E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSHere's the story on the full NBC/WSJ poll:
As Democrats and Republicans wrestle over spending and deficits in advance of an Aug. 2 deadline to raise the debt ceiling, most Americans want their political leaders to compromise rather stand their ground, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
Strong majorities of Democrats and independents prefer that Democratic congressional leaders make compromises in this budget debate, while almost 70 percent of independents want Republican leaders to do the same. And nearly six in 10 favor President Barack Obama’s proposal to lower the federal deficit by $4 trillion over 10 years by cutting federal spending, raising tax revenue from the wealthy and reducing some Medicare spending.
By comparison, only about a third of respondents prefer the House Republican proposal to reduce the deficit by $2.5 trillion over 10 years through cutting spending alone and not raising additional revenues.
Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted the survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff, says the public’s message can be summed up in one phrase: “Compromise and get it done.”
“The public feels like this is a real problem that needs a real solution,” Hart explains. “And they want compromise by both parties.”
But there’s one hurdle to this compromise: A majority of Republicans – and nearly 70 percent of Tea Party supporters – want GOP leaders to hold their ground.
Leave a Comment:
6 in 10 favor Obama's proposal?
What proposal is that? Did he actually come out and give specifics? Has he named one cut to an entitlement?
Or is this the same old smoke and mirrors routine?
You know, Spanky, when I read the poll, I could not help but think the same thing.
I wonder what the response to the question, "do you approve or disapprove of President Obama not coming forward with a debt reduction plan"- rather than asking if people approved or disapproved of a non- existent plan.
Just rem beer - there is no media bias. None whatsoever.
You right wing nut jobs simply refuse to face reality. Most (if not all) economists (experts in their field) exclaim that to balance the budget and truly work on reducing the deficit, without further damaging the on-going recovery, requires implementing a balanced approach of spending cuts and increased revenue. Yet, you tea-bagging, brainwashed, morons continue to spout your ignorance by ignoring those experts and, instead, listening to the self-inflicted, morally righteous, religious nut-cases that have no expertise in economics other than their self-interest of gaining complete control over the Government, no matter what! How does that saying go: "Don't confuse me with the facts. I'm happy with my ignorance." Truly sad…..
Well, will you look at that - Edith Bunker put down her bottle of bourbon long enough to 'chime in'! lol
'rem beer' - is that some home brew you're cooking up in your toilet?
Jokes on them. Obama has no proposal.
" Strong majorities", Mark?
"Nearly 70%"?
73% of independents want DEMOCRATS to compromise. Since we can assume that the same, self-described independents were asked the same question about republicans compromising, 68% favoring that is pretty significant.
Majorities for both, but, by five percentage points, independents want democrats to compromise more than they want republicans to compromise.
A greater majority sees the economy either getting worse or staying the same- given that Cisco announced major layoffs today, they are right.
Looks like the Obamas will be paying for their own luxury vacations in the very near future.
Well, those of you on here who claim to speak for the conservative viewpoint do not appear to speak for the public in general. So now you're going to question the poll. Priceless.
The "public in general" doesn't comprehend the questions. They're too busy looking for new apps for their smart phones, which appear to be smarter than most of them.
6 in 10 like Obama's proposal - What proposal? How is this even a question in any poll?
confused - your handle suits you. From what I have heard most economists think that our having a debt ceiling is what is flawed.
As for a balanced approach, income taxes are going up at the end of 2012 but where are the spending cuts the left says they will impliment?
Tea-bagger's motto: " I have an open mind and will consider anyone's point of view.....as long as it agrees with mine! Long live America, home of the free and the brave, where everyone is free to agree with me!"
Spanky, you're wearing your What Can I Deny Today Glasses Again. Re: the Proposal that maybe everyone except you and Totas below knows about:
Right now the current bipartisan Gang of Seven is looking like a mixture of Obama and Simpson-Bowles approaches. No plan, even from the President, even if written on parchment paper in rainbow colors and addressed to Spanky, will just be swept up and voted on. It is called democratic process.
Obama has been clear from the start that he wants a balanced bi-partisan approach. He put forward a budget and a framework, has consulted with leaders from both sides from day one and set Simpson-Bowles on task. The way it works is a plan emerges from bi-partisan negotiations, is presented and then voted on.
