E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom NBC's Kelly O'Donnell
As the debate raged in Washington over a budget to keep the government from shutting down, the issue of abortion funding was consistently in the spotlight.
Ultimately, Democrats succeeded in retaining funding for women's health organizations that also provide abortions (like Planned Parenthood), but they were not able to eliminate a controversial 'rider' related to abortions in D.C.
A senior Democratic aide says that on Thursday night at the White House, President Barack Obama told House Speaker John Boehner that the White House would include the D.C. abortion language that was in a Republican House-passed one week extension bill. That provision bans the District of Columbia from using its own local tax money to pay for abortion services.
The aide says he witnessed the president say to Speaker Boehner in the Oval Office, "John, I will give you D.C. I'm not happy about it."
But when Boehner later asked for the elimination of funds for Title X -- spending for women's health and family planning organizations that also provide abortion services, the aide said the president flatly refused.
The president replied, "Nope. Zero."
Boehner continued to push to discuss the funds, the aide recalled.
The President repeated: "Nope. Zero."
"'John, this is it,'" the aide described the president as saying. "'This is it, John."
There was a long pause as no one spoke in the Oval Office spoke.
The Planned Parenthood issue was resolved that Thursday night.
Leave a Comment:
We need to reduce the budget and reduce it now. Washington does not produce anything. Washington can only grab money from you and me in the form of taxes and fees.
We can't keep funding programs that are not absolutely necessary. We can't continue to fund any benefits to illegal criminal aliens. We can't continue to pay unemployment benefits without drug testing. We can't continue to not secure the border. We can't continue to have taxpayers at the mercy of union thugs. We can't continue to pay ridiculous retirement benefits to public sector workers. We can't continue to be the world's policeman. We can't continue to send foreign aid to our enemies.
Obama needs to be voted out in 2012 or we will continue to have an uncontrollable budget and high unemployment.l
V-e-r-y good, Bill. But you missed one ~ totally omitted it. Now if you hope to become a paid shill on NewsVine, you have to score 100 on the talking points. There is no latitude for error. Review your class notes, wipe the drool away, and try again. There are nine (9) "We cant's" in the approved curriculum. You are close, but no gold star.
Jim in Texas...
I'll do the 10th one for bill:
We absolutely cannot continue with all the stupid cradle-to-grave progressive/socialist give-away programs to people who refuse to get off their butts and do something useful.
Eliminate federal welfare, food stamps, dept of energy, education, hud, etc., etc.,
Enough Said...
What a hardnose. Many citizens need financial help not because they won't get off their butts and do something. I do counseling with hospitalized veterans who have been so traumatized by their military experiences that they can't function well enough to get off their butts and do something. would you just dump them in the crapper? Or, what about senior citizens who have dementia, sometimes severe, sometimes moderate; they can't get off their butts and do something either. Maybe you'd like to treat them like the eskimos treat their aged; put them on a chunk of ice and push them out to sea.
You must not have any religious training or beliefs - Christian, or any other religion I've ever studied. what a shame that you have no compassion for anyone who has a problem and can't get off his or her butt. What made you such a misanthrope? You must have had a terrible upbringing, and want to spread the same kind of misery you have endured - that's all I can think of that would make you such a judgmental, hubristic sadist.
Welfare has a 7 year lifetime federal limit, has had since Clinton signed into law.
BTW Washington produces laws which help make this country something other than Afgahnistan. Are you that dense that you don't understand why a strong Federal government is needed?
The reason we can have a nice civilization and the infrastructure and opportunity for thriving business is because of Washington.
Man I'm so tired of people taking for granted our government and scapegoating it for everything.
Weeper of the house " BONER" is the biggest snake in the grass, corrupt,corporate owned, full of Sh#t politician I've ever seen in my life, have you ever listened to him speak? The man never answers a question, never, all he does is a little spin and dance but he never answers a direct question with an honest answer, the man is a total moron and it makes our country a joke to have him as speaker of the house, he's a prime example of just how corrupt our government has become, he's so busy looking out for the interests of the Rich and the Corporate giants that put him into office that he considers the American public as nothing but a nusance getting in his way of doing business as usual with the "Good oldBoys" Bounce "BONER" out ASAP he is what's wrong with politics today.
Robert...
It would make more sense if you replaced Boner's name with Reid's...
Just Saying...
I agree with you. The only good thing about Boehner is that he's a chain smoker, and so I don't think we'll have him around too much longer.
Keep it up T Baggers. You are making it so much easier to reelect OUR President (the best man to hold the office since JFK), take back the House and bolster our hold on the Senate. Please continue to genuflect at the feet of rush limberger and the ilk on the Republican Propaganda Channel (laughingly known as fox news). You are so out of touch with the REAL issues in our country. Your wingnut crackpot agends are bringing you down. Have your fun... enjoy the ride. We the American people will do the right thing and vote you ALL out of office. The T-Baggers are a joke. And the joke is on them!
I agree with you about Obama, he's a bit too middle of the road but he's been a great President.
