How about we let the government "shut down" and we replace all of them ... if that was the case, they would not even mention this non sense.

The government will not shut down and the politicians will keep making sure they get more and more while the "rich" guy making $150 k keeps paying for all their present perks as well as the future they set up for THEMSELVES .... Obama did not take a huge paycut to $400k for nothing ... he'll make more $$$ than all the dopes that give the govermnet shut down non sense a thought combined........

A shutdown sounds even better than gridlock, as long as they don't pay off the union gov't workers for not working while the gov't is shut down; start with the congressmen and senators missing a few checks and they'll come to terms fast enough.

Any private businessman or business woman could balance the budget in a week as they wouldn't be worried about having to bribe various special interest constituencies (homosexuals, the elderly, unions, industrial "donors", etc.), or be bribed by them, to get re-elected. Put me in charge, I'll do what they don't have the courage or conviction to do...the right thing by the taxpaying public, whatever that might be.

The republicans had better find more than that.We elected them to cut spending, 61 billion is ridiculous.

They had better find a lot more than that.

Stop this compromising and cooperating carpa and start cutting.

We gave you a huge electoral victory when you campaigned on cutting the spending ,.

We removed a lot of republican incumbents in the primaries last year.

Boehner, you and McConnell start acting like Rinos again, you will both be gone in 2012., we are no longer accepting excuses.

anyone that thinks a gov't shutdown is good or won't be extremely harmful is fooling themselves...or an extremist idealogue

$61 billion is just for what remains of this fiscal year, actually would be $100 billion if applied to a full year. But I must agree, it isn't near enough.

Jerry, the republicans can't just stop compromising and do whatever they want. They only control the House. Anything they want to push through has to make it through the Senate AND get Obama's signature.

Politics IS the art of compromise.

Gotta agree. 6X billion is not enough cutting. I want to see upwards of 1 trillion in cuts. They need to get rid of government agencies that are redundant. Cut back on the massive number of employees. We need to close up shop in many of the military bases we have in various parts of the world. We also need to make these politicians, aka public servants, paid like servants. None of this getting rich while they make us poor. They should have a dorm type location in D.C. where they are allowed to live, and should be paid in the range of 50K a year tops.

Richard, I'm curious what you think will happen to all the people who will lose their jobs if what you suggest actually happened. You sound a bit out of touch and more than a bit harsh by suggesting that just because people are public servants they should be paid like servants. You can't be serious....?

A senior Democratic aide warned that the devil was in the details, and that leaders had yet to examine the full details of the entire House bill

Wish they would have taken that approach before passing the Health Care bill.

I am in agreement with SteelerFan that this whole thing is getting tiresome. Both sides need to put their politics aside and do some real work to address this immediate problem.

A bunch of old men talkin about a fight .. that they never intend to have ... a bunch of "Woofers!"

I don't think they have the collective balls among them to shut it down for thirty days or more!

Send them a new load of sand for their box ....

Jerry, the republicans can't just stop compromising and do whatever they want. They only control the House. Anything they want to push through has to make it through the Senate AND get Obama's signature.

The House should do the cuts they need to do regardless of what the other chambers do. The Democrats will be forced to answer to the American people why they are the ones not cooperating.

Norm,

With the handfull of prospective voters you just insulted (probably about 65-70%), I don't think you'll be getting a job offer. Goverment is NOT a business. I find it funny that there are any 2012 Republican presidential candidates, since they all have the business sense to know that Fox and the speaking tour pay much, much better. So you can write off your business plan to slash the budget (sell out the majority of Americans who keep you in business) and collect your golden parachute.

To all the others screaming slash, slash, slash.

You may want to look at whose jobs you will be cutting. The US Federal government is the largest buyer of just about any American product. Weapons, Aircraft (military AND civilian), Trucks, Automobiles, Oil, Electricity, Furniture and Appliances, even Clothing and Food stuffs. And many of the businesses that the Fed does not directly buy from benefit from government loans, subsidies, and low-cost land and mineral rights. Federal employees are also a major component of the private sector economy, they need food, clothing, a place to live, transportation, energy, and entertainment. All bought with Federal paychecks that are much smaller than most people believe. Interesting observation from the TV crime shows, when someone uses a knife to murder, he invariably cuts or stabs himself. You might ask what Federal cuts will mean to YOUR jobs or businesses.

Richard,

We abolished slavery in the 1860's. Now, I understand that certain people are trying to reintroduce it in civil service today, but you need to understand this. Your slave Congress will have no reason not to do what really needs to be done to balance the budget. Raise your taxes. And raise them alot.

I would also like to be there when you tell some 3.5million armed men and women (the military) that we no longer need or want them. And since you just totally ruined the economy, they have no future. By the way, you also effectively opened our country to invasion by any country who wants to take us. And just try depending on some back-woods militia for protection. Rifle, shotguns and a few missiles might seem impressive, but so far every group has been defeated by local police, or the FBI. Wonder how they would do better against trained killers or a professional army?

Aren't you Republican nitwits the same ones who pissed and moaned about the Democrats "shoving bills down our throats", not compromising, etc? What' changed? Thought once you folks gained some power you would show the Democrats how to legislate "properly". Guess it just depends on if you're in or out.

By the way, any of you geniuses figure out how much of a hit US GDP is going to take after you cut $61 Billion or $100 Billion of government spending this year? Oops! Job losses, less private spending, back into recession.

Oh, right, cutting government spending IS GOING TO STIMULATE BUSINESS GROWTH, right? Well, HOW? No one has ever explained that.

Oh, the recent extension of the so-called Bush tax cuts is going to stimulate the economy, right? Sure, like its done the last 2 years.

You geniuses better wake up and figure out what you are talking about. Near as I can tell, the Tea Party plan is to turn as many middle class folks into trailer trash as possible--all while giving wealthy people a free ride. SMART!

