaling $1.1 trillion over 10 years...least of all, President Obama.

Maybe he should pay attention to the recommendations of his own hand-picked, blue-ribbon debt commission.

All this hot air coming from the right, righteous indignation, bellicous rhetoric.....and not a positive idea or a plan for jobs or to help the country to move forward.

Just where are the plans or the ideas, if all you have to offer is criticism and naysaying, it wont help....but I guess y'all know that. Cripple the country, cripple the President, whatever, none of you have any interest in going forward.

xcellent posts, USN and Bev. It annoys Conservatives to hear "where are the jobs", protesting that there hasn't been time. Perhaps if they weren't wasting time attacking the rights of everyone disliked by Cultural Conservatives and trying to shut down the social safety net they'd find the time to do what the majority of voters actually had in mind for them.

Government does not create sustainable jobs, it is beyond their scope and their power. All they can do is create a climate that is favorable to business which would in turn create jobs. This has much to do with taxes and other regulation.

Before you try to put words in my mouth, let me say I am by no means saying we need so stop all regulation or give way more tax breaks. We do need to regulate and tax smarter though. You have to think about a county from a business standpoint. In our global economy, companies have the ability to set up shop just about anywhere and are able to still sell their goods/services around the globe. The US has to be competitive with other countries if we want companies to stay here or start here. If we are not competitive the US will loose these businesses.

Joann: Reducing the deficit to only interest on the debt in 10 years will be a far cry from where we're at now. And BTW, if the annual deficit spending is on debt interest, then any money we put towards the debt principal makes much more impact.

John B, Des Moines, IA

It annoys Conservatives to hear "where are the jobs"

That's right; just look at JoAnnaSmith1 quoting a distortion from Bloomberg aka a part of FOX Noise's ECHO CHAMBER.

I find it strange she just now see the true colors of our President.

Do you have attention deficit disorder; Jo Anna? The President campaigned on not giving the store away to the crooks, liars, and robber barons on Wall Street.

Hint: JoAnna just because it is written in a right wing rag does NOT make it true.

no joe, no bo, nj

This budget, folks, is DOA.

Yea No kidding, No Jo the president is sending his budget to the house, and it will be up to the house republicans and tea party, to trim, gut it, hack it. once the final budget is passes and the amiercan people will see what the president proposed and what the republicans have done for the rich at the expence of screwing the middle class, once the middle starts to suffer more than we have, Obama will get his second term, and the republicans will be called out. look at the increase of the deficts right now since november, 400 billion for tax cuts the republicans said will revive the economy.

No Jo, this time next year when we see once again that tax cuts only increase the debt, and spending cuts only screw the middle, there will be another revolt and this one will make egypt look like a cook out.

Bag:

No one should be impressed by spending cuts totaling $1.1 trillion over 10 years...least of all, President Obama.

Yeah. Let's do what the Republicans want: Slash spending now and bring on another recession. The Republicans are experts at starting recessions and depressions.

Maybe he should pay attention to the recommendations of his own hand-picked, blue-ribbon debt commission.

You mean he should listen to experts like "green weenie" Alan Simpson? I can't imagine why Obama put that clown on that commission.

Terrific posts, Navy, Beverly, John B.

Where are the jobs, Speaker Boehner? Guess conservatives do not like that question posed now but the past two years, it appeared regularly on First Read. Boehner whined that democrats did not help him last week--what help did Boehner provide while America hovered on the brink of financial and economic collapse? The GOPTP gets zero sympathy from me since it was they who created the massive debt for 30 years while telling Americans that deficits don't matter, that voo doo economics is the answer and that shared sacrifice really involves only sacrifices from the middle and low income wage earners.

A newspaper cartoon this weekend made me smile. There was Boehner, Cantor and the third guy whose name escapes me sitting on chairs in the House Chamber while some little characters running around with tea bags and tea pots on their heads have the three GOPTP leaders tied with rope.

Gingerbread Mama-

"Just where are the plans or the ideas...?"

Glad you asked, GM.

They're in the report of The National Commission On Fiscal Responsibility And Reform...the group empanelled by President Obama to provide him with recommendations on how to address the debt crisis.

GMF: Joann: Reducing the deficit to only interest on the debt in 10 years will be a far cry from where we're at now.

You seem unclear on what Obama is doing. A 10 year budget isn't worth the paper it's printed on. The objectives to resolve deficit reduction are to be done today, not in some mythical out years when Obama will be long gone on as President. Any proposal by Obama after next year is pure fantasy, because at the rate the economy is going, American will choose to elect someone else besides Obama because he seems incapable of doing the job.

Jeff: so i will ask you President Joannasmith1, please submitt you budget to the american people

As Mixed Bag stated: They're in the report of The National Commission On Fiscal Responsibility And Reform...the group empanelled by President Obama to provide him with recommendations on how to address the debt crisis.

"How is $1.1 trillion in savings over 10 years a bad joke?"

___________________________________________

If you can't figure out what the problem is with blowing a close to $5 Trillion hole in the budget over four years and claiming credit for saving $1.1 trillion over 10 years, there's nothing I can say or do that will help you.

Who says American's are falling behind in math skills??

Obfuscate all you like, Houston...

But it's President Obama's own commission...and he asked for their recommendations.

I'll be the first to admint, I'm not too bright about a lot of this deficit business, but I'm going to go out on a limb here:

One side says cutting spending will fix it sooner. The other side says increasing taxes will fix it sooner.

Makes me wonder what could be accomplished by doing BOTH at the SAME TIME???

OK, people- tear me up....

Bevy: Hint: JoAnna just because it is written in a right wing rag does NOT make it true

Odd, I don't see you whining about the consant barrage of the copy-and-pastes from thinkprogress seen here all the time. Would that be your version of the truth? And Bloomberg is anyting but "right-wing".

Hey kids what time is it?

______________________________________________________________________________________

It's time for the NEW Dodd-Frank CONSUMER PROTECTION AGENCY to ACTUALLY TELL THE TRUTH and send NOTICES to ALL THE NEWBORN, KIDS, TEENS and YOUNG VOTERS: "YOU will be PAYING for Obama's RECKLESS SPENDING for the REST OF YOUR NATURAL LIVES"

DBO:

One side says cutting spending will fix it sooner. The other side says increasing taxes will fix it sooner.

Makes me wonder what could be accomplished by doing BOTH at the SAME TIME???

========================

See the Presidents report on "The National Commission On Fiscal Responsibility And Reform".

Glad to see you're on board.

Did not happen here, Jeff.

Our governor cut spending, including on schools. A few weeks later, the tax payees enacted deeper cuts- by voting against 60% of the school budgets.

That means that PARENTS have to transport their own children to school- not the senior citizen down the block. It means they have to pay for sports equipment, and volunteer for the booster club- like I had to do. It means they have to pay musical instrument rental fees, and fees for class trips.

I was amazed at how many things I had paid for for my son, that were now "free". So were a lot of other people.

Entire programs lost their state funding, and the only people crying about it are the folks who ran these programs, who now actually have to do fundraising to keep their doors open.

He has a pretty high approval rating for a governor in a blue state.

I can pretty much guarantee that you would be shocked at how much money your state government is spending on things you find ridiculous. Heck, I bet you would find things in your local government that would make you question the sanity of the people running the town.

Imagine what it is like on the federal level.

Mitch Daniels has said, " you would be amazed at how much spending you would never miss". He proved that in Indiana, where his cuts have gained him an approval rating consistently over 60%.

The federal budget needs to be cut - deeply. Our very survival as a country is at stake.

JoAnnaSmith1

Bevy: Hint: JoAnna just because it is written in a right wing rag does NOT make it true

And are consant barrage of the copy-and-pastes from thinkprogress seen here all the time the truth?

Yes,

Because think progress is actual documentation . Your Bloomberg link was an opinion; and a skewed one at that, about the CBO.