It's interesting how obsessive Obama is on the abortion issue. How determined he is that no woman should ever be 'punished' by having a child. You have to wonder if his mother didn't instill that perspective in him. If she thought, projected and probably told him he was her punishment. And a father who basically cared less he existed...I think this boy has Mommy and Daddy issues, maybe even existence issues.
It's interesting how obsessive you are on Obama. Are you a licenced psychiatrist or psychologist? If yes, please give us more analysis. If not, shut up.
Or maybe he's so concerned with female rights because he has two daughters.
You would think that those people who express such ideas for freedom and personal responsibility as well as individuals rights would support a woman's right to make decisions for herself.
Freedom of choice was much more than abortion, is was a womans right to not have her husband make decisions for her. And now we have those who would decry the government inserting itself in healthcare have no problem letting the government make decisions for people in the case of abortion.
Obama really nailed the situation. The Republicans wanted to do away with womans rights. Obama refused. The Republicans wanted to kick the can down the road once again. Obama stated he would not sign another continuing resolution. Budget or shut down.
the republicans wanted to stop funding the killing of babies with our tax money...but you libs will die rather than see that happen...your holy sacrament is killing babies.
kill your own babies with your own money.
joe, federal funds cannot be used for abortion by law for thee decades.
Now, either you are a liar, or an idiot. It has to be one or the other, or possibly both.
So, take your pick.
First of all they're not "babies". Secondly it's no more "killing" anything than removing a tumor. Lastly TAX MONEY IS NOT USED FOR ABORTION.
Talking to these cretins is like talking to a frigging wall. They just don't and never WILL "get it".
yeah they are babies...no surprise you would dehumanize an entire group of people...just like you democrats did with black people in the days of slavery and jim crow....some things never change...
you're a cancer upon this country.
When will people realize that CNN poles are a spin on the truth? CNN............CLINTON NEWS NETWORK!!! Just who do you think they support constantly and spin the truth for?
Maybe instead of yelling we should not cut Title X.......Abortion Funds.......you might want to use this example... the government reaching into your pocket to fund an abortion some woman is using as birth control. Incest, & rape are crimes that the courts should be determining whether they even happened and if there's a quilty verdict then the felon should have to pay the cost of any abortion. Life-threatening is the insurance company's expense not the taxpayers'. Cut all funds for abortions out of what they take out of my taxes! I'm not willing to pay for someone's abortion and when the gov. allots money for anything it comes out of our pockets!!! ANytime you see or hear the gov. using the word fee.......think TAXES
As I read some of the comments I find it interesting that the people that pay the least amount of taxes demand the most government handouts.
I guess they think money grows on trees?
Bill-433395,
Yea....and I find it most interesting the States receiving the most Federal funds are Red States in the South whose deficits are the highest in economies with GDP's that are lowest.....hmmmmm.
Coporate Tax Cuts for everyone???????
tony : thats BS, the biggest recipients are states like CA...get a clue
joe, why do you even lie about things that are easy to check? Is it a congenital problem?
Un-believable... the rethuglicons clearly are on a path to repeal the 20th century.... that goal is clear.
I just watched congress lump John Fleming (r-LA) on MSBNC news in a interview with Tamarin Hall sit in front of the remote camera and LIE straight to the camera that his 'constituents' overwhelmingly supported the repeal the 20th century initiative. If there is ANY part of the US in need of more help than areas in Louisiana, I can't seem to recall them (maybe Detroit), but to watch this clown Fleming just LIE, LIE, LIE directly to the news audience was clearly what the republicons want Americans to see....all bundled up like a pig in lipstick... it's still a pig...
so the 20th century was socialism huh? you're right, thats what it was SO bloody.
I actually felt sorry for Boehner. He did not have control of the Republican party. He made deals then had go back on them. Everyone understands that budget reductions need to be made. 2012 should be entertaining. The Republicans will want to kill granny and the Democrats will want to do away with subsidies to corporations and private interests.They can start with 19 billion in oil and ethanol subsidies and then the farm subsidies to large corporate farms. That would be just a start.
when do the democrats want to get do away with subsidies to corporations? you really are naive if you believe that. GM GE chrysler...wall street...get a clue.
GM is doing just fine and they paid back their loan (TARP) as did most of the financial institutions with billions in profit to the government. He administered that situation really well. Everyone thought it would cost the government 700 billion. The current projections by GAO under 20 billion. That is a far cry from the 700 billion all the conservatives were crying about. Remember Bush originally funded that program. Leaving Obama to administer it.
they haven't paid it back..they will never pay it back...where do your info msnbc?? please.
Because a loan of such a huge amount would have been politically controversial, the Obama administration handed GM only $6.7 billion as a pure loan. (It asked for only a 7 percent interest rate—a very sweet deal considering that GM bonds at that time were trading below junk level.) The vast bulk of the bailout money was transferred to GM through the purchase of 60.8 percent equity stake in the company—arguably an even worse deal for taxpayers than the loan, given that the equity position requires them to bear the risk of the investment without any guaranteed return. (The Canadian government likewise gaveGM $1.4 billion as a pure loan, and another $8.1 billion for an 11.7 percent equity stake. The U.S. and Canadian government together own 72.5 percent of the company.)
