As the 2 minute warning approaches things are going to get really ugly.

The GOP/TP is still holding the United States of America hostage so that the richest 2% can keep some of their tax cuts while the rest of us will go down the preverbal toilet.

There is a $4 Trillion Dollar deal on the table that includes $3 Trillion in spending cuts and $1 Trillion in increased revenues. This is pretty much what the GOP/TP bill wanted from the beginning so why not accept it and share in the credit for moving this country forward? They (GOP/TP) swore an “oath” to this country. Why are they (GOP/TP) reneging on this oath and replacing it with a promise to Nordquist, Koch Brothers, Karl Rove and the US Chamber of Commerce? What happened to their oath to defend and support this country?

President Obama has been saying that all things are on the table for discussion including the DOD and Entitlements. The GOP/TP is not interested and will not even come honestly come to the table unless there is no revenue portion of the equation.

Virtually every poll, every leading economist (republican and democrat), every non-partisan think tank like CBPP, CERP etc all say that the only way out of this mess is via “spending cuts” AND “increasing the revenues”. That is it in a nut shell. Cut government spending and increase revenues.

Nobody is asking the wealthiest people in this country to change their life styles one bit. President Obama is asking them to give up the tax loopholes that allow them to avoid paying their fair share. He is asking people with a taxable income of $500,000 or more to pay a little more (3-5%). This is not going to change their life styles one bit and depending on what polls you look at 70-80% of the people (including those in this bracket) say paying a little more in taxes should be part of the plan moving forward.

It appears the only people that do not get it is the far right radicals (the same ones holding this country hostage) that have reneged on their oath to this country and replaced it with their oath to Nordquist and others, basically telling the people that elected them to go to he!!.

Duck, Dodge and Dismantle really does sum up what the GOP/TP Party is doing not only with the Debt Ceiling but with the Balanced Budget Amendment that is now being proposed as part of accepting any DEBT CEILING Bill that is basically the “Ryan Bill” on STEROIDS. In fact the Ryan Bill would not be possible under the GOP/TP BBA because even it would not be DRACONIAN enough to pass muster.

Duck any and all accountability/responsibility, Dodge the real problems that are driving up costs, and Dismantle the Federal Government, entitlements and most middle class Social Safety Nets. This is the real GOP/TP agenda. Not “Fiscal Responsibility”.

If we do in fact default on paying our bills that we have already accumulated to date we will be thrown into a depression that will make the great depression look like a picnic in comparison. All the gains we made in our 401K’s, Pensions, Stock Market will be wiped out – gone. Unemployment will be at new records, there will be no economy to speak of, taxes will increase as a result and the wealthy will be the only ones around to pay them and there will be utter chaos in the streets of America. There will be NO BAILOUTS this time around. And this is only what will happen here. In Europe those countries now operating under a fragile economy will fall as well. How do you think the rest of the world will react when the greatest and wealthy Nation on the planet goes belly up??

Maybe this is what it is going to take to get our politicians to get off their ideological stupidity and start doing what we elected them to do. Move this country forward and everybody will need to make some sacrifices. But, until they sit down like adults and work this out for America put Power and Greed in the parking lot we are going to be in big trouble and it will take decades to repair if it even can be repaired.

Shemp Mathews was Hillaryous on last night’s Wiffleball. He had Grover Norquist on and when Norquist referred to Barry’s reaction to Republicans not being willing to increase taxes as “having a hissy fit”, Shemp got very angry. Almost screaming at Norquist “A HISSY FIT?? WHAT’S THAT?” and when Norquist began to speak, Shemp again asked very loudly drowning him out “A HISSY FIT?? WHAT’S THAT?”

What Norquist should have said then is “A hissy fit is what you’re having right now!!”

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ron:

Very true. The BBA Bill as I have been saving is the Ryan bill on Steroids. It does the same thing as the Ryan Bill except puts the Law in concrete.

It would require a 25% cut across the board on all programs or higher cuts on some to protect others. You cannot increase taxes unless you get a 2/3 vote. That means in SS you could not raise the payroll tax nor could you raise the cap. What is left?

The means test for Medicare would probably fail as well.

This is a very bad bill and it will fail. It is not a vote on whether the dems support a Balance Budget or not. It is more smoke and mirrors and all about power and greed - Period.

Navy and Ron,

So True.

It's so sad in what these folks on the Right are willing to do.

A little snip from David Brooks:

The Road Not TakenBy DAVID BROOKSPublished: July 18, 2011

"For many legislators, the purpose of being in Congress is not to pass laws. It’s to create clear contrasts you can take into the next election campaign. It’s not to take responsibility for the state of the country and make it better. It’s to pass responsibility onto the other party and force them to take as many difficult votes as possible.

"All of these groups share the same mentality. They do not see politics as the art of the possible. They do not believe in seizing opportunities to make steady, messy progress toward conservative goals. They believe that politics is a cataclysmic struggle. They believe that if they can remain pure in their faith then someday their party will win a total and permanent victory over its foes. They believe they are Gods of the New Dawn. "

"Fortunately, there are still practical conservatives in the G.O.P., who believe in results, who believe in intelligent compromise. If people someday decide the events of the past weeks have been a debacle, then practical conservatives may regain control. "

As the legendary Sergeant Jack Friday used to say: Just the facts ma’am…

Nixon raised the debt ceiling 9
times for a total increase of 36%. Ford... 5 times for a total increase of 41%.
Reagan... 18 times for a total increase of 199%. George H.W. Bush... 9 times
for a total increase of 48%. George W. Bush... 7 times for a total increase of
90%. That was okay; they were white Republicans.

The FACT of the matter is, this was NEVER about doing what’s in the best
interest of the country. By their own
admissions Republicant’s have agreed, this is about bringing down the current
occupant of the White House at ALL COSTS!!
The country is just collateral damage.

The country burns while Boehner, Cantor & McConnell fiddle!!!

Call, e-mail & write your representatives and tell them; ENOUGH IS
ENOUGH!

Real change begins at the bottom – it DOES NOT trickle down from the TOP!

So I stopped at the Joyce Kilmer Rest Area on the New Jersey Turnpike the other day to refuel my car and I noticed something and came up with a great idea to create jobs in this country. As I was refueling, I noticed a lot of out of state drivers who got out of their cars and garbbed the gas pump before being scolded by the attendant. As you may not know, it is illegal to pump your own gas here in the Garden State. And that's when it hit me!!!

Think about this for a second: If every state followed New Jersey and Oregon's examples and outlawed self-service at the gas station, then thousands and thousands of jobs would immediately be created!!! (I'm a genius, I know!!!) Of course, this may result in gas prices going up slightly in those states to cover the added payroll, but wouldn't it be worth it??? If people are willing to pay more in taxes to create jobs, why not pay a little more at the pump for the same thing???

So go, all of you First Read Faithful and write your state legislators and demand an end to self-serve gas stations!!! Tell them New Jersey sent you!!!

Obama was a lousy president when he held the majority in the house and senate. He's even worse with a split congress. We need a true leader who can unite diffrent groups. I think America got an expensive lesson in hiring blind "hope"vs experience and common sense. I doubt America goes for another 4 years of this ridiculous leadership.

He's even worse with a split congress. We need a true leader who can unite diffrent groups.

Let me guess...

"unite" = "do exactly what the Republicans want"

"They believe they are Gods of the New Dawn"

This is exactly the intellect on the right. It is all about them and nobody else. They do think they are the Gods of the new "Great Society" they are trying to create. A society based on class. Those that have and those that never will.

The GOP/TP is lost and the people know it.

Some have forsaken their oath when they were sworn into office and replaced it with the Nordquist Doctrine and others.

Too bad, we deserve better.

The Washington Post's Ezra Klein speaking to Ed Schultz last night on the positioning of the GOP on a debt ceiling deal:

"They've got the timing and the substance down."

Klein went on to say there's "no chance" for tax increases as part of a resolution to the ongoing debt ceiling negotiations.

According to Klein, President Obama and the Democrats will ultimately be forced to accept the best deal they can get to raise the debt ceiling before August 2nd.

But all is not lost on revenue increases after the debt ceiling deal is done, First Readers.

After all, Bowles-Simpson is still out there...isn't it?

Hmmm...

Debt commission co-chair (and former Clinton White House Chief-Of-Staff) Erskine Bowles and Republican Senator (and debt commission member) Tom Coburn sound remarkably similar on the matter of a $1-2 trillion reduction in the nation's debt, don't they?

They clearly aren't impressed.

Poor Leadership------------->OBAMA

Feisty:

The GOP/TP has never been about "Fiscal Responsibility". For the last 30 years it has been about power and greed. These are their Gods that they think are in their own image.

Time will tell in how this is going to play out.

NO Leadership, NO ideas, No Shame ---------> GOP/TP Party

Interesting interview between Chris Matthews & the 'ever so powerful' Grover Norquist yesterday.

I'll give Grover credit for one thing - he absolutely refused to answer the questions OR deviate from his talking points!

Is it any wonder the Republicant's are referred to as 'lemmings'?

That kind of 'group think' worked out so well in Jonestown!

Feisty:

Karl Rove 101 - Never answer any question when a talking point will do. Kind of like some of the posters from the right hat visit here every day. No ideas just more and more talking points and the same debunked lies over and over again.

The GOP/TP seems to be getting closer to the edge of the cliff every day. Pretty soon the American people are going to say enough is enough and give them that final push and it is not going to be a push into "Glory" like they think it will be.

Yes, it was amusing to watch Chris Matthews blow a gasket when Grover Norquist refused to allow Matthews to frame their debate to Matthews' liking.

I'm not a big Norquist fan, but he handled Chris Matthews' bluster perfectly, remaining calm throughout Matthews' emoting.

I like the way Tom Coburn has handled Norquist.

"the New York Times' David Brooks today singles out the Republicans and conservatives who gutted any chance of the grand bargain passing Congress."

So a far-left liberal zealot blames the conservative Republicans.

How hard was that to predict?

Somehow, I suspect that if Karl Rove issued a statement blaming the liberal Democrats, it would never appear on FR.

lol

Job1, David Brook's point about those who hold the view that politics is a "cataclysmic struggle" is revealing. His view fits like a glove for those whose worldview is a religious struggle between good and evil, god and the devil, etc. It is fanaticism pure and simple. Fundamentalism is destroying the Republican party both the Norquist or Bachmann/Perry" Called by God" variety.

Obama's critics both on the right and left are perplexed that he does not buy into this worldview. Go back and re-read his first speech at the Dem convention. It is a good antidote for today's extreme rhetoric.

If the American people thought the Ryan Budget was a disaster, they need to take a look at Cut, Cap & Balance ala Tea Party style. As Ron said, it is the Ryan plan x 10. It literally would destroy this country by making the USA a dysfunctional government. This proposed bill is a disaster. The Balance part locks in place Grover Nordquist's Pledge to the Rich by making it impossible for the country to ever raise taxes (2/3 majority to pass it) or close tax loopholes or eliminate tax breaks to businesses which ship jobs overseas. It allows cuts to everything else to be made with a simple majority. The USA does not need a Balance Budget Amendment to the Constitution, we just need serious people in Congress willing to compromise and do the serious work needed. Clearly, the Tea-publicans are not serious people, they are extremists. This country has never been successful or functional when extremists, left or right, have too much power. We are a center right and center left Nation.

What do Obama's Budget Projections Show?

Obama's own 2012 Budget calls for the National Debt to increase to $20.825 Trillion (a) by the end of fiscal year 2016 - only 5 years away (vs a National Debt figure of only $10.025 Trillion for Bush's last fiscal year in office (2008). That's an increase of almost $11 Trillion within 5 years if Obama gets reelected.

Our children and grandchildren are going to be neck high in debt for their entire lives - all to fund the grand schemes of Obama. That will be an average debt for a family of 4 of about $250,000, and just the interest alone for a family of 4 will be over $10,000 per year - in new taxes required - Basically another mortgage for an expensive house on every American family - just to pay interest to foreigners.

Congratulations on that "Change we can believe in" that you voted for.

(a) - See the White House Budget for 2012 - Table S-14. The link is below;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

Actually, Obama's projection is very optimistic and assumes an economic growth rate of over 6% per year (economists think 3% to 4% is realistic), which could raise the National Debt to over $25 Trillion - again in only 5 years, which would be an increase of $15 Trillion under Obama.

Good idea, Chris, on the gas pumping thing. I, for one, refuse to use those automated check-outs at the grocery store. Not because I'm afraid of them or their technology, but because I refuse to contribute to one more person being out of a job. I'll stand in line and wait first.

This disease of the repubs is universal. This past Sunday in Minnesota, it was announced that a budget deal had been reached Between Gov. Dayton and the repubs in the legislature. We find out Monday that well, the repub leadership STILL can't get its rank and file to support a budget that gives them virtually everything - the repubs may NOT be able to pass their OWN budget without Democratic help, and the Democrats have already told them that they will NOT get a single vote UNLESS the repubs invite THEM to negotiate - something the repubs NEVER DID this entire time (the repub leadership completely locked the Deomcrats out of budget negotiations).

At this point a MINORITY Democratic budget has an EQUAL chance of getting thru the Minnesota legislature. The repubs are simply incapable of governing or acting like adults.

