House to consider another short-term funding bill

From NBC's Shawna Thomas and Carrie Dann
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor just announced that the House will consider another short-term government funding measure next week.

It is expected that this funding measure will be for three weeks. This continuing resolution would keep the government open beyond the March 18th deadline if the Senate passes it.

This three-week spending bill is expected to show cuts of $2 billion per week, totalling another $6 billion in cuts.

President Barack Obama said Friday that he is open to "one more" stopgap measure to avert a shutdown, but he called on congressional leaders to "compromise on prudent cuts" and agree on a long-term budget to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year.

"We can’t keep running the government based on two-week extensions," Obama said during a news conference.  "That’s irresponsible."

Discuss this post

Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3

 The dems don't want a budget passed. They want to use the continuing resolution for as long as they can. Under the rules of CR no programs can be defunded ie healthcare. Passing a budget means Obamacare can get defunded. 

  • 2 votes
Reply#26 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 4:42 PM EST

No budget last yr. ,so the faux CIC-CEO now wants nada cuts in spending, regs, and taxes. Yipe. Apparently Nov. missed his elitist mind and understanding. Golf does cut down on past and present reality. For two and plus years, the naif has brought debt and deficits to a record level. Dems have controlled Congress since 2006, remember? Pubs only have the House now and the socialists,err, Dems have the Executive and Senate. And the MSM and propaganda groups like the NEA-SEIU-ACORN-NPR still pronounce that it is Dems who are exploring energy here in the USA, balancing budgets, defending the borders, cutting expenses. Every one of those emotive points are lies. Most Americans are waking up to those facts . In two years, just list successes for America that have stood the test of our heritage, history, culture and values. Care, tax hikes,more regs,no education reform, horrid foreign policy in the ME and with Chavez, failed Stimulus, no private sector jobs worth reporting and unemployment numbers (underestimated with people giving up looking) at near 15-16% now and the Labor Dept. going to put out numbers on Mar. one month deficits more than a year of W's , plus rates going up to nearly 10% again. Yipe. This is success? And it is W's fault? LOL There are none so blind that those who will not see and Obama and his ilk are as blind as bats.

  • 1 vote
Reply#27 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 5:39 PM EST

you haven't a clue you live in a bubble you only associate with people who think like you. There aren't many dems jumping ship...and trust me the swing voters are those college educated elitist mind types...they fact check and understand many of the complicated issues a little better than high school educated, trade school education is bad types....repubs are their own worst enemy you have ensured that obama gets elected again foolishly I voted for bush the first time...but I would never vote repub again if they stay like this

  • 2 votes
#27.1 - Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:07 AM EDT
Reply

If all of the cuts to the CR are "Ideological" does that not mean the spending was "Ideological" to begin with?

At this point I would have to say The Speaker and Mr Cantor are winning the argument on the deficit.

And the real winners in Wisconsin are the Taxpayers and the Children. Now the Unions must work for them and not the other way around.

The President does nothing but hit his sound bites as he ramps up his Win the Future 2012 re election campaign. This country has spent $5.3 trillion on this mans on the job training we can no longer afford him. He has failed to show leadership on anything. I like the man and have no doubt he is from Hawaii I just have no faith in his vision for America and his agenda has not proven to be a path in the right direction. Right Track 28% Wrong Track 65%. Job Approval rating by Independents dropped 10% from 47% to 37% in one month, they will no longer be swayed by Hope and Change, President Obama has a Record he must defend now. If we are only given a viable alternative in 2012 the Independents will send this man back to Chicago.

  • 1 vote
Reply#28 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 5:58 PM EST

thats just it the repubs don't have one palin, bachmann, huckabee etc. all will lose big...the old john mccain who was not as far right then was the only one who could have beat obama and then palin comes into the picture, hell obama all most could have stopped campaigning and still won

  • 3 votes
#28.1 - Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:10 AM EDT
Reply

You can put in consideration that when Odumbo came to office, odumbo,dingy reid and ballerina pelosi blame everything on Bush for the mess we are in. Now do you see the congress under control of rep. crying like the three stoogies and blaming everything on the demo's. Even though the three stoogies had control of all three chambers and still couldn't pass a budget to me they sound like the most incompetent elected officials? Now they are trying to make the rep. like the bad guys what a joke to the taxpayer.

  • 1 vote
Reply#29 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 9:13 PM EST

How can you create a budget with no money? No wonder they are going in 2 week increments. The US is BROKE!!! We have off-shored all of our jobs and given away all of our resources and now we are reaping the greed that we have sowed.

  • 2 votes
Reply#30 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 9:37 PM EST

Dems failed miserably, there's no legitimate dispute about it.

Congress failed to do its job

"President Obama first proposed a budget for fiscal year 2011 on Feb. 1, 2010. That was 404 days ago.

Here's what Congress did manage to do: The House produced two of 12 appropriations bills. The Senate has not voted on a single one. Lawmakers couldn't even agree on their own legislative budget.

And those two House votes? They happened way back in July, when Democrats had huge majorities in the House and Senate, with Obama in the White House.

Why Democrats failed to take more action when they had the chance remains somewhat of a mystery.

"Certainly the White House didn't make the budget a priority," Zelizer said. "And there are divisions in the Democratic Party, and especially in the Senate, that are significant. Not everyone is on the same page."