Thank you for stating all that so concisely! As the wife of a federal worker, I assure everyone, we are not making a bunch of money. And the more they take out of the paycheck, the less we have to contribute to the economy. I'm just sayin'.

Bill Marvel: You are probably a GVT employee - that said some of your comment does have merit. Thesaid there are many programs that are poorly managed, fraud runs rampant with poor GVT oversight and GVT oversight in many cases is a joke - corruption runs rampant - many examples exist based upon recent history.

There are literally hundreds of billions of dollars that could be recovered if we could end waste, fraud and corruption within the GVT. The Medicare program announced in Dec 10 that this was a record year for them - they had reduced fraudulent claims to "ONLY" 67 billion dollars for 2009. Get that "ONLY" 67 billion of fraud in one single GVT program and this is looked upon as a significant accomplishment. The Republicans want to cut 100 billion and democrats are going hysterical about it when we already found one program that could contribute a fair amount toward that goal.

Public Service unions were a bad idea that has brought the country to the brink of rule by a private entity that can literally over ride the decisions of the voting public of this nation, bring this nation to a complete halt, and jreopardize the security of the nation - that private entity are the public serviceu unions

AZ--I honestly feel that they have looked at public sentiment and will cut the budget. Shutting the government just gives these people a vacation. I want them there working and working together. I remember in a post that you said that there should be no compromise. What if both sides felt that way--guaranteed 100% gridlock and we hear 2 differing versions of who is responsible? If they do nothing--if they don't act, or they do not do their jobs--I want to see it.

If both sides are reasonable and give up many of their pet projects, things will happen in a positive way. All will have to compromise. It might be something as important as a water treatment plant project in their state or district. I thing it's really time to cease all foreign aid. You can't give what you don't have. The defense budget will have to be reduced by at least 30% immediately to make a substantial reductions in the budget and long term debt. There are a number of bases on foreign soil that could closed immediately. That's untold fortunes being wasted. It's not that hard to cut a budget--until you go back home and explain to your constituents that the base is closing. Together.

Bill M. Your rebuttal makes great points, but actually confirms my contention. Consider this thought: if something can't stand on its own and requires gov't support, it is (generally) antithetical to our economic system, Capitalism. Additionally, to your miltiary-industrial complex comment, which is spot on, General Dynamics, General Electric, and General Motors are going to have to find other things to make, we can no longer afford 600 overseas bases, a navy with more airplanes than the rest of the world combined (don't know if this is a fact, just on a roll), etc. Too many Generals means too many soldiers, etc.

We can stop spending before we go broke or after. Probably worse after.

its all the rich fault this whole mess..

linof, you took the words right out of my mouth. Why now Democrats? Why is that now, you want to take the time to read a bill? Why not pass this, like the bills you shove through without reading any other time? And I`m with neither party.

I'm no Harvard scholar, however two birds with one stone solution -

Lift the drilling moratorium - provides jobs and increases our own oil production.

Several companies have been bought by China because the even the permits in permitted areas have not been issued. They are dragging their feet to stifle drilling and that does no one any good during these troubled times.

m123-3102953 "shocking to see it snowed in February-obviously disproves climate change/global warming-NOT!"

Not! Actually, global warming models predict that there will be more weather EXTREMES in addition to an overall warming trend.

I don't think there is any reason to doubt that 'global warming' is happening. The problem I have is in the proposed SOLUTIONS. We have several choices;

1 - Spend ourselves into poverty in a vain attempt to delay the inevitable.

2 - Try some relatively inexpensive 'fixes', such as 'iron seeding' some oceans to dramatically increase the sequestering of carbon through plankton blooms, or injecting Sulfur Dioxide into the stratosphere to mimic the cooling effects of volcanic eruptions (a well recognized effect).

3 - Accept the reality that, without complete international cooperation (which won't happen, since many large countries will BENEFIT from global warming - China, Russia, etc.), we need to learn to adapt - just like we have with the warming trend that has ALREADY happened over the last 150 years.

I think adaptation is the only reasonable strategy, as unfortunate as it might be for some low-lying countries that front the oceans.

Last week, President Obama painted a grim picture of what might happen if the government shut down, saying that "people don't get their Social Security checks, they don't get their veterans payments."

That's not true, however. Social Security checks and veterans payments would still go out as they did when the government shut down 15 years ago. But both sides are now trying to avoid a shutdown, figuring it would be political suicide.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/25/earlyshow/main20036325.shtml

WHAT???? Obama caught lying to the public? Fear Mongering? I thought he always blamed Republicans for that!

Sandtrich....I am all for doing something about our military empire we created overseas. Thats where the cutting should be and I agree. I agree with Eisenhower who warned against the military industrial complex. I also understand the military and NASA are where most of our high tech inventions have originated, such as the internet. Would cutting the military hamper our innovation? Does removing ourselves from the Middle East altogether make us safer? Is the whole point of the jihad against Americans because of our presence there? Or will leaving just invite the jihad to be fought on our shores instead of theirs? It appears to be coming regardless. We just captured a Saudi in Texas on a student visa plotting to blow up some stuff. Korans were found in the tunnels under the border in the Tucson sector.

If the compromising is going toward making more cuts, then I am all for it. But I dont see where the Democrats are looking to make cuts. I see Obama wanting to build high speed rail for some $53 billion. I see him increasing spending in many areas. I see his budget of a $1.6 trillion deficit unbelievably insane. I see the Democrats wanting to raise the debt ceiling...again. Back in 2006, Senator Obama ranted and railed against raising the debt ceiling as a byproduct of a failed government. Whats changed?? I see Obama suing my state ignoring federal laws on illegal immigration while turning a blind eye to the several sanctuary cities in California, which are illegal.