JoAnnaSmith1

Nice link, fiscal responsililty, that is a joke, Joanna, if the republicans really believed in the crap they pass out of there butts, the extention of tax cuts should have never happened, lets be real, they are no more interested in being fiscal responsible than a dope addit is in cleaning up. everything they have done since 2003 is in direct conflict with being fiscal responsible.
It was irresponsible and goes against twhat i read in your link, (thank you) to pass medicade part D 6 trillion to the deficts over 10 years dated back to 2007, 2 unfunded wars, 1.2 trillion in tax cuts, the increases in military spending, when they knew we would not pay for it.
if they had cancled the Bush tax cuts and not passed medicade part D, while we were fighting 2 wars, i and many liberal would have lot more respect for them had they done the fiscal responsible thing , but they did not, they never even considered the budget short falls untill a tax and spend liberal got in to office, and now it fiscal responsible.

YOU SAY OBAMA BUDGET IS A JOKE, WELL IN REALLITY YOUR LINK IS A JOKE, THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WOULD EVER BELIEVE THE REPUBLICANS WOULD ALL THE SUDDEN BE FISCAL RESPONSIBLE.

Again nice link.

All you Liberals:

Do you have something original? "Where are the Jobs"....that is something you all heard on MSNBC from Maddow or Shultz and you take it as gospel.

I don't think any of you voted for a Republican so why does it bother you so? They were mainly put in office to take down Obamacare.

If you didn't vote Republican it is a safe bet to say that you are not aware of the reason they were put into office.

They're in the report of The National Commission On Fiscal Responsibility And Reform...the group empanelled by President Obama to provide him with recommendations on how to address the debt crisis.

So, if all the answers are there, why did Republicans claim it was essential to give them a Congressional majority so they could fix it for us?

Dos this mean Conservatives don't know how they're going to fix it, or does it mean they want to avoid responsibility for a job they requested?

RVZ555

Navy, not sure what lefty/loon website you cut and pasted your rant from, but maybe you should have read it all the way through first.

......."The GOP/TP continues to try and control our individual freedoms via the "Patriot Act". The GOP/TP wants to know what you are reading, who you talk to, what web sites you visit,wWhere you take your vacation, etc. Soon we will all have monitoring devices implanted at birth.".......

===========================================

Yea, well what can you and Mixed Bag tell US about when those caring Republicans/Tea Baggers are going to produce a J O Bs bill? They promised J O B s; haven't seen any or any attempt to produce nary job.

Mixed bag what's it to you? It's not your body.

How many of you have actually READ the Presidents budget proposal? No, not the FOX or MSNBC opinion pieces or the Rush or Glenn propaganda pieces. How many of YOU have actually READ the document?

That's what I thought, not a damned one of you.

But that won't stop the GOP apologists and cheerleaders from attacking it will it?

I have not read the budget. I do not claim to understand the complexities of a budget for a country as complex and diverse and in as much financial difficulty as the United States of America AND NEITHER DO YOU!

Hell, folks, the EXPERTS can't agree.

Why don't we wait and see what's in the budget and what the GOP has to offer rather than going off half cocked and shooting a big hole in our foot, huh?

GEEEZ. Sometimes it just really get's to me. Joanna, No Joe, and the rest of you GOP cheerleaders, you would complain no matter what President Obama did. You don't need to know the details, you don't need to put it in perspective with the delicate condition our economy is in, you don't have to KNOW anything. Your against it, lock stock and barrel, if the President proposes it.

You are not worth arguing with.

Your comments have no validity.

You haven't read the document and you don't know want you are talking about.

Sheesh, what a sad, negative bunch of anti-Americans you are.

Who's paying you? China? Iran? Texas? Who?

And while we're at it, Where the hell are those jobs the GOP has been talking about for the last year HUH?

Yea, well what can you and Mixed Bag tell US about when those caring Republicans/Tea Baggers are going to produce a J O Bs bill? They promised J O B s; haven't seen any or any attempt to produce nary job.

I have already inquired about this below, but you have not answered it. The other day, there was a lot of posting about how good "discussion" can actually be productive.

I have seen countless numbers of your posts in just the past few days asking about where the jobs bill is.

Please discuss some of the things you would like to see in a jobs bill that would help to create long term sustainable jobs and economic growth.

You haven't read the document and you don't know want you are talking about.

How true - but then again it's never stopped them in the past! lol

If they have ALL the answers, when the hell are they going to share them with the rest of us?

Good to see you this morning Skip!

How many of you have actually READ the Presidents budget proposal? No, not the FOX or MSNBC opinion pieces or the Rush or Glenn propaganda pieces. How many of YOU have actually READ the document?

Even worse than that is our elected officials voting on legislation that they have not even read themselves.

There needs to be a strict limit on maximum size a bill can be. This would help to reduce pork spending and would make voting records meaningful. If each bill only addressed one topic at hand, then the voting records would be clear what a politician was actually for or against.

Bag:

Obfuscate all you like, Houston...

But it's President Obama's own commission...and he asked for their recommendations.

Looks like "obfuscate" is another word Bag uses as an insult but doesn't know the meaning of. Other people on the commission opposed the recommendations made by Simpson and Bowles. Actual experts on economics like Paul Krugman have warned that this is the worst possible time to start making big cuts in spending.

NJNB - Our governor cut spending, including on schools....

That means that PARENTS have to transport their own children to school... It means they have to pay musical instrument rental fees, and fees for class trips.

No Jo No Bo - Why the constant trumping of New Jersey's cuts? First it was your rejoicing at the cuts to police officers and fire fighters in Newark and Camden. I'm sure you are aware that Camden is set to lay off nearly half of their entire force as of Jan.

Today we hear from you rejoicing about cuts to school funding. Why would people rejoice at cuts that will cost teacher's jobs and further degrade the quality of education? Apparently New Jerseyians like you are happy to cut funding to educate their children because they are adamant that they will not sacrifice and pay one more red cent in taxes.

Congratulations.

no joe, no bo, nj

Imagine what it is like on the federal level.

Mitch Daniels has said, " you would be amazed at how much spending you would never miss". He proved that in Indiana, where his cuts have gained him an approval rating consistently over 60%.

The federal budget needs to be cut - deeply. Our very survival as a country is at stake.

No Jo first i would like to say, go to Indiana, and see the damage Lee Daniels has done to state of Indiana!!!! the state is broke, not because there in debt, but because of Daniels major infrastructure in Indiana is falling down and he will not spend the money to fix things. case in point, a Major express way from Chicago was shut down and closed it was unsafe and ready to fall down, this came to light after the section of I35 fell in Minnesota. Daniels said that the state can't alot moneys to fix this road I90 that use to carry thousand of Indiana residents to Chicago where they worked. No Jo today 3 years later the expressway is still closed. way to go Indiana, make it hard for your people who pay tax to get to work, and Jobs, In Indiana, where are they, Gary should de declared unlivable and the people made to move, Hammond is about the same, If Daniels was really serious he would cut the income tax rate that is higher than Illinois even with our tax increase, but he can't.

Indiana loosing residents due to the cuts in Education, people are moving across the state line to the southern Chicago burbs, where taxes are cheaper and education is better.

Our governor cut spending, including on schools. A few weeks later, the tax payees enacted deeper cuts- by voting against 60% of the school budgets.

That means that PARENTS have to transport their own children to school- not the senior citizen down the block. It means they have to pay for sports equipment, and volunteer for the booster club- like I had to do. It means they have to pay musical instrument rental fees, and fees for class trips.

That is real nice No Jo, take away music from those who can't afford to pay, take away sports from those who can't afford to pay, make parent loose money from there jobs to take kids to school, because the state does not want to pay for Bus service. you know what will happen from that, will be the same thing Indiana is going though, by cutting so much your are driving people away, as you drive people away your tax base will go down, so then the next year, with more short falls, more will be cut, until people will find other places to live and work. You said as much.

skip Nicholson, Oklahoma City

How many of you have actually READ the Presidents budget proposal? No, not the FOX or MSNBC opinion pieces or the Rush or Glenn propaganda pieces. How many of YOU have actually READ the document?

Skip, I read their worthless"Pledge to America."

It was like a photo album.

It has more pictures than text and no plans. LOL Starting from page 1, then page 8, 10, 11, 12 and so on and so forth out of 48 pages. When I opened it, on the very first page I saw the Statue of Liberty.