In the absence of a full-year budget, lawmakers have instead passed five short-term spending bills called "continuing resolutions." Designed to bridge short-term gaps in appropriations, Congress has approved one after another to keep the government running. Average length: 34 days

That forces federal agencies into a head snapping game of stop-and-go. Hiring is delayed, work is repeated, and agencies struggle to implement new legislation. Uncertainty is king, with agencies left to guess what their funding level for the year might be.

Republicans want 10 times the budget cuts the White House wants. Last week, the Obama delegated Vice President Joe Biden to meet with the House and Senate leadership. No deal emerged, and Biden has since decamped to Europe."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/11/news/economy/budget_crisis_congress/?cnn=yes

  • 4 votes
Reply#31 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 9:40 PM EST

Those terrible Republicans! President Obama submits a budget with a $1.6 Trillion deficit and the terrible want to cut 3% of the proposed deficit! That barely fits the definition of a trim much less slashing the budget!

  • 5 votes
Reply#32 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 10:20 PM EST

The republicans should aim for a 20%, across-the-board reduction for 2012. I know they probably wouldn't make it, but it's something to aim for. I'd almost guarantee that there's that much waste alone considering that Obama increased federal spending by 24% in just 2 years.

And yes, I know we would still be operating at a deficit, but at least it wouldn't be as large - and we could aim for another 20% for 2013.

    #32.1 - Sun Mar 13, 2011 4:51 PM EDT
    Reply

    I am tired of this blame the Dem's Blame the Republicans. The ppl we should blame is The American Ppl. We let it happen. we need to run our country like a house and we are the family in that huse take care of home first and Get our Pride back and and American Made again.. We need price freeze accross the board take care ok the working class middle class and low class. rich should pay there fair share.. We all should .

    • 3 votes
    Reply#33 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 11:18 PM EST

    I love seeing the Lefties twist and turn now :-)

    I won't waste anyone's time arguing with the Left. Wisconsin is simply what lies ahead in the Unionized States because the Basic Liberal Plan of Buy Union Votes is exposed .

    Even the Unions in Wisconsin agreed to give up concessions on Pension and Health Care -- what they fear the most is controll over being fired :-) They just lost that one too !

    Did you Libbies see that Iowa just Outlawed Collective Bargaining ?

    Are you aware that Federal Officials do NOT have Collective Bargaining Rights ? Jimmy Carter outlawed them because even he realized they were destructive ?

    So why are Liberals upset about Wisconsin ? Because most of the them are either State or Federal Union backers or members :-)

    The Left is exposed--- for simple proof,, check Obama's February Record Deficit -- Obama's Deficit in February 2011 for 1 MONTH,,, is almost 150 % higher than George Bush's Deficit for all of 2007--- LOL

    We cannot survive 22 more months of The Community Organizer whose Lazer Like Focus has NEVER been displayed.

    We cannot survive 22 more months of Dingy Harry Reid,, who cannot pass his own bill in the Senate because he is so out of touch with the Financial Crisis we face today,, even the Democrats realize he is out of touch.

    Obama lied thru his teeth today when he said we set record Oil Production numbers ,,, we produce far less oil today than we did in 1977.

    That fact was verified this week by the Energy Committee in the House.

    The Democrats and Liberals are in a Frenzy now ,, because Obama's record of spending and debt is exposed . If the National Media ever actually thought of challenging Obama's record,,, he would be impeached.

    Enjoy this ride into Hell my wonderful Liberals,,,, Obama is a Communist Plant bent on destroying America,,, and one day you will realize this,, but it will be far too late.

    • 2 votes
    Reply#34 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 11:20 PM EST

    I love seeing the Dittoheads twist and turn now :-)

    You won. Now -- can you govern??

    • 2 votes
    #34.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:06 AM EST

    Charlie

    You noticed that the Senate and the White House were still controlled by the Democrats correct?

    The House presented a CR for the Senate and they (Democrats) couldn't/wouldn't pass it and then the Senate (Democrats) could not pass their own CR either.

    The President meanwhile sits on his behind and attends serious sessions on bullying in high schools rather than wok on the budget.

    Nice leadership eh? Not

    The Democrats are starting to look like they want the government to shut down and if it does it will be on the Democrats and no one else

    Lack of leadership that is what we have right in the White House

    This same dance is going to happen with the debt ceiling bill and the 2012 budget, so I am glad the Democrats are beginning to understand that the dance is no longer solely with them (Democrats) leading.

    Let's hope so

    • 1 vote
    #34.2 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:30 AM EST

    "Lack of leadership that is what we have right in the White House'

    All spending bills begin in the House. That's where the leadership begins. The problem with cutting spending is everyone likes to talk about it -- including voters -- but NOBODY actually wants to do it. Both parties love to spend money. This idea that Republicans want to cut spending and Democrats don't is totally false. All you need to do is look at what the Republican controlled Congress spent between 2001 and 2007. For years politicians have sold the idea that all we need to do is cut waste and fraud and manage our money better and everything will be great. But the real problem is Americans want the best military, highways, airports, transportation, schools, universities, doctors, hospitals, space program, the best of the best of the best -- in everything -- all the time --- we just don't want to PAY for it. Cut spending but don't cut my Social Security. Cut spend but don't take away my mortgage deduction, cut spending and MY taxes. I want, I want, I want -- the only thing I don't want is to pay for everything I want. And if you think Republicans are going to do any better than Democrats, you're either totally uninformed or totally blind or both.