But when Whitacre says GM has paid back the bailout money in full, he means not the entire $49.5 billion—the loan and the equity. In fact, he avoids all mention of that figure in his column. He means only the $6.7 billion loan amount.
But wait! Even that's not the full story given that GM, which has not yet broken even, much less turned a profit, can't pay even this puny amount from its own earnings.
So how is it paying it?
As it turns out, the Obama administration put $13.4 billion of the aid money as "working capital" in an escrow account when the company was in bankruptcy. The company is using this escrow money—government money—to pay back the government loan.
Joe- GM has paid back a significant portion of its TARP loan. See here: http://www.factcheck.org/2010/05/general-motors-debt/ though Republicans don't like how they did it, the money was still returned to the government. Perhaps you'd have preferred that they keep it. And then GM bought back a large portion of their stock, reducing the government stake in the company to 26%. See here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/business/18auto.html
uh yeah they repay their loan with more taxpayer money...nice.
 All of the politicians, ALL 436 of them in Washing D.C., care more about themselves than do the American people. What they are doing to America is little different than what is happening in North Africa and the Middle East. I resolved several elections ago to NEVER vote for an incumbent and I haven't. I only wish all voters had guts enough to do the same.
Limiting your own choices in the voting booth is "guts", is it? I don't think that's the word I would use for it.
Just curious... Were there or will there be ANY cuts to the Defense Budget? or ANY compromise on non-tax cuts for Corporations and the wealthy. As a lay person it just seem so basic. Why in the hell wouldn't we tax those groups who truly can afford it?! That's one of the insane parts for me. I keep hoping Obama will call someone out on these travesties of justice. Can't he just simply come out and say "We need GE for example and the abundantly affluent to pay their fair share" Kinda like United Way? No more no less but just their fair share like we working class drones. Or does the lust for reelection (or not) really supersede EVERYTHING ELSE? Also insane. OK I'm not a scholar but I don't understand... Why is lobbying/influence buying even legal? How is possible in a Democracy that Lobby groups actually propose pay for and actually write much of our legislation? I'm confused about that and wonder when this could ever be addressed? I guess I'm dreaming..
Congratulations Sparepair! You have reached the level of confusion and reason that drives people to 3rd parties. We welcome you with open arms.
Actually, GE has 133,000 employees in the United States, They did not pay any taxes in 2010 because they were still using part of their 35 billion write off that GE Capital lost in the recession. You know like the mortgage interest you write off on you itemized deduction. The usually pay about 20% during normal years. But I bet you did not hear that on Fox.
pj, 2/3's of corporations paid no fed. tax. I didn't hear that on Fox but I did read it in the New York Times. What are you dems and repubs doing about this little factoid? Doesn't look like much to me.
The Republicans had done away with most of the regulations that has caused that. You know, being owned by corporations. The Republican or Democrats do not run this country, Corporations do.
pj: really? post your list of all the regulations the evil republicans have done away with....
Sure repubs deregulated lots of stuff I believe they shouldn't have. But are the dems really any better pj? Glass-Steagall repeal comes to mind. Seems that was a Clinton thing.
Clinton may have signed it, out of fear of not being able to sustain a veto; he certainly didn't write it. Please note that the legislation came from Republicans in Congress.
"The republicans made me do it!" Ha, do you really want to go there?
Whose names were on the bill, again? Here, I'll give you a hint, it starts with"Gramm-Leach..."
Now, name me the POTUS who hasn't signed at least one bill that he was sure would become law anyway.
Russ Feingold, YOUR COUNTRY NEEDS YOU!
IOW, you can't answer. Might have been easier for you to just admit that.
While DC is technically administered by Congress, why should the federal government dictate the use of local funds within DC's jurisdiction? DC has a mayor and city council. How their local tax dollars are used is for DC's citizens to decide, not the congress at large.
Agreed, mike. But, it is traditional for Congress to micro-manage DC. And, a piss-poor job they have done of it.
Actually, DC has always been under the jurisdiction of Congress. It is not a state so therefore it doesn't have a Governor and all taxation decisions come from Congress. It was deliberately set up that way. In order for DC to be autonomous it would need to become a state and lose MOST of the federal funding they currently enjoy - which is the majority of DC's budget.
Thank goodness the budget passed. I was sure we were going to have old people dying in the streets from starvation. The dog food manufacturers are disappointed as they had ramped up their production to take care of the extra demand by Granny and Pops.
See if you don't find a big sale on dog food next week to reduce the inventory.
We will not need to worry about the dog food. Ryan's 2012 plans to kill granny.
I'm sure you good libs will send extra checks to the government to save granny....LOL sure...
I thought FOX News was only watched by the RepubcriensÂ
Correction - It is not Fox news, it is Fox Entertainment.
at least its not DNC propoganda like msnbc, abc cbs nbc cnn..etc...
And yet, here you are joe.
yeah I enjoy poking your cage...
So I guess we can call Obama the "president of 'no'?"
It worked for him.