Honestly, I thought it was Clarence Thomas's wife, Ginny, all covered in green. You've probably seen Ginny Thomas at the Tea party fund raisers with the same headgear Lady Liberty in New York wears.

http://pledge.gop.gov/resources/library/documents/pledge/a-pledge-to-america.pdf

=================================================

In the Middle Where are the jobs was coined by the Boner not MSNBC.

Skip-----great post---*stands and applauds*

Hopefully whatever real adults there are in Washington will sit down and arrive at a compromise budget---I mean a real compromise, where each side gives a little and gets a little. Not a faux compromise like Senator McConnell said he would be in favor of if all his positions were met. We are in a fragile economic state right now and the deficit will not be solved overnight.

Red, Bev, Navy and all the rest of you right thinking American, good morning and good to see you are out and about.

The PLEDGE TO AMERICA, don't get me started. CONTRACT WITH AMERICA, more toilet paper. Geez, the Brazilian rain forest is being destroyed to publish this garbage? Please.

But my rant today has to do with the knee-jerks. Those GOP commentators who are opposed to something JUST because it comes from the other side. They have not read the President's budget proposal. They don't know what it says. They only know what they've been TOLD it says in a SYNOPSIS format with more opinion in it than fact.

And here they go, if Obama proposed it, we oppose it. Knee-JERK!

They don't have any validity.

They don't know what they are talking about.

More GOP Jaw Flap. Just like their promise to create jobs if we just let their rich contributors continue to get their Bush tax cuts and shove the debt off on the middle-class.

To Paraphrase Mark Twain, "There are lies, damned lies, and the GOP"

Thanks Steeler fan, I appreciate the feedback. You are right on the mark Pard, hopefully we'll see some intelligent compromises that will move the country forward, probably dragging the Tea Party kicking and screaming behind us like a Toddler in a Walmart.

Oh BTW, the theme for today is "GOP JAW FLAP". Really the only thing they are good at.

Skip - did YOU have to mention Wal-Mart? ;o)))

"Other people on the commission opposed the recommendations made by Simpson and Bowles."

The National Commission On Fiscal Responsiblity and Reform completed and issued its report with recommendations in response to President Obama's mandate.

That's a fact...not an opinion.

More obfuscation, Houston.

The word is perfectly appropriate as applied to your narrative...you simply refuse to acknowledge it, sunshine.

Your problem...not mine.

:-)

Bush managed to load $5 trillion on the debt to bring it to $10 trillion during in his 8 years in office. We now have Obama on record to push that debt to $16.8 trillion, in his 4 years in office.

And Obama is talking about $1 trillion dollars in cuts in 10 years. So say the projection for deficit spending over that time was $1.2 trillion per year, so that would be $12 trillion in deficit spending to bring the debt to $26 trillion dollars. Obama is saying with his magnificant "cuts", the overall debt number would be $25 trillion.

So now you see why Obama's numbers are such a joke.

Wow the conserrvatives are out in force early today. The Presidne must have done something right!

"...hopefully we'll see some intelligent compromises..."

The National Commission On Fiscal Responsibility has recommended across-the-board spending cuts on everything from defense to entitlements, in addition to increased taxation, in order to cut $4 trillion in deficit spending.

Were those recommendations to be implemented, everyone will be forced to compromise...across the political spectrum.

Do you honestly believe that conservatives welcome cuts to defense spending, and increased taxation?

The National Commission On Fiscal Responsiblity and Reform completed and issued its report with recommendations in response to President Obama's mandate.

That's a fact...not an opinion.

More obfuscation, Houston.

I never denied that it was a fact nor did I evade it, so that makes you a liar, twinkle toes.

The CBO says we will run a deficit of 1.6 trillion dollars this year

The president budget will reduce the deficit 1.1 trillion dollars over ten years

In other words, Obama's budget will not even reduce the deficit accrued in one year.

If the Republicans were really serious about the deficit, they would have gone along with repealing the tax break for the wealthy.

John, Tucson, AZ

worring about the budget should be the last thing you should we thinking about, you need to think about how Tucson is the gun and nut capital of the US!!!!!

I guess it's time to ask since no one answered...Conservative Republicans wanted control of the House so they can control the budget. What's their plan to increase jobs and decrease the deficit?

Standing around screeching "Bowles-Simpson" isn't a solution. Do the Republicans HAVE a plan?

Getting back to navys original diatribe

The GOP/TP is trying to change the 14th Amendment taking citizenship AND ALL THE RIGHTS THEREIN away from children born in this country via illegal immigrant parents. This is also a back door attempt to deny them (men and women) rights to vote.

So how about we amend the amendment to read something like..."in order to be a natural born citizen, at least one of a childs parents must be a citizen of the United States" ? That way we can get around this whole anchor baby crap and get back to the original intent of the amendment.

Also, is Draconian your new word of the week?

John B.

Standing around screeching "Bowles-Simpson" isn't a solution.

Some people seem to think it is. As for that commission, I seem to recall that it recommended some tax INCREASES. But I haven't heard those mentioned very often. A former Supreme Court justice once said that "taxes is how I pay for civilization." If only spending is cut to decrease the deficit without raising taxes from their current 60-year low, people may get a balanced budget , but at the price of losing civilization. From the draconian cuts now being made in some police departments and the cancellation of infrastructure projects, civilization is already starting to deteriorate in some areas.

Chef Darryl

So how about we amend the amendment to read something like..."in order to be a natural born citizen, at least one of a childs parents must be a citizen of the United States" ?

Fine. Go ahead and start a petition to have a new amendment added to the US Constitution that will repeal the part of the 14th Amendment that you don't like. That's the only way to do it that is legal according to the very same US Constitution that conservatives profess to hold in such high regard.

Hoostin,

thanks for your permission

Chef Darrell - well, maybe we should get the prespective of a real life Anchor Baby and then we can talk about amending the constitution.

I am sure that Gov. Bobby Jindal will appreciate your efforts. He is one of our most FAMOUS Anchor babies.

Chef,

Great idea, then we could make them take a test, but both parents and the child have to pass the test within the first 24 months of birth and of course the test will only be printed in ENGLISH.

Nuthin' but GOP Jaw Flappin'

RED,

Sorry, I just can't get those images out of my mind. Hey, what did I tell you, not a single one of the usual suspects DARED to engage me or to respond to the failure of the GOP to provide a single bill or idea to actually CREATE a job. Not a ONE of them responded to say they had actually READ the President's proposal before they lined up to take shots at it.

Can I call'em or can I call'em!

I'm bad, I'm so bad! I'm doing my end-zone dance (which of course, sadly, looks a lot like the chicken dance)

"Standing around screeching 'Bowles-Simpson' isn't a solution."

From the website of the National Commission On Fiscal Responsibilty and Reform:

"President Obama created the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsiblity and Reform to address our nation's fiscal challenges."

'Bowles-Simpson' was created by President Obama's executive order.

So...in a sense, you're correct, John B.

It's only a solution if the President actually implements the recommendations of his creation.

"Twinkle toes...?"

Lol, Houston.

Thanks for the compliment, but one hardly needs to be light on his feet to rebut you or strip away your obfuscations, sunshine.

;-)

There were no recommendations. The commission missed their assigned deadline AND failed to get the required number of quotes required to publish.

All we have is Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles walking around giving their personal opinions.

So we're back to the Republicans who run the House of Representatives. It's their baby, what are they going to feed it? How will they clothe it? Conservatives seem amazingly unwilling to take responsibility for the job they worked so hard to land.

Dang it John B. there you go, letting the facts get in the way of a good diatribe.

R U Obfuscatin' agin?

John B., Des Moines IA: There were no recommendations. The commission missed their assigned deadline AND failed to get the required number of quotes required to publish.

"Quotes required to publish"? What in the world are you talking about?

And there were plenty of recommendations in the Bowles-Simpson report. Did you even bother to glance at the report? Recommendations like: 1) Cap discretionary spending through 2020 2) Annual limits for war spending. 3) Stop abuse of emergency spending. 4) Enact fundamental tax reform to lower rates, reduce deficits and simplify the tax code.

Did you even look at the report?