Just because I am a conservative doesnt mean I heart Republicans with everything they do. But I admire the Tea Party bringing the GOP back to its roots. I felt betrayed by Bush after Iraq. I felt he betrayed the conservative base. I also felt that Bush was strong-armed by the Democrat Congress into passing alot of garbage late in his 2nd term.

Point is we jettisoned alot of career Republican politicians in the last elections that became corrupt (why McCain wasnt one of those booted is beyond me). Americans felt that a move to the right was necessary to counter the liberal movement that America was undergoing. In doing so, it validated the Republicans and the need for Democrats to begin cooperating with the right more.

When I said there shouldnt be any compromise, I was saying the Republicans shouldnt be compromising with more spending, like they did with the tax cuts in the 11th hour of the lame duck session. That was one terrible compromise that just ended up costing this country an arm and a leg. The tax debate will heat up again in time for the 2012 elections. Still no certainty because of the temporary nature of the "compromise." If the compromise is "if you want this cut, we need to cut that." Then great! But thats not the type of compromising we been seeing.

The only compromising the left seems to want is to get the GOP to lighten up on the cuts. Then no, I dont want that compromise.

Why is cutting corporate welfare never discussed when people talk about spending cuts? I hear a lot about cutting social programs and defunding government agencies, but no one ever talks about cutting subsidies to big agricultural corporations, big oil, big pharma, tobacco, big coal, big banks. They make so much money they would never even notice a reduction in federal subsidies. Everyone seems to have jumped on the bandwagon of cutting spending, mostly on things that benefit the working people, but God forbid the bazillionaires have to give up anything, even a few measly percent of their vast fortunes, to help the country that provides them their billions.

AZ---The Republicans have never shown core values to cut the debt--it's just a different spending priority--that born of Imperialism. The notion that we are safer when we fight wars abroad in from the Bush era to justify Iraq. The vast majority of our foreign exchange students, including this guy caught in Texas, come from Saudi Arabia. I try to keep in mind that it was Saudi nationals that were responsible for the 9-11 attacks--yet we're cozy with them. Stop the inflow. The attacks have and will come from within--not on some foreign battlefield.

As for compromise--many see it for what it is--both keeping some pet projects. The cuts proposed by the right attack domestic spending as opposed to spending on foreign soil. There's plenty of waste--both sides. The House is an independent part of the puzzle. The intent to blame the left for what is controlled by the right won't work. When the deal is struck and the national debt issue still lingers--spread the blame. 737 bases on foreign soil--no justification and $T's in waste which will continue.

Heartlight -

Granted subsidies need to be cut, but consider this -

How high do you want food prices to go? How much do you want to pay for fuel? Plastics? Pharmaceuticals?

Removing subsidies to these industries will have to be done incrementally to allow the economy to adjust itself to the public paying the real value of these things.

One additional item concerning pharmaceuticals - citizens in this country currently pay for pretty much all of the current research being done in one way or another as other countries will only allow so much to be charged for drugs in their countries. Our federal government needs to step in and do something about this, but has only so much clout. In the meantime, liberals cry that pharmaceuticals charge too much for drugs which is one of the driving factors behind the cost of health care. In fact, Obama gave the pharmaceutical industry a very sweet deal in the Obamacare legislation that the democrats passed.

Big pharma got the very sweet deal under the Bush administration with the medicare prescription drug plan. Big business of any kind needs to stand on their own. After all that is what is called capitalism. Big business likes socialism as long as the money goes to them and their corporate puppets; but it is an absolute outrage if any taxpayer monies benefit the regular folk. There should be no subsidies to any businesses. Let them stand or fall on their own. Our leaders on Capitol Hill should be setting the example and giving up their one of a kind pork healthcare for an hmo like the regular folk. There should be no millionaires pensions for them either only social security like the people they supposedly were elected to serve. Public servants aren't supposed to be kings; but servants of the people. The servants aren't supposed to live higher than the master. I for one am tired of the elite at the top telling the little people the sky is falling; and we must sacrifice our jobs, ss because the puppet politicians stole the trustfund, our homes, our standard of living; while they hobknob with their corporate puppetmasters living extravagent lives at taxpayer expense. Both parties are corrupt and serve themselves and corporate interests.

I guess my comment #1.2 was too much of "An Inconvenient Truth" for the liberals on this site.

Isn't it interesting that the so-called liberals who say they believe on "Freedom of Expression" are the same ones that try to censor any opinions that disagree with theirs.

Do we have a balance of power between houses or a balance of power between parties?

I believe the Constitution was written to protect from ideology!

The Democrats have increased spending over the last 2 years by $1,280 Billion (Almost $1.3 TRILLION) above the level of spending for Bush's last fiscal year in office (2008).

The idea that they can find $60 Billion (4.7% of the increase) to cut is ridiculous. Harry Reid is just a typical 'tax & spend' liberal who never saw a spending program he didn't like. The National Debt has now increased by $3.49 Trillion since Obama took office (an average of $1.75 Trillion per year).

We can't afford Harry Reid and he needs to get serious about cuts, or the Democrats in the Senate need to replace him with another Senate leader that will see reality.

The capital gains tax where most giant money is made is only 15%, That is crazy.

Oil companies get billions tax free from the "oil depletion allowance." Crazy!

A 1/2% charge on all derivatives, stock and commodities trades would put us in surplus. No politican suggests this because because it would only effect big money manipulators. Crazy!

It appears that both parties are planning on putting the burden of deficit reduction on the struggling people and leave the big rich to continue robbing and destroying the country. Crazy.

If we allow much more of this we will be in depression and chaos. Crazy!

let's cut all the spendings except for the military for defensive pusrposes. Make the corporations pay their full taxes, make the oil industry start paying their dues. They have been enjoying their hundreds of billions annual profits for way too long, yet paying almost no tax and still keep raising the gasoline prices. Let's cut all the welfare for the poor since the republicans have promised that the rich will create jobs. Everyone should earn their livilhood. There should be no free lunches, for anyone. Fair is fair.