    • 4 votes
    #34.3 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:09 AM EST

    Charlie

    If what you say is true why didn't Hinky Harry and the Democrats in the Senate pass HR1 and send it to the President for his signature

    If we continue two weeks at a time until Sep and cut $2B per week then the Republicans will get the number they want anyway

    There are going to be big spending cuts attached to the debt ceiling bill out of the House and the 2012 budget is going to get cut as well

    If the Democrats are serious about spending cuts are they going to pass these bills or keep screwing around

    I think the Democrats want to shut down the government and Obama is not sure about it that is the conflict right now

    NO leadership from the white house, he needs to be serious in the number he proposes and $10B is not going to get a CR or a budget passed this year.

    • 3 votes
    #34.4 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:32 AM EST

    Personally, I would like to see $8 billion in cuts for this next 2 weeks, then $16 billion, then --- you get the picture.

    It seems like Reid needs to be taken back behind the woodshed and spanked - for being a spoiled brat. He is the one primarily responsible, at this point, for any 'shut downs' as he doesn't allow legislation to the floor of the Senate unless he feels like it - especially when sponsored by republicans.

    Talk about partisanship!

      #34.5 - Sun Mar 13, 2011 4:59 PM EDT
      Reply

      BS - SHUT IT DOWN ! ... A Pox On Both Your Houses !

      The Repub leadership is trying to be too cute, by half, and if the freshmen go along with this childish behavior we are lost.

      Both sides think this is a big chess game and in the end they will outmaneuver the other side and capture the King - tripe foolishness.

      We are dying as a nation and these fools play games.

      We shall begin again in January 2013.

      • 2 votes
      Reply#35 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 11:42 PM EST

      Each and every day the American people realize they made a horrible mistake with Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

      Massive Record Deficits, Obama Care , High Unemployment, Diplomatic Failures.

      Obama is way over his head,, he never had a real job and is trying to lead America ?

      The Liberals are like angry little children as their realize that the silly rhetoric and dreams Obama spun to them are all BS. The Independents realized long ago they bought a dream in the sky with Obama and left him.

      Liberals = 20% of voters

      Moderates = 35 % of voters

      Conservatives = 40 % of voters

      Check November 2010 voting results- Republicans had even larger gains at the State Governor level than they did in the House and Senate-- and now the States are facing their budget problems. They all know Obama will bankrupt every state.

      Exactly how could Obama POSSIBLY WIn in 2012 ? His achievements ? ===== 0 :-)

      Where is Van Jones today ? LOL

      • 3 votes
      Reply#36 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:11 AM EST

      Liberals = 20% of voters

      Moderates = 35 % of voters

      Conservatives = 40 % of voters

      But the Republican party (tea party) is chasing away the moderates.

      • 1 vote
      #36.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:11 AM EST
      Reply

      This is A trickle up plan that could get the country back on track in A short time and help to pay off the deficit, it could save the country A lot of problems, The States, are in trouble, the people who can not find work are too; the pension plans are not funded, the economy is not bringing jobs back fast enough to have A solid recovery, and it could get worse, many more small businesses could go under, etc. they have a deficit problem, this could help them to pay for medical insurance when it is mandatory, and possible save the government more money.
      One way to tackle this would be to take around 17 to 20 million people who need it, low income people who can not find work, and people who have low incomes, [I based these figures on 17 million people,] and pay them 500.00 per week, This would help to bring these people up to the poverty level and give them A chance to grow from there, and give the economy a better foundation to grow on, and take 28% tax from the top not to be refunded to these people for any reason, this 28% would be around 2,380,000,000 per week for two years, or around 247 billion dollars; take out their SS tax and pay that to SS, this 8% would be around 680,000,000 dollars per week or around 70 billion dollars for two years going to SS, or the deficit; this would leave them with around 350.00 dollars per week to live on, This 350.00 by 17 million people would be around 5,950,000,000 billion dollars per week, or around 618 billion dollars for two years going into the economy this would solve the job problem temporarily for two years, while the economy rebounded, and it would help to keep the small businesses from going under
      ,[unknown amount of savings], and would get them to hire; During this two year time frame to save money, and to help fund this, stop giving these people food stamps, and unemployment, and other for the two years, possible they could stop the food stamps for another year, this would stabilize the jobs problem, and save the government billions of dollars that could be used to pay on the deficit.
      the 28% tax they would take from the top should be given to the states, not to be paid back, but with oversight, this money would be around 2.4 billion dollars per week, they could stabilize 3 or 4 states per month, and in so doing would eventually stabilize all the states, and this would be one of the best ways to stabilize the nation, and give the states time to start to recover better; all this to be done with oversight.[ This money to the states is not to be paid back
      because it solves A problem, paying it back would create another problem]The other problem is the deficit! with the states stabilized, and the lower class receiving a pay check, the federal government would be in A better position to start to cut waste, and to curb spending, and the increase in sales tax, as the economy starts to recover faster would bring them more revenue, also if they pay these people even if they find work, for two years it would only increase the taxes they collect, and the SS tax and the new demand for business in the market, as some of these people if only 6 or 7 million of them were to find work.
      By doing this it could hold crime down! saving money;, it could help the real estate markets, and when this is all over, and the economy is growing, these people would not need near as much assistance, saving more money, they would have already been helped, as they helped the country as they spent the money to provide for their families.
      the other is How to pay for it, not counting the savings on food stamps, lower crime, and all the other benefits, the tax break they, extended to they wealthy, over a ten year period of time would pay for this in full, 17 million people receiving 500 per week would come to 884 billion dollars, it would be less if you figure in the unemployment money, the food stamp money, housing assistance etc., if they ear mark the tax cut for the wealthy for this it would pay for it with money left to implement it with too!
      The wealthy would receive much more if the business economy picks up than they would receive on the tax cuts, all the new business would more than make up for those tax cuts! , with the economy going at full throttle, it would be much easier for the government to pay down the deficit, even If they would need to add A tax, to get it done, If they do need to add a tax it would be less, when the economy is back to normal, then they possible could with hold some money that usually goes to the states this is one way they could tackle the problems, and help all the country, and the states, It would help with education to by not laying off teachers at this time!
      Another thing that could be done is to repeal the tax cut for the middle class, and apply anything they could to the deficit, I'm not sure about the middle class tax cut being repealed, If it would help or not, and with the states receiving the money they need to balance their budgets, the federal government could withhold some of the money they normally pay the states for a couple of years, and apply it to the deficit.