This represents just Four days of Federal Government spending. Looking at the amount that the Fed. government is spending each day over and above what it is taking in($4 Bil), this represents around TEN days. This is a really great example of fiscal restraint.
Kind of like a alcoholic husband telling his wife "OK, I'll start being responsible. I'll cut back a beer a week."
I say get rid of the subsidies to oil and ethanol that would save 19 billion. And Farm subsidies to corporate farms. Bush Raised discretionary spending 77% in his 8 years.
Obama has already raised it more than 80% in his 2 years...well why didn't the democrats get rid of those things when they ran everything?? hmmm?
Downhill momentum feeds on itself, especially when one cuts revenue to pay debt. Give a kid a quarter to buy a 30 cent item, see if he will give away a dime to make up the difference.
Hey, joe, for once in your pitiable existence, man up and prove something that you spew. Any one thing would be more than you have ever done in the past.
C'mon, little rightwingnut troll, you can do it!
Or, are you just a common liar, as well as a garden-variety idiot, joe? See, this here's the internet, joe, not Rush's AM radio show. You can't just pull your "facts" out of your sorry lard ass and fling them around the room, you've got to actually back them up.
 no surprise obama and the democrats refuse to stop funding the killing of babies...its the left's holy sacrament.Â
they're vile and evil
I say double the amount to planned parenthood since the previous administration doubled the number of Americans below the poverty line.
Joe. Fed can't fund abortion directly. Planned parenthood delivers health care, education ,etc. Please read something with facts in it.
And war is just?
It's not black and white Joe - there needs to be support for abortion under certain situations.
Its a womans choice Joe,not yours or anyone else. Sometimes unfournate things happen in your life. The goverment doesn't pay for abortions!!!! Why do you think you can speak for God,I'am sure when the time comes our lord will pass down his judgement without any help from you sir.
pj: laughable...yeah that 5% unemployment under bush was just awful wasn't it?
fool: right....they take the money with the left hand, transfer it to the right, and fund the abortions..get a clue.
greg: why don't you ask Obama about his latest WAR FOR OIL? pay for your own abortions with your own money.
burgundy: well if its the woman's choice...THEN LET HER PAY FOR IT.
oh and tell me since you are speaking for the Lord apparently...does He approve of abortions?
.
Great display of ignorance Joe. Are you proud of it?
The national debt was doubled under Reagan. It was more than doubled again under Bush 2.
The national debt the tea baggers are suddenly aware of and trying to blame democrats was a Republican deal.
Reagan had the public and the congressional Democrats so bamboozled that he got whatever he wanted.
You were still in diapers at the time I assume, since your knowledge is so poor and your ignorance of the time so high.
.
There is no sense in aborting truth, decency, and facts in pursuit of a contrivance.
I really do feel sorry for you,I don't know if he does or not,but i'am pretty sure he doesn't approve of children beening beaten,sexual abused,starved,or just left to survive on their own because no one wants them, and who do you think pays for that sense its all about money to you.
william: please like you're concerned about national debt...which has went up by 5 TRILLION since bela pelosi took over congress and over 3 TRILLION since obama became precedent
you're still in diapers now to believe the idiotic drivel you post. the 80s were a great decade...we recovered from that disaster jimmah carter...and stagflation...I'm sure you remember that right?
burgundy: I'm sure you remember that the abortionists told us all those unwanted babies would cease to be since we had abortion...and abuse has only gotten worse...thats what happens when you dehumanize an entire group of people.....you know the like the democrat party dehumanized black people by slavery.
and how can you support an organization, planned parenthood, that accepts donations to kill black babies??
There is no reasoning with joe-3041821 he is a tea partier through and through,. Save your energy, may as well talk to a wall.
yeah DNC lies don't work on anyone who has an ounce of common sense....
MJL-3 Thank you thats the truest statement yet.
Joe:
Anyone with an ounce or less of basic sensibility would know better than to say what you did.
Marginalize, criticize, and imagine is nonsense.
affinity; you just can't handle the truth.
@Joe says " oh and tell me since you are speaking for the Lord apparently...does He approve of abortions?"
Actually YES.... we just call the ones HE performs "miscarriages".
He does?? you've seen Him do that?? you must be a coke-head like your precedent.
I keep reading comments made on various news articles. I need to stop reading these things because it frustrating to see the lack of insight into political matters, the status of our nation economically and a basic misunderstanding of what members of each political party are after. My thoughts:
The Democrats want to socialize this country by making everyone dependent on the Federal government for education, health care, income and every other aspect of our lives. They hope to meet this goal by transferring income from the middle and upper income groups to the lower income groups and by courting minority groups , including illegal aliens, in this country. By achieving these objectives they hope to gain them the votes in current years as well as the coming years that they need to stay in power. This is not intended to be a negative comment concerning minority groups. After all, if a person is dependent on the government for his or her entire well being, that person is going to selfishly vote for the person that will continually take care of him/her.
The Republicans want to keep America strong to ensure that we continue being a world super power not just militarily but also economically. To do this we must get our economic house in order. This means that years of overspending on social programs and earmarking huge amounts of money for anything that sounds good on paper or that may gain a politician a few more votes has to be stopped. Where to start is a problem because there are so many special interest groups that have such great amounts of money to spend on media advertising that public opinion can often times be easily manipulated in a way that makes the necessary steps impractical.