Mixed Bag:

To put yourself on record as being for or against this piece of Cut, Cap and Balance legislation that will never become law is simply a waste of time. Why not get some legislation written and debated based on the Bowles-Simpson recommendations and put it up for a straight up or down vote.

Yesterday, the President suggested that his opposition to Bowles-Simpson was based on the cuts to military spending.

I researched that topic and found that Bowles-Simpson recommended a $1 Trillion cut in defense over 10 years. Both Mullen and Gates have said that a cut that large would decimate our military. Actually, I think their right...but....haven't some of the cuts recommended by Bowles-Simpson already been enacted? I believe almost a half trillion dollars in cuts took place last year by closing the Virgina Naval facility at Norfolk, the elimination of the F-22 Fighter program, the elimination of the F-35 alternative engine program, the elimination of the Ospry aircraft and a decision not to build the new amphibious assault craft the Marines wanted as they were deemed unnecessary since there hasn't been an amphibious assault in over 60 years.

Were these cuts made or are ther on the table.

It's about a half trillion dollars.

Gee Bag, you still haven't told us how it's possible to implement Simpson-Bowles when Republicans refuse to raise ANY taxes. Since that plan consists of approximately 1 dollar in tax increases for every 3 dollars in spending cuts it doesn't pass the ideological test for Congressional Conservatives. It's DOA and there's no point in pretending it's the solution.

Feisty, Suddenly Norquist is all over the TV. Curious?? Saw him on CNN, Chuck Todd, Matthews . He definitely fits my description of a fanatic.

Steve Wynn is a democrat, and a businessman.

He is a HUGE Harry Reid supporter-gave to his campaign, campaigned for him, the works.

Steve Wynn has also explained what is wrong with the economy

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/07/18/wynn_slams_obama_on_business_responsible_for_this_fear_in_america.html

Here is your choice, democrats- believe the man whose speeches contain a lot of words but say nothing- and, incidentally, is presiding over the worst recovery since the Depression, or believe a businessman, who happens to be one of your own, who has given explicit details of what is wrong with this administration.

I know there are some who will vilify Wynn as a turncoat- no criticism of Obama is countenanced, ever- but there have to be at leaser SOME of you who recognize a train wreck when it is staring you in the face.

Y'All just keep whistling past the graveyard, while this country spirals into the abyss.

Anybody catch what Steve Wynn had to say about our President? And he is a Democrat!

I guess, I can only assume most of you figure you will be dead by the time SS, Medicare and Medicade become insolvent. I can't figure out why else you are OK with any of this spending.

I, for one, refuse to use those automated check-outs at the grocery store. Not because I'm afraid of them or their technology, but because I refuse to contribute to one more person being out of a job.

_______________________________________________

Maybe we should get rid of user-operated elevators and bring back elevator operators too.

One of the most serious problems facing us is that we imagine that everyone is paying attention to what is going on in Washington, D.C. because we do. That's just not the way it is.

My experience tells me that most folks have no idea what is going on in D.C. They couldn't tell you the name of their Representative is, but by gum, he's a Republican. Here in Kansas, if he or she has an "R" after their name, they will get the "R" vote. Elections here, like everywhere else, turn primarily on self-identification. My Daddy was a Republican, my Daddy's Daddy was a Republican, so I'm a Republican. I may not know my guy's name, but he's damned sure a Republican. Same, same for Dems.

If Dwight Eisenhower could barely tolerate a Richard Nixon, it's almost impossible to imagine him doing anything less than locking Sam Brownback in a closet and throwing away the key. Yet, Kansans not only have sent Brownback to the House, but then to the Senate, and now they have made him Governor where he is cutting funds for schools and doing everything possible to make abortion impossible. He knows this is a good thing and he knows government is evil. Yet a check of his bio reveals that he has spent the bulk of his adult years feeding at the government trough. The right is now a captive of the ignorant and uneducated screaming right-wingers. Dems have their own issues, but in general aren't held captive by an extreme wing, which is not to say there aren't extremists.

The word "hypocrisy" has almost lost its meaning. So powerful are the propaganda machines of the right that a completely discredited and hated idea - The Ryan Plan - can be resurrected virtually overnight and presented again with a new name - "Cut, Cap, and Balance". It's the same crap but with a new name. New lyric, same old song.

Not once have we seen even the slightest variation on the theme "Spending is the problem". Same game, different name. Facts be damned. We have borrowed huge amounts of money to cover the costs of the Bush/Obama tax cuts. Now we pay interest on the gift we gave the filthy rich. As debt has been increasing, so has the unemployment rate, yet the "Tax Cut" mantra continues. Tax cuts are not working and they won't, UNLESS someone comes along and tells the truth, and no one is better positioned to do that than Democrats. The old consumption economy will never work again as it once did. We have surplus capacity, a spoiled-rotten work force, and there is little more for us to consume - and THAT can be turned to our advantage.

The Democrats WILL NOT seize their chance unfortunately, because they too are captive to Big Money and Megabuck Monstrocorp. This is their "Only Nixon could go to China" moment. The Dems can lay out serious cuts, even as they go full bore with desperately needed infrastructure repair a la WPA. It's time for a modern day "Manhattan Project". If we are ever to regain economic stability we must lead the way to a new world of energy. Fossil fuels are NOT the answer. Live in Kansas for one year and watch the incredible power of the wind and the unfathomable energy stores of the storms here and imagine harnessing that power. This is where we need to go.

When did America lose its imagination, its vitality, its confidence, and most importantly....it guts?

That is the

I see the latest RWNJ's talking point; Steve Wynn was somehow delayed this morning...

What a shame... ;o)

Slow & stupid is NO way to go through life...

They should bring back Bathroom attendants too. Nothing like a spritz of $2 Polo cologne.

US Disabled,

The GOP/TP is still holding the United States of America hostage

I thought it was Obama that was holding the gun to Grandma's head, threatening to not pay SS to the elderly when he can certainly pay.

$1 Trillion in increased revenues. This is pretty much what the GOP/TP bill wanted from the beginning

Investments is code for spending and increased revenues is code for tax increases. When have the repubs ever said they wanted tax increases when the economomy is in the tank. It is a job killer.

There are 14-20 million Americans who would love to pay more taxes. They are called the unemployed and underemployed and they would love to have a job to pay income taxes.

Wierd that Obama never mentions growing the economy anymore - I guess he realized he has no clue how to do that, huh?

President Obama has been saying that all things are on the table

Obama will say anything, but he does nothing - you know that. Has he even put a budget on the table, a plan on the table ....... you think Obamacare is on that table. What a joke.

President Obama is asking them to give up the tax loopholes that allow them to avoid paying their fair share.

Yet the multi millionaire Obama doesn't give up his tax loopholes does he. Obama is supposed to be a leader. How about he lead and set the example ...... especially when the tax payers provide him the biggest fat cat private jet, a 747 for his use ...... his wife takes $800,000.00 safaris ....... where is Obama's shared sacrifice? Pay up Obama - be a man - be a leader.

It appears the only people that do not get it is the far right radicals

So people that feel we shouldn't borrow more than $4 out of every $10 we spend are far right radicals, huh?

basically telling the people that elected them to go to he!!.

More accurately .... Obama is spending us to hell

Well Feisty, David Brooks says something and you guys are all over it, but that's not a talking point, now is it?

Beltway bandits indeed . The constitution is meant to set out the basic rules of the road for the country's governance. It's not an appropriate vehicle for enshrining transitory or controversial policy preferences. this is what the 18th amendment establishing prohibition did and so ensured widespread defiance of the nation fundamental law.

A balance-budget amendment could befall the same fate at the hands of fiscal bootleggers of GOP controlled congress. even house republicants voted for a budget that doesn't balance the federal book until 2030.

"the New York Times' David Brooks today singles out the Republicans and conservatives who gutted any chance of the grand bargain passing Congress."

So a far-left liberal zealot blames the conservative Republicans.

Roy,

David Brooks actually leans Conservative.

I just read David Brooks' piece and almost puked. No wonder he's the token "conservative" the leftists around here will tolerate in their polite company.

He should read my piece from yesterday explaining why compromise is a loser. He should do some of his own thinking and explore why the "art of the possible" doesn't necessarily get the ball appreciably closer to the goal line regarding our debt problem. He should have the courtesy (dare I say respect) to refrain from characterizing players like Palin and Bachmann as "show horses" – particularly when those folks have energized many voters in ways that Brooks could never do even in his wildest dreams. And surely he should find the discipline to refrain from wallowing into the swamp of psuedo-eloquence with his "Gods of the New Dawn" remark.

Good grief, only in the NYT. A proper home for this token "conservative."

Ryanushi, As a fellow Minnesotan, I completely agree! Expand this to the federal level debt ceiling impasse. I am beginning to believe that McConnell's solution is the most realistic. Do it and lets move on.

Only on this board would David Brooks be described as a "conservative"

Kind of like the President is a "centrist"

"the New York Times' David Brooks today singles out the Republicans and conservatives who gutted any chance of the grand bargain passing Congress."

So a far-left liberal zealot blames the conservative Republicans.

Roy,

David Brooks actually leans Conservative.

David Brooks IS a conservative, at least by old standards. He's not barking mad crazy, which I guess is the new definition of a liberal zealot among the lunatic fringe of the ultra way-out-there far far right that's taken over the Republican Party.

Ira-

I can't say I disagree with you on the House vote today, but in any event, it's all kabuki...sleight of hand for the base. I doubt it'll have the slightest effect on the substance of the agreement to raise the debt ceiling.

The far more important discussion is a long-term approach to addressing the nation's snowballing, growth-crushing, national debt.

And, I couldn't agree with you more on an up-or-down vote on Bowles-Simpson.

As I noted yesterday, if President Obama is sincere in his concerns that the debt commission's Plan cuts defense spending too deeply, he can simply advocate for the adoption of Bowles-Simpson with some modification to the defense provisions. That said, Ira...I'm having a little trouble believing that President Obama is more concerned with cuts to defense spending than cuts to entitlement spending, but I'll take his words at face value.

Either way, my support for implementing the debt commission's Plan is reality-based. I believe it's the only proposal that has even a prayer of passing both Houses of Congress as presently constituted.

The President should link arms with liberal Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and conservative Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), both signatories to the debt commission Plan, and engage in a full-court press using the bully pulpit of the presidency to advocate for an up-or-down vote on Bowles-Simpson.

I'm not an ideologue, Ira. I'm not crazy about the cuts to defense spending or increasing the federal gasoline tax either, but if that's what's necessary to get a handle on spending...so be it.

And, I love the notion of tossing out the present tax code with all its loopholes and special interest giveaways in favor of a new code designed to improve the competitiveness of American companies and foster economic growth.

To all of you here who despise the Bush tax cuts...you should just LOVE Bowles-Simpson.

If the debt commission Plan is ever implemented...the Bush tax cuts are gone.

The Brooks column repeats some points raised in the past few years by authors Naomi Klein, Thomas Frank, and Matt Taibbi - I've cited them in a number of recent posts. As others here have already noted, the conservative movement, and its mentor-cum-disciplinarian Grover Norquist, are indeed focused entirely on their objectives and will not give an inch. They have developed a political mentality similar to that of the so-called samurai code of bushido indoctrinated into Imperial Japan's military of WWII.

What actually is more revealing is that this has been their way for 30 years and more. What many do not understand is that the confrontation over the debt ceiling is the right wing's image of Ragnarok - the Vikings' final mythological battle. The ultra-right zealots feel that their "creative destruction" will remake the United States into their vision of a Libertarian nation - backward, impoverished, and a semi-feudal economic aristocracy. This confrontation exactly fits the pattern they have followed for decades, what Naomi Klein very cogently termed "disaster capitalism." Cause or suffer a disaster, she explaied, and then use the chaotic conditions to hoodwink the country.

So, yes, it seems more and more likely that the intransigent ultra-right hopes either for capitulation by the White House, or a complete collapse. In their playbook, they win either way. Of course, they have ended up failing horribly many times in the past 30 years, and never understood just what went wrong.

I find Brooks' words very consistent with the views of these authors mentioned:

Brooks concludes his column this way, “All of these groups share the same mentality. They do not see politics as the art of the possible. They do not believe in seizing opportunities to make steady, messy progress toward conservative goals. They believe that politics is a cataclysmic struggle. They believe that if they can remain pure in their faith then someday their party will win a total and permanent victory over its foes.

Thomas Frank did the most consistent job of documenting precisely that mentality. The right wing movement in recent months has aggressively attacked every source of funds or votes for Democrats, has pushed states to the brink of destruction, has either privatized public education or further starved education of funds (as in Florida with its vast emphasis on charter schools and mass layoffs of public school teachers), and attacked almost every social service or safety net program in the nation.

The attempts now to end regulation by de-funding the various departments' budget or simply block appointment of officials to operate them are substitutes for outright repeal of regulatory agencies' existence. If the right wingers' disaster occurs, they can go back then and just write the hated regulators out of existence; for now, as before, merely render them impotent.

And as Frank shows in his book, that has been their program all along.

Grover Norquist, protege of the infamous political thief Jack Abramoff, is in this for money. He is making millions using scare tactics, bullying his business contributors, threatening lawmakers, and funneling cash through his various lobbyists. He stand to lose a great deal if the ultra-right cracks, or moderates in Congress split from the Tea Party line.