        Reply#37 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 6:44 AM EST

        What we're seeing is the emptiness of the Republican Party. They haven't had a new idea in over 30 years. It's a whole lot easier to campaign, make up slogans and say NO. NO. NO, NO, NO, to everything than it is to govern. Well Mr. Tan-man --- you won last November. But like the dog who finally caught the car --- what do you do with it now!!!

        • 4 votes
        Reply#38 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:02 AM EST

        Charlie

        What you are seeing is the lack of leadership from the White House to solve the single biggest problem facing the U.S. which is fiscal sanity, economic recovery, debt/deficit reduction and a process to get America back to work.

        Instead he is the School Master figuring out what to do about bullying

        Leadership from the White House - not this White House

        • 3 votes
        #38.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:32 AM EST

        Charlie, and Robert In Ohio: you have little room to talk, about them not being able to see what needs to be done, when you ignore this plan#37 above, You two are just as blind as anyone of them, and you don't have A clue!!!

        You need to keep silent, because you can not understand any better than they can!!!

          #38.2 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:03 AM EST
          Reply

          So far no one seams to be able to understand the impact that this plan # 37 above would have on the deficit and the economy!

          just the food stamp , housing subsidies, unemployment, and other assistance money that the government gives the states every year, that could be saved by doing this plan would almost pay off the deficit by its self, if they withhold this money for two years, while these people would have the money they would need to survive, then the unspent stimulus money could be applied to the deficit to, once the deficit is paid off it would be easier to bring down the national debt, with all the new tax revenues they would be taking in because of full employment, sure hope someone is able to understand this plan be for the country goes broke!!!

            Reply#39 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:22 AM EST

            Hello: MR. President, Hello MR. vice President, Hello MR. speaker of the house... Is any body home? Hello" Can you all stop fighting long enough to take A look at this plan?

            If you do this it will fix the economy in a few short months and solve the unemployment problems for two years, while the economy gets back to full recovery! Then you all can finish the fighting and arguing on your own time!!! We are moving closer to the edge of the cliff, its time to do something positive to stop the country from going bankrupt!!!

            This is A trickle up plan that could get the country back on track in A short time and help to pay off the deficit, it could save the country A lot of problems, The States, are in trouble, the people who can not find work are too; the pension plans are not funded, the economy is not bringing jobs back fast enough to have A solid recovery, and it could get worse, many more small businesses could go under, etc. they have a deficit problem, this could help them to pay for medical insurance when it is mandatory, and possible save the government more money.
            One way to tackle this would be to take around 17 to 20 million people who need it, low income people who can not find work, and people who have low incomes, [I based these figures on 17 million people,] and pay them 500.00 per week, This would help to bring these people up to the poverty level and give them A chance to grow from there, and give the economy a better foundation to grow on, and take 28% tax from the top not to be refunded to these people for any reason, this 28% would be around 2,380,000,000 per week for two years, or around 247 billion dollars; take out their SS tax and pay that to SS, this 8% would be around 680,000,000 dollars per week or around 70 billion dollars for two years going to SS, or the deficit; this would leave them with around 350.00 dollars per week to live on, This 350.00 by 17 million people would be around 5,950,000,000 billion dollars per week, or around 618 billion dollars for two years going into the economy this would solve the job problem temporarily for two years, while the economy rebounded, and it would help to keep the small businesses from going under
            ,[unknown amount of savings], and would get them to hire; During this two year time frame to save money, and to help fund this, stop giving these people food stamps, and unemployment, and other for the two years, possible they could stop the food stamps for another year, this would stabilize the jobs problem, and save the government billions of dollars that could be used to pay on the deficit.
            the 28% tax they would take from the top should be given to the states, not to be paid back, but with oversight, this money would be around 2.4 billion dollars per week, they could stabilize 3 or 4 states per month, and in so doing would eventually stabilize all the states, and this would be one of the best ways to stabilize the nation, and give the states time to start to recover better; all this to be done with oversight.[ This money to the states is not to be paid back
            because it solves A problem, paying it back would create another problem]The other problem is the deficit! with the states stabilized, and the lower class receiving a pay check, the federal government would be in A better position to start to cut waste, and to curb spending, and the increase in sales tax, as the economy starts to recover faster would bring them more revenue, also if they pay these people even if they find work, for two years it would only increase the taxes they collect, and the SS tax and the new demand for business in the market, as some of these people if only 6 or 7 million of them were to find work.
            By doing this it could hold crime down! saving money;, it could help the real estate markets, and when this is all over, and the economy is growing, these people would not need near as much assistance, saving more money, they would have already been helped, as they helped the country as they spent the money to provide for their families.
            the other is How to pay for it, not counting the savings on food stamps, lower crime, and all the other benefits, the tax break they, extended to they wealthy, over a ten year period of time would pay for this in full, 17 million people receiving 500 per week would come to 884 billion dollars, it would be less if you figure in the unemployment money, the food stamp money, housing assistance etc., if they ear mark the tax cut for the wealthy for this it would pay for it with money left to implement it with too!
            The wealthy would receive much more if the business economy picks up than they would receive on the tax cuts, all the new business would more than make up for those tax cuts! , with the economy going at full throttle, it would be much easier for the government to pay down the deficit, even If they would need to add A tax, to get it done, If they do need to add a tax it would be less, when the economy is back to normal, then they possible could with hold some money that usually goes to the states this is one way they could tackle the problems, and help all the country, and the states, It would help with education to by not laying off teachers at this time!
            Another thing that could be done is to repeal the tax cut for the middle class, and apply anything they could to the deficit, I'm not sure about the middle class tax cut being repealed, If it would help or not, and with the states receiving the money they need to balance their budgets, the federal government could withhold some of the money they normally pay the states for a couple of years, and apply it to the deficit.