I don't have a solution for the problems that we, as a nation, face at this time but there are practical steps that need to be taken. Among these is the need to determine how much money is being spent from tax dollars to provide services to immigrants, both illegal and legal and how many dollars they are sending out of this country each month. This includes money spent on education in public schools, colleges and universities, medical care, food stamps, WIC and other little known programs. Also, it would be interesting to learn just how much of the money spent on these groups are charged specifically to Social Security and Medicare. It may be surprising also to learn how much is actually being sent to other countries that, if spent in America, would create the need for additional jobs. Some newspaper articles several years ago estimated the amount sent out of the country to be in the billions of dollars.
Well, you discredited everything you said in the first paragraph with the first sentence of the second. You should know better if you believe what you say. Launching your discussion with a simple-minded statement of silly motivation, proves you know less than you think and think less than you should.
D- for content and A- for conceit
//
//
//
//
//
//
Wow, JW. Another TeaBagger troll.
Say, can you name me the POTUS and his party who took the US from being the largest creditor in the world to the largest debtor? Surely you remember, he was that one who constantly harped on the need for a balanced-budget amendment, but never once proposed a balanced budget in 8 tries. Oh, and he sent quite a bit of money out of the country, but he got a lot of it from outside the country, too.
Oh, and he ran the national debt way up along the way with his deficit spending, which he did for the sake of starving the government he so despised.
Is any of this ringing a bell?
JC: oh you mean the guy who ran deficits in the BILLIONS...not TRILLIONS like your savior?
Uh, joe, you do remember that Bush's last budget was 1.2 or 1.3 TRILLION in the red, right? Surely you can remember that far back.
Now, why don't you try actually joining the conversation for a change, instead of drooling on your keyboard and regurgitating TeaBagger talking points?
JC I remember the last bush debt with a REPUBLICAN congress was about 130 billion...you can remember that far back right???
now why don't you get a clue...oh but you can't cause you're a typical knuckledragging democrat stooge.
Wow, that was even stupider than usual, troll. Kapitan Karl is going to be very sad.
Now, provided you ever get all your smegma cleaned off your keyboard, little chin-balls, try addressing the topic just once. Just once.
Prove to us that you are more than just Agent Orange's slurpee-boy.
Beverly - I like John as well. I'm not a Repub but I think John will continue to do a good job. I find fault though with a view that everything is supposed to be adversarial. This cannot be perpetuated and leads to gridlock.
I think JB could go down as being one of the best house leaders ever but this also has to do with Barrack being in there as well. They are working together.
This mainly got done because they are working TOGETHER to do it and with John and Barrack we can expect more of the same.
Winning Negotiation is an oxymoron.
This got done because Obama stated last week he would not sign another continuing resolution. Budget or shut down. Boehner and Reid both had to work together to get the job done.
What I don't understand is why the Republicans, when Democrats had control of both houses and the White House, fillibustered more times than ever in the history of fillibustering and never tried to compromise? Now that they have control of 1 house, they think the Democrats are suppose to give them everything they want (again, no compromise). And, by the way, the spending was done by the Republicans and Bush for 8 years before Obama was elected. All of a sudden the Republicans want to pretend they had nothing to do with the debt and put the blame on the Democrats and Obama. The trillion dollar Iraq war that Bush started was never even added to the budget until Obama came into office. Obama inherited a mess and had to spend money to keep the country from going into a worse depression. Would it have pleased the Tea Baggers to see families living in the streets? I think so. I agree that the debt needs to be addressed, but not to the point of being heartless. Taxes are lower than they've been in 50 years, yet the Teabaggers insist they are too high.
yeah Obama inhereted a mess...created by democrat congress elected in 2006...and has made it much much worse.
yeah spending your way to prosperity works all the time...sure...until the bill comes due.
.
Tea Baggers and Republicans whine that taxes put down the economy. Obviously most of them failed post world war 2 history of the USA.
During the Eisenhower years the marginal income tx rate was 90% NINETY PER CENT!
Despite this, the US economy was strong. We started the interstate highway system. Built up a massive military for the Cold War. All the basic industries were strong including metals, auto, commercial vehicles. We built millions of homes people managed to keep and grow old in. Work was plentiful and good paying jobs were easy to come by. The only fast food outfit was White Castle.
The belief in staying ignorant keeps the tea baggers being conned by corporate Republicans.
.
Well it seems you failed the history of the Reagan years Joe.
The mantra of the Reagan years was "spend outselves rich". Economist Laffer was the guru of it.
.
Sure, joe, the deep recession that started in 2007 was the fault of the Congress that started in 2007.
Man, they sure had to work fast!
So, it should be easy for you to specify exactly which legislation enacted by that Congress got the worst recession in nearly eight decades started and accelerating so rapidly. The culprits should stand out like a pearl in a blackbird's ass.
So, let's see your list, joe, with your rationale supporting each item.