The entitlements need to be the excessive Welfare for illegals and healthcare for illegals.......the total spent in one year for illegals' benefits and what they cost our legal system for the more than 100,000 sexual crimes, plus jobs and education ...exceeds 382B

Retired people paid into this Social Security all their lives and pay for their Medicare premiums every month. Amazing that the Social Security Trust is going broke according to Democrats but the first thing they try to steal from to fund Obamacare.....how can anyone believe it's going broke when the gov. makes a beeline for it every time they want to spend on something?

Cut the elected officials retirement benefits to Social Security only if you want to save money and their healthcare to Medicare as well. Take away that 20,000 pay raise they got right before they said raises for gov. employees would be frozen......what a laugh

Last, exactly my feelings on the subject.

Lets's Go Congress!!! Are you serious? I can just see you now standing with your tutu on cheering for yourself in front of a mirror! Aren't you just a sweetie pie! Must have voted for O"boo"ma!!

Sarcasm-really it looks well on those that cannot express themselves otherwise.

Nobody has stolen money from social security. It is solvent for about 30 years. But when social security started in the 1930's the average person died in their mid 60's. Now they live to over 80.

Social security is easy to fix. Just have to gradually raise the retirement age to 70 and also increase the income cap - working poor people pay social security tax on their whole income so should richer people - at least up to $200,000. Above that they may figure out ways around it.

The discretionary budget other than entitlements, defense and interest is only 12 percent of the budget. Needs to be cut but doesn't solve the problem. Main issue is to address our medical system - which has costs twice as high as other developed countries with no better care on average (cancer treatment is the best in the world but other treatments is below world standards with respect to results - part of that is because uninsured people don't get physicals and timely treatment - leading to preventable deaths). The system could be fixed with a change in procedures - make doctors and patients aware of costs (with co pays for working patients), remove incentives for doctors to prescribe overly expensive and unnecessary tests and treatments, more treatment by nurses in pharmaicies for colds and vaccinations, more treatment by GP's who earn half what specialists earn, import immigrant GP's and nurses on a j visa (must leave the US if the job ends) preferably convertible to a green card after 10 years.

Excessive focus on the 12 percent of the budget that is discretionary spending is not an honest way to address the nation's problems. Military adventures also play a part.

Increasing "the retirement age" to 70-72 is a double-edged sword. Unless the economy can expand by 5-6% per year or more, raising the retirement age only defers the problem. By clogging the employment pipeline with older workers at the top, fewer opportunities will exist for their children and grandchildren.

Stagnant wage growth and longer life expectancies are the real culprits behind SSI's problems. The solution is in the withholding rate. To allow benefits at current rates, and to allow COLA increases, really requires a higher rate than the 12.4% combined rate that should be in force today. Probably more like 16-18%. This will allow the same stability, and hopefully allow seniors a few years retirement. When Dad retired, the UAW published figures that over half it's retirees died within 16 MONTHS of retirement. Dad beat that. It took cancer 3 years. This was in the early 1980's.

Which brings us the the success of Medicare. Better senior healthcare = longer life. One government program that worked has damaged another government program that worked. But it can be fixed.

Tom

You should really keep up with current events with the "medicare cuts to fund "Obamacare."" I guess you don't understand what it meant to cut spending to health insurance companies for supplemental insurance policies.

Took away an unnecessary subsidy to insurance companies in their program for supplemental benefits for better off medicare recipients.

dangerfield,

Does anyone ever responds to you? Even if its a one liner, I appreciate your commitments. They are very insightful, but I am afraid they are to busy trying to out due each other to notice.

johnny, please enlighten me what funds goes to people here illegally. i am pretty sure if there are such funds, it would have being the first thing cut off.

Ummm........let's see here.....welfare....education and college benefits over YOUR child who performs better in school......health care.....more cash for plopping out anchor babies....need I add more?????

Hot Hmmm....Let's see.

Welfare is designed to go to citizens only. If money goes to illegals it is by fraud not by Congressional mandate.

Education money is targeted for citizens. Those crossing the border each day to get an education are American citizens, either born here or from parents who were. Sorry if you don't like the class of people but citizens they are.

Health care fraud needs to be addressed but fraud is a crime and not mandated by Congress.

"Cash for plopping out anchor babies" can you get more crude? This was stopped a long time ago. Where have you been, in a foreign country?

"Need I add more?" Seems like you will have to start not add.

LL

I'm in agreement with you on this Johnny B, all those fat congressional pay raises and pet projects need to be cut all together. Drop all the special interest groups as well because all they want is money or something else that creates budget deficits and are not needed. Then give some of that money to our men and women in the military for new and updated equipment and their barracks!!!!!! Then reinvest in our country by cutting all business and corporate taxes to where they want to come back home to open up shop again!!!!!!! This is what creates jobs and other opportunities. Isn't that what made our country great in the first place and why others legally immigrated here from other countries. Drill, drill, drill for oil (to hell with the tree huggers) isn't that the reason why it took BP so long to cap the oil leak????? Stop our dependency on Middle Eastern oil and use other renewable energy sources too. Which again creates more jobs. Hell congress it isn't hard to do those things!!!!!!!!!!! If a family of four on a fixed income can balance their budget why can't you!!!!!!!

well, I must disagree with you Master Q. Welfare benefits are not received frauduently if the only requirement is that you have an address and an alien registration card (which is the only requirement that some states have) So for instance, if there was an illegal, by way of water or land, if they happen to get hurt on US soil,, that becomes our issue by the way of Medicaid. Sad but true. Now, I am the last to dig into immigrants, because I am one, but let's be fair,, let's cut the spending and stop handing out money for having children,, let's make the mothers responsible for their children,,(receiving welfare is not a job) and let's stop allowing everyone to come over,spend money from an "account" they are not making a deposit into

Keith, you must be enrolled in the medical marijuana program. You want to give corporations tax breaks, eh? Well they'll gladly take them and stuff them in their pockets and continue to outsource our jobs to people who will work for a fraction of what it takes to live here. Get with it. We've given these greedy b--tards more than they deserve and they still stab us in the back. I'm all for smaller businesses, but they must show that they will hire citizens of this country and not green card aliens or illegals.