The debt ceiling vote, as I predicted months ago, is now a "crisis." But the country is getting a good look at the very ugly risk posed by the ultra-right political ideologues and the kind of bleak future they offer if they succeed in causing catastrophic collapse.

And the hits just keep on coming:

Final chapter for Borders; 10,700 workers to lose jobs

Jaclyn Trop/ The Detroit News

Borders Group Inc., the Ann Arbor-based bookselling chain whose success helped shut the doors of many independent bookstores, said it will soon go out of business, deciding Monday to ask a bankruptcy court to approve its sale to a group of liquidators.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110719/BIZ/107190368/Final-chapter-for-Borders--10-700-workers-to-lose-jobs#ixzz1SYrcWHon

Mixed Bag..

Could not agree with you more.

My question was serious though.

Do you know if the defense cuts I mentioned are the half trillion dollars everyone is talking about without specifics or have these cuts already been made?

These cuts were ALL approved by both Gates and Mullen and would be an easy half trillion dollar cut to make and compromise on.

And the hits just keep on coming:

Final chapter for Borders; 10,700 workers to lose jobs

But, I thought that innovations in business and new technology were supposed to be GOOD things?

Blame game? Doesn't sound like leadership, a leader takes responsibility for their actions, not blame the other guy. The question should be, what can I do to fix this mess? Not blame, blame, blame.....sounds familiar Navy? By your comments I know for a fact you were never a leader, you retire as a Petty Officer? Couldn't make that leap to Chief? Take orders than blame somebody for your f**k ups? I shouldn't rag on you, my bad. Bottom line, it's really hard to take responsibility for messing up then it is to blame it on the other guy. It's on both side of the aisle. You have people on here calling people Nazis to un-American, why is that?

Joe in Albany - Mr. Norquist, predictably, was spouting Republican talking points during his interview with Chris Matthews. Furthermore, Mr. Matthews was not almost screaming at Mr. Norquiest; rather, he questioned this new talking point, "hissy fit."

At to your name-calling, and other posters' name-calling, it diminshes your arguments. Calling people "Shemp Matthews," "Barry," "Shrub," "Dubya," "Obammy," etc. are juvenile attempts at strengthening a weak argument.

WCA -

The Borders bankruptcy has been in the works for months. The company closed a great many of its stores around the country and entered reorganization earlier this year. It was unable to succeed in re-capitalizing or renegotiating much of its debt.

The fundamental cause has been the success of ventures such as Amazon and the Barnes & Noble online sales program. In addition, music and video sales have changed dramatically over the past 4 years - many brick-and-mortar stores for those products are gone, too - Blockbuster, for example, is struggling. Borders had relied far more than Barnes & Noble did on such sales.

As an avid reader and fan of old-fashioned, hard copy, paper books and nice bookstores in which to browse and peruse, I'm sorry to see Borders go. Too bad that dumb jackwagon who hardly can speak, much less read a compound sentence, that one from the White House, you know, George W. Bush, trashed the economy and started the fire that finished off Borders.

I think its a great idea to go back to full-service gas stations, out of curiousity how much does one of the attendants make an hour? Can someone live on that salary? As one who travels extensively around the U.S. for work, it is always fun to be waited on at the gas station. This and bathroom attendants would put a lot of people back to work, but I hardly think they would make much more than minimum wage, nor should they.

That's a good question, Ira.

In either case, I would still be inclined to trust the conservatives on the panel like Senators Coburn and Crapo that the interests of national defense were respected under the debt commission Plan.

The Plan isn't perfect.

But it's the best we've got.

John A, I am well aware aware of Borders troubles. Pretty close to home ya know. Once again, though I point you to Steve Wynns comments. While technology may have played a big part in Borders demise, the actions of our President are not helping anyone in Business.

And I gotta say, the sudden, once again continuous drumbeat of It's Bush's fault, isn't going to fly in 2012 the way it did in 2008.

David, you being disingenous as you know the GOP has supported the debt commission and the tax increases as part of a plan to eliminate the current tax code. The GOP would raise revenue by creating a simpler fair progressive tax code that eliminates all deductions and loopholes for the wealthy but reduce the overall rates. So Navy likes to use the 18% effective rate for the wealthy (which really only applies to the nonworking super wealthy or wealthy seniors who have retired and live off of dividends and interest). As you know, the comfortably working rich, have effective tax rates close to 50% and probably more in some states like NY and California. So what would happen is that effective rate that Navy uses would go up to like 25% or higher, raising substantial revenue from the wealthy. Its the working wealthy would in the aggregate have a lower effective rate. The reason that democrats dont get behind it is because they love using the tax code for social policy and social engineering. They like to hide welfare and entitlement payments within the tax code because it isnt called welfare. The earned income tax credit for example is plain welfare and I dont care if as a social policy we want to provide welfare to people earning less than a certain amount but lets call it what it is and take it out of the tax code. This plan would also ensure that everyone working about a certain poverty level pay income tax even if at a minimal rate which the democrats hate because they would prefer the entitlement welfare state where a bigger and larger proportion of the people continue to feed at the government trough so they get used to it and dont want to give it up and then vote to keep them in office. This is no different than how the unions became so entrenched with democrats because at the state and local level, they feed at the government trough and now they are addicted to it and will continue to vote democrat in their own self interest. Any by the way, I dont blame them as I would do the same thing if I were in a union. But David, lets not embellish the tax increase issue too much.

@Chris, Cranbury, NJ...We in Oregon do not have to pump our own gas and when we travel, we notice that the price of gas is HIGHER in most of the places that force us to pump our own. Go figure.

Why is anyone who is halfway intelligent find the stance of the Tea Party surprising is beyond me. They ran AND WAS ELECTED on doing just what they said they would do. From the Fiscal Times:

Republican congressional candidates across the country are running on promises to give the country less of everything -- less government spending, less regulation, lower taxes, lower deficits and less debt.

I know, I know. It is a foreign concept of standing on one's principles and word to democrats who are used to their own ilk to lie and break promises and then try to create more lies to account for the lies.

John A, its called capitalism and you have to know from your debating skills class than when you personally trash someone else, you lose the credibility of your message as people only remember the personal remarks. I am no Bush fan as he was a horrible president but because of his policy decisions not because of his inability to meet your standards of oral presentations. He actually had a higher SAT score than Gore and probably of 90% of the people posting on this blog but that doesnt make him a good decision maker or president. Why not focus on his decisions and your style wouldnt appear as if it came from the left wing playbook of using the art of personal attacks and destruction? I think you could actually win a debate on the substance for Bush's policys so why get in the mud and lose your credibility (I know you dont lose it with your like minded friends who would hug you and genuflect at every word you say but who cares about winning the hearts and minds of the people already in the mud with you. Dont you want new friends?)

Agree with them or not, you really need to take Steve Wynn's comments seriously. He runs a company that is a very large employer and right or wrong, he stated why he is keeping so much cash on the sideline and not expanding employment at his company. You would have to think that a lot of other major employers are having similar thoughts. We need to come up with a bipartisan solution here to get people like him off the sidelines and back into the hiring game. The GOP (particularly the House) could help by showing more of a willingness to compromise. The President could help by toning down some of the speeches that seem to almost threaten businesses.

I agree with some of what has been said above...why not start embracing the Debt Commission proposals a little more? Here you have a bipartisan commission that made recommendations...put them to a vote. Or at least start with the recommendations and make some tweaks from there.

And White Collar Auto said:

They should bring back Bathroom attendants too. Nothing like a spritz of $2 Polo cologne

Ugh...please no, we really don't need more of them. Every club I go to in South Florida has one...seriously, I am capable of applying soap to my own hands, thank you!! LOL!!

Have a great day all!

ok just a quick question to the repubs. on the board. If we give you Obama hasn't been able to lead this country, has been an extremely divisive figure in politics (current environment is more partisan than ever), etc....

What about the subject at hand? Do any of you feel the the Cut, Cap, and Trade Bill is an even remotely good idea?

Also, do any of you feel that the grand bargain (3 trillion cuts, 1 trillion in loophole closes and putting the wealthiest taxes back to reasonable levels) was a bad thing?

Chris, Cranbury: "Of course, this may result in gas prices going up slightly in those states to cover the added payroll, but wouldn't it be worth it??? If people are willing to pay more in taxes to create jobs, why not pay a little more at the pump for the same thing???"

Do I detect just the slightest note of sarcasm there, Chris? Nevertheless, as someone on the other side of the bridges (who's also been scolded by an attendant a time or two - even Wawa has them!), I feel compelled to point out that there would apparently be no need to pay any more at the pump for those jobs. Whenever the price of gas is a news topic, we always get price comparisons for the whole tri-state area, and New Jersey is consistently a few cents LESS than Pennsylvania, even with the additional payroll. I've never been able to figure out how that works - you'll have to enlighten us. And why do they just pump your gas, but don't clean your windshield or check your oil like gas station attendants did in the olden days?

P.S. - A friend's husband was driving the PA turnpike for the first time a few years back and was just livid that the fast-food restaurants at the rest stops didn't have drive-throughs. Apparently the entire concept of "rest stop" completely escaped him. I know, I know - this has nothing at all to do with politics. Though now that I think of it, he IS a rabid Republican..... :)

Hi JoAnne...

I lived near the NJ / PA border and I remember the same thing...NJ gas was cheaper. I think the primary reason is the state gas tax per gallon. As of 7/1/2011, PA's gas tax was 5th highest in the country at 45.2 cents per gallon. NJ's is 7th lowest at 23.5 cents per gallon.

Hope that helps.

Take care!

WCA -

Well, lessee, the crash of the economy began in 2007 and was in full roar by September, 2008. Hmm, yep, Bush was still in office at that time. His Administration tanked not only the U.S. economy, but the global economy, and caused vast numbers of business failures, either right quickly or over time. Even now, most Americans understand that the recovery is slower than we had hoped, but they also squarely put reponsibility where it belongs for this economic mess - on Bush II's shoulders. I won't go back into a lot of what has aleady been written about it, just check Navy's post from yesterday:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/07/18/7104621-first-thoughts-holding-pattern#c56078050

And by the way, isn't it a bit disingenuous of you to past that story, with the inference that Obama is somehow responsible for Borders' closing? That's actually why I went into some detail about the company's distress - not for you but for others here who might not have known the additional information.

'Blame game,' is a perfect part of the title of this article. Hmmn, what do these politicians remind you of?

Exactly what is going on here.

It is much better to spew and be righteous about opinions, than to actually solve anything, right?

Must be, because that is what is going on.

Jody, Iowa: If the American people thought the Ryan Budget was a disaster, they need to take a look at Cut, Cap & Balance ala Tea Party style.

Yeah, you're right, all the GOP budget plans are disasters.

So what's the Democrats plan again?

Frank is too quick on the keyboard for me!!!

Joanne, I wasn't trying to be sarcastic there. If self-serve pumps were outlawed in Pennsylvania, the prices there probably would go up to cover the expense. Gas prices are usually set by the individual station owner and have to cover the state and federal taxes as well as any expenses they have. Payroll for attendants would add to that expense and, thus, add to price per gallon. I would expect to see an additional 10-15 cents per gallon to cover the additional payroll should this happen. Thankfully, this would probably not affect the prices here in New Jersey as we already have the payroll expense built into the price (and we still pay less!!!). Some places still do clean the windshield and check the oil. Again, that depends on the individual station.

Now, the question is, would you be willing to pay more at the pump to help get some Americans back to work???

Gotta hand it to Navy all he does is rant. Obamacare is not on he table and back in 2006 how many Senators voted against raising the debt ceiling

On that particular vote in March 2006, 44 Democrats voted "nay," including 31 senators who are still in office. They are Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Barbara Boxer of California, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Tom Carper of Delaware, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Dianne Feinstein of California, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, John Kerry of Massachusetts, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Carl Levin of Michigan, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, Bob Menendez of New Jersey, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, Patty Murray of Washington, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bill Nelson of Florida, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Harry Reid of Nevada, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, Chuck Schumer of New York, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, and Ron Wyden of Oregon. In addition, three members of Obama's cabinet voted the same way: Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar.

Ben Nelson of Nebraska said this:

Raising the debt ceiling allows Washington to continue to spend without cutting costs. Instead of forcing Washington to adopt a pay-as-you-go budget, this proposal encourages government to spend now without even a plan to pay for it later. If we raise the debt ceiling, the nation will just go deeper in debt. Washington will never get out of the hole if it doesn’t stop digging.

And Tom Carper, sounding almost like a Tea Party supporter, said this, in defense of his "no" vote:

“We’re in a hole and we need to stop digging,” Carper said. “We’re running up bills that will be left for our children and grandchildren to pay. We simply cannot continue down this path."

9:17 AM, Apr 12, 2011 • By MICHAEL WARREN www.weeklystandard.com

Doesn't that sound familiar. I guess what goes around comes around.

On the Ed show and what an idiot he is tells the President to veto any bill that comes through if it doesn't have tax increases in it. Maybe the IRS can audit Ed see if is paying his taxes. Better than 50-50 there are mistakes in his returns.