              Reply#40 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:42 AM EST

              I'm sorry, but when is everyone going to realize that the people in Congress only care about their own agenda's.  They have nothing to worry about...they are guaranteed a paycheck and they aren't subject to the same rules as the rest of us because of the seats they hold.  You can all sit on here all day and be arm chair politicians and it won't make any difference. 

              This country needs to go back and start over and stick with the plan that our forefathers had in mind - NO PARTIES - TERM LIMITS - AND CONGRESSPEOPLE SUBJECT TO THE SAME RULES AS THE REST OF US!!  Don't spend money you don't have and TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN PEOPLE FIRST!!

              End of story and trust me there will be no more comments from me and I won't be checking for your responses.

               

              • 3 votes
              Reply#41 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:46 AM EST

              For the love of Pete! DO SOMETHING you spineless idiots! The clock is running and we are nearing economic Armeggedon. You think what just went down in Japan is scary? If the dollar goes kaput, country files bankruptcy..what will be experienced in this country will make a natural disaster seem like the "humane way out." At least you're gone in a flash (either crushed to death or swept away,...if our self-serving dimwits in Washington don't do what is necessary and grow some balls...society will be plunged into a excruciating, slow death of chaos, anarchy, death...

              Hey politicians! Since it's YOU, and your predecessors who got us into this god-awful mess...how bout taking the lead and lead by example. $1 a year wage until you fix the mess you allowed to happen. You do that, and I'll be willing to do whatever is necessary.

              When you see the horror of societal breakdown the likes of Egypt, Libya...where people did NOT have the right to bear arms,..can you imagine what this country would be like if the dollar becomes worthless? Yeah, I'd prefer a 50ft tsunami head-on.

              • 2 votes
              Reply#42 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:20 AM EST

              The instalment plan of cutting the budget and spending will work. Sometimes a thousand cuts works better than one.

              • 1 vote
              Reply#43 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:38 AM EST

              Bighorn,

              This is what Obama stated, cuts must be across every socio-economic class in addition investments yielding profit revenues for paying down the peoples deficit. It's rather simple. Yet, Republicans want cuts to remain purely on the backs of the middle class and poor......while Coporations and the rich continue getting tax cuts. Trust me, this is going to kill them in 2012 elections........

              • 2 votes
              #43.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:41 PM EST
              Reply

              the GOP ran on jobs. how many job bills did they pass? ZERO!!! they said they would balance the budget. they said the dems should have passed a budget. so what are they doing? passing 2 & 3 week cr's. they aren't passing a budget either. and don't be blaming the dems. it was the GOP that said they would pass a budget. that means they need to compromise with the dems. not the other way around. and the GOP created the entire mess with 2 wars unpaid for, tax breaks to the rich unpaid for, medicare drug coverage unpaid for. so guess what, you broke it you fix it. what a bunch of morons. boehner....... WHERE ARE THE JOBS YOU PROMISED???????

              • 4 votes
              Reply#44 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:39 AM EST

              dji,

              Isn't the GOP (Tea baggers included) a joke? Sooner or later, the deficit raising tax cut item for those making over 250k per year will have to be dealt with. Sooner or later (sooner rather than later), the budget will have to be dealt with. Until then, the GOP refusal to write legislation addressing cuts across ALL socio-economic classes only makes them ALL look like selfish and hypocritcal Pigs incapable of solving America's problems......

              • 1 vote
              #44.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:30 PM EST
              Reply

              It's nice having some adults back in D.C. The childish spending with no concern of the consequences has to stop.

              • 2 votes
              #45 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:11 AM EST

              Obama lies,

              State the basis of your title...When did Obama lie? Let'see what lie you come up with....

              • 2 votes
              #45.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:32 PM EST

              We can start from yesterday's propoganda conference where he claimed his policies have increased domestic oil output when, in fact, those rigs were opened during the Clinton Administartion and are just coming on line now. How about that Obamacare will reduce the deficit? The CBO has released new data that shows that to be a lie. How about his porkulus bill "Saving or creating jobs"? That's a lie as well. I could go on all the way back to his campaign, but I have to get to work, so folks like you don't have to.

              • 1 vote
              #45.2 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:42 PM EST

              Obama lies,

              Adults who pass 2 week budgets every two weeks instead enduring legislation to repair their 8 year enduring spending spree.....Moron.