Are you serious? Doing anything about or taking anything away from the illegals is the last thing this President would allow. He would open the border completely if he could. What I want to know is what country is going to open their arms to the citizens born and bred here that will need a new place to call home.

Don't forget to cut the defense budget back to around $200 billion., which is still more than twice what any other country on this planet spends on defense.

You have it real well in the USA despite the mortgage crisis, and some other things.

You should try living in one of these Middle Eastern countries for awhile, then tell me how bad you got it.

No big extra fries with that big Mac baby.

cheers

Seandra,

Around here the biggest problem is dealing with the children of the legitimate citizens. You know, the barely educated, will never earn more than minimum wage mothers, whose highest ambition is to stay out of prison but on drugs. Their "husbands" usually can't make it past the prison part. Meth babies and kids in meth lab houses. BTW, these are all small-town white issues. And we wonder why so much education money goes up in smoke. Burned up in drug councilling, drug enforcement and poor class performance by damaged kids. Further burned up disrupting the routine curriculum to teach kids subjects on a standardized test, based on the year end, but administered in the late fall, about six months of classes early. All things they will then forget because they don't understand them.

Freemannogod,

Interesting that you should mention the Middle East. High percentage of young people without jobs or job skills, in a society that imports professional, professorial, managerial and manual labor. See where they are today? Sound like the US? And these are the so-called "RICH" countries.

Maybe illegals are getting services by fraud but they are still getting them and it is still costing the taxpayer money. I have personally seen illegals standing in the line in WalMart using food stamps and WIC coupons. The wife or significant other uses a different name than the male so they can do this. Don't tell me it is illegal for them to do it or that they can't, because all it takes is for them to go get a fake ID and SS card, which are both readily available in any major city.

Yes, we need to cut off the birdfeeder for these people and the other recipients of public assistance - Congress.

How do you know they're illegals, NVArt? Do you go up and ask them for their birth certificate? Just because they don't speak perfect English doesn't mean they're here illegally or they weren't born here.

They didn't speak any English.

gee barry, i didn't know you visited this board.

If the lefties like independent Jim McDermott would let us build refineries and drill for oil until the new energy sources are available we wouldn't need to worry about the middle east at all. If Harry Reid had half a brain this budget fight would never happen. Would somebody tell Harry to quit trying to look smart.

Natural gas is here and readily available. Big oil is one's who say that we need to drill oil and Repubs are beholden to 'em so they spout the same words.

LL

The reasons why the Repubs are talking spending cuts is it's the Dems and your Pres (I didn't vote for the guy) who got into this bigger deficit in the first place. I didn't want Obama-Care did you??? I didn't ask for them to buy out AIG, GM and Citi Corp either!!!!!!! Did you?????

You are half right, no 100 billion cuts, we want 1.65 trillion cuts, the republicans can get it for us or do their best or we'll remove another large bunch of republican incumbents in the primaries, in 2012.

It sounds really cool and easy to "just drill here." Do you wonder why it hasn't happened? Look up mud volcano AND indonesia to ee one potential cause. It is estimated that this will continue for at least 26 years. It isn't simple stuff, and the federal budget cannot be compared to balancing a budget for a house of four. I am balancing a budget for a house of four, and I get to use coupons! Just some humor for you all...

chrispalmer,

Drilling here for our own oil which would require less energy to transport requires nationalization of oil obtained from U.S. soil (even in the Gulf of Mexico). This is big government, public owenership of private oil companies. Do you really want bigger government and public ownership of oil companies (Venezuela did this). Or do you not really understand how all oil is really on the open market, even oil from U.S. soil.

they act more like 1st graders even while nameing important legislation (( the job killing health care repeal bill)) how juvenile can you get

the job killing health care repeal bill??? Yeah, Jim....Obama's got a winner there! Unless Obamacare is repealed, their won't be any Democrats left. Watch it get tossed under the bus, later this year....

give me a break!

the job killing health care repeal bill??? Yeah, Jim....Obama's got a winner there! Unless Obamacare is repealed, their won't be any Democrats left. Watch it get tossed under the bus, later this year....

Don't kid yourself.

Third Judge Finds New Healthcare Law's Individual Mandate Constitutional

For Those Keeping Score: The WSJ reports that U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler is the third U.S. trial judge to hold that Congress was within its constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce when it chose to penalize people who forgo health insurance.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/healthlawprof_blog/2011/02/third-judge-finds-new-healthcare-laws-individual-mandate-constitutional.html

Um, that'd be three in favor and two against.

Bev honey you have enough to worry about with Rham itinn running your city! Anyways the SC is going to shut this down.....or perhaps the New 2012 Rep President can just declare HRC unconstitutional. Oh My!

Um, that'd be three in favor and two against.

The last one was based on religious reasons. That like me saying that I don't want to pay taxes because it is against my religion. Ain't gonna happen.

John, You are 100% right that was a case based on religion. But you can't argue with Bev she won't listen.

Ah, the Constitutional cacophony continues. However, the last time I checked my Constitution, it says that the Supreme Court is the panel who gets to decide what is, or is not, constitutional. When the nine old folks speak, we'll know. Until then, opinions are just opinions. Don't confuse them with facts.

Chrispalmer, Your statement that you will not follow any law that lowers your standard of living is exactly the same as followed by any career criminal. Drug dealer or Madoff, you sound just like any other crook.