Chris -

If I actually thought it would create jobs, yes. But as with any other increase at the pump, all that ever seems to happen is that oil executives get richer and richer. And prices for everything else just go up and up. Oil doesn't really "trickle" very well at all.

By the way, as long as we're talking gas prices, any number of posters on here (not directed at you personally) promised me that President Obama was going to give us $5.00 a gallon gas this summer. It's now July 19th and I can't even find $4.00 gas anymore. Where's my $5.00 gas, people? You PROMISED!!!

John B, Des Moines, IA "Gee Bag, you still haven't told us how it's possible to implement Simpson-Bowles when Republicans refuse to raise ANY taxes. Since that plan consists of approximately 1 dollar in tax increases for every 3 dollars in spending cuts it doesn't pass the ideological test for Congressional Conservatives."

It also requires changing Medicare (which is scheduled to go bankrupt in 12 years), and a slight adjustment to Social Security, so it doesn't pass the ideological test of Congressional Liberals.

Since the largest note holder of federal debt is the Social Security Trust Fund (at about $2.6 Trillion), if Obama CHOOSES not to pay the Social Security debt payments and instead pays foreign debt or federal worker pensions, what does that say about his priorities?

David Brooks has been and is a strong admirer of Barack Obama, which is hardly the sign of a 'conservative' commentator. Trying to paint him as a 'conservative' commentator is disingenuous and self serving by the liberal media on anything related to Obama.

David Brooks has been and is a strong admirer of Barack Obama, which is hardly the sign of a 'conservative' commentator. Trying to paint him as a 'conservative' commentator is disingenuous and self serving by the liberal media on anything related to Obama.

Ok, so now I see the problem now. If you are a conservative you are not supposed to respect the views of the other side or visa versa.

So as a democrat I am suppossed to not like the ideas of some of the GOP people I have voted for???? By voting for them I am some how a defective Democrat? I voted for them because they had better ideas than what my party was offering.

And we wonder why we are where we are today. That above statement tells it all.

The right wing radicals are brain dead. Even if you belong to their own party if you do not toe their line you are not one of them. These are the people that are being disingenuous not Brooks.

Roy Wilson:

This is where you guys always come up short. Your quote: "David Brooks has been and is a strong admirer of Barack Obama, which is hardly the sign of a 'conservative' commentator."

I admire Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley, but I wouldn't vote Republican today on a bet. Does that make me disingenuous? Does that make me self-serving?

What has happened is that the extremists of the G.O.P. have co-opted not only the party, but the notion of what makes a "conservative".

In the main, David Brooks is a conservative. What gives him that horrible liberal taint is the fact that he is willing to constantly challenge his own position. What a concept!

Roy Wilson - David Brooks is a true conservative; he is a conservative just as many Republicans that I remember are true conservatives. However, today's "conservative" is not the same. It seems that to be a "conservative" during our current time, one must hate President Obama, not just his policy ideas, but the man himself, and advocate for large government. For example, interferring in people's personal lives, even to the point of mandating how one must wear his or her pants.

I am a conservative Democrat and have always respected conservative Republicans. I looked to them to provide sound, fiscal policy while showing compassion for the truly disadvantaged in our country. I respect some who are currently serving in the House and Senate, such as Senator Lugar and Senator Coburn. Additionally, there is a freshman Tea Party member of the House, whose name escapes me at the moment, who I greatly admire. I don't admire the ideologues and uncompromising, whose goal it to make President Obama a one-term president. Admittedly, both sides want their own party represented in the White House. However, to consistently state that a goal is to make him a one-term President is disrespectful to the office and dangerous for the country.

Roy Wilson - I might add that I don't like egocentric, uncompromising ideologues from both parties.

OK, it's time to put the lie to Conservative claims that they'd support tax increases if only Democrats would accept Simpson-Bowles. Let's see what leading Conservative Republican group Americans for Tax Reform has to say;

"Senators should oppose Simpson-Bowles tax hike." http://www.atr.org/senators-opposebr-simpson-bowles-tax-hike-a5685

Oh look, Paul Ryan and the Heritage Foundation are also opposed to increasing taxes as part of implementing Simpson-Bowles. http://www.newsmax.com/GroverNorquist/Norquist-Simpson-Bowles-taxhike/2010/12/07/id/379255

One great flaw in the proposal is the massive tax increase proposed by the co-chairmen, former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo) and former Clinton Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles.

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/11/10/heritage-reacts-to-simpson-bowles-deficit-reduction-panel-proposal/

So, how 'bout we just stop pretending that Simpson-Bowles is any less DOA with the GOPTP than anything else that would increase revenue?

I've looked around and I have not noticed that anyone has pointed out the single greatest part of the McConnell/Reid Plan B, Hail Mary punt:

After voting yes on the plan, it gives the TeaPublicans the opportunity, neah, it even requires them to vote NO three more times before the next election. How great a plan is that. It requires Republicans to vote NO, something they have gotten very good at doing.

dirp101:

This has come up several times the past few weeks and it is a sticking point with many democrats. What happens is that the GOP/TP will get 12X between now and the elections to hammer President Obama on the Debt Ceiling even though they (the GOP/TP) are claiming they will let it go through. They want to use this as a way to try and claim President is spending money again no matter what it may be for.

The McConnell bill is a bad idea also because it lets them walk away from any responsibility at all and just throw stones at President Obama later 12X later.

If they want this bill they should have just accepted the $4 Trillion Dollar bill and with it half credit for moving this country forward. We all know where that went.

They seem to think leadership means "Cut and Run".

Very astute pickup.

Chris, out of curiosity what type of pay would you consider to be fair for someone to pump gas. Not exactly a skilled labor postion.

johnB - And yet ryans proposed FY 2012 budget plan was revenue neutral, you know, what obama said in his state of the union address he would consider.

You forgot these little gems from your links...

The tax increase in question is not "tax reform" along the lines of the 1986 Tax Reform Act. That bill lowered marginal tax rates and broadened the tax base, just as the commission report does—but with one essential distinction. That 1986 bill was tax revenue-neutral, whereas the commission report is a massive, $1 trillion-plus net tax hike on the American people. It’s a tax increase that is merely disguising itself as tax reform.

It was bad enough when President Reagan got tricked into a 3-1 spending-tax ratio in 1982 and when President George H.W. Bush got tricked into a 2-1 spending-tax ratio in 1990. Each time, the tax hikes were real and the spending cuts never materialized. But now it seems those supporting this commission may have in fact signed off on a 1-1 ratio of real tax hikes and fake spending cuts.

We’d be remiss, of course, not to mention the strengths. The Heritage Foundation has long recognized, as the chairmen’s proposal also recognizes, that the ultimate solution to a government that is too large and spends too much is to get entitlement program spending — especially medicare, medicaid, and social security spending — under control.

Based on the above I would say that the right is correct in wanting to know what the spending cuts are that obama and company will support or that the right won't increase revenues as time goes by. Perhaps it is the left who really want to lie about spending cuts.

BTW - I never knew of any politician that didn't look at any type of revenue increase as anything other than a means to spend money on new programs and not paying down debt.

How admirable of Ryan and the rest of the Republican party to destroy Medicare without actually saving any money.

And Conservatives can't figure out why they have a 21% approval rating on their handling of the debt ceiling.

John A. Your post #1.43 got me to buy" Shock Doctrine' on my way home from work. Anyone who uses the cosmology myth of Ragnarok is my kind of author. Norse myths have always played second fiddle to Greek/Rroman mythology as a source of imagery in thoughtful writing, poetry fiction. But I digress.

Will get off the threads and settle down with the book tonght. I appreciate your references to this book in your well thought out posts last week.

Both sides are to blame. Nothing but a bunch of self serving ignorant crooks.

ROY WILSON,

In your right-wing desire to see ideological purity to exist, your own political peers and right-wing independents are happily willing to throw each other under the bus. I hope you like being thrown under the tires as well ...by your own people.

I've read on private, right-wing-managed blogs that said they wanted to throw you, ROY WILSON, under the bus so to speak, because "you weren't right-wing enough" in your public desire to bash Obama and all non-conservatives in the U.S. They said you "weren't working hard enough" to achieve the goal they paid people like you to do. (For proof of this, just Google your own pseudo-name. Hundreds of hits appear, and what do you know, a lot of talk coming from you, a lot more on the left criticizing what you say, and even those on the far right-wing criticize your opinions, as well as commenters who claim to be "politically independent," like you ...Can't win for losing, huh?)

---------------------------------------------

GOP Sen. Tom Coburn, who released his own plan yesterday (see below), was hit hard for his budget plan by … Grover Norquist. Clearly, that's a feud that's gotten personal.

Grover Norquist Rebuked By GOP

Excerpts:

WASHINGTON -- Grover Norquist's grip on the Republican Party's tax policy slipped dramatically on Tuesday, a development that is likely to have significant repercussions on the debate over spending, revenue and the federal deficit.

Norquist, the head of Americans for Tax Reform and a leading party power broker for a generation, drew a hard line in the sand against repealing ethanol subsidies, arguing that ending the tax breaks is equivalent to a tax increase and therefore a violation of The Pledge -- a document nearly every Republican has signed promising never to vote to raise taxes.

Thirty-four Senate Republicans walked nonchalantly across that line on Tuesday, voting to move forward on an amendment sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) that would repeal the subsidies.

Norquist has been vicious in his recent talks on Coburn, charging that his amendment means he "lied his way into office" and is breaking the pledge.

Coburn was unmoved.

www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/14/grover-norquist-ethanol_n_876887.html

rradiko,

Good for Coburn. Maybe some of these Repubicans can think on their own with out Norquist pulling the strings the strings.

Glad that new slew of republicans in the House are bringing about great change in govt. Good job voters. Did you want to pay your reps to not do anything but say NO?

The top 1% owns 20% of the Wealth in America!

How about that factual data. One percent of the population in America owns almost a quarter of the Wealth, and the Citizens don't believe the Rich are turning the rest of us into serfs and peasants!

These are the provable Facts and everyone seems to be okay with it?

Do you really beleive all the crap you post Louis?

Obama wants everyone to share the sacrifice – except for him!

We have been hearing quite a bit from Democrats and BO about “shared sacrifice”, yet when it comes to spending cuts to the Executive Office of the President, cuts roughly in line with the cuts to other departments in various House spending bill thst have been taken up so far, BO balks!

Proposed House cuts to the EOP’s budget will hurt administration efforts to cut the deficit, the White House argues.

The Obama administration made the argument in comment on H.R. 2434, the 2012 Financial Services and General Government Appropriation Act. That bill could be o the House floor as early as next week, and would decrease funding for the EOP from $705 million to $640 million.

Seems everyone but Obama should have to ‘sacrifice’! LOL

Pride and Joy

We have been hearing quite a bit from Democrats and BO about “shared sacrifice”, yet when it comes to spending cuts to the Executive Office of the President, cuts roughly in line with the cuts to other departments in various House spending bill thst have been taken up so far, BO balks!

Remind me again: what, exactly is it that the wealthy have had to sacrifice for the sake of the economy? Is it having to put up with having their eyes offended by the sight of one of the growing numbers of the poor trying to wash their limousines' windshield when their chauffeurs are stopped at a red light? Ah, how the wealthy must suffer for the greater good!

Here is a thought to ponder.

Reagan -- deficients don't matter

Bush I -- deficients don't matter

Clinton -- GOP hard swing to fiscal conservative push to balance budget

Bush II -- Reagan proved deficits don't matter

Obama -- another GOP hard swing to fiscal conservative again time to balance budget.

It looks like to me that if you really care about the debt, you have to keep Obama a Democrat as president. The only time the republicans are responsible are when they are trying to degrade a sitting president. Otherwise deficits don't matter.

Kinda sad when the republicans have to see a picture of the president with a D or R to know whether they are conservatives or not this year.

I thought the tea partiers ran on jobs, jobs, jobs. Not we are going to kill more jobs and sent American into a worse recession. Just like the religious to think it doesn't matter how much they hurt the innocent people. After all they have 72 vir.... I mean the kingdom of heaven waiting for them.

Slash, dash and crash. With Agent Orange, Eric the Red (State Buffoon), McChinless, DeMented, Bassackardmann and the Pauls at the GOTP helm we are screwed! Our only hope is that Mr. Obama and the Dems in Congress stand their ground.

Why do people fall their blatant Tea Baggery, Corporate apologists agenda? A sucker is born every minute that is the only way to explain the Tea Bags who buy into this crap!

Pride & Joy,

That's an interesting question, but It will be lost here at FR.. Houston is a prefect example instead of answering the question, she goes around it and points it back to you.

I was taught to lead by example. So why not, President Obama?

Also, whats wrong with wanting a balance budget amendment?

thetotas

That's an interesting question, but It will be lost here at FR.. Houston is a prefect example instead of answering the question, she goes around it and points it back to you.

P&J didn't ASK a question, you moron. He she or it just posted an idiotic rant about the budget of the Office of the President of the United States. I was the one who asked the question, and YOU can't answer it: What, exactly, have the wealthy sacrificed to help the economy recover?

By the way, I'm a guy. What are you? A reptile?

Louis,

Maybe you missed it but it was Obama creating panic in the streets by threatening to withold grandma's SS check. I don't know what liberals read and listen to but it must be as one sided as Fox is for conservatives. Oh yeah, it is the rest of the media.