Here is a pointer to the report. Read a little of it so you can at least have an educated discussion about it: http://static1.firedoglake.com/1/files/2010/12/fiscal-comm-final-report.pdf

If the Republicans were really serious about the deficit, they would have gone along with repealing the tax break for the wealthy.

The wealthy individuals are not the issue. They will just hide and conceal any tax rate increase like they always done through the vast array of loopholes, deductions, and credits available. Its a moot point if their tax rate increased from 35% to 39%.

The issue is small businesses, whom the tax increases would seriously put a burden on. If 70% of employment comes via small businesses, why would you want to kick them when they are already down by bilking them of more taxes? Do you want them to hire or pay more taxes? You wont get both! Cant understand the logic of liberals when it comes to taxation and the economy. What works on paper almost never translates to reality.

The Republicans are on the right track trying to loosen the liberals grip of legislative mandates on small businesses. The tax cuts should be made permanent and the Obamacare repealed. Only then will calmness and certainty for long range planning make the environment conducive to hiring again for small businesses.

Should be "votes" required to publish. Because there was no level consensus as required there WAS NO FINAL REPORT. 14 votes were required to formalize their recommendations so there ARE NO RECOMMENDATIONS. Nothing but opinions from some of the individual members.

And yes, I'm familiar with the work of the "Catfood Commission."

So, that leaves it all in the hands of Republicans who hold the purse strings in the House of Representatives...what's their plan?

Wow, John B.-

The "Catfood Commission"?

That's what they call it over at Jane Hamsher's Firedoglake.com.

Are you aware of what the progressives over there call President Obama?

I mean, of course...the printable things that they call him?

John B., Des Moines, IA: Should be "votes" required to publish. Because there was no level consensus as required there WAS NO FINAL REPORT. 14 votes were required to formalize their recommendations so there ARE NO RECOMMENDATIONS. Nothing but opinions from some of the individual members

John, you are really digging a hole you can't get out of, . . . . like that's different.

There was indeed a report, and seeing it is no longer being worked on, it is indeed final. There were "Recommendations" in the report, just search for "Recommendations" in that document and you will see plenty of them. The vote you speak of was to get a super majority of votes necessary to have Congress have an up/down vote on the report. That did fail, but that doesn't mean the report is any less worthy to be used as a template and road map to fiscal solvency.

And Obama doesn't even acknowledge that report, not with this budget of his. He, Obama, had a golden opportunity today to take the lead on deficit reduction, but instead punted the issue to others. The man is a coward.

John, you want to be tied up in the process and use that to ignore/discredit the work of the Debt Commission, that's your business. There was a considerable amount of bi-partisan work that went on with that Commission and that work should not be ignored. It would have been nice if Obama had recognized that work in some form, but he's totally ignored it. Now it's time for the Republicans in House to acknowledge that Commissions work and create a budget that works towards the recommendations in that report.

Yes, there was a draft report because Simpson and Bowles took it upon themselves to issue one, over the objections of some members of the commission.

This is as much the official recommendation of the President's commission as the Paul Ryan Roadmap is the official policy of the Republican Party.

Is the Paul Ryan Roadmap the official policy of the Republican Party?

Speaking of which, Republicans run the House of Representatives, home of all budgetary matters. What IS the plan of the House majority?

I don't think they've said yet.

@Navy,

I read your opening OPED from the 14th, and I find I do agree with you on one statement. Until the 535 legislators in the House and Senate agree to move forward in meaningful discussion and agreement, nothing will be accomplished during this budget session.

I did find your OPED to be interesting though; however, I disagree with much in your piece. I am interested in learning how several of you connect with MSNBC to present these oped pieces on the net daily.

Query your views. Well, it is the 15th in China, 8:43am - time to go to work. Look forward to reading your 15th oped.

Bravo, Navy, let's see if the right wing can take this to heart. It is Valentine's Day after all.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

Let's see, "getting too involved in the economy." More proof that the GOP/TP is not going to create any new jobs nor are they going to help our growing economy continue to grow. This is another example of the minority party trying to cram their Agenda down the throats of Americans, period. It is all about power and control of the populace. Nothing more, nothing less.

Navy,

Have you seen a bill yet? I haven't.

After all, how long has it been since the Republicans assumed control of the House of Representatives without proposing a single jobs-related bill. It's all about "when" the GOP promises of jobs creation will finally come to fruition.

http://WhenAreTheJobs.com/

If there is BIIL Where is the Jobs Bill?

Navy:

There is something fishy going on here. Unless you are extremely fast at typing it is hard for me to see how two very long responses could be written so quickly to each other after reading the article at hand. Do you just type of responses before the articles are even posted?

Have you seen a bill yet? I haven't.

After all, how long has it been since the Republicans assumed control of the House of Representatives without proposing a single jobs-related bill. It's all about "when" the GOP promises of jobs creation will finally come to fruition.

http://WhenAreTheJobs.com/

If there is BIIL Where is the Jobs Bill?

Please enlighten us with what you would like to see in a "jobs" bill that would directly create long term sustainable jobs that would improve our economy.

Bev, here is an excellent article that explains why government spending cuts would spur job growth

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/02/14/for_small_businesses__a_hesitancy_to_hire/

Most jobs are created by businesses employing fewer than 100 people. When their costs per employee are so great, they cannot even begin to consider hiring new employees.

Not to mention that these same businesses nearly went under in the last two years- that alone would make them hesitate to hire, unless and until the business climate is stable.

The best jobs bill this congress could enact would be a bill that reduced mandated costs per employee.

Bev:

The GOP/TP has no intention of creating jobs in this country nor are they inclined to help keep the economy growing. This would would make President Obama look good since he is listening to the American people and trying to create Jobs and keep the economy growing. The things that the GOP/TP campaign on but suddenly had a memory loss. They are going to continue with their agenda to be "Obstructionists" and now added the new agenda to strip the rights from select groups of the population. It is about power, wealth and control.

Navy:

Do you do anything else besides Cut N Paste? Man you need to get a life. All you do is preach to the choir.

If you are so worried about what republicans will and won't do; run for office and then we will see what your solutions are.

Bev, here is an excellent article that explains why government spending cuts would spur job growth

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/02/14/for_small_businesses__a_hesitancy_to_hire/

The article cited is about high unemployment insurance costs, an effect of the just-ended recession, the worst since the Great Depression. To control that you're suggesting one of two things;

1) We should let the unemployed suffer without a safety net, or

2) The Bush Recession has made it more difficult for the economy to bounce back from recession, therefore becoming an indictment of the Bush Administration and Monetarist mismanagement of the economy.

Which is it?

Deacon John B,

"We should let the unemployed suffer without a safety net, or"

I guess 113 weeks is not enough eh? By the way the state pays for the first 26 weeks, after that the Federal government pays the rest, so that means I'm paying, you're paying.....................Really 113 weeks? Do you realize that's over 2 years? You can learn a whole new trade or finish school in that time.

Your number two, never heard it called the Bush Recession, but what Obama did to ADD to this is by far worse than what was started by Bush. What Bush did in 8 years, Obama made it worse in 22 month, by the way less that 113 weeks.

Paul-Florida

Your number two, never heard it called the Bush Recession, but what Obama did to ADD to this is by far worse than what was started by Bush. What Bush did in 8 years, Obama made it worse in 22 month, by the way less that 113 weeks.

Obama's only significant contribution to the deficit was the stimulus bill, (including the Obama tax cuts and tax credits). The majority of the deficit is the result of the shortfall in revenue caused by the Bush Recession, Bush's tax cuts, Bush's unfunded wars, and Bush's unfunded Medicare drug prescription scam.

At least Paul is willing to answer. He'd let the unemployed suffer without a safety net.

How about any other game Conservatives? Suffer without a safety net or admit that Conservative mismanagement of the economy created a recession so deep it's difficult to bounce back?

Sounds like the conservatives want both the unemployed AND the employed suffer without a safety net. Or workplace protection of any kind. Or retirement. Or equal pay...

John B, fielden, Houston - I have been reading the comments regarding the PROPOSED Budget by the President.

Note the word PROPOSED. This is NOT the final budget, and it needs to be debated upon. This is the starting point of that debate.