This Administration has long proposed a $4Trillion reduction in the deficit over ten years, but not by burdening seniors, or by cutting Education, Research, Innovation and Infrastructure. Certainly not by ending entitlements while 98% of us are recovering from the worst recession in 50 years.
On April 13 2011, the President laid out his framework for a balanced approach to "achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over twelve years, based on the values of shared responsibility and shared prosperity". It builds on $1 trillion in deficit reductions in the President's FY 2012 budget and the findings of the Bipartisan Fiscal Commission:
a) Domestic Spending Cuts: Building on past budget agreements with largest 1-year reduction in goverment spending ever. Cut non-security spending to levels consistent with bi-partisan deficit commision.
b) Security Spending Cuts.
c) Health Care Costs.
d) Tax reform.
See whitehouse.gov/2011//04/13/PresidentObama-s-framework-4-trillion-deficit-reduction for the breakdown details. Or read it in 'Speeches and Remarks'.
hmmmm, obamas original proposal was for $1.1 trillion in cuts over ten years with 25% of it coming from the top 2% wage earners and small businesses.
The balanced approach would have been for raising everyones taxes.
BTW- I have yet to see what obamas proposed cuts were when he countered ryans plan with his own that you mentioned in april. Obama couldn't even come up with a firm number on military cuts, just that gates was looking into it.
I did so like his thoughts on trying to control health care costs as a means of a budget reduction. Wage/price controls during the 70's didn't do much and I am sure they will do the same today.
The fiasco in getting the FY2011 budget passed pretty much defined the willingness of obama and company to cut spending. To think that obamas original FY2012 budget proposal had about $75 billion in cuts, but he nearly choked on $38 billion in meaningless cuts for FY2011.
You so eloquently said it " read it in speeches and remarks" How about referencing the CBO analysis as well?
Here's the bottom line...what Republicans, Conservatives, and Tea Party members are either too dumb, or too ignorant to comprehend is that they can not win a general election with only their faithful voting. They need Independents, minorities, young people, and probably a certain number of conservative Democrats to win the White House. You would think they would have learned that lesson in 2008. Those who do not learn from the past...well you know the rest.
Looks like you're always the last one to get the memo Spanks.
American, Spanky, or mmmmm, doubt, ....mm, negation....mmm are facts really real....are non-facts are BAD.....is the past re-WRITABLE or not.....?
Just to raise the debt ceiling usually takes about one line and it's all over, but the Rs weren't willing to do that simple thing. President Bush raised the deficit seven times without any fuss.
That didn't happen, so question now is whether to do something small or something bigger to address debt and deficit issues beyond raising the ceiling. From the start, the President supported a balanced approach and is in favor of getting the biggest deal possible, setting us up for the next few decades, reducing spending in non-defense discretionary, in defense, in entitlements by strengthening and reforming them without cutting benefits, and in the tax code.
Suggest go look at what Obama said to the Press today, "On the Status of Efforts to Find a Balanced Approach to Deficit Reduction".
Do you agree it's good to know what's happening right now, rather than trying to get others to debunk your own views and all those....mmmm who-knows-really?.... doubts from the past.
Backhouse
In 2006, every democrat voted against raising the debt ceiling...including Obama.
Joe,
The debt ceiling has been raised over 70 times in the history of America and 7 times under President Bush without fuss. It pays for the spending of past Presidents and is not new spending.
If you're perfect I commend you. The President spoke about that vote and said he made a mistake. When you and I get to be President in some lifetime hence, we'll understand better. Myself I've not encountered anyone like Barack Obama on consistency and transparency, anywhere on the world stage today.
You are yet to see the defined cuts from the Republican plan too. You know, the one that the House wasted their time voting on tonight. They call it "Cut, Cap and Balance" but nowhere in it do they say what they want to cut.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/18/news/economy/cut_cap_balance/index.htm?hpt=hp_t1%27%20rel=%27nofollow
The Teapartiers are trying to brag that they want to pass a balanced budget amendment for the first time ever. Did they forget about Paygo that was allowed to expired in 2002? Paygo expiration, tax cuts, and unpaid for wars have put the debt up the the level it is today!