President Obama did not threaten withholding social security checks. He said he could not promise. If he had promised and found he could not deliver you would be screaming even louder.

That whole liberal media lie was for the mental midgets that watch faux. The right wing knew that more and more truth would be coming out. So their plan was if a conservative heard something negative, they could cast it off as another liberal lie. faux censored the news with 10 second sound bites and anything that says anything different was a liberal lie.

You bought their scam hook, line and sinker.

A vote for any republican is a vote to end social security.

Are you just another republican ready to cut your nose off to spite your face? If you aren't in the 2% of the richest of Americans, that is all you are doing.

We're willing to listen, robert. You think it can be done, please show us how. There's a tool here http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/federal-debt-limit-you-choose-who-gets-paid/?hpid=z2 that will do the math for you. All you have to do is decide what you believe is most important to pay and let us know. It will be interesting to see your priorities.

John B.:

Thanks for the link; very interesting and quite instructive. I continue to marvel at the fact that anyone argues against the fact that the debt ceiling must be raised or that revenues have to be raised. Loopholes and special tax treatment must be completely overhauled - not eliminated - overhauled.

One particular thing struck me that I had not considered before. There are any number of programs - HUD for a certainty - where participants/recipients could contribute some sort of in-kind payment to mitigate the overall cost of the programs in which they participate.

We desperately need some people with imagination in on these budget negotiations. This problem can be solved and I find it nothing short of ridiculous that we have yet to hear of any solution from either the Democrats OR the Republicans that envisions a balanced budget within 20 years. That's all the more shocking when one considers the fact that when George Bush took office we were told that the debt would be gone, disappeared, no more, zero - THIS YEAR! I'm going out on a limb here, but I think something went wrong.

HEY.......TAX CUTS FOR EVERYBODY! THEY'RE FREE!

I come up with ~29 billion more to to decide on what to write checks for.

Seems that the real problem lies in what the short term priorities should be. Mine were easy, interest payments, SS, medicare, military payroll and bennies, tax refunds, unemployment extended benefits and most federal pay (but I could see my way clear to reducing it.

Regardless, it was a fun exercise, but clearly shows how government spending has gotten way out of hand.

OK, so you're in favor of not paying;

• Payments to defense vendors such as BAE Systems, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman and Boeing
• Tuition assistance for college students, special education programs
• Food stamp recipients, child nutrition programs, and the Women, Infants, and Children program
• HHS grants, such as National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Food and Drug Administration, for research and projects
• Housing assistance for 1.2 million poor households, rental assistance recipients
• Support of local and state governments in design, construction and maintenance of the national highway systems and programs involving the national transportation infrastructure
• Energy research, national nuclear programs
• FBI, federal courts
• Job training and employment services
• Programs that support public transportation systems such as buses, ferries, light rail and subways
• Programs protecting health and the environment, such as oil spill cleanup and air quality
• Programs for small businesses, such as loans, training and contracting
• Smaller costs in such agencies as State Department, Agriculture Department, Federal Railroad Administration, and U.S. Post Service money orders and District of Columbia funds

Thanks for illustrating that this is about destroying government services instead of being fiscally responsible. You even said so in your last sentence.

You are forgetting the pork and outlandish spending in Washington. $8 million a year for bottled water at the Capitol and Michelle's new food pie at $2 million for example. Start adding up those millions.

Balanced Budget Amendment

Republicans are moving ahead with their "doomed" plan to amend the Constitution to require a balanced federal budget. It probably is doomed, but I want to address the economics of the balanced budget requirement. In particular, Norm Ornstein has a piece in today's WaPo that presents the classic liberal position against requiring the federal government to balance its budget:

"A sagging economy requires what we call countercyclical policy, stimulus to counter a downturn and provide a boost….Countercyclical policy is what every industrial country in the world employed when the credit shock hit in late 2008, to avoid a global disaster far more serious than the one we faced. Under a balanced budget amendment, however, no countercyclical policy could emanate from Washington."

Thank you Norm for lowering yourself to our level long enough to explain "what we call countercyclical policy." Your typical leftist condescension is duly noted. But more to my point, notice how Ornstein takes it as an article of faith that countercyclical policy is a good thing, and the inability to implement same would thereby be a bad thing. Notice how he takes it on faith that in the absence of countercyclical policy, a global disaster would have ensued in 2008. Dare I point out that this faith is based on a decidedly Keynsian view of the world, a view that tolerates no heresy from the precepts embedded in their catechism. Well umm Norm, not all of us worship at the Keynsian altar and there are alternative views on this point.

The fundamental flaw of the Keynsian prescription for any economic ill is that human beings have the ability to control with some precision an enterprise as vast and complex as the American economy. That my friends is hubris writ so large as to be laughable. One would think that history has provided ample examples of the policy mistakes made by intelligent and well meaning people, mistakes that might give folks who would use the tool of "countercyclical policy" pause. But no, these are the same folks who refuse to learn from history and are thereby condemned to repeat the same old mistakes. Lets count a few.

For years the federal government has intervened in our housing market for the noble purpose of expanding the pool of Americans who can own their own home. Unfortunately, this well meaning policy was one of many factors that contributed to the housing bubble and the subsequent financial collapse. Also, Alan Greenspan's Fed kept interest rates too low for too long and thereby provided the fuel that drove that housing bubble. And some may recall that Greenspan's Fed flooded the financial system with liquidity in late 1999 in response to the Y2K hysteria, liquidity that helped fuel the stock market bubble at that time and ultimately led to the crash of the Nasdaq in March 2000.

This is just a brief listing but it serves to make my point: economic policy makers don't necessarily get it right. In fact, one can easily make the case that interventionist policies of governments make matters worse, not better. But that view is anathema to Keysians because they believe smart people can be counted on to devise smart policies that will improve our lives – indeed, this is THE key pillar of the leftist approach to activist government. The same pillar that supports the misguided notion that a complex and far reaching law like HCR can be effectively implemented via thousands of pages of regulations written by smart, well meaning people.

The cold cruel reality is this view is a smoke and mirrors charade. Not only do policy makers get it wrong on many occasions, but their mistakes affect all of us in very negative ways. Just take a look around at our current situation – how's all that "countercyclical policy" working out for the U.S. and European economies? And look at the massive amounts of debt accumulated over the years by those same economies – how could smart, well meaning people ever allow that to happen? And how could smart well meaning people in Greece and European banks allow that debt problem in particular to grow so large as to threaten the euro and the whole concept of a united Europe?

The answer is whenever governments exercise their power they do so at the ultimate peril of their citizens. Because governments are staffed by smart well meaning people who make bad decisions – and do so with alarming frequency. So Mr. Ornstein, there may be some good arguments against requiring the federal government to balance its budget. But restricting the feds from massive"countercyclical" interventions into the economy isn't one of them.

Yesterday I spoke of ALEC, a creature of the wealthy Conservative elites that works to undermine our representative democracy, replacing it with legislation custom written to the desires of those who fund the group. It’s a powerful organization with the capacity to plant nearly identical legislation in statehouses throughout the nation at the same time.

To move forward in our understanding of the American Legislative Exchange Conference it would be useful to know who is paying the bills and therefore expecting results. Here’s a shock—right at the top of this list we find the Koch brothers;

Hundreds of ALEC’s model bills and resolutions bear traces of Koch DNA: raw ideas that were once at the fringes but that have been carved into “mainstream” policy through the wealth and will of Charles and David Koch. Of all the Kochs’ investments in right-wing organizations, ALEC provides some of the best returns: it gives the Kochs a way to make their brand of free-market fundamentalism legally binding.

No one knows how much the Kochs have given ALEC in total, but the amount likely exceeds $1 million—not including a half-million loaned to ALEC when the group was floundering. ALEC gave the Kochs its Adam Smith Free Enterprise Award, and Koch Industries has been one of the select members of ALEC’s corporate board for almost twenty years. The company’s top lobbyist was once ALEC’s chairman. As a result, the Kochs have shaped legislation touching every state in the country. Like ideological venture capitalists, the Kochs have used ALEC as a way to invest in radical ideas and fertilize them with tons of cash

There are plenty of others, of course. The Conservative world features a variety of deep-pockets funders, wealthy elites whose greed leads them to have no problem impoverishing the American middle class if there’s money to be had;

Other right-wing foundations have also supported ALEC, far beyond the “dues” paid by any legislator. For example, the Castle Rock Foundation, which is run by right-wing beer heir Peter Coors, gave $50,000 last year and in prior years. The right-wing John M. Olin foundation has also been a donor to ALEC. Another of the big right-wing foundations, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, has been a funder and, for example, gave ALEC $50,000 in 2009 to fund “budget reform” work. Similarly, right-winger Richard Scaife has given ALEC over half a million dollars the past decade or so, through his Allegheny Foundation. Some of the organizations that support ALEC, like Scaife’s, are also deeply invested in the profits of corporations that sit on ALEC’s board. The Allegheny Foundation has held over $11 million of ALEC board member Altria’s stock, along with major stock holdings in other ALEC corporate board members like Kraft, Coca Cola, AT&T, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, and Exxon

http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/07/10887/cmd-special-report-alecs-funding-and-spending

And then of course there are the “corporate people” for whom SCOTUS Conservatives have so much concern. They’re represented as well, naturally;

Many global corporations and trade associations. ALEC claims to have over 300 corporate “members,” and each pay between $7,000 and $25,000 or more to be members, plus fees to have a vote on a task force and for other sponsorships. The names of all of these entities is not known. We do know that the American Petroleum Institute, a trade group that aids the largest companies in the world like Koch and Exxon, gave ALEC $50,000 last year. And, as GreenPeace has documented through public filings, the Exxon corporation and its foundation have given a combined total to ALEC in the past decade or so of over $1.4 million. Other current ALEC corporate leaders have given an undisclosed sum to ALEC this year and before.

These companies include: CenterPoint 360 (a firm that helps companies “manage legislation”), Altria (formerly Phillip Morris tobacco), the American Bail Coalition (the trade group for for-profit bail bonds), AT&T, Bayer (aspirin), Coca-Cola, Diageo (Crown Royal and other liquor), Energy Future Holdings (Texas electricity), ExxonMobil, GlaxoSmithKline (Tums and other brands), Intuit (Quickbooks), Johnson & Johnson (lotion), Koch Industries (Georgia Pacific paper products and other brands), Kraft Food (Macaroni and Cheese dinners), Peabody Energy (the largest private coal company in the world), Pfizer (Viagra), PhRMA (the pharmaceutical trade group), Reed Elsevier (Lexis/Nexis legal research), Reynolds American (tobacco), Salt River Project (energy), State Farm Insurance, United Parcel Service, and Wal-Mart (world’s largest retailer).

So as you can see there are some very powerful interests wanting to take away your voice in government. Will you let them?

John B:

Your coverage of ALEC has been outstanding. These guys have been around for a long time flying just under the radar. Now they are being exposed for what they are.

Great posts.

Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill

If you don't like how your town, state, country is being managed you run for office, or ring doorbells for your candidate, and you elect a new crop. It's a process that has worked for 235 years.

The last time I checked, our flag still waves over the land of the free, and the home of the brave. How about showing a little patriotism for a system the original Tea Party folks left their farms to go fight the Bristish to create? How about a little respect for the Constitution crafted through inspiration, hard work and yes, compromise all those hot summers ago? Sure, conservatives have a role to play in our country, but you don't get to enshrine your ideology in the Constitution that has governed us so well.

Especially, considering it was the Republican administration that spent our money on two wars and Bush's drug prescription bill for seniors without raising revenues to pay for it. (And guess what, the invasion of Iraq did not "pay for itself.") Might as well draft an amendment blocking Republicans from holding higher office, if you want to balance the budget forever.

Thanks USN. When Conservative politicians buck the will of the voters so consistently it becomes necessary to ask why. Clearly it's something that only happens when a politician isn't actually serving the voters, but someone else. It's time to talk about who that "someone else" is and what it is tat they're trying to accomplish.

Keep hammering it home JohnB!

Excellent work!

Bill, I think you know that I am no Keynesian.

My problem with a balanced budget amendment is with the tax policies it would require. During recessions, when tax receipts are lower, the government would be forced to raise taxes- thus deepening any recession.

During times of demand/ pull inflation, the government would be forced to lower taxes- thus feeding inflation.

I would prefer to see government spending capped at an inflation adjusted dollar amount, with specific exemptions for extraordinary events such as natural disasters and war- with those exemptions requiring two thirds votes.

In that way, with an expanding economy, increased revenue would be allocated to driving down the debt.

Hi John,

GREAT

Great post JohnB.......the more we open the 'shades' on these organizations such as ALEC and individuals such as Grover Norquist, the more I'm thinking that behind the GOP/TP is now a cult that operates mainly in the shadows pulling the strings.

Again it begs the question, what kind if unprincipled individuals are willing to be bought for the proverbial 30 pieces of silver, these Judas' that would sell their souls and our country to do the bidding of the shadowy powerful. Is there no courage or sense of duty in any of them?

Great work John B! Now, if you can just get your "work" on a website that has more then 15 fellow liberals yakking all day about how great Obama is, and how the Republicans want to destroy the middle class, you'll be in business. Hoist up your sails and sloop yourself over to a site that actually has leftists who think. Wait..there probably are none.