I have also noticed that many on the right-wing ringe are saying that the United States is BROKE.

No, we are not Broke.

If we were broke, we would not be able to honour any of our obligations, and from what I can see, The United States has. If we are so broke, why are the ones saying that we are broke so damn wealthy?

The issue is this - we have a bigger REVENUE problem than a spending problem. Our REVENUES that we are bringing in are not enough to cover all of the DEBTS initially. We are making payments on that debt.

Why isn't ANYONE talking about our REVENUES? Cutting the spending is proving hard enough, so hard that even Rep. Ryan is backing away from many of his previous predictions.

Why can't we look at a way to raise REVENUES as well as Cut the waste and unneeded?

My challenge on Friday of last week to the usual right-wing fringe suspects only garnered one area (Bob and Big B- thanks foryour contribution) where a REVENUE source needs to be looked at.

The rest of the nay-saying crowd had nothing to offer.

NOTHING.

So before everyone jumps off the cliff, remember that this budget is a PRELIMINARY budget - a starting point of what the President wants to spend. Also, the House has control of the pursestrings of the country, and THEY are charged with and responsible for producing and presenting a budget that the President can sign - not the other way around.

If the House GOP/Tea Partyers are like the right-wing naysayers on this blog, then we are in for a LONG 2 years, as they have NO ideas and NO CLUE has to write - much less balance - a budget.

Note the word PROPOSED. This is NOT the final budget, and it needs to be debated upon. This is the starting point of that debate.

Well, it's a pretty da*n poor proposal.

Obama had an opportunity to show the country his leadership skills on how serious he is about deficit reduction. Instead he showed the country he couldn't care less about it.

No, we are not Broke.

No, just like the schmoo with the 10 maxed out credit cards, we're managing to keep up with the interest payments, at least for now.

The challenge is still there, and except for Paul from FL nobody has responded.

The House of Representatives is in Republican hands, just as they campaigned to achieve.

All budgetary matters originate in the House.

What's their plan to increase economic activity while balancing the budget?

MBeaty

Navy:

There is something fishy going on here. Unless you are extremely fast at typing it is hard for me to see how two very long responses could be written so quickly to each other after reading the article at hand. Do you just type of responses before the articles are even posted?

I had similar thoughts about this also. That's one reason why I asked Navy the question about from what source does he receive his oped's. If you read several of the opening posts on this blog, you receive an insightful article on a subject. You may agree/disagree with the article, but it is a well written piece, with supporting documentation (from mostly libbie sites) attached. During additional posts, you can see the follow-up to be less structure than the original post.

And you are correct when you ask the question about the lengthy follow-up to the original post in question. Another with great length in such a short amount of time does make one wonder as to when and from who the information was originated.

But I am certain that the attack minions will now talk about the conservative conspiracy on this subject. We will probably be awarded a "turd" or other name for even questioning this.

If you have an issue with what Navy writes just put up your own rebuttal. Base it in fact, with supporting evidence, it'll turn into a good debate in which maybe everyone learns something.

It's that simple.

No issue what is posted by Navy, John B. I just wonder who the original author is, and how often people on the blog receive information to post by others.

Interesting reads for those who research the truth from sites other than one sided liberal sites.

Oh WHOA is me - those mean old lefties are picking on poor Palin!

Psst - she's a C E L E B R I T Y who puts herself and her klan out there every chance she gets!

Along with the territory comes criticism, and you got to take the good with the bad! Palin herself, is the one who set the lack of 'civility' 'meter' and now is reaping what she sowed!

If she wasn't such a freak, she possibly wouldn't garner the negative attention.

Oh, and, before you start to call people fakes & frauds you might want to have something to back it up.

Are you by chance related to NJNB? lol

You want to supply evidence for that? The poster I remember using muti screen names was "The Chihuahua Gang", a right winger.

NJNB has a LONG way to go before sinking to your level Feisty. By the way, wasn't your multiple screen names / personalities something like...Mean and Meaner?

Paul the pretty lady that I left a box of chocolates and a card for this morning will be very happy to learn that the fellow that has walked through the door for the last thirty years or so is a figment of her imagination and she doesn't have to feed him any more. Ought to cut the grocery bill on the Hill down right considerable.

Paul (MI) - Mirror of Truth

First of all, you are not a mirror of truth. Yes, I am one of the libs you are talking about. But I have always been Ron, Indiana; Feisty has always been feisty in name and style, Clara has always been Clara, IR has been IR or Independent Redneck, Nashville fan has always been Nashville fan. I could go on and on. You know who we are by what we write...and it is consistent in style and message.

However, Selfish Redhead looks a lot like JSI, and she's never denied it. The Chihuahua gang who had really wierd names. I imagine Mixed bag could tell you who they are. The point is unless you can give some specific facts. You lack credibility...along wit NJ

There is only ONE Fesity Redhead!

Always has been, always will be!

NDD is right about the CHEWOWOWA gang! Although, they're still among us but now using yet again different moniker(s)!

@ Ron - dangerfield was previously bad chihuahua and the mixed bag I believe was full moon... it's all a matter of style with is exactly what gives them away! ;o)

I thought some of the fake Palin comments were really funny.

I have never had the impression of the same person posting under more than one name---most of us, both right and left, are busy people who are lucky to have the time to post under one name.

Don't have a dog to kick Paul?

Gee whiz.

Happy Valentine's Day . . . all we are saying Paul, is give peace a chance! :o)

Wrong Paul, I'm me and always have been. Happy Valentine's Day to you with butterfly kisses.

I would have a lot more respect for Republicans if they didn't always resort to lies, slander and spreading misinformation. If you want to know why I, personally, despise Sarah Palin and her tribe it's because they consistently employ all three tactics in their war on America. I have read FR for several years, and I know all the liberal posters by their personalities, which are distinctly different. You just don't want to acknlowledge there are that many liberals in the world.

What an pile of crap, remember not to long ago the clown that tried to steals Feisty's login? I have only one login and I only write on FR. mostly on FT. You Paul are about as far away from the truth that a person can get.

Gee, I wish I HAD thought to use another name - maybe then people wouldn't keep confusing me with JoAnnaSmith1........

liberal posters by their personalities, which are distinctly different.

Unlike the 'carbon copies' on the right!

You read one of them... you've read them all! lol

An excellent post Amy. I used to post as "sotiredofignorance" and changed it to "newdayDAWNING" the night the President was elected. I also announced that change that night.

Paul (MI) Mirror of Truth:

How you coming on your rebuttal? Or was your inital comments just random thoughts that had no basis of reality? Like most Tea Partiers, are you just throwing mud in the "mud pit" hoping something will stick, then running off and hiding. Com'on Man--where's your facts?

I have always been Jody, Iowa. Finding time to post under one name is enough for me. Apparently the idea that other liberals visit First Read often but do not always comment except occasionally is alien to Mirror simply because he did not like the comments posted. Too bad, so sad and Happy Valentine's Day, Mirror of Truth?!

Ha............

. all we are saying Paul, is give peace a chance! :o)

I am changing my Name to Chance. so the Saying can be changed to . "all we are saying is give Chance a peice"..

1.6 Trillion Dollar Deficts .. Created by Obama and the Liberals in Congress. Thats all that needs to be said.....

Paul -

Please give us the names and alter egos of these villains. We have a right to know. LOL.

Steve,

I have no idea what you were trying to say . . . but I do give you an A for effort! lol

Odd...

Both JoAnnaSmith1 and bag boy on all over the board this morning and somehow we haven't heard a 'peep' out of them on this... lol

Maybe we've finally found an effective 'rightie repellant' ;o)

And my favorite. "I have my own business." No you don't.

Uh Oh! Wait until spanky hears of this... lmao!

Steve-505729

The truth is, Obama inherited a federal deficit of $1.2 trillion on the day he was sworn in, AND received a dire prediction from the CBO of a cretering economy.

President Obama was successful in halting our slide into a Depression by ordering stimulus spending.

That is truly all that needs to be said.

Amy ..

You are Correct. Obama Inherited a 1.2 Trillion dollar Defict. from the Democrats that Controlled Congress. and he has INcreased it Every Year.