Bill

You don't understand. This is how we learn about our constitution. We discuss it, cite what we know is to be the truth about what our constitution is, says, and means. Forget about what the Supreme Court says. Who cares what those old guys say.

Eduardo--- well said the Republicans were awarded the largest electoral victory in 70 years campaigning on repealing the insurance farce, cutting spending and opposing anything the inept lying quasi socialist in the white house tries to do.

We removed a lot of republican incumbents in the primaries last year, they can do what they said, or we''ll take a lot more of them out in the primaries in 2012.

Snow, Collins Brown and LUgar , of course are history anyway, there is nothing they can to to be reelected..

All of the republicans that voted with Obama during the lame duck session will be one.

When are voters going to learn that just voting in new people and throwing out the old ones may not work, and historically has not worked.

Everyone is corruptible: Repubs, Demos, Librit, Indenps; everyone. All it takes is for businesses and special interest groups to buy a senator is an amount of money they can easily afford. Big oil makes hundreds of billions a year, they can afford to buy our entire government times over if opposing interests had not already bought some of them over.

We will not have any kind of fair government until private, opaque, underhanded "donations" to our politicians is stopped.

If that ever happens we will still have issues though, because of how radical each of our majority parties has become. Republican's want a fascist government where education, living and working conditions, and the standard of living no longer apply. Democrats want a more socialistic Government where everyone in the country has something to fall back on via welfare entitlements.

Either way we, as a country, are screwed. We either kill education and become a country of idgits, or we continue to force our economy down by fighting inflation by increasing the cost of living, making companies pay more to employees, raising taxes to cover welfare spending bills, and probably expanding outsourcing.

What we need is a mix of the two parties. A party that will not cut areas that are absolutely needed, like education, energy reform or innovation, and health care, while cutting back on things we do not need, like defense spending outside of the US, subsidies to Big Business where the essential businesses are not struggling (we had to bail out the auto industry, they ARE the biggest US manufactures and without them we would be in a deeper economic hole then presently), and aid to countries that can not be logically explained other then to subsidize their oil.

I think a lot of people are hardly objective when they look at these proposals from either side, they see them only as the evil Democratic response or the vile Republican response.

Essentially Rebublican's are saying, look we could not come up with a plan to save the economy without cutting jobs or job conditions. Democrat's are saying, hey we are trying to support the businesses that support American jobs, but it is going to cost a lot.

So we have a choice, we either side with the Republican plan and lose some jobs now and combat a lowering economy for the outlook of a stronger economy down the road or we can back the Democrat plan, raise our taxes as our own contribution to fixing this problem and shore up the falling areas of the economy while it limps toward the finish line.

There are other options, but I will leave them out because we need to do something right now, renegotiating or re-collaborating at this point is only putting the task off until later when we might still have no new ideas and maybe the economy gets worse or better in the mean time.

Point is that EVERYONE in this country must make a sacrifice in order to fix the problem. Either we lose more jobs now, or we pay more now. Those are the only viable options our Government has, and probably can, present to us right now. Either way it is not going to get us out of the economic hole over night, maybe not over half a decade, but we will be moving in the right direction eventually.

What won't do it is to continuing this bickering along party lines, not only is it immature, it is a reckless endangerment to the country.

Let me help you with a little math. Pres. Obama said extending the Bush tax cuts on the high income would generate $700 billion of tax revenue over 10 years or an average of $70 billion per year (no small sum). While it helps reduce our annual debt of over 1 trillion dollars it isn't the sole solution. A little known tidbit, the Bush tax cuts also resulted in a tax savings of $2.2 trillion over a 10 year period for those below $200,000. Everyone needs to sacrifice but it's too easy to gore someone else ox rather than look in your own barnyard.

Jim------- agreed they should have cut the tax breaks for everybody, I would have loved to listen to the whining libbies.

If it's any consolation, every republican that voted for that bill will be gone in 2012,.

But that top 2% creates jobs OBTW!!!!!! Along with the rest of the small business owners thank you!!!!! So why not give them a tax break????? Thank you Common Man for your post also.

Keith,

So the top 2% of taxpayers, buy all the new cars, buy all the new houses, buy all the new products.

Capital does not create jobs. Demand creates jobs. 335million people consuming goods and services creates jobs. Capital provides a means of delivery in exchange for a share of the wealth generated in trade. Maybe you ought to read Henry Ford's views on Capital when it comes to industry and job creation. And he was certainly no liberal, socialist, or communist.

Common Man

So Obama said that extending the top income people (top 2%) saved $700 billion. When did he say that? If that is true, then all of Bush's tax breaks should have yielded a surplus in our deficit, eventhough Bush did not include the 2 wars in his budget. Stupendous logic on your part.

If congress concentrated on getting more jobs for people who would then be paying taxes rather than collecting unemployment benefits, get rid of the tax breaks for the rich, and some badly needed cuts there would be plenty of money to get the debt under control. Especially if we ended the two wars (one that should have never happened) and the other that should have been over years ago.

They say we will have to have troops in Afghanistan for maybe 10 to 20 more years till their army and police are able to defend their country. If I'm not mistaken, our military enlistees get about 8 weeks of training, possibly a few more in some specialized training and they are then sent to fight for the Afghanistan people. Our police get a month or two of training and they are out on the streets patrolling and protecting our citizens. Why should it take 10 or 20 more years for the Afghanistan army and police to be trained and able to defend themselves? If they don't care enough about their country and themselves to get trained and out there protecting themselves, why should we be sending our young people to die over there, and bankrupting our country to defend them? No one has ever explained this. Maybe they are just smarter than we are - we're sending our kids to die and bankrupting ourselves while they sit back and let us do it.