Amy, Amy, Amy -- one of these days you'll actually grasp the point. We all await that day with bated breath.

no joe -- as you point out, I would agree there are other potential problems with a balanced budget amendment. I just especially dislike some of the knee jerk liberal views on this issue.

Damage,

If we are boring, you can poop your lies somewhere else.

This isn't faux where repeating a lie over and over makes it true. Not only does the republicans want to destroy the middle class, but intend on doing great damage to the poor. If they get to destroy our environment it is just a win win for them.

But for you, the damage has already been done, you already believe the lies. I hear that the tea is developing quite a bitter taste. Good luck with that.

Amy isnt that what happened in Wisconsin, Ohio, Minnesota etc but it appears that the democratic legislators in those states must not believe in the same path your stating.

Through the past weeks of this debate one thing has been made perfectly clear, that despite Obama's rhetoric, he is not willing to cut any spending period. He is adamant that new revenues be brought in, why? He needs to keep up his level of spending or the whole house of cards he has built will collapse. The GOP has made it clear that before any compromise on taxes, deep spending cuts need to be made. Personally I side with the GOP on this, not because I want Obama to fail ( he is doing a good job of that on his own) but because our federal expenditures without social security or defense are larger than many countries total GDP! Government is far to large and needs to shrink, spending across the board needs to be cut. Has anyone noticed that the numbers on Medicare being thrown around for cuts, on top of the supposed 500 billion from Obama care add up to more than it has in it's budget? Why won't Obama put forth a budget? Why have Democrats opposed putting a Budget on the table the last two years? Could it be that they are afraid of what might happen when they are mandated to live within their means? We as a nation are living a far to unrealistic life style. The government currently is borrowing 40 cents of every dollar it spends, how many Americans actually live that way? How long do you think you could live that way? The longer we put this off the worse it will hurt when it all comes down. Cuts must come first before taxes get raised. Republicans also need to give a little ground on what they don't want cut and face reality on tax increases. I caution however those that support the liberal view point, that if you think tax increases will stop with the upper 2% you are sadly mistaken. The extension of the Bush cuts was said to have had a value of about 700 billion over three years, that is a little over 200 billion a year, the deficits Obama has been running are over a trillion dollars more per year than that figure. If significant cuts are not made where will that other trillion per year come from? The GDP certainly won't be growing fast enough to bring that number down to manageable size any time soon so I guess that the rest of America will have to pony up the bill. As a result, the 47% who make up the middle class will be trashed by tax increases as well because the other 51% doesn't pay taxes! Change you can believe in no doubt!

Let's see Americans: The middle class makes up the overwhelming majority of people who vote Republican, yet the Republicans want to destroy them? Can you please tell me how this makes sense? What happens after they destroy their largest voting bloc? What do they do then?

Ahhh. Wait a minute. I get it. They are destroying them without them realizing it, right? If that's the case, doesn't that make America's middle class a huge bloc of idiots? Please let me know about this. It's fascinating.

Keep dreaming, ask how many Wisconsin people are voting republican?

Wisconsin people voted 6 new republicans in and now those same republicans are being recalled. This all happened when the people realized that the republicans were actually out to destroy the middle class.

For the smaller damaged thinkers let me repeat this. Wisconsin people started the recall process on 6 just elected republicans when the people realized that the republicans were actually out to destroy the middle class.

They needed 250,000 signatures and got an extra 1,000,000 signatures for the recalls.

You just keep hiding your head in the sand and pretending no one sees what going on. If it comforts you to lie to yourself, go for it. You don't need to lie to us anymore we know better.

I hear you bill, I take it that you are of the opinion that the politicains always know what is right, when in fact they can just as easily do harm via government controls.

No where is this more evident than in the fact that no politician or economist has been able to solve our 7-12 year cycle of recessions, wars or natural disasters. But yet some think that legislation or more money spent is the solution.

We were doing just fine until Bush came in started two wars and gave tax cuts to the richest. The tax cuts cost us more than the wars. The wars could have been paid for if bush had not given the tax cuts to the richest in America. We would not be in all this debt.

How outrageous we should think the rich should pitch in and help pay down the debt they caused.

More harm can be done without government controls. Who cares about the Yellowstone River or the Alaskan tundra or the Florida coast? The important part is to get rid of them pesky controls.

Who cares if the stock market crashes and you lose half your retirement. It was worth it to not have those pesky controls.

Free the corporations to rape America, its the republican way.

Americans First--Can you tell me what rape corporations are doing? Who are you referring to? Did Mcdonalds rape America or was that Hertz or maybe even Sara Lee? Or maybe you were referring to Fannie Mae costing taxpayers hundreds of billions because of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd or the cost of Franklin Raines exit package of $150 million? Is that the rape you were referring to? What pesky controls did you want in place for the stock market crash? The ones in place during the internet bubble crash? What debt did the rich cause? I dont remember them borrowing any money because spending grew at 3-1 rates compared to revenue and politicians of either party couldnt stop spending. Who was against Afghanistan? I dont think you find too many people in favor of IRAq in hindsight but I dont remember too many rich causing that war. Get off the class warfare and go open your own business and contribute to something instead of always trying to reach into someone else's pocket. Have some self reliance why dont you. You want the christian right to leave your body alone why dont you respect ours too.

...and the #1 whistle-blower, Sean Hoare, suddenly turns up dead?

No, nothing suspicious about that.

IR:

Murdoch is in serious trouble. If he is found guilty of what he is being charged he may very well face issues here in our Country as well. He very well could have all his media licenses pulled which would take his empire down for sure.

You all just keep praying for FOX news to be shut down. Just keep on praying. Probably right after they try Dick Cheney, eh?

I do get pleasure in knowing that Dick Cheney is afraid to travel over seas.

Hey IR, I asked for proof, not more allegations.

Settling law suits is a business decision as I am sure Anna Molly and Spanky could explain to you. Check into General Electric and see how many Lawsuits they have settled in the past 10 years. I think you might be surprised.

But that doesn't count in your world does it?

Job1 you need to stop getting your talking points from the Huffington Post.

Hopefully, Murdoch will go to jail for along time.

WCA,

Jail.

WCA,

If the allegations are true, FOX News may survive but Rupert Murdoch will not.

Shucks WCA you ought to better than that. You ain't to good at this spin game are you there Sport.

Da Noid - If Pigs had wings they could fly.

Couldn't come up with anything more ridiculous, sorry.

This scandal is just the tip of the iceburg - the SS Murdoch is going to sink faster then the Titanic...

With any luck it will happen some where near Gilligan's Island...

Murdoch & his wife of course would be Mr. Howell & Lovie

Sean Hannity - Gilligan

Blow Hard O'Reilly - the Skipper

Glen Beck - the Professor

Assorted blond tail wagging bimbos - Ginger & MaryAnne

Da Noid - If Pigs had wings they could fly.

And if you had a brain you would be dangerous. I wonder wherethe GOP/TP is going to get their talking points if Murdoch's empire gets muted.

Well I guess their is always Rush.

Tell you what, get back to me when they take FOX news off the air and Rupert Murdoch is in jail. In the mean time, just keep hope alive.

Navy - two days in a row the left has said those with opposing views have no brain. That sure is adult of you all.

Job1. Thank you for reminding me...it's a balmy 77 degrees in Maine today and everyone is invited up to visit us except Dick Cheney AND Karl Rove. They can't come. I think we actually have a sign on the turnpike, to that effect.

Terrific information, IR.

News Corps and its British counterpart have been engaging in less than honest behavior to decades. Chris Matthews had a photo chart on Hardball last night linking the people--and linked in was conservative British Prime Minister David Cameron. Rupert Murdoch liked Gordon Brown but his protege Rebecca Brown? preferred David Cameron and promised Cameron she could influence Murdoch. Cameron hired the former head of News America has his communications director in return for the backing of Murdoch's British media. One wonders how long before Cameron gets muddied. It probably wasn't the first time Murdoch's empire influenced elections but the daily discoveries make one wonder how long before Murdoch's House built on sand tumbles down. Lawrence O'Donnell discussed Murdoch's ties to Rudy Guilliani and Bernard Kerik also very cozy. The drip, drip, drip in Britain is spreading.

See there WCA there's the difference between you and me. You'd see an 89 year old man go to jail for his follies. I'd rather see Mr. Murdoch settle up with the folks that he has harmed by his actions and take whatever is left over and get on back to reporting the News rather than manufacturing it. It has the elegance of simplicity

Hi Amy,

That's Great. I love Maine.

IR...great post. It wont take Mr Murdoch too long to resign, watching he and his son, James, testify before a parlimentary committee who are not buying what the Murdochs are trying in to sell says a lot. And while I will give Rupert a slight edge because of his age, when he says he doesn't remember, the line of questioning is very revealing.

We are watching News Corp. drip dripping away and it may never be the same again.

YAY!!!! Bring down FOX NEWS! Right? And you know what will happen almost immediately? ANOTHER consevative-leaning TV channel will take it's place. Why? Because of the HUGE demand for such a channel as evidenced by the GIGANTIC ratings FOX has been getting for the past decade and a half. Or even better, O'Reilly and Hannity could move to TWO DIFFERENT channels and then there would be two consevative networks. How great would that be?

You all need to learn a little about supply and demand. Learn a little about what the average American likes and wants. And what is that? Center-right broadcasting. If MSNBC went down nobody would care because nobody watches it. Same with CNN. I don't expect fringe lefties and Obama Fanatics to understand such things but at least I'm trying.

Damage123-

lol

I'm sure that possibility never occurred to the "usual suspects".

People would scramble to form a new conservative cable network.

The success of Fox News virtually guarantees it, doesn't it?

Damage you aren't to good at this spin thing either are you there Sport.

MB- Apparently the libs think MILLIONS of people watch FOX NEWS because they one day tuned into to see the pretty logo, then were sucked in by the evil lies and have been falling victim to them ever since. Doesn't occur to them that people watch because they trust that network the most, are most comfortable with it and it's messages etc...

Oh and just for the record it would be interesting to see if another conservative network would be willing to invest say a cool 5 million in a Sean Hannity before they even made a dime as has been bragged about for years. You can make money or you can sponser fools but you can't do both.

Damage123 -

As I've pointed out before, millions of people watch "Two And A Half Men", too. That doesn't make Charlie Sheen any less of a train wreck. Millions of people watch "America's Got Talent", too. That doesn't mean there's any actual talent on the show. And millions of other people - like me - don't watch much tv at all. We like to think for ourselves.

Hey, isn't Glenn Beck starting his own network? Who needs FOX anyway?

It's not about bringing Fox News down. It's about Fox choosing to be the opinion show they are now as opposed to the news show they aspire to be. Fox is not even reporting the truth about the News of the World scandal, which only exposes them for the sham they are.

There can be as many conservative (and liberal) news organizations as the country will support. But if you are going to claim to be a news organization, you cannot ignore certain stories, exist only on talking points, and most of all you have to be truthful, even when it is not in your favor.

Great point Joanne. And millions of people voted for Barack Obama too but that doesn't make he and his presidency any less of a train wreck. It doesn't mean the nation has gone liberal. It doesn't mean the people that voted for him were smart and thinking people, does it?

Go ahead. Compare a sitcom with a news network. The fact is, more people watch Hannity in one night than watch whatever libtard that's on opposite him in two nights. It's a nightly slaughter. To say that ratings don't matter is just means you don't like said ratings.

"It doesn't mean the nation has gone liberal".

But of course not. Any more than the results of the 2010 elections mean the nation has since "gone conservative" - even though you and every other conservative poster on here have been trying to make exactly that leap since before the polls were even finished closing last November. See my post below.

And to say that ratings don't matter only means that I'm not a network tv executive.

But you're right, I should never have compared Hannity to a sitcom. Sitcoms are laughable on purpose.

This Murdoch story has been utterly fantastic. A modern day William Randolph Hurst - so many parallels. I enjoyed a terrific editorial this weekend in the LA Times in which the writer commented on the continuing power of newspapers, even in this day and age a good (or bad to an even greater extent) newspaper can still reach and influence more people than any other form of media. Newspapers remain critically relevant and bear great responsibility for journalistic integrity.

Switching over to my opinion now (perhaps a little off topic but indulge me)- reward is proportional to effort. TV news is crap, thinly, or not so thinly veiled entertainment aimed by the respective advertisers at a chosen target audience. Ultra right wing ranting sells stuff on Fox and far left nonsense works for other network's sponsors. Even NPR has to please its benefactor. It is just too easy to sit down in front of a TV and watch with minimal intellectual involvement and advertisers know this. Newspapers are also accountable to their sponsors but the dynamic is different and a newspaper has much greater latitude with its content than TV, good or bad. Where's the reward? It takes a lot more effort to pick up a newspaper and actually read. The act of reading involves you with the story so much more than watching TV. Engages your brain and stimulates thought, leading to informed opinions and viewpoints.

This observer's rag 'o choice the Los Angeles Times............but I travel a lot and I love reading different newspapers all over the world.......and when the brain is fried is there any better entertainment than British tabloids?!