Amy, roughly $700 billion of that deficit was TARP money.

Which has been repaid. With interest.

So, tell us, Amy- where is that money? How on earth did Obama manage to spend it so quickly?

cratering. Not cretering. You will always know its me by the misspellings :)

Steve-505729

Don't blame me, I protested against the invasion of Iraq on the streets of Portland, Me.

Non-partisan analysts ascribe the fact the deficit grew so large during George W. Bush's two terms to the fact we waged two wars while cutting taxes.

The deficit for fiscal year 2009 was $1.4 trillion and was the largest deficit relative to the size of the economy since the end of World War II.

By the way, the deficit tripled under Ronald Reagan as well, care to blame that on the Democrats?

Thanks for the input Paul the Mirror, I wondered if some members posted under more than one name. Since I am a recent member to this discussion group I wan't aware of the past multiple personality issues, but recently I did find somone talking about popping the corn and other phrases and insults that made me ask if the poster was someone with another handle.

But Navy, are you stating that you actually write the oped pieces you and others daily publish as the first post of the day?

Amy B. Portland, ME

I would have a lot more respect for Republicans if they didn't always resort to lies, slander and spreading misinformation.

Amy, I recognize you have a very liberal view of the politican process, but are the Republicans the only party or leadership that as you state: lie, slander and spreading misleading information? I seem to recall some of that from Nancy, Harry and others in your party leadership, not to mention misinformation from the current leader of this administration.

I believe Navy is saying that he writes the op eds that he posts. Others write the op eds they post.

Why is that so hard to believe? I believe Joe from Albany and Bill from Fairfax write their morning op eds. I wish I had time to write really indepth more often and think all those who take time to do so deserve all the credit.

Writing something original and Cutting N Pasting are two totally different animals.

Most of that drivel is Cut N Paste.

GMJ:

How true. Funny the GOP/TP says that 1.1 Trillion over 10 years is too low. Is that not about the same number they propose? The difference is that the GOP/TP wants to put this 1 Trillion solely on the backs of the Middle Class, cutting hundreds of thousands of jobs, increasing unemployment and reducing tax revenues even further, more people on welfare, loss benefits, loss services like medical research, police and fire fighters, improvements to our infrastructure, gut education etc. Good plan if you want an "Oligarchy".

Well said, Grand Moff Joseph. Sooner or later one would think people would realize just what the GOPTP is really all about but it is taking far too long for it to filter past the social and religious issues Republicans use as smoke and mirrors.

Pancakes

Popcorn!

Scrapple!

Puppies Super Bowl

Dark Chocolate Bonbons!

Breaded and deep fried pork tenderloin sandwiches.

Feisty Redheads . . . did I say that out loud?

I'm blushing! ;o)

Wm. Lets not forget it was Boehner who when he was speaker in a previous congress handed out checks from the oil companies to their trusted lackeys on the floor of the house. When these people talk about sacrifice, they are talking about the middle class and the poor making the sacrifices.

Boehner handed out big checks from the tobacco lobby, too.

wm,

What's a "military entitlement"? Just wondering? I believe this budget does have cuts in the military budget.

Patrick,

What oil checks? I didn't realize Boehner was an oil man from Ohio? What sacrifices are the Middle Class making? I'm Middle Class and I just found out my Military retirement check is getting more taxes taken out. By the way that wasn't from this Congress either.

Jody. Your right it was, it was tobacco Checks.

Paul: it's a play on words - the GOP wants to cut entitlements, but the defense industry treats their funding as an entitlement. The middle class has already made its sacrifices - it was called the recession. It's called being priced out of college and health insurance premiums that represent a larger share of their income than the more affluent.

All you do everyday is complain about that Governor. He is the Governor that your state as a whole voted for and just accept it. I bet he is not losing any sleep over you lambasting him on FR.

You probably didn't vote for him anyway....lol.........

You talk about Republicans; Liberals whine like little switches everyday.

(Not) IntheMiddle, TX

Paul LePage came in last among Repbulicans in polling prior to the Republican primary. He went on to win the primary due to the Tea Party GOTV drive. He won the governorship with 38% of the vote, after the Independent and the Democrat took 61%

I want the country to know what happens when moderate voters are complacent and the Tea Party bullies its way into power: LePage has begun a steady roll back of the environmental regulations that Maine passed with bipartisan support in previous years. He is proposing lowering the estate tax for the very rich and paying for it by reducing the retirement benefits of state workers. This is the Tea Party in action.

Amy:

What I'm saying is you keep whining about that man everyday to no avail. That man is going to do whatever he feels like doing, point blank. You can't stop him and no one else on FR can either.

Clinton won the presidency with less than 50% so that doesn't mean anything. Perot took a lot of Bush seniors votes but that is the way of political elections.

All POLITICAL leaders go in and roll back policies of administrations before them. When he leaves the next man/woman will come along and swear his/her way is best and I'm rolling all of this shiznit back.

Watch what happens when Obama is gone. It is called POLITICS.

Hi Nash, a great day to you too. Love that quote. Sending love right back at you and your family.

Thanks so much Gingerbread Mamma . . . much needed and appreciated!

Hiya Nash!

GIANT Valentine *HUG* & all the popcorn you can eat! lol

Agree with you for not being much in the mood for politics today!

Awwww, thanks Feisty . . . I miss all the awesome popcorn parties we used to have . . . *sigh* . . . got to plan another one real soon . . . Happy Valentine's Day! :o)

Nash:

Have a great Valentines Day. Same for all the Ladies on the board today, have a fun day.

Thanks Navy . . . Happy Valentine's Day to you as well!

Love from Kansas City :)

Great quote.

Happy Valentines Day everyone!

Muchas gracias Rachel and Jody!

Happy Valentine's Day to you and yours, Nash!! I think the day calls for chocolate covered popcorn!!

Now THAT is an idea that I heartily endorse Steeler Fan . . . hope you have a great Valentine's Day!

Awesome comment Houston . . . and so true!

Houston, I almost didn't watch Meet The Press on Sunday because the guest was Boehner. It DOES feel like the Republicans get an outsized portion of publicity, in addition to having an entire network dedicated to promoting their party. I will say this for David Gregory: he used the word "ignorant" to describe the FOX focus group people who thought Obama was a Muslim. Couldn't get Boehner to use the same word to describe the Republican base, but boy did he try!

Lets not forget Boehner on Meet the Press. But then thats the "liberal media" for ya.

Speaking of Egypt. Mubarak was president for 30 Years, but Orrin Hatch of Utah has him beat, he has been a senator for 34 years. Talk about job security.

I almost didn't watch Meet The Press on Sunday because the guest was Boehner.

I made the same mistake Amy - 15 minutes of my life I'll NEVER get back! lol

Actually, the only reason I watched Boehner, was to see whether or not he would shed one of his trademark tears...

Anyone know what the hell we was doing flicking his tongue around like some kind of reptile?

Oh! I noticed the tongue flicking as well! I think that's his "tell," as they call it in poker, that indicates he's lying. I noticed it when he was trying not to agree with Gregory that the Republican base is ignorant.

Amy B.

It DOES feel like the Republicans get an outsized portion of publicity

I can kind of sympathize with how the Egyptians felt pre-uprising. No matter what channel they switched to, all they saw was Hosni Mubarak or someone praising Hosni Mubarak. On Sunday morning in this country, no matter which channel you turn to, it's Newt Gingrich or another one of the interchangeable Republican clones attacking President Obama.

Houston:

Kudos, nice post to start the week. Egypt's people have taken the first step. They will have a long road ahead of them and they will face many obstacles along the way. It is their country and they now have a chance to try and mold it the way they want (the operative word is THEY). Time will tell to see how this turns out in the long run. Should be interesting to see if any of the other countries follow suit.

Terrific post, Houston. McCain seems to ignore that the very last thing the Iranian demonstrators needed was the U.S. President interferring beyond urging Iran to not use force against them. President Obama seems to understand that U.S. involvement is not always the right and best policy, something GOPTPers do not grasp.

When I saw the lineup on the Sunday shows, I decided there was no point in watching them since there would be only one-sided chatter--but I did catch most of the McCain interview.