What proposal?
Are they talking about the one with zero support?
I read something similiar over the weekend...
The Teapublican'ts are playing a VERY dangerous game of chicken & it's seems the more this continues the more they'll come out on the losing end!
Thank you America for FINALLY paying attention!
Nice try from the right. The bottom line is that the GOP/TP is loosing this issue big time. I am not going to waste time with the numbers, everybody can read the poll and figure it out for themselves.
The point is that the American People are supporting President Obama and not the radical right. Those are the facts pure and simple.
Why do you think Coburn went back to the gang of 6? To cover his butt, he sees that the GOP/TP is losing this battle and he is cutting and running. He wants to be part of the solution and not the problem.
More tomorrow after I digest the whole report.
Speaking of 'chicken' my all time favorite bumper sticker continues to be;
Voting Republican is the equivalent to a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders... lol
These dirt bags can't run for cover FAST enough!
"Why do you think Coburn went back to the gang of 6?"
I'll help you with that, Navy.
From CNN:
"Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, who was an original member of the gang but dropped out because he wanted deeper cuts to entitlement programs, said Tuesday he had rejoined the gang.
'The plan has moved significantly and it's where we need to be and it's a start', Coburn told reporters. 'It doesn't solve our problems. It creates a way forward where we can solve our problems.'
(Sen. Kent) Conrad said Coburn agreed to rejoin after the group added $116 billion in savings to entitlement health care programs."
"Loosing". What exactly are they "loosing"? Oh, you mean losing.
Are the GOP losing a 9.2% unemployment rate? Are the GOP losing a 1.8% GDP? Are the GOP losing 400,000+ new unemployment applications every month? Are the GOP losing 14 million unemployed workers? These are items on Obama's and the Democrats "List of Achievements", and the Democrats won't be "loosing" any of them any time soon.
The originality of Navy D. never ceases to amaze and entertain his followers. lol
It was always going to be about compromise. But the Republicans/conservatives/Tea Party do not know the meaning of the word. Too bad Coburn could not stick around and be part of the whole process. Now we can see him for what he really is.
No surprises here... Lucy has chimed in and Ethel is still bringing up the REAR!
Again, I have to ask you JS1 - you're putting in some serious O/T... who stole your CORNER?
Maybe, instead of trolling, YOU better get back to STROLLING there honey... the rest of the gang will not be pleased when you're NO longer bringing home the 'snausages'...
You've missed the point, fielden.
The Gang Of Six has gotten this far, in part, exactly because of Coburn's actions.
Now he's back and here we are.
Glad you're as pleased about it as President Obama and I are.
That it is, and as soon as the Democrats come up with something to compromise with, the negotiations can then begin. Until that time, we have a Republican bill that has passed the House, and nothing that has passed in the Senate. Maybe Sen Corburn's Gang of Six plan, ehh, proposal, ehh, proclamation, ehh, suggestion, can someday become legislation that can be voted on? At least if it does, we'll finally see what the Democratic majority in the Senate believe in, if they can ever manage to pass a budget - its been 800+ days since they last did so.
Now it has to be translated into legislation and voted on in the Senate. The Democratic majority Senate. The Libs talk a lot about the GOP and their promise not to raise taxes. The Libs and the media go totally nuts that the GOP won't even consider tax hikes. But now the Libs will hold the Democrats honest for their Holy Grail, Medicare and Social Security. No way, no how, those programs are to be touched. It's extremely doubtful a Democrat will ever vote for changes to either of those programs.
I'm not too concerned about the Gang Of Six plan in the Senate, JoAnna.
The House is another matter.
There will be fierce opposition there from both sides of the aisle.
We'll see.
All of this presupposes that the President will vigorously advocate for it.
If he doesn't...if he's being disingenuous...it will fail.
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
Why do you think Coburn went back to the gang of 6?
These dirt bags can't run for cover FAST enough!:
I think Feisty, he was running for cover from his involvement in the Ensign debacle and what better way to exit from the debt talks than with a seemingly plausible excuse. I don't know, but maybe.