Mark -

Enjoyed reading your thoughts, and your views on newspapers make you a man after my own heart. Not sure if you get ads for the NY Times in your neck of the woods, but I just noticed last night they had started a new tv ad campaign here in the Philly area that focuses on the sensory, tactile pleasures of opening and reading a paper newspaper as opposed to an online newspaper - which, when you think about it, is an oxymoron that ranks right up there with "plastic silverware". And yes, the irony that they were running this campaign on television was pretty obvious.

By the way, I'm glad to hear that you recognize the entertainment value of the British tabloids. You'd be amazed at how often they're quoted on here as being the gospel truth!

Thanks, JoAnne.

What, you mean the Daily Mirror isn't gospel truth? Aw, c'mon!!

Tom,

Yes indeed.

First of all, not to brag, but it is 77 degrees in Maine today, with a steady, cool, seabreeze. Come on up everybody!

I was thinking last night, I don't know who the Republicans will nominate to run against President Obama, but I know who he will run against: the House of Representatives. And he will win. What a bunch of jerks they are.

Absolutely, President Obama 2012!!!!

@California Tom -- to finish your statement "will officially become a One Term President.

Oh, no...we can't call them "rich" any more. We now have to call them "job creators".

I keep wondering about that one. To call them "job creators" shouldn't they, I don't know, maybe create some jobs?

Nah, they aren't job creators, they're the money hoarders. If they were "job creators", they'd have created jobs while George W. Bush was President and we know that didn't happen but the GOTP keeps repeating that lie over and over.

White House spokesman Jay Carney has come up with his own name for the GOP fiscal plan; "Duck, Dodge and Dismantle."

Jody -

This part of David Brooks' column quoted above really struck me:

"They do not believe in seizing opportunities to make steady, messy progress toward conservative goals. They believe that politics is a cataclysmic struggle. They believe that if they can remain pure in their faith then someday their party will win a total and permanent victory over its foes."

The postings on here every day from the more closed-minded wing of the conservatives certainly bear that out. Ever since last November, they've been crowing about how the GOP takeover of the House is just the beginning of the permanent downfall of liberalism in America, all the while totally ignoring the fact that at no time in history has there ever been - nor will there ever be - a lasting political dynasty from any political party in America. They fail to see that that's exactly what makes America so great. And much to their own detriment, they fail to see that their "all or nothing" mentality will only continue to cost them in the long run.

But hey.....the deeper they dig their feet in, the easier President Obama's re-election will be next year.

Yes JoAnna, they see themselves as warriors for the cult of Rich and Plenty

Job1

Dodge, Duck, Dip, Dive and Dodge!

(the five d's of dodgeball, or as we like to say on the board - the GOP party platform!)

Jody

How is Obama compromising in all of this? Is he willing to make deep spending cuts and commit his administration to living within its means? Did you notice that the unemployment figures have been slowly rising again each month with the same show of surprise from the white house? Wasn't this something Obama said he would focus on like a laser beam? The facts are that despite their blame of GWB for this mess, that the Obama administration has out deficit spent Bush's 8 years in just under three with projections over the next 10 years that make Bush look like a choir boy! Conservatives, the Tea Party included, recognize that someone needs to turn off the spigot before the well runs dry. Something that liberals like Pelosi, Reid and Obama have no clue how to do! If you seriously look at all the comments made in this battle by liberals, you'll see the underlying truth that they have no intention of giving up spending at the rates they are currently at, in fact with the proposed programs in the pipeline and the talk of investment, they will more than likely embrace increased spending as soon as taxes are increased. The ink won't even be dry on the tax increase legislation and they will be proposing increased spending levels. Good governance learns how to do more for the community with less, unfortunately Washington doesn't know how to that and sadly never will.

Makes you wonder how Boehner can make that statement and keep a straight face. Our President offered $4 trillion in spending cuts but demanded closing tax loopholes to increase revenues--how dare he ask for such a sacrifice from the rich and wealthy businesses.

sbv and Jody

Did you honestly look at the cut proposals Obama made and the assumptions on GDP growth he used as a basis for his numbers? They were as flimsy as a fart in a hurricane! He assumes 5 to 6 % GDP growth when almost universally economists are saying that for the next ten years 2 to 3% is realistic! Those figures are per year in both cases and considering that we are currently under 2% and have been for the past few years I think I'll side with economists on this one. Anyone can say that in two years government spending will be at 3 times the level it is now and that they propose to cut it by one third. It makes the numbers look very impressive (4 trillion) but reality is often different than projections especially when it comes to the federal government. Propose a balance budget, work a deal based on that, and use it as a foundation for the future. Big numbers sound great but without a commitment to living within our means they mean absolutely nothing at all. This whole debate is not about the numbers but about ideology. About judicious use of the public credit card. Yes Bush ran deficits each year but so has every other president for the last 60 years. What it boils down to is how far are you willing to let unchecked spending go, so far Barry and the Democrats have out deficit spend Bush at a minimum rate of three to one and a maximum of five to one. The actual numbers are even higher when you talk about actual government spending because one of Obama's first acts was to raise discretionary spending by 40% just after he took office.

Man that Republican flavored Koolaid is good. Do we get to touch their shiny jets? or just watch them fly by?

UAW,

Don't worry. We Progressives will vote.

Oh yea Barry! Tell us how evil "corporate jet owners" are! It's not us being lazy it's those guys being greedy that keeps growing the welfare ranks!

Technically speaking, it was George W. Bush who put Americans on the unemployment line, and it was President Obama who saved autoworkers, teachers, cops and firefighters from the same fate.

it's those guys being greedy that keeps growing the welfare ranks!

Have to agree with you on that one UAWP =

...those wealthiest 2-4%, CEO's, hedge fund managers, t-baggers, wingnuts and Republicans being greedy has and continues to grow the welfare ranks for American citizens.

Why don't those guys (YOU guys?) have more respect and concern for our great nation? Since they already have all they could want and their lifestyles will not be measurably enhanced, the only asset I can imagin them chasing is ego. Are they REALLY willing to do harm to America and American citizens just to stroke their own egos?

Not only ridiculous, self-defeating and self-serving, but very immoral!

It's "tea" flavored Kool Aid so that pretty much explains UAW's remark. Taxes lowest in 60 years, Bush and the GOP doubled the debt without paying for a single piece of legislation they passed and without paying for two wars. Did and do they think that irresponsible lack of fiscal common sense would magically pay for itself? It would be nice to have a conservative explain why they defend NOT closing tax loopholes for things like corporate jets the rest of us do not nor ever will have and we tax payers subsidize it while allowing our infrastructure to crumble. Their inability to answer with anything but 30-year old talking points is proof of who is drinking the "tea" Kool Aid.

Obama/Biden 2012!

without paying for two wars

Well they really couldn't pay for those wars Jody because they were giving it all to Cheney and Haliburton and W's rich friends & suporters. (...and they want to accuse President Obama of creating "class warfare"???? MAN! Talk about reflection!)

Thank you Barry for signing that ridiculous Frank/Dodd act. I really need Richard Cordray to review all my credit offers 1st. I have no idea if I can afford my payments until you tell me if I can. Personal responsibility is sooooo yesterday. I'm also done working in the private sector we need more stimulus money directed at firemen so bankrupt cities can afford to hire a short fat bald 50 year old white guy like me and get my fat pension too! We need to do away with right to work laws and enact more right to not work laws! VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012!

I WANT MORE FINANCIAL LEGISLATION FROM BARNEY FRANK! It was all GW who caused this idiots like Barney Frank had nothing to do with the housing collapse!!!! VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012!

"These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

Personal responsibility is sooooo yesterday

You are correct! Just ask Cantor, Boehner, McConnell, Norquist & company.

VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012

Oh, we will... the mid-term fiasco WILL be un-done 2012 so that President Obama can better lead America in his second term.

Anything else?

UAW,

Don't worry. We Progressives will vote.

Republican Conservatives are working really hard to make sure average citizens don't get any of the additional consumer protections intended to come from the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Their ideological devotion to the religion of deregulation totally ignores the way Wall Street collapsed the economy in 2007/2008.

The biggest irony is that ultimately these extremists are destined to destroy the very Capitalist system they supposedly revere. Markets are based on faith that both parties in a transaction will walk away happy. Thanks to an American tradition of basically free markets coupled with reasonable regulation the United States became the most powerful economy in the world. Now the GOPTP would replace that with a system geared toward the rich and powerful, a virtually unregulated wilderness in which Caveat Emptor is the most important rule.

What happens when we achieve that Libertarian ideal? Simple--you can expect to be taken advantage of in nearly every transaction. Why would people participate in the market under those situations? As a result people will ONLY make deals when you have no choice. Commerce declines, business slows, and the deregulators destroy the markets they worship.

That's what extremists do...they destroy.

At the moment, according to Gallup, 44% of the American people are grateful for President Obama.

48% are not.

Nash:

How true. The American people are now aware of who is the blame for what is currently going on. And by a large margin it is not President Obama.

Not matter how low some of his numbers may be, the GOP/TP'S numbers are even lower. A point the right wing pundits continue to not mention.

Thanks Nash. President Obama wins Re-Election in 2012.

Nashville, I thought it was odd when Cantor leaked the statement the President made that he would risk his job to do the right thing, and raise the debt ceiling while asking Americans to sacrifice to reduce the deficit.

Only a Republican would think that somehow reflected badly on the President.

The American people are now aware of who is the blame for what is currently going on.

You mean like those CBS poll numbers released yesterday that show 71% think the Teapublicans in Congress, SUCK? lmao

At the moment, according to Gallup

Well, according to the quarterly campaign fundraisinig totals just released, President Obama is MORE POPULAR tha all the Repuke candidates combined - not to mention that he brought in MORE "new" voters/donors than anyone.

Better be carefull believing in Gallup Mixed; and Murdoch & company too - just free advice for ya.

Fiesty, love your summation of the polling results. Keeping it simple!!!

Perfectly said, Nashville.

Thank you Mr. President for working hard to force Congress back into their jobs in the governing process as is clearly stated in the Constitution rather than continuing the "unitary" government of Bush/Cheney.

Thank you Mr. President for...

keeping the Bush-era tax cuts.

continuing Bush's policy of locking up Islamic terrorists in Gitmo and having trials there.

continuing the Patriot Act.

continuing to blow up and slaughter Islamic terrorists even if it means killing a few dozen civilians from time to time.

And thank you for proving that you are a lightweight who can't handle your own plan of radically "changing" America into a place we won't recognize from our childhoods.

You can't fool me, Damage123...

I know you're with the 48%.

Oh my the delusional are out in force today....

Obama is so much "MORE popular" than the republicans. Give it a rest already. This guy is going to get trounced in 2012. NO President has EVER been reelected with unemployment above 8%. Say a pray it's your only hope!

Stupid, you do realize that his campaign finance chair was a Pritzker right? Buffet, Pritzker, Gates I dont think thats the small everyday american that is supporting him. Money doesnt equal a one for one vote silly. I suppose if the polls are against you and the only reply Fiesty can make is how about that 71% against the GOP house, well scare me with that one. I dont remember anyone getting scared for Obama when Pelosi had an approval rating in single digits. I think Obama has great political skills and with an economic turn around he could very well beat any republican candidate but his fiscal policies do show his fiscal inexperience and will be his downfall. The voters that will make the difference and its not the close minded progressives on this board or the fiscal conservatives on this board as they have already made up their mind. Its the independents who voted for Obama the first time who currenly hold a 61% disapproval rating on him on handling the economy and they dont listen to this constant it was Bush's fault. Two and a half years later, its not Bush's fault anymore its Obama's fault.

The Progressives will bring the popcorn, and the Republicans can bring the nuts.

Kirk excellent post. I might add another demographic that voted for President Obama that may not vote for him this time is the young voters who are finding it tough to find a job. He promised the world to them and has not yet delivered.

Quoting kirk-2957282:

. Money doesnt equal a one for one vote silly. I suppose if the polls are against you and the only reply Fiesty can make is how about that 71% against the GOP house, well scare me with that one

Spin & RNC garbage

I dont remember anyone getting scared for Obama when Pelosi had an approval rating in single digits.

RNC garbage & Spin

his fiscal policies do show his fiscal inexperience and will be his downfall.

Lie & prayer

independents who voted for Obama the first time who currenly hold a 61% disapproval rating on him

Untruth & halucination

its not Bush's fault

Lie, spin, and RNC garbage

Do you get paid to blog here too. I figured out feisty, navy and the others but I am starting to realize you don't really debate either. Just make responses like this that show no critical thinking skills and total denial. Sounds like a paid blogger to me

Quoting Kirk-2957282:

Do you get paid to blog here too. I figured out feisty, navy and the others but I am starting to realize you don't really debate either. Just make responses like this that show no critical thinking skills and total denial. Sounds like a paid blogger to me

reflection and spin

(and please notice the word "too" indicating to me that he is being paid to post RNC garbage.)