I agree I quit watching the Sunday morning shows a long time ago.

BTW: I personally think it's a good strategy for the Democrats to let the republicans do all the talking. It shows just how out of touch they are with real America, and how angry they really are. The more they talk the more the electorate turns against them.

Great post, Houston. I don't think the Democrats are very effective at getting our message out and representing the accomplishments of the administration. The Republicans are much better at that.

Steeler Fan-380417

The Republican's propaganda machine is an awesome sight to behold.

Mo:

WTF is real America?

That is a slogan that needs to be shoved up someones azz. I fought and bled for this country and you say people like me are not Americans because we don't bow to the liberal ideology. I tell you what; you take your little narrow azz up in one of those fake Americans (as you call them) face and make your statement and see if you don't get your teeth planted in the back of your head. I bet it will be the last time you say that dumb shyt.

Of all the GOPTP candidates, I agree, Ron Paul is honest about what he believes. I thought that during the 2008 GOP primary debates; he made the most sense. That said, I do not agree with the purist ideology that he promotes. Some of it makes good sense but in the real world, it simply does not work. Pure ideology never translates to perfect policy--whether left, right or center.

wBush

I agree Ron Paul is honest. IMO he clearly won every GOP 2008 presidential debate with his truthful talking about the need for civil liberties, his disdain for the patriot act and his antiwar stance in Iraq and Afganistan. He clearly saw the fallacy of the GOP lies that "we are fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here" or "They hate us because of our liberty and freedom."

He rightfully said that the middle east both the countries and terrorist organizations hate us for our foreign policy decisions. Along with liberals such as Dennis Kucinich he was one of the only candidates running that spoke against the Patriot act. I can respect him for his foreign policy views.

However, what I have no respect for is his exteme calls to defund and cut the department of energy, education, department of the interior and a list too long to record here. Although he honestly thinks this approach is the right track for the country; supporting a person like him who believes in a completely market based approach to everything, think no regulation or regulatory agencies, and you would have a true plutocracy where the robber barons of old would return.

Ron Paul defied the Republican Party by with his opposition to the Iraq war that was both principled and rational. I suspect that it was his supporters who heckled Dick Cheney and called him "murdering scum" at the conservative convention. His opposition to the spying powers expanded by Bush and supported by Obama also is based on his libertarian principles that go beyond party lines.

I've always kind of liked the guy. He's not nasty, mean-spirited, and dishonest like Newt Gingrich and the other "serious" GOP politicians who are always on the cable talk shows. However, when he starts talking about going back on the gold standard or eliminating the EPA, that's just a bit too much for me.

Happy Valentine's Day Bill!

I hear death by minutiae is painful . . . sometimes a broader view adds some much needed perspective . . . just a thought! :o)

P.S. Perhaps, instead of debating the technicalities of how HCR was passed, it might be more beneficial if you could share some insight on ways to address the problems in our health care system that hurt PEOPLE instead of the myopic focus constantly only on PROCESS. People is the thing in my humble opinion.

Kind of reminds one of the "tawdry" process the Republicans used to pass the Bush tax cuts for the rich doesn't it Bill? I mean what's your point anyway?

w bush:

Same GOP/TP logic. Do as I say not as I do.

Bill, you can do better than this!!

How about getting your bretheren to make some AMENDMENTS to the current Law (which is easier to do than repeal, by the way)? Why is it that you are so FIXATED on the fact that this law was PASSED?

For the same reason, Pietro, that a vast majority of the electorate was fixated on the fact that it passed.

We did not want it. It costs too much. We believe it will have a deleterious impact on quality of care.

That is why.

You never passed Schoolhouse Rock, did you Bill?

The bill passed by a 60 vote margin...even you admitted that. The version that was approved by the House was slightly different. As a result a slightly different bill was sent back to the Senate. In most circumstances that's referred to as a Conference Bill, but in budgetary matters it's called a Reconciliation Bill.

This is normal congressional procedure. You are conflating two different usages of the Congressional term "Reconciliation." Your twisting of terminology to claim Democrats somehow subverted cloture is an epic fail. The Affordable Care Act passed the only cloture vote required.

More GOP rewriting of facts to suit their beliefs. There's a difference between using "reconciliation" to pass initial legislation and bypassing the 60 vote cloture rule in the Senate and "reconciling" separate bills passed by the House and the Senate. The original HCR bills in both House and Senate were not passed by reconciliation.

I have not forgotten the "outrage" of republicans when democrats even discussed the idea of using "reconciliation" to pass HCR. Democrats did not use that method because they did not want to make HCR a temporary law which would expire. The GOP used reconciliation for the 10-year tax cuts which allowed them to by-pass the 60 vote requirement for cloture; that's why tax cuts were to expire Dec 31, 2010. Reconciliation was not used to pass the original HCR bills. Remember the Nelson, Lieberman, Landrieu, Lincoln demands or else 60 votes for cloture were not there. Once the Senate bill passed, the House either had to accept it as their version because their HCR bill would never be "reconciled" with the Senate's version; starting over for democrats was not an option.

The bill passed by a 60 vote margin...even you admitted that. The version that was approved by the House was slightly different. As a result a slightly different bill was sent back to the Senate

Good grief John, not only do you have your facts wrong – AGAIN – but you seem to be in need of a basic civics lesson as well.

The version that was approved by the House was "slightly different?" Wrong, on March 21, 2010 the House approved the exact same version (HR 3590) as passed previously passed by the Senate. If you don't think so, prove otherwise.

A "slightly different" version was sent back to the Senate? Wrong. What was sent back to the Senate was the reconciliation bill (HR 4872) that fixed the problems in HR 3590 that the House had heartburn with.

Tell us John, if a "slightly different" bill was sent to the Senate, how did the Senate get away with passing it with only 56 votes? The answer is that HR 4872 was an entirely different bill which was considered under the reconciliation procedure.

The original HCR bills in both House and Senate were not passed by reconciliation.

You completely miss the point Jody, why don't you read some of the materials referenced in my original post. The House did pass the same version of HCR that the Senate passed, but they only did so on the condition that that the Senate would also pass the companion reconciliation bill that fixed many problems the House had with the original legislation. A reconciliation bill that passed with 56 votes, not 60.

OK, Bill, I have read your posts. If it was passed by reconciliation, like you say it has, then there is a time limit on the law. We have a great example with the Bush Tax Cuts, which was passed via reconciliation and they were only in place for 10 years. This is why we had that very interesting debate in the Lame Duck 111th Congress, correct?

So, when does the HCR Law sunset?

Hi Pietro - The below is from First read on Sept. 29th 2010.

My take on reconciliation, I understood HCR was passed using reconciliation, the reason it doesn't have to sunset after 10 years is because it is projected to save money. The Bush tax cuts added to the deficit so they had to be extended, which Obama wrongly did during the lame duck. I could be wrong, after all I'm not a lawyer or a constitutional law professor.

_______________________________________________________________________

So how did health-care reform fall under reconciliation?
If deficit reduction is the original purpose for using reconciliation, how did a health-care bill get involved? Simply put, Democratic leaders made it about controlling spending and at the same time created a path to push the bill through if they realized they couldn't find 60 votes to pass it the traditional way. It's an escape hatch, of sorts.

From President Obama on down, Democrats have long proclaimed that a key component of fixing the economy was reining in health-care costs -- "bending the cost curve," as they like to say. Equally importantly, Obama's only line in the sand thus far has been that any health-care bill cannot "add one dime" to the deficit. (Ding, ding. Did someone say "deficit"?)

So when Congress passed its budget earlier this year, it included "reconciliation instructions" for the Senate Health and Finance Committees to produce legislation that reduces the deficit by $2 billion. So in simple terms, as long as long as the bill that could cost as much as $900 billion can find a way to make an extra $2 billion to put towards reducing the deficit, reconciliation can be used.

The answer is that HR 4872 was an entirely different bill which was considered under the reconciliation procedure.

How many times do you want to fail before admitting you're wrong? Now you admit that you're talking about the Health Care and Education and Affordability Reconciliation Act, not the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Democratic leaders made it about controlling spending and at the same time created a path to push the bill through if they realized they couldn't find 60 votes to pass it the traditional way. It's an escape hatch, of sorts.