And, in the all-to-likely event that you still have nothing but bull@!$%# taking points to repeat mindlessly, then kindly just STFU. Adults are trying to have a discussion here.
Your such a hatful person Joe really, could you turn that anger into doing something good for someone who needs it, honestly it will make you feel better.
we didn't spend ourselves rich under reagan we worked ourselves rich....because we had more of an incentive to work harder...since we could keep more of our own money...
he had democrat congresses to deal with....too bad he didn't stop them from spending more...notice the only time we had a balanced budget was when we had a republican congress in the 90s....
your efforts to rewrite history ala 1984 have failed....oh and that year we had a 7%+ gdp growth, unmatched by any president since the 1950s...
burgandy, you seem like the hateful one project much? you hate anyone who opposes your holy sacrament of killing babies...and what could be more hateful than that?
Joe, Facts matter, not opinions. History cannot be revised for a crutch. If you want to be confident, crusader free, and conversational, let the facts speak for themselves, then you can discuss what they mean to the best of your ability.
affinity: when and where have you posted any facts?
JC looks like the truth hurts....hows that 9% unemployment and $4 gas working out for ya??
yeah spending your way to prosperity...works every time...NOT.
I was pretty sure you could do neither, joe, neither substantiate your bull@!$%# whatsoever, nor quit spewing it.
Now, either come up with something besides TeaBagger talking points that aren't even on-topic, or, really, just STFU. You are embarrassing yourself, little troll, and your friends and family, if you have any, should be embarrassed for letting you try to interact with grown-ups.
JC you can't dispute anything I've said...all you can do is deny it. why don't you STFU you brain-dead liberal racist..
If I can't dispute it, it's because you haven't said a goddamned thing, joe, you've just made another sticky mess on your keyboard and regurgitated TeaBagger talking points.
Now, why don't you go away, and try to rub the twin indentations out of your chin.
Really Joe. Show us ONE Republican President who hasn't had this country in the RED and INCREASED the national debt except Eisenhower and Nixon in ONE of his two terms , in the last 70 yrs.
Reagan, Bush Sr and Bush Jr were responsible for the biggest INCREASES in the Nat'l Debt out of ALL Republican presidents. Not ONE Democrat president put us in the red in that 70 yr period. NOT ONE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
oh you so you missed the 3 TRILLION obama has added, or the 5 TRILLION that democrats added since pelosi became speaker?
oh and your chart is misleading as hell..no surprise you would use it...it shows debt to GDP, not the actual amount of debt added per president.
.
So Obama finally found where he had misplaced his balls.
Now if only he had stood up to the women in his administration who were all for entering Libya's civil war...
.
What nonsense is that.
Cast the first stone william,because you must live in a glass house. Just to remind you,the 2 wars were in were FALSE & have been the biggest strain on our budget,thank you republicans.
.
Well burgs, does being stupid in two wars justify a third.
I'll bet you whined to your mommie: "all the other kids are doing it..."
And if Obama is stupid enough to begin a ground war in Libya are you going to have th balls to enlist in the Army to serve there. Or areyou just another big mouthed cowardly arm chair "hero".
And it was reported by both the NYT and the Wash Post that the women in Obama's administration were the pushers to get involved in Libya's civil war -- especially the US amassador to the UN.
.
burgundy: you really shouldn't lie like that. bush didn't lie about anything....the robb silvermann commision found...
so why did your savior just start another WAR FOR OIL IN LIBYA?
Bush did lie, he said we need to go to Iraq because of weapons of mass destruction. The French said that was nuts and were correct.
bush didn't lie...but you libs haven't stopped lying. post your proof about the french...
.
Bush went to war in Iraq for personal revenge on Saddam for Saddam's 1993 death plot on Daddy Bush.
Cheney help to make up the "facts" to justify what Bush wanted to do.
IN 1999, while in England Bush announced that if he got the chance he would take Saddam out.
Just at the start of his war Bush got caught off guard by CNN and said about his war and Saddam: ".. after all he did try to kill my daddy..."
For the young and ignorant Bush's formative years were at the time when the Western was the king of TV. there 2 or 3 every night. Every movie house had Saturday showings of the pot boilers of the 30's and 40's.
The plot for many was revenge for doing my ma,pa, bro, sis, cousin, uncle friend, etc wrong.
Like so many arm chair war mongers on Libya, Bush did not have the balls to call Saddam out man to man like the heroes of the western TV shows, he spend a trillion, got 5000+ Americans killed, and tens of thousands maimed to get his "missions accomplished".
.
really post your proof? you can't.
so you didn't want to remove saddam from power...he fed people to plastics shredders...I can see why the liberals loved him so...
You know, if this unnamed source's rumor is true, I'm happy that the POTUS stood up for some principle, but I still have to ask:
What productive, useful purpose is served by cutting federal spending right now at all, as opposed to waiting until the economy is stronger? What is the potential reward for doing so, and how does it outweigh the potential risk that reducing federal spending will slow the recovery?
Please let me clarify that I am not interested in any political reasoning here, I am asking in terms of sound economic policy.