JS1 Honey: Don't you remember your favorite tag line from last November?
"Elections have consequences" - JS1
Surely your memory isn't that bad is it?
Many of the conservative comments seem to be drawn straight from Fox News punditry. There doesn't seem to be an effort to understand a different perspective.
For example, there is a rant about why Obama policies haven't produced more jobs. The same folks won't talk about why the Bush tax cuts for the "job creators" hasn't created more jobs. With recent dismal job reports, would you consider that the Bush tax cuts have failed?
The Obama proposal is a framework that balances raised revenue with spending cuts, with a lot more of the latter than the former. Why aren't the conservatives on this blog appreciative of such an approach?
It will be interesting to understand why there are not any specifics to Obama's proposal; why the White House works with frameworks and lets the Congress hash out the specifics. We saw the Healthcare framework shot down till the failure of a congressional compromise "forced" the White House to come up with specifics: Obama Care. What has happened since? The conservatives are spending so much of their energy to tear it down even after it has become law. They have a specific target to attack. A framework for deficit control on the other hand will get the left and right to "own" the specifics and will be more sustainable.
I think as long as the Republican conservatives don't show some sign of compromise and their ability to work with the White House (remember the blank sheet of paper Cantor brought to the healthcare debate? They found *nothing* in the health care reform proposals to work with), Obama may continue with frameworks.
Well said GT!
Repubs are going to be spanked again in 2012. Gonna' look like 2006 all over again. And the repubs had such high hopes that they would take over in 2012...........
Sorry to burst your little fascist bubbles, but.........
OBAMA IN 2012!!
XX
you got a lot to digest. I too am a 100% disabled Navy Vet. At least I can read and I still have a brain that functions, unlike some of these bloggers. Obama has done nothing but give away billions of dollars for what. That was tax payers money. He wants to raise taxes on who? The ones that provide jobs? The ones who pay the burden of all taxes? So, he can give that away also? Was he thinking about any of the retirees, the disabled, seniors (social security, medicare) our service men and those that draw disability pay? Not when he was presenting hundreds of billions of dollars to corporations that had money lusting CEO's leading them. Some even gave them selves million dollar bonuses when the Obama folks gave them the blank checks. Others held a huge party in Vegas to celebrate. You wonder how he is collecting millions in campaign funds? Its the one that did not get the blank checks on the last go around, maybe if they give big their name will be noticed for any future give away.
That was the Bush administration that did TARP with no accounting of where the money went or for what.
hmmmm, with a democrat controlled congress, but let's not forget the stimulsa package of 2009 that went nowhere. Regardless Obamas hand was still in tarp as well.
Mike,
You might want to check your facts, yes Bush was President and signed TARP, but Obama and the majority of democrats voted for it. Obama also asked Bush to save half of the TARP funds so he could use it. BTW I believe all the TARP money was paid back.
sfcret, Obama didn't just vote for TARP, he had a hand in writing it. If I remember correctly, both he and McCain left the campaign trail to help negotiate the deal...
They said the same thing about Trump a few months ago- is this the best the Republicans can do? She's married to a self-hating gay man who has been billing Medicare for years to "make" gay men straight! Can we at least get Scott Brown, the only potential candidate with enough charisma to defeat Obama- without Romney's magic Mormon underwear?
They should stop wasdting money first. Start being responsable with our money, Stop forgiving debts owed to us , foreign aid , and funding all of those silly Cia activities.
Now THERE'S some news. Not.
But what's also not news is that Congress is no more likely to listen to the American people now than they have been for the past ten years or so.
They're going to drive the bus right up to the edge of the cliff before they jump off to try to save themselves.
Let's hope someone remembers to set the emergency brake before they jump.
From my latest poll on the vine:
Things would be better if:
odd numbered days, spending was increased Monday through Thursday except for
leap years when it would be Monday though Wednesdays and every other
Saturday. 9%
VoteTotal Votes:
115
71% of 115 voters favor tax increases.
So that 71% just jumped up and said "increase my taxes, lets get the show on the road". Perhaps they said "increase someone elses taxes, but not mine".
But then I am sure your poll was all tongue in cheek.
98% of the people all agree, someone elses taxes should be raised instead of theirs.