@Bill Marvel---Ford? He supplied Nazi Germany as part of his global empire. How did that work out?

Let me help you with a little math. Pres. Obama said extending the Bush tax cuts on the high income would generate $700 billion of tax revenue over 10 years or an average of $70 billion per year (no small sum).

No he didn't. Let me help you with that. In fact, $700 billion is the amount of debt that the tax cuts on the high income earners will add over the next ten years.

They were going to be built in Alabama, but Obama shifted it to Washington, one of his blue states. It will cost more there than in Alabama.

Judy...

You know, it is really pitiful that folks like you tend to get on these vines and spew your drivel without any research at all to determine whether or not you are correct. How does it feel to realize that the only people who will take you seriously are those who are also brainwashed like yourself.

Now, you made several statements that are blatantly false and unless you respond, I will assume that you lied deliberately to try and impress your socialist friends. Please take note of the following which was found in about 15 seconds:

As it is for all other federal employees, congressional retirement is funded through taxes and the participants' contributions. Members of Congress under FERS contribute 1.3 percent of their salary into the FERS retirement plan and pay 6.2 percent of their salary in Social Security taxes.

Members of Congress are not eligible for a pension until they reach the age of 50, but only if they've completed 20 years of service. Members are eligible at any age after completing 25 years of service or after they reach the age of 62. Please also note that Members of Congress have to serve at least 5 years to even receive a pension.

The amount of a congressperson's pension depends on the years of service and the average of the highest 3 years of his or her salary. By law, the starting amount of a Member's retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary.

According to the Congressional Research Service, 413 retired Members of Congress were receiving federal pensions based fully or in part on their congressional service as of Oct. 1, 2006. Of this number, 290 had retired under CSRS and were receiving an average annual pension of $60,972. A total of 123 Members had retired with service under both CSRS and FERS or with service under FERS only. Their average annual pension was $35,952 in 2006.

Now, would you care to reword your post?

Just Asking...

Let's get the Union mentality out of political offices and professionalism.

What makes politicans and Union members so special that they can get more perks than the people who pay the taxes to give them those perks?!!!

Who said Obama was "ignoring the constitution on marriage and the bill passed by Congress and signed into law by Clinton"? I did hear that Beck and Gingrich were saying that Obama was refusing to enforce the DOMA but, as often happens, they were wrong in their accusations.

Bud,

For the most part, right on! The only point I would disagree on is that both sides are just as guilty of running up our debt over the last 30 plus years! Reagan did it and W certainly did it!

And we can no longer afford to give billions to big oil and other corporations that are doing very well on their own thank you! Corporate welfare has got to stop.

What exactly have they caused that wasn't already here before the Democrat majority? What I last remember, is before the 2008 Presidential Campaign, the ship was already in sinking mode. So much so, that even Bush decided to SPEND in the form of a massive non-regulated bailout. What I remember is that the entire housing crisis started before the 2008 Presidential Campaign. What I remember is that the economy was screwed up years before the 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Now, was there a great deal of spending AFTER the elections - YES, and I believe it is time to curb that spending. Was a Democrat elected to carry on the conservative failing agenda - HELLS NO!! Only the "Do things my way" Repubs saw that differently.

But for you to say what THEY CAUSED is totally unfounded. Half of you are angry because your master Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck or whoever else is telling you to be. You all haven't read a bill to know what to be mad at.

I agree to curb the spending, but let it be on terms both sides can agree with. For those who want the Communist way of no compromise, my way or you are an enemy of the state attitudes, please go form your own country somewhere else.

All the politicians hypocricy boils my blood. All of them are guilty of over spending.

JEN------ When you libbies get through with it, can we borrow the time machine you libbies use to go back in time and right all of those wrongs? That's what you do isn't it, I mean you don't just sit and talk about how it's okay because it happened before, do you?

Sorry Jen, conservatives don't have a time machine all we can do is the present and dealing with the inept lying quasi socialist in the white house is a full time job.

Jen....

Have you any completed any research (just a little bit) on your statement "and as I mentioned somewhere else on this board, the debt ceiling was raised EIGHT TIMES under George W. Bush, without any complaint from the Republicans in Congress ".

It seems to me that you are only spewing the DNC talking points because your statement is not true. I will submit that when you make statements such as the above, that you are just a "repeater" of something that Chris Matthews, Rachel, or one of the other idiots on PMSNBC has instructed you to.

A little research goes a long way....

Just Saying...

tea-party-fan:

From the fifth paragraph...

[It'll be the 7th time the debt limit has been raised during this [Bush] administration.]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500803_162-4486228-500803.html

http://crooksandliars.com/taxonomy/term/608,17455

You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

...just sayin...

I cannot believe that some people actually think because one president raised the debt ceiling that its okay for all of them to do it.I have seen what the republicans have proposed,but i just havent seen anything out of the liberals.all the libs seem to do is badmouth any idea to start fixing this problem.I find it intresting that when they spent damn near a year ramming obamacare down our throats i did not hear anything about jobs,but as soon as the republicans take power and try to start repealing it all the liberals are concerned about now is jobs.

I found that same article: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500803_162-4486228-500803.html ! It also says that the OMB projected the national debt would hit $10.14 TRILLION by February of 2009. Obama took office in January of 2009. Wouldn't that mean that the bulk of our current national debt was incurred BEFORE Obama took office? And how much of the current debt is a direct result of saving our country from bankruptcy and depression? We must do something about our current financial mess, but the republicans are giving bad advice that would harm our economy and not deal with the really big ticket items of tax cuts for the rich, and welfare for some of the biggest corporations in the world, including big oil.

Lakerman:

[It also says that the OMB projected the national debt would hit $10.14 TRILLION by February of 2009. Obama took office in January of 2009. Wouldn't that mean that the bulk of our current national debt was incurred BEFORE Obama took office?]