I have asked this question several times in several discussions; I have yet to receive an actual response, beyond the talking-point level, that supports cutting right now.
97% of Planned Parenthood health care budget is has nothing to do with abortion. The 30% grant they get is required, agreed to, and enforced to not be used for abortion for any reason, a law that has been in effect since 1976, and improved many times. The other 70% of privately donated funds are for comprehensive women's healthcare and male HIV, STD, and prostrate cancer screening, as well as contraception and family parenthood planning. By default, natural and clinical abortions are significantly reduced and births are full term. This is all about the Republican Party, not government, in the first place.
Abortion takes place for health, safety, fetal failure to thrive, fetal unsurvivable development defects, and personal reasons common to women's health care and normal. Planned Parenthood is aware that they risk demonstration, abuse, and terrorist acts by providing abortion service per se. The totality of services the provide are popular, health care charitable services with very broad appeal and constitute a major service to society in a broad and non-political fashion.
The Republican Party panders to extremist crusaders in their base for amoral reasons. Obviously, things in the party are getting out of control. They are being bludgeoned with a plank in their platform. Now the "issue" is being blown completely out of proportion and the party is caving in, instead of just saying, no. They are trying to enforce an extreme religious reactionary agenda into the budget(?) Now they have become the Party that couldn't say no.
The anti-abortion movement, besides being an assault on medicine and the constitution, has enough respect for the unborn to use them for advertising, intimidation, civil rights infractions and is commonly subject to waving about a pickled, dead fetus in a Mason jar and threatening lives, privacy, constitutional protection, and women's broad spectrum health care. What religion, civilization, society, or politics justifies that? On the patriotic front and other considerations, it is unAmerican in law, spirit, and practice and is an abuse of Christianity and the Gospel.
//
//
//
christianity ended slavery...the dehumanizing of a entire group of people...and yet you do the same thing with the unborn...my how 'christian' of you.
most abortions are a CHOICE and have nothing to do with the health of the mother or BABY.
so how can a 'good christian' like you support an organization, planned parenthood, that accepts donations to kill black babies? hmmmm?
.
Well Joe, since you are so noble will you tell us how many unwanted babies you have adpoted?
.
where are their parents? hmmm? shouldn't their parents take care of them?
why don't you worry about taking care of yourself...and stop expecting the rest of us to do it for you?
Christianity ended slavery ??? LMFAO. Are you frigging serious ?? What bag of bull@!$%# did you pull that out of ?
amazing stupidity...let me guess you must be a democrat!!! ever hear of WILBERFORCE??? hmmmmm??
and the abolition movement in this country?? it sure wasn't muslims or atheists...get a clue..such stupidity has to hurt....
Joe, You are wrong about California getting all the federal funds, In fact, California pays more in federal taxes than it gets back and most southern states get more federal dollars than paid in. You can look it up on the internet. It is a fact.
even the huffington post admits that DC gets the most federal aid, followed by vermont, alaska, new york, then massachussets.
Joe, for every dollar paid INTO the national treasury, most red states get more than $1 back. DC gets the most federal aid because it is not in a state, so there is no state government ONLY federal government. The top 10 states that receive more PER DOLLAR put in are: North Dakota, New Mexico, Mississippi, West Virginia, Montana, Alabama, South Dakota, Arkansas.They all get more than they put in. The LEAST amount of federal money returned to states goes in this order:
1. New Jersey ($0.62)
2. Connecticut ($0.64)
3. New Hampshire ($0.68)
4. Nevada ($0.73)
5. Illinois ($0.77)
6. Minnesota ($0.77)
7. Colorado ($0.79)
8. Massachusetts ($0.79)
9. California ($0.81)
10. New York ($0.81) (source: The Tax Foundation)
kate is this per capita?
this has per capita taxes by state n.wikipedia. org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
( it doesn't like it when I put in links)
The Theory of Relativity states: 'For every action, there is an equal, and opposite reaction.' It holds true for every activity, including political policy. And I am sorry to say it, but it all comes down to dollars, and cents. I, too, would like to see all abortions eliminated. But! Ban abortions, and the end result is millions of unwanted children, most likely living in poverty (Social programs), with the high probability of a significant percentage of them being abused. There are not enough people in this country who are willing to adopt the orphans that we currently have, let alone the hundreds of thousands of new, unwanted children. Republicans are always very quick to point at, and condemn the number of abortions that are done in this country, and others around the world, but they are even more quick to want to cut funding for the social programs in this country, and others around the world, that address the related problems associated with abortions, like poverty, child abuse, education, and healthcare. Republicans cannot attempt to resolve the abortion problem, without also addressing the results of their actions. To do so is just as bad, or more so, than the act of abortion, itself. And most of what they have been doing on that end of the problem is, blame those who find themselves in need of those same social programs that they are endlessly trying to cut. They refuse to take responsibility for the results of their political actions, preferring to tell the world how to live, but offering little, or no assistance to achieve those goals. They simply want to have it both ways.