I've said before I think we should go back to the Clinton tax rates for everybody, not just the top 2%. Combined with ending our several wars and reform of SS and Medicare along with other reasonable cuts that effect everyone, not just the middle class, we could get this under control. I'm not naive enough to think that will happen though.
Joanna, lol!
Just like everyone wants to see spending cut, but not my favorite program. Let the libs spend us into oblivian, then they can ask the question but what about ME!
Reminds me of the time when my sister-in-laws mom died and they were reading the will. Her uncle was always borrowing money from her mom for this and that. Apparently, he thought that he would share in the inheritance as he was invited to the reading of the will. His inheritance was a bundle of canceled checks while the rest of the family got property and cash. To this day my sister-in-law laughs at his antics as he jumped up on the table yelling "what about me."
When the US can no longer find someone to extend us credit, I wonder how many libs will jump on the table yelling "what about me"?
Indy, like I said, I am sure your post was done tongue in cheek. The sad thing is that when interest rates rise our interest payments will rise accordingly and I do believe that regardless of whatever tax increases are proposed it won't be enough without serious spending cuts and rethinking how we handle $$$.
american, click on my name thingy and check out the top article. It has this poll and 2 other questions. Give your feedback, some of the comments are hilarious.
Do you mean "oblivion" (A)merican?
Your republicanism is showing..............
GOP based on what I have seen on this FR blog the inability to spell is shared by both parties.
The only question I care to see asked in a poll never will be, but it goes a little something like this:
"Are you willing to pay more in taxes."
It's really easy to say the rich should pay more in taxes but who is willing to say they are OK with paying more. Right now, I can say without a doubt that I am not. And there's one simple reason for this- congress has demonstrated absolutely ZERO ability to spend my money responsibly. Too many times I've seen the "tax increases for future spending cuts" deal made and only the first part actually happens. Cut spending first. Show me that you genuinely grasp the concept of spending responsibly then we can talk about tax increases and the tax increases MUST go toward debt reduction, not new spending. $4T in promised reductions over the next 10 years doesn't seem like a fair trade. Too easy to get the increase and say "Whoops, we thought we could reduce spending but it turns out we actually need to increase it more". It kind of like raising a teenager- show me you can behave responsibly and then we can talk about a raise in your allowance."
George Bush was left a budget surplus...and while he didn't ask for 9/11, he did declare war on Iraq and give the richest Americans (oh, what does Fox News call them, "job creators?") and huge corporations unnecessary tax cuts. Guess what- it didn't create jobs, and now we are seeing the interest statement on a staggering bill of credit- an untenable national debt. The two Bushes, collectively, did more damage to this country than any other administration in HISTORY. Let's get this crap taken care of! Shut that grinning Cantor the hell up-- what's always so funny with him, is he banging the ineffectual Boener?-- and compromise! Is anybody in Washington listening? Did they ever?
Why not look up our national debt historical numbers. Clinton still left him with an additional $1 trillion in debt. There is a difference, a big difference between a deficit and a national debt.
Clinton was an idiot. But, he was a smart idiot. Carter was just an idiot from the start.
Obama is a constant campaigner. Everything he says or does is weighed on the balance scale of votes. Nothing else matters to him. He is truly in the wrong job. We need a REAL President, and soon.
Four more years of this campaigner will put us so far in the hole that we might never dig ourselves out. One term and done.
The Bush tax cuts, at least the first round, were never intended to stimulate job growth, they were intended to encourage people to save. Unfortunately we didn't get the message until 10 years later after everything went in the tank. Turns out the general population isn't a whole lot smarter than congress when it comes to spending, but at least we wake up and make course corrections a bit earlier than our governing body does.
71% of liberals would like to throw a pie in Rupert Murdochs face. The other 19% would hope he chokes on it.
The Chinese are a bit antsy about the debt ceiling too...holding a $trillion in paper, and expecting to get screwed over.
The solution involves the TOTAL ELIMINATION of all personal and corporate income tax deductions, reducing the rates to make it initially revenue neutral, and making spending cuts to amount to at least $4 billion in debt reduction in this decade.