              Domestic oil output equates to American Oil consumption. America already consumes 25% of all International oil. Whats the relevancy of Obama being at fault for America's addiction to oil constructed by oil companies?

              The CBO already confirmed (latest confirmation) that HCR will save $1 trillion in 10 years....period. The CBO has never denied this fact or contradicted this fact. Bush's $5 trillion deficit after Clinton's $33 billion deficit places blame squarley in GOP members laps.......

              • 1 vote
              #45.3 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:46 PM EST

              Tony

              Let's see

              ..I will close GITMO within one year

              ..I will march in the streets with demonstrators

              ..I will never sign a bill with tax cuts for the top earners

              all seem to have ended up being lies wouldn't you say

              • 2 votes
              #45.4 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 3:35 PM EST

              Robert in Ohio,

              If you're a gambling man.....there's two things you better not gamble against if you intend to avoid poverty...

              1. Obama abolishing tax cuts for those making over $250k per year before his second term.

              2. Obama getting elected to his second term in 2012.

              • 1 vote
              #45.5 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 4:01 PM EST

              Tony

              I think he will probably get re-elected and I hope there will be tax code reform before his second term that will make the tax rate extensions moot

              • 1 vote
              #45.6 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 6:22 PM EST

              It would seem to me that if the SCOTUS is going to say that corporations are the same as persons and people, then there should be no such thing as a corporate tax rate structure for them. Retro-actively we should be able to collect 36-39% of everything over $200,000 in profits.

                #45.7 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 6:57 PM EST

                Paul

                While I think the idea you propose is a bad, there might also be ex post facto issues to consider

                And by the way raising corporate taxes is the best way to insure that jobs and companies continue to off shore and that is likely not good for the economy

                • 1 vote
                #45.8 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:47 PM EST

                Robert, don't be ridiculous. Just how many jobs were brought BACK to the US when the tax rates were extended in December?

                Zero.

                Spare us your naivete.

                • 2 votes
                #45.9 - Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:59 PM EDT

                Clara

                Ok I will send no more naivete your way and you can keep your lack of understanding of business to yourself as well.

                Let's say the tax rate extension themselves are all that was needed (and it was not), then do you really think the jobs were coming back in the next quarter. Hum probably not.

                It is the jobs that are going to be off shored next month and after that we need to save, the ones that went last year and the year before are not coming back ever.

                Get a clue please

                  #45.10 - Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:28 AM EDT

                  That isn't much of a demonstration of business understanding, Robert. For thirty years you have repeated the line, "The jobs that have gone overseas are NEVER coming back." While over those same thirty years, your ilk has been refusing to acknowledge that it is the POLICY choices which have made that business environment so.

                    #45.11 - Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:55 AM EDT

                    And with ALL of those tax cuts from 2001 thru 2008 - some 3,000,000 MFG and Professional jobs were lost overseas. So the mantra that tax cuts mystically create jobs is pure fiction.

                    I appreciate that you are finally admitting it. Now the yahooz that last week were taking credit for the Republican HOUSE creating jobs? Give me a break. They have passed NO legislation nor have they pursued any attempts at job creation. They are much more concerned with defunding planned parenthood, npr and the other 'culture' wars. Just to keep the masses entrenched in ideology while they crawl into bed with the Robber Barons.

                    Same old Same old from the dysfunctional Repubs. Now be a good little sheep and go back to grazing, Robert. PS. The Republicans did it, with Greenspan on Wallstreet - with very questionable financial instruments (credit swaps, derivatives, etc) - I am pretty sure I have more than a CLUE.

                    • 2 votes
                    #45.12 - Mon Mar 14, 2011 10:40 AM EDT

                    Paul

                    I fully acknowledge that the policy decisions that have kept the tax rates future uncertain, the policies that have over regulated industries an the policies like HCR that have changed and made uncertain business costs have influenced decisions to offshore businesses.

                    The lack if incentives to do the expansion here, while those incentives (along with lower labor costs) were available overseas led to off-shoring decisions.

                    I repeat those jobs are not coming back. We need to new industry and we need to make sure that the "new"manufacturing businesses are encouraged and incented to build and expand here in the U.S.

                    Clara

                    The tax cuts you speak of were personal income tax rates an did little for the corporate tax rates of businesses of any size that are not "S" Corporations. You are a very rude person, good at labels name calling and talking points, but if jobs are to be created (sustainable jobs) they will be created in the private sector by the "robber barons" that yu demonize and hate.

                    I believe they tried to repeal HCR which would have encouraged businesses to hire, otherwise why have nearly a thousand businesses and union sopted out because it is too expensive, but the Democrats voted that down.

                    They are working on bills to rein in the EPA to lighten the load on businesses but the Democrats will kill that too.

                    We are still in a jobless recovery and when the business owners regain confidence, the jobs will start to come back in bigger numbers.

                    What would the "bill" look like in your most educated and experienced opinion that would lead to all of these jobs that Congress should be creating in your opinion? Please share the details with all of us.

                    Thanks for he feedback

                      #45.13 - Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:06 PM EDT

                      First you write that the jobs are NEVER coming back, then you write that if conditions are right. "the jobs will start coming back in bigger numbers": sounds like economic extortion to me.

                      • 1 vote
                      #45.14 - Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:14 PM EDT

                      Paul

                      YOu are quite dense, so here it goes again

                      once conditions are

                      the jobs that have been off shored will never come back to the U.S. no matter what

                      favorable, new jobs will be created and new industries will be developed

                      It is not extortion it is business, businesses do not exist to create jobs, they exist to make money

                      There is that clear?