Stupid, I wish I was getting paid then I would debate similarly to you and actually have some income coming in for it. Instead, I feel sorry for you inability to actually to critically think. Do you know how much thinking skills it takes to be confronted with basic facts or the latest news and respond "Lies and spin" "RNC garbage" instead of actually thinking through what was just told you and trying to engage and figure out why it is what it is. For example, if I was thinking on your side, you should have responded to me that even though the current polls continue to show dissatisfaction with both Obama and congress's handling of the economy, history shows that reverses quickly as the economy gets better. You should have said that I believe that government spending and making sure that corporations and wealthy individuals as defined as those making over 250k paying much more in tax so we can afford to provide the unions, seniors and poor additional funds and this policy will stimulate the economy and provide millions more jobs before the 2012 election reversing the current poll numbers. You should have said that I believe that making the 15% of people along with the illegal immigrants have access to health care and the additional costs associated with that and will get past on to corporations and the rest of us with health care insurance can be absorbed and is worth it and will stimulate even more jobs. You should say that I believe that stopping those evil corporations from outsourcing and making sure they pay all the tax on that cash sitting overseas so we can have additional revenue will again stimulate the economy and create more jobs for the unions here in the US. You should say we dont need to worry about the 100 trillion unfunded liability for future social security benefits and medicare as we will tax the wealthy even more to pay for that and that will definitely stimulate the economy and create more jobs. Why is it that I can critically think and respond better than you on your own platform ideas? Lies and Spin responses are useless in the face of current news and facts that you dont like.

I have followed your posts on First Read for some time now, Journey towards Peace, so I know you are not a partisan Democrat. Sometimes I do not agree with your statements, however, this post is a thing of beauty, and exactly describes how I feel about the Tea Party's anti-government sloganeering. Thanks for posting.

JTP:

Ditto Amy and you got my vote. Well written.

Journey towards Peace. Terrific post, well said and thank you for it. I echo Amy and Navy by adding that I enjoy reading your comments.

There was a time when after the elections, politicians put aside their differences and worked together--compromised--to solve problems and do great things. It is critical that we return to that concept soon.

Friends,

Journey was taken to the hospital this afternoon and is not expected to return home. He asked me to tell you thanks for your kind words and that most of what was stated were bits and pieces from John Maynard Keynes, Adam Smith, and Alex de Tocqueville...he was just putting them into context. He has always written from his heart. Now he is on his own 'Journey towards Peace'. God Bless you all.

My thoughts and prayers are with Journey's family and friends.

thank you for this post from the family of Journey. His heartfelt posts added to the conversation. God bless you and your family at this time.

Please let Journey know, they will NEVER be forgotten!

Godpseed Journey...

Godspeed Journey, You deserve the Peace that you have so dearly earned. Thank You for having imparted some of your wisdom here amongst us!

To Journey's family and friends -

Please tell Journey it's been an honor having him stop here along the way and to know that his posts will live on - not just in the First Read archives, but in our hearts and minds. I hope your journey has been a good one and that your final destination is worthy of you. Peace to you, Journey, and to all those who love you.

Dear Journey's Family and Friends

It has been an honor to have him stop by on his journey to peace. His moniker alone was a statement in and of itself. The little he imparted to us said a lot about him and were a joy to read.

May he find Peace in his Eternal Rest and may his family and friends be comforted in knowing he was a welcomed traveler to the friends he may not have known he had here.

My deepest sympathy and prayers to you for your great loss.

Peace.

God Bless you, Journey. Thank you for sharing the words, they will be remembered.

Blah Blah Blah. Both sides have rap&& the taxpayers for years including Obama. He currently is being asked why he gave a company over seas (which happens to be in his old town) over 500 billion dollars in stimulus money and guess what. Crickets. He also fails to mention the fact he signed a PAY AS YOU GO bill into law in 2009 already. Why? Because he allowed his congress to waive it repeatly. Give me one poor politician in Washington who is not somehow aligned with corporations. one?

JCfollower:

I've been right here watching my President trying to make this country a better place, thanks for asking! :o)

The sad thing is these Republicans-Tea Party people are so illiterate as far as economics, is concerned. They want to roll the dice and not raise the debt ceiling. If it wasn’t so serious an issue, it would be fun to see their reaction when all of their savings goes bye-bye as the markets crash.

Wake up you little sleepy heads.

Excessive government spending is the issue ......and problem. The GOP wants to raise the debt ceiling with spending cuts attached........a compromise.

Republican compromise, Do you want it my way or my way, your choice?

The Republican-TEA People are a little thick at times.

Houston:

Outstanding, another one bites the dust. They just cannot put up anything other than talking points and trying to get others off track. 50, 60 years so what. The point is that taxes have been at their lowest for many decades now and as you have documented so well Houston. That is the point.

The GOP/TP is so lost and impotent in their little false reality that this is the only thing they can find.

Come on get real.

Nice job Houston.

The GOP/TP is so lost and impotent in their little false reality that this is the only thing they can find

But it isn't their fault Navy -

If they acknowledged these facts it would be a betrayal of their idol/hero/posterboy Reagan who began this entire, absurd "give the rich MORE and let it trickle down" and "greed is good" non-sense which has lead us to the brink of disaster. If they admitted their hero was wrong, they would loose their identities.

Good response, Houston, well done.

Facts are inconvenient truths for conservatives which makes them incapable of discussing whatever the topic might be. Alan could not dispute the facts so he deflected to question the number of years; he'd rather debate something irrelevant, the number 50 or 60, rather than discuss the truth about the current tax code.

America has been in decline for 30 years; we stopped doing "big" things. That decline began with President Ronald Reagan and the tax cuts solve everything, government bad ideology. One can hope that such unsustainable ideology is gasping for its next to the last breath.

Jody:

Facts are inconvenient truths for conservatives which makes them incapable of discussing whatever the topic might be. Alan could not dispute the facts so he deflected to question the number of years; he'd rather debate something irrelevant, the number 50 or 60, rather than discuss the truth about the current tax code.

Note that none of the usual suspects (Bag, JAS1, nojonobo, Alan, N.J., etc.) have chosen to respond to my post above. That's what always happens when you post facts that don't fit in the fantasy world they inhabit. All they see is a blank white space where people in the "reality based community" see intelligible words and sentences.

Deferred Maintenance was the line item that helped governments and even business 'balance' their books. Guess what?

The balloon payment is now DUE on all of that deferral. Time to be Americans, pass a Capital Improvements Bill and upgrade our grid, roads, bridges, etc.

END THE TAX SALE!

Conservatives are quick to point out that a return to the Clinton era tax rates would not significantly close the gap between revenue and spending. What I have trouble understanding is as far behind as we are already, how they believe further tax cuts would help. The lowered tax rates of the last decade are not solely responsible for our growing debt, but they have certainly contributed. Conservatives are quick to point to increased annual defecits and blame it on increased spending and government bloat alone. The numbers don't lie; increased spending and decreased revenue together have brought us to this place. I don't understand how people can miss that just as both sides of the equation have brought us here, the trends of both sides must be reversed to undo the damage.

Obama signed Bill PAY AS YOU GO bill is pretty well what the GOP is also proposing. Which makes me wonder why we have another bill when Obama already signed his into law. And why Obama would be against something he not only endorsed but signed himself already. Now has the majority democrat or GOP congress ever followed it? No.

Well said, Mav.

Jake J. Is this the only comment you have? FYI--with the exception of the stimulus bill, democrats paid for every piece of legislation they passed including health care. Got it? Pay/Go. Where was Pay/Go during the Bush years? Oh, that's right--according to Cheney, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter" and they didn't until a democrat was elected to the White House. Deficits mattered then, too, Jake--where was the outrage? Where were the Tea Party protests about the debt and the unfunded spending while the GOP was in charge? Where was the demand for Pay/Go from 2001-2006? Where was the refusal to raise the debt ceiling without spending cuts then? I've been asking these questions for over two years now and have yet to read an answer from a conservative because the GOPTP has no answer to their legislators and president's fiscal IRresponsibility. They have never accepted any responsibility for the mess that was created.

I will be happy to eat my words, people. But this drama about raising the debt limit is just that "a drama". There will be a fix(good or bad, whatever) and the debt ceiling will be raised. Our country, currently being held hostage by the GOP'hers, will be released and the fight to get our fiscal house in order will continue. Of this, I have no doubt!

FYI--with the exception of the stimulus bill, democrats paid for every piece of legislation they passed including health care. Got it? Pay/Go.

Jody Show where health care has been paid. Obama took $500 billion from medicare to cover obamacare. Pay/Go hahahahaha very funny. Nothing in Congress is pay/go, if it was we wouldn't be having this debate.

From 6/10

Three months after the networks, led by ABC’s Jonathan Karl, derided Senator Jim Bunning for daring to hold up an “emergency” spending bill which circumvented the “pay as you go” rules, as Karl made a fool of himself chasing the elderly Senator into elevators to cajole him to give in, on Monday’s World News Karl had the chutzpah to scold Congress for approving “emergency” spending which doesn’t have to follow those very same “pay-go” rules.

“Congress is on its holiday break this week,” fill-in anchor George Stephanopoulos announced, “but there is no break in the steady increase in the national debt, now up to an astounding $13 trillion.” Stephanopoulos promised that in “watching out for your money, Jonathan Karl found some of the culprits” – though neither cited the news media’s role in incessantly pushing for more spending.

Without displaying any self-awareness of his own hypocrisy, Karl listed some of “the ‘emergency’ bills Congress has taken up over the past few months,” including “$20 billion for highway construction.” Yet back in early March, Karl fretted: “Bunning is also blocking money for highway construction. So across the country today, 41 construction projects ground to a halt, thousands of workers furloughed without pay.”

The next night, anchor Diane Sawyer had asserted: “Republican Senator Jim Bunning still has Congress under blockade. For another day, he's kept thousands of unemployed workers from getting their benefits and forced some highway construction projects to stop.”

Three months after the networks, led by ABC’s Jonathan Karl, derided Senator Jim Bunning for daring to hold up an “emergency” spending bill which circumvented the “pay as you go” rules, as Karl made a fool of himself chasing the elderly Senator into elevators to cajole him to give in, on Monday’s World News Karl had the chutzpah to scold Congress for approving “emergency” spending which doesn’t have to follow those very same “pay-go” rules.

“Congress is on its holiday break this week,” fill-in anchor George Stephanopoulos announced, “but there is no break in the steady increase in the national debt, now up to an astounding $13 trillion.” Stephanopoulos promised that in “watching out for your money, Jonathan Karl found some of the culprits” – though neither cited the news media’s role in incessantly pushing for more spending.

Without displaying any self-awareness of his own hypocrisy, Karl listed some of “the ‘emergency’ bills Congress has taken up over the past few months,” including “$20 billion for highway construction.” Yet back in early March, Karl fretted: “Bunning is also blocking money for highway construction. So across the country today, 41 construction projects ground to a halt, thousands of workers furloughed without pay.”

The next night, anchor Diane Sawyer had asserted: “Republican Senator Jim Bunning still has Congress under blockade. For another day, he's kept thousands of unemployed workers from getting their benefits and forced some highway construction projects to stop.”

Read more: #ixzz1Sa4GzihZ

Jody pay/go sounds good but doesn't work.

Since you have time you might research why there are no poor politicians in Washington. And why they all made 40-68% in profit last year. FYI I do not endorse the Democrats or GOP because I understand they both are scre**** you.

Yes Dan,

These Extreme Republicans would destroy a Nation and its people to protect the richest and to make a silly point on cutting spending.

You said it, Dan. According to polls, a lot of folks would not vote for the GOP today that did in 2010. Pretty much sums it up. Good luck to you.

Ignore Jake, he's a one-tone singer; hasn't posted a new thought in two days.

Yep, that's all.

The first checks to get lost should be those of every GOPTP legislator in Congress.

KRT - You are correct, the "blame game" has, and continues, to run rampant in Washington. And, as you state, what matters is who the American people blame. However, while polls indicate that more people blame the Republicans for getting us into this mess and disapprove of their handling of the debt ceiling issue, numbers are not too great for Democrats, as far as their handling of the debt ceiling issue. The extremes of both parties in the House and Senate are to blame, and I hope that the American people will attempt to resolve this at the polls.

Mary: Agreed! The problem then it seems still falls sqarely on the Republicans since they are directly responsible for allowing their extremists the power to dictate the national discourse. The President is clearly leading from the middle while it is clearly evident that Rep leaders are drinking the tea.

Great idea, Mike. Just don't tax the mosques. That would be discriminatory and would show that we are nazis who are oppressing muslims.

yea, typical teagagger B.S. thanx for reenforcing my point .....where was your mouth when Bush was president ????? Thing is Obama spent his share to fix a mess, what was Bush's excuse other than to start one

Actually you party members jumped over every cliff Bush pointed to during his administration, tax cuts two wars with no intent to ever pay for them, regulatory incompetence, take time to read how the Bush administration turned paying down our deficit over the next decade to the mess we now have. GOP policies got us here. Obama's spending turned what was going to be a bad depression into a recession. Now the GOP is doing its usual blame shifting act. Just remember, the past three GOP administrations are responsible for over 65% of our total National debt, even including what you Right Wingers claim is Obama's massive spending spree.

Before Bush went to town with his tax cuts and wars, the economists were worrying that the national debt would be paid down too fast, and cause inflation. Well, Bush and the lemmings in Congress ended that worry.

Also remember the last 2 GOP administrations left office with the country in a recession. Last 2 democratic administrations stopped those recessions......

No no we still have more to spend, we will continue to borrow it from china, so Hillary can give it to other countries, making the spread the wealth crap international.

surprise surprise, another intelligent teagagger response !!!