And if you take a step back, and look at the overall picture, I believe that you will see a pattern within their actions. Fact: Republicans have voted against every increase in the minimum wage; have introduced legislation to reduce the minimum wage; and have passed legislation making it easier, and more profitable for companys to move high paying jobs out of the country. Fact: Republicans have always been only too eager to go to war, or to attack those countrys that do not agree with them. As a country, we stick our noses into way too many places that it does not belong. Actions that our country would be up in arms over if some other country tried to stick their noses into our policies, or way of life. Fact: If our country came anywhere close to achieving full domestic employment with jobs paying a good livable wage, there would be even less young people who would volunteer to join the military service. The vast amount of advertising that each of the services run on any given weekend pertain to offering a route to a higher education in return for volunteering to serve. And I am not criticizing anyone who chooses to join for reasons other than financial. I admire, and pray for all of you. Fact: The latest rounds of budget fights have included Republican proposals cutting several programs that offer educational grants to lower income individuals. Fact: It is in the best interests of Republicans to keep our average wages low, in an effort to keep our military in warm bodies to throw at whatever cause they deem necessary, like attacking Iraq for WMDs. Fact: About the only thing Republicans overwhelmingly support more than cutting taxes, is funding the military. Fact: Cause and effect points to the true reasons for why Republicans want to eliminate most programs designed to aid those less fortunate, and less educated. To provide an unlimited supply of personel for the military.
yeah cause and effect,....raising the minimum wage increases unemployment among the least skilled...unions have driven companies overseas...and destroyed entire industries in this country.
if raising the minimum was is so great, why don't we just make it a million dollars an hour, then we'll all be rich?
Good post, Sexy ~ and spot on. Republicans constantly accuse Democrats of "keeping people down" through welfare and social programs. Yet is is Republicans who advocate the same thing. The biggest difference is that Democrats accomplish their goal by making funds available to the disadvantaged while Republicans prefer to keep the underprivileged barefoot and pregnant at no expense whatsoever. This is their main objection to unions ~ organized labor results in better wages and benefits for workers and that literally chaps the loins of GOPers. There is grave danger in allowing the serfs to achieve too much success ~ far better that the manor lords set limits and slap the uppity achievers back down. And these are the same people who use the term "union thugs."
.
Joe is going to step up to the bar and adopt 10 unwanted to set the example of how a good anti abortion person shows his true compassion, and his commitment to his beliefs!
Good for you Joe!
.
William: I take care of my children...why don't you man up and take care of yours instead of expecting the rest of us to take care of them?
Joe, it amazes me how stupid you are! Please read more facts, not "FIXED NEWS".
talk about stupid all you can do is post DNC talking points...I would say get a clue, but if you had any intelligence you wouldn't be a democrat....but its obvious you need someone to do your thinking for you...
In all fairness, and I think Joe will agree with me, the dems' problem is that they can't follow talking points as well as the GOP can. If they could, they wouldn't lose so badly all the time. It's harder for more educated people to all follow along on a single chorus, but frankly it's a winning strategy. Just look at the conservative radio hosts with their huge following. Something worth replicating on the dem side, I think.
"Just look at the conservative radio hosts with their huge following."
lol
The free market, and exchange of ideas, as demonstrated by talk radio.
Should advertisers pay to have their products and services represented where the largest audience is...?
Or, should they be ordered by the federal government to support Air America instead?
Silly, silly, silly...
Especially for someone enrolled in a major university.
"Educated people" used to have more intelligent opinions.
Complete sentences.....please? Sounds like we are on the same page.
Conservative talk show hosts are just more clever than the folks that listen to them, and it pays big bucks. Limbaugh mocks his listeners credulity, both overtly and deliberately. "Let me tell you what to think", "Why the facts are not true." "Here is the alternative to journalism" "Bet I scared you." "Depend on me..." "Fiction that is stranger than truth" "Your government is your enemy, so vote for more" Ditto Heads
limbaugh mocks people like you...and it works so well because its so true, and easy to do.
and liberals don't succeed in talk radio...or tv networks like msnbc...because lies don't work....only amongst the uneducated and easily led...democrats...do lies work.
oh and affinity: post your source for your quotes...let me guess...media matters....LOL
People don't say lol anymore. lqtm is it these days. Over 30?
Doggone it, U of CS-
It's the message, not the strategy.
If the message doesn't resonate with the listeners...
Strategy is irrelevant.
Why do you think Air America is a failure?
If advertisers thought they could make a buck..well then, don't hurt yourself getting out of the way!
Why is the obvious so elusive to you?
What are they teaching you there in Chicago?
Okay, I'll bite. What does lqtm mean? I'm just this side of a luddite, so be nice.
lol, Indy Lib..
It means you and I are anachronisms.
Oh no!
Did I say "lol"?
lol
Ha. Laughing quietly to myself. It's at least accurate (how many people do you see typing away on their computers actually laughing themselves silly looking like mad men?). I apologize for the mess, but hopefully now page 4 will be more constructive.
Any comments page at First Read that's actually constructive would have to be considered progress, UofCS.
I wouldn't bet on page 4 being any better if I were you, though...
Quietly or otherwise...we still hear your laughter.
Thanks for the definition, anyway.
Dang...
My arthritis is acting up...