Very perceptive...but try not to confuse those that would "refudiate" this by posting a fact or two...it makes their anus itch...

Mickey, NY...(#39.7)....

On Jan.20, 2009 the debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08 ....The date of the Obama InauguCoronation

On Feb.26, 2011 the debt is $14,119,807,822,019.49

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

Not CBO estimates....they have always worked on the "Garbage in---Garbage out". They can only analyze numbers given to them by Congress using computer models they themselves concocted.

Mike in Delray:

The timeframe Lakerman was referring to is January/February 2009. And it seems CBO numbers are only good when they fit into a Republican agenda, and when the numbers don't, well...it must be GIGO...

Now, as far as your claim of $10.6 trillion vs. $14.1 trillion, no one is deputing the numbers. That being said, I've always stated that it wouldn't have mattered WHO won the last presidential election, nothing would have changed. A McCain/Palin White House would be doing these same unpopular but NECESSARY actions that the Obama Administration is doing.

Republican tax cuts sound juicy, but even THEY know that they don't work, and can't work, in times of a major budget crisis like the taxpayers inherited from the Bush Administration...I mean, who's bright idea was it to try and hide not one, but two TRILLION dollar wars? C'mon...even you have to admit that was financial suicide.

Mickey, NY....I was pulling my hair out during the last Bush term......culminating in " We have to abandon free market principles in order to save the free market" ....But even that statement and having wishy-washy McCain on the ticket could not get me to pull the lever for the Progressives in 2008.....but enough independent voters did, and they went the other way in 2010.

The Wars.....I supported them in the beginning. Everyone from Bill Clinton to John Kerry to the Bush WhiteHouse to the Queen of England believed at the time Saddam had those — — d's ( I can't even type that anymore) and he was going to use them. The turning point for me started after the "FALL OF BAGHGDAD", when L.Paul Bremer let the country break-out in "Victory Mahem"....but enough of that...

I don't think going even further in debt is a sound way to get us out of debt.....My ex tried that approach....that's why she's my ex....

Mike in Delray,

First, I want to thank you for your honest and CIVIL debate on the issues posted...truly refreshing.

That being said, if I remember my history correctly, we have spent our way out of debt (for lack of better terminology) before, but in my opinion this time is different in the sense that our troubles are truly staggering, and it wouldn't surprise me if 20 years from now we find out just how close we really came to another depression.

I think this country's troubles have hair on them, and personally I have faith and confidence in this administration to do everything in it's power to get us on the right track. I believe it will happen, but will be slow. Too bad there is such divisiveness.

And thanks for the humor about your ex...and I'm glad you seem to have found the humor in it.

You have NO idea how serious a loss it would be.

Well, they could use their brains about what they closed down.

Corsair, if they closed the Department of Education tomorrow, what would be the downside? (OK, we'll keep subsidizing school lunches - that's just a welfare program anyway.)

If they closed the Commerce Department tomorrow, what would be the downside?

If they closed the FTC tomorrow, what would be the downside?

If they ended all farm subsidies tomorrow, what would be the downside?

Except for the food inspection programs, if they closed the Department of Agriculture tomorrow, what would be the downside?

That's a good start - plenty of hundreds of billions of dollars. I'm sure that's enough to satisfy the freshman Congressmen, at least for this year.

Heck, with all those savings, they could even keep the National Parks open.

Economan...

You could easily become my "hero".

I have been making similar statements for ages....

Just Saying...

Did anyone do any research on how much the ill-fated shutdown of the government under Gingrich ended up COSTING the American tax payer. It sounds like a lot of people are simply spewing talking points than putting some thought into what it costs the economy not only to lose revenue, what costs are associated with closing and opening offices, furloughing employees, and the ripple effect of cutting jobs. Despite what the Republicans claim, cutting programs costs people jobs, people that are more likely to spend that money than are the rich who get uneeded tax cuts.

You hit the nail directly on the head and it still does no good. The Republican/Tea Baggers are pure ideological "Hypocrites". They don't believe in Abortion but they do believe in the Death Penalty. The last time I checked, killing was killing, regardless of the method or why. You can't have it both ways.

The Democrats will gut the "Fat" or "Pork Barrel" from any budget the Republicans/Tea Baggers put forward. You think the "Tan Man" cried about the loss of his "Duplicate Pratt & Whitney Engine" from the Defense Budget, just wait until the Democrats get to the real meat. They'll all be crying in their "Kool-Aide or Tea".

Dumbo, the republicans were the one that killed Pratt Whitney. another mouthy lib with a keyboard an opinion and nothing else.

Economan,

Actually, if the actions you suggest were to be taken over the course of next week, much of the U.S. economy would collapse within weeks.

Corsair,

I'm afraid that was sixteen years ago. I don't know if the attention span of a Congressman or of a Tea Party member is that long. "Those who will not learn from history are condemned to repeat it."

The tea baggers can't remember anything for 16 minutes, what do you expect?

Does the same apply to the "Bushies"? Or is this another hypocritical idea like the Death Penalty and Abortion? You can't have it both ways.

Republicans are "Hypocrites". Its that plain and simple.

I'm sure "W" would give up his pension and "Security Detail".

You have to love all of these experts on the tea party it is laughable.

I think it is unfair to the newly elected republicans to expect them to solve all the messes the democrats have made in the last eight years and way beyond that in less then a year.

They have alot of sh*t to shovel as they have been chosen by the people to do just that.

Get over the sour grapes.

People voted and demand cuts. This is mearly cut one of a thousend cuts.

I am greatful for any start in the right direction.

Everything cannot be about the selfish ones, something must be about the future generations and their right NOT to pay a mortage, just because you want to suck government nipple.

It would take alot of dumbness to hurt this country worse then the last two horrifying years of democratic majority and I fully expect more democrats to be ousted in the next two years.

Grow up!