                        #45.15 - Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:55 PM EDT

                        I can't change what you wrote. You're the one who is too dense to proofread your posts. Funny how you can write one thing and then have to make a correction, to an error which never should have been made, and you blame the person who pointed out your written falsehood and contradiction.

                        • 1 vote
                        #45.16 - Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:07 PM EDT

                        Yu can always argue contextual semantics when you have no points to make in an argument

                        You have my undying apology for the contextual error in the post

                        I promise I will try and do better when communicating with you in the future

                          #45.17 - Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:13 PM EDT

                          The actual point I was trying to illuminate, is you don't believe what you wrote enough to even bother to get it right. It's all con-man boilerplate. The policies that shipped jobs overseas were designed to gut the middle class of this country, sold on the premise that it would create new high tech, higher paying jobs here at home. It was a falsehood based on a false premise, all along.

                            #45.18 - Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:27 AM EDT

                            There were no policies that shipped jobs off shore.

                            That is the point

                            The corporate taxes were high, regulations were becoming very restrictive and there was no incentive to create a factory or expand jobs in the U.S.

                            Mexico, Brazil, China, Korea, Thailand, India and Malaysia on the other hand gave taxs breaks and cash incentives to build factories there and the cost of labor was lower as well.

                            I know why we off shored, I was the Dir of HR for a midwest manufacturing company that expanded into all of those countries between 2001 and 2007 and it was a very profitable move for our corporation. I was on the team that panned and executed many of these movements of production capability, we did this with minimal impact to our US workforce because we moved into other technologies.

                            I am very knowledgeable about off shoring jobs and why it was done and how it was done and gutting the middle class was not the reason. That is just a good talking point for the liberal left.

                            And that is why we did it, profitability. If it has been as profitable to expand in Indiana then we would have done it there.

                            You are the one using talking points without knowledge

                              #45.19 - Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:57 PM EDT

                              And there you have it folks. A man so close to the policy that he doesn't see the policy which created the economic environment in which he operated.

                                #45.20 - Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:27 PM EDT

                                Paul

                                You are missing the point

                                There was not a policy entitled = Offshoing Manufacturing to Asia and South America

                                A confluence of events (described above) resulted in business decisions, driven by business reasons to move manufacturing operations off shore into low cost countries.

                                There was no conspiracy to attack the middle class as you seem so intent to state there was.

                                Business people made business decisions.

                                Whether the government should have done things and put policies in place that would have changed these business decisions is an entirely different discussion, but for you to condemn business owners as being on a mission to attack the middle class is absurd on its face.

                                This process is obviously something that you know nothing about except for the political talking points that you have heard, yet you will you are some kind of expert. I was involved in the process, but do not think I am an expert in any sense, we did what we thought was best for our business.

                                That is all

                                  #45.21 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:25 AM EDT

                                  That won't be all. I never have contended that Business owners conspired to attack the middle class. Business owners don't make National policy, nor international TRADE policy, though they do lobby for them. Not seeing the Forest for the trees appears to be one of your specialties.

                                    #45.22 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:39 AM EDT

                                    See there, Paul, it's so simple really - Unintended Consequences explains EVERYTHING!

                                    And Robert, quite frankly, you were insulting first. It doesn't take an MBA to know you can raise your profitability by using cheap labor. As a country, we use to have a modicum of STANDARDS and I see that in your superior grasp - that is such a quaint notion.

                                    I haven't the time or inclination to chart for you the direct and indirect impacts of Bush Doctrine policy along with Wall Street Robber Baron policies that led to the brink of our economic collapse. I'm quite certain you'd deny it all anyway, so I won't waste my time.

                                    By the way, I think MANY would say - the Unintended Consequences of the nuclear disaster in Japan right now would make the RISKS far exceed the Benefit. But not this current class of profiteers. They will use whatever means (human or otherwise) to build an alter to the money gods that they worship.

                                    It's no small mystery why Jesus says it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. That cognitive dissonance didn't just happen overnight. It's been woven into the ideological fabric of the greedy.

                                    • 2 votes
                                    #45.23 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:09 AM EDT

                                    Paul

                                    I simply related what happened with our company to show that we did what we did for business reasons, we saved money in taxes, we saved money on labor and we saved money on sourcing raw materials and buy rather than build components by getting them in China an Thailand.

                                    We increased sales by over 80% in the period from 2003 to 2008 and increased our profit as a % of sales by over 3 points which is significant I am sure you will agree.

                                    There were unintended consequences I am sure n the overall off-shoring process

                                    For us, we we forced to reinvest in our work force (we didn't lay people off) as we retrained those that had worked on production lines to use more technically advanced systems in new manufacturing operations and it paid off since we retained loyal, technically sound employees who were well paid, with good benefit packages and the ability to move up and or around in the company on a global basis.

                                    Clara

                                    Nice speech

                                      #45.24 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:09 PM EDT

                                      See. I told you it wouldn't be all. They really can't help themselves. They think that the search for profit justifies everything.

                                        #45.25 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:26 PM EDT

                                        Paul

                                        I figured it out

                                        Since you have nothing substantive to add to a discussion of a subject like this, you pick nits

                                        Good job for you

                                          #45.26 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:33 PM EDT

                                          He tells us that is all,........... and then...... he just has to come back to get the last word. Pathetic.

                                            #45.27 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:51 PM EDT

                                            Paul

                                            Remind you of anyone?

                                            What is pathetic is that you know nothing of the topic and refuse to admit it.