Yellowdog - help me out here.

The excerpt that I posted above stated that they needed to create a path to push the bill through IF THEY REALIZED THEY COULD NOT FIND THE 60 votes to pass it the traditional way.

I think that this was wise - having a 'Plan B' in case 'Plan A' did not work.

Just because the law had an 'alternative plan' does NOT mean that it was passed USING that alternative plan.

So when Congress passed its budget earlier this year, it included "reconciliation instructions" for the Senate Health and Finance Committees to produce legislation that reduces the deficit by $2 billion. So in simple terms, as long as long as the bill that could cost as much as $900 billion can find a way to make an extra $2 billion to put towards reducing the deficit, reconciliation can be used.

OK, so where does this tie into the HCR?

Maybe you can help me out here.

Pietro,

Not too big to say I was incorrect and need to eat some crow here.

In my defense, the HCR tale was about as convuluted as a John Grisham novel. From memory of what I think happened. I remember the legislation passed the cloture vote in the senate. The House had another bill passed so the two had to be reconciled in conference. When it appeared the two bills couldn't be reconciled HCR's final passage was sort of in limbo. Then Brown's win in MA lit a fire in the Dems and Pelosi and the House dems agreed to the Senate bill.

So I guess that is how come it could have passed with 56 final votes.

Yellowdog-Mark D - you don't have to eat crow, and you are OK with me. Don't worry about it. Like you said - this bill was convaluted. I do think that Bill, Fairfax, VA was saying that this HCR bill was TECHNICALLY passed by reconciliation and I was challenging that assertion.

As usual, conservatives ignore the massive debt created by Bush and the GOP because that doesn't count as debt for children and grandchildren, only democrat debt does. Try researching and you'll find that Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 increased the National Debt by 333%. Contrast that to Carter and Clinton's 81% -- whoa, what a difference. As for President Obama, which of these other five presidents faced a Great Depression and took whatever steps necessary to prevent it? Zero.

While I agree with some good points you make, it is a misconception that democrats grow the size of Government more than do republicans. Reagan and Bush 43 greatly expanded the size of Government much more than did democrats. Because democrats support things like safety nets of social security, medicare, medicaid, and VA benefits, the perception is they must grow government more. But Reagan, Bush and Bush grew the military side, the defense side while cutting investments in America's infrastructure and aid to those less fortunate. It isn't about the size of government, it is about having smart government. I prefer government that keeps us safe but also helps the people with something beyond tanks and fancy aircraft--things like clean and renewable energy, roads, highways, bridges, high-speed rail--those are the things that play a big role in growing America, the economy and putting Americans to work. If those things mean bigger government, so be it, but I think they mean smart government investing in its people.

Budgets originate in the House.

Republicans control the House.

What's their plan to generate additional economic activity while reducing the deficit?

Houston, you obviously do not understand the labor laws in Germany.

See, if you lay someone off, you pay that worker - forever.

Does not matter WHY that worker is laid off- downturn in the economy, poor work record, drunkenness, - nothing matters. He or she was hired, therefore, he or she gets paid.

That is one of the reasons that when German companies expand, they do their expansions in BULGARIA. Or the Czech Republic.

It is a major problem, that the government is seeking to address, by cutting the payment length to one year- like the rest of Europe.

As always, the devil is in the details.

nojonobo

Does not matter WHY that worker is laid off- downturn in the economy, poor work record, drunkenness, - nothing matters. He or she was hired, therefore, he or she gets paid.

Yeah, that's why German-made products are so highly valued. All those drunken workers manage to make pretty decent automobiles, cameras, scientific instruments, etc.

Houston:

It is obvious that you have never visited Germany. I was stationed there for 4 yrs and have been back many times. Their labor laws or totally different than here in the U.S.

That economy is not in good shape.

I have former soldiers that worked for BMW and they were laid off back in 2005, guess what; they are still getting paid by BMW today and presently working in the U.S.

What they do in Germany "works", and it works for everyone not just the top 2%.

ITM:

I have former soldiers that worked for BMW and they were laid off back in 2005, guess what; they are still getting paid by BMW today and presently working in the U.S.

Guess what: People still regard BMWs to be great automobiles. Your portrayal of the German economy has no relationship to reality whatsoever. I know facts to a right winger are like sunlight to a vampire, but here are some facts anyway:

Defying Others, Germany Finds Economic Success

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/world/europe/14germany.htm

RV

Am I reading this right? In Germany, they get paid no matter what? Laid off, fired, etc...? People should only be paid if they work.

If you're reading nojonobo and ITM, you're reading garbage.

I know that's a radical concept in the age of Obama but it sounds like common sense to me.

Congressional Republicans have figured out a way to get paid for not working: They gave themselves paid vacations for 1/3 of the time they're in Congress and they let the corporate lobbyists write their legislation for them. They've created a Socialist Workers' Paradise for themselves that Karl Marx would envy.

Thanks for sharing, Houston. I think this sums it up pretty well;

The strong growth figures will also bolster the conviction here that German workers and companies in recent years made the short-term sacrifices necessary for long-term success that Germany’s European partners did not. And it will reinforce the widespread conviction among policy makers that they handled the financial crisis and the painful recession that followed it far better than the United States, which, they never hesitate to remind, brought the world into this crisis.

Blinded by Conservative supply-side ideology the American economy not only dragged the entire world off a cliff, but Conservative Republicans are determined to make sure we learn nothing from the experience.

IntheMiddle, TX

I don't doubt you have been to Germany, but if you found it poor, you must have been hanging out in the wrong part of town.

Germany has the largest economy in Europe, and the fifth largest in purchasing power in the world.

Then there is this from the Google a few hours ago:

BERLIN (AP) — Germany's economy minister says the country's 2011 growth could be even better than expected.

Rainer Bruederle raised the official prognosis of GDP growth from 1.8 percent to 2.3 percent in January.

But he told Bild newspaper in an interview published Monday that amid increasingly positive economic news, "It could also be more — I'm optimistic."

He says if trends continue there should be room for the tax cuts that his party has been pushing.

"We want to talk in 2012 how we can further consolidate the budget and at the same time provide relief to those with lower and middle incomes," he said in the interview.

Amy:

No where in my post did I say Germany was poor. I said the economy is not doing great. They are in a better position than the U.S. but not great.

Houston:

WTF are you talking about? (brushing you off of my shoulders and moving on).

IntheMiddle, TX

You said, regading Germany "That economy is not in good shape."

If Germany is not in good shape than Arnold Schwarzenegger is a limp noodle.

Facts are facts, (Not) InTheMiddle.

Where was the republican accountability from 2001 through 2008? They're the ones who took a budget surplus and added 89% to the debt with unfunded legislation. Common sense should tell every person, right or left, that severely reducing spending while the economy is in recovery would result in another recession. Federal cuts shifts to State cuts which means more layoffs, greater revenue shortfalls, less money feeding the economy, higher costs in unemployment, etc. It is a vicious cycle. Spending cuts now must be careful and not draconian. Otherwise, we'll be right back to Dec 2007 which the Great Recession began.

Jody, do you go shopping even though you have spent all your earnings for the month? The American tax payer is tapped out! There is no other source of revenue for the gov. Welcome to the poorhouse weather there is another recession or not.

Jim-792547 If I'm reading you post correctly, you're implying that one out of every two pregnancies to black couples is terminated through federally-funded abortions. You're out of your mind !!!

keeper, Having worked with the EPA I can honestly say they are as corrupt as any official in Washington.

No, in the 50's they were called the Greatest Generation and they give birth to the Boomers.

Shawn, you are correct. This was the beginning of the Baby Boomer era. The point was, this era economically was in much better shape for cuts on assistance programs. This Article mentioned cutting the electricity and home heat assist in half. I personally do not need it, however there are many families that do until they are able to retain work and get on their feet. This was what I was questioning on the Budget cuts by the administration.

reality, Obama first wanted HCR for the poor and now wants to cut heating assistance for the poor. So, I conclude that he wants the poor to be cold and get sick so they need HCR. LOL