                                              #45.28 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:47 PM EDT

                                              Socio-pathetic Robert in Ohio: Anyone reading this exchange will easily see that you stated "that is all" and then couldn't help yourself and had to return multiple times to the discussion. I never stated that I was done, you did. My understanding of the issue isn't going to be as specific as your claimed understanding. You demonstrate that you are too close to the issue to actually have a macro-economic comprehension of the policies which created the business environment in which you worked. You chased the dollar and were brainwashed into believing that the capitalist pursuit of the best economic return on an investment supercedes any other concern. You demonstrate it everyday in almost every posting you make. Sub-conscious guilt is what keeps you coming back to try to defend the indefensible. Seek help. Print out this exchange and hand it to a licensed mental health professional, you'll be glad that you did.

                                                #45.29 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:44 PM EDT

                                                Paul

                                                No guilt

                                                Just satisfaction that I performed well in the position I held in a very successful corporation for many years.

                                                You have all the buzz words and talking points down pat, but seldom say anything and I enjoy pointing that out to you.

                                                So instead of that's all, I will say until later.

                                                  #45.30 - Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:39 PM EDT
                                                  Reply

                                                  Pjam09,

                                                  Your assertion Democrats are at fault for not correcting a 9 year failure of the GOP through failed economical deficit raising policies within 2 years of negotitation with those same GOP members responsible is ridiculously irresponsible and dispicable. It's also delusional. If you're in denial, refer to blog entry#8 and read the facts (numbers) from within Business journal archives dating back to 1980 until 2008. Open your eyes blind man..........

                                                  • 3 votes
                                                  Reply#46 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:55 AM EST

                                                  Obama lies,

                                                  Connect the dots of your false claim. What's the relevancy of oil consumption between the Clinton administration and the Obama administration have to do with any relevant points indicating our deficit was not caused by Republcans??? I'm not even sure any President can control the country's oil consumption. Except, to issue an executive order to shut down gas stations.........

                                                  However, it still does not explain or dispute how Republicans took a deficit from Clinton's $33 billion to Bush's $5 trillion...........with a shrinking GDP resulting. I'll give you a hint....tax cuts for Coporations are really American economic expenditures......hello????

                                                  HCR has already been proven by Mathmeticians and Economists to cost LESS than the previous Health Care system did over 10 years........PERIOD!! What do you want to say now???? I'm supposed to believe a Preacher from Ark. (Huckabee) over Mathmeticians and Economists??????

                                                  • 2 votes
                                                  Reply#47 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 1:20 PM EST

                                                  Obama lies,

                                                  Wow....Mr. delusional Big Shot thinks he's the only one who has a job. Eventhough, I'm working now, also. His Mommy must be proud. He's under the same delusion about Democrats being repsonsible for an unpassed Budget and our soaring deficit.

                                                  Have a nice day, Bozo........with a job.

                                                  • 3 votes
                                                  Reply#48 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:39 PM EST

                                                  You are real adept at name calling. Must be either in a public union or have anger management issues. Same difference. Anyway, Google "Obama lies 158" and you'll see 158 separate, documented lies your hero has told so far. This is the clown act you support. Birds of a feather.

                                                  • 2 votes
                                                  #48.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:04 PM EST
                                                  Reply

                                                  Robert in Ohio,

                                                  What Obama has promised to his base has been 95% fullfilled within 2 years of his first term.....period... Obviously, as a Republican, your dispute about the Promises Obama kept to his Democratic base really have nothing to do with questioning the 95% accomplishment ratio he's already fullfilled with his base and more to do with your agitation those within your own Party can't beat him.....case closed.

                                                  • 1 vote
                                                  Reply#49 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 3:52 PM EST

                                                  Tony

                                                  My issue is that "the great one" lied and yet no one calls him on it

                                                  He is a corrupt politician like all the rest on both sides of the aisle

                                                  That is what I see

                                                  • 3 votes
                                                  #49.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 6:23 PM EST

                                                  We will let you investigate and prosecute Obama/Biden if you allow us to investigate and prosecute Bush/Cheney first. DEAL?

                                                    #49.2 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 6:59 PM EST

                                                    Paul

                                                    There is nothing to investigate and prosecute, He Lied

                                                    It is unethical and immoral to some but not illegal

                                                    You do know that Bush has been out of office for going on three years right

                                                    Time to let go

                                                    • 1 vote
                                                    #49.3 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:48 PM EST

                                                    The ability to hide your crimes behind classification means we, as informed citizens should never let go, especially in cases of the mass murder of Americans.

                                                      #49.4 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:58 PM EST

                                                      Paul

                                                      Well okay then

                                                      Hang on tight there partner and complete the ride

                                                      • 1 vote
                                                      #49.5 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:00 PM EST
                                                      Reply

                                                      If what you say is true why didn't Hinky Harry and the Democrats in the Senate pass HR1 and send it to the President for his signature

                                                      Again -- all spending bills start in the House. Mr Tan man doesn't have the guts to even suggest cutting the programs that make up the REAL spending.

                                                      • 2 votes
                                                      Reply#50 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 6:33 PM EST

                                                      Charlie

                                                      A spending bill was passed by the House and sent to Hinky Harry, he could have passed it and sent it to the President

                                                      He did not

                                                      Those are the facts

                                                      And by the way HR1 means that it started in the House of Representatives for those who are not aware of the process of naming bills

                                                      • 1 vote
                                                      #50.1 - Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:50 PM EST
                                                      Reply
                                                      Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3
                                                      You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                                      As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.