Then, congress must reform all entitlements by year's end to make them fiscally responsible. And this does not have to affect anyone over the current age of 55.
When this solution is realized, the economy and jobs will grow immensely; without this approach, our country is doomed.
Obamacare is a whole different issue that the Supreme Court will "correct" and must not cloud the current situation.
You turly cannot believe that; it will be up held 6 to 3 and it may be 9 to 0. IT IS INTERSTATE COMMERCE!!
they sure didnt poll me , i want and we need to go to a flat tax
 What about her hot flashes? Will she be able to control them, or will North Korea pay for their Godlessness?
I hope they can get a reasonable compromise. There is good commentary on the budget and Catholic social teaching at #/.
I equate the obama zombies to a group of Communists determined to destroy this country. Nothing comes out of their mouth but "you owe me this or you owe me that" and " this country is a really bad place and we need to change it into something like Iran where the people are free" .
I believe the progressive communists or demoncrats for short, are a bunch of cry babies just like their communist leader obama. Worthless pieces of donkey dung who are proud to roll around in it along with their preceived prophet " yes we can, change, change, change, " obama .
I direct a question expressed by Marr and Mathis back at you Progressives, seriously " Wouldn't the world be a much nicer place if all the Progressive just disappeared". Of course it would be!!!! I point out that I have finesse which the Progressives are lacking. Of course they stated the Republicans should just die. I cannot count on you getting my point but I've wasted enough of my time on the Progressive idiots who infest the federal press blogs.
frjm
Spoken like a true fascist tool Frank. We'll see who gets "destroyed" in 2012
There will be no compromise as long as these corporate/theocratic fascists have any power.
been reading all the comments. As a conservative Republican leaning more and more towards Libertarian view, I can tell you one thing, and it comes down to this:
Anybody but Obama! While Bush started this out of control spending, Obama has added more to the national debt than all presidents before him combined. I just can't imagine after observing all the damage of the first term, that Obama in a second term, with no re-election worries, would reduce us to a third world country. But I think that was his plan from the beginning. He threw Reverand Wright under the bus after he became a liability. But don't think for a minute that he doesn't believe what he heard sitting in that church for 20+ years. "Not God Bless America, God damn America". He or almost nobody in his cabinet or any of his high paid government "czars" has run anything but their mouth! Thet're all from academics with theories, but no real world experience.
Ask yourself this America before the 2012 vote: Are you better off than you were 4 years ago??
And those who voted for Obama: How's that hope and change workin for ya??
1. Wrong. Obama did not spend $14 trillion.
2. If you put out a lot of fires your water bill is going to be higher. Obama had a lot of repub fires to put out. Tax and spend republicans. Always remember:
REPUBLICAN DEFICITS WERE NOTHING MORE THAN A COWARD'S WAY OF RAISING TAXES!!
NEVER,....EVER,...FORGET THAT.
Tax and spend republicans. Always remember: ???
Are you kidding?? Tax and spend is the Democrat oath. I came over here to MSDNC to view the chat.
Where did you get your views? MSLSD is putting it mildly. I ask again:
Are you better off than you were 4 years ago??
And those who voted for Obama: How's that hope and change workin for ya??
Signing off, will return after the gang of 6 deal goes thru. Don't bother to reply. I now know where you get your talking points, I'll just listen there, Chris Matthews, Rachel Madcow, Keith Overbite, and probably the infamous hate monger Bill Maher. You all think alike.
I love the liberal argument that they hated Bush for running deficits..yet praise Obama for being Bush on steroids.....it can't even make sense to them but they keep screaming it over and over hoping someone will believe it..
I (still) work for Chrysler tombilita1.
Next cerebral question.
Gopisextinct: Good points. Yes we are better off! We did not go totally under which could have easily happened. I just wish they had not bailed out the banks and wall street! Stimulus money, yes!
Thank you Sandy. I shudder to think what would have happened if McLame and "whats-her-name" got in.
Hansen , Dave (i)
Dem
13,675
69%
Vanderleest, David
GOP
6,191
Another win for against Hate! Wisconsin Recall election
Scary to read all the crazy way of thinking these dem-a-crack-ic nut jobs do. Tards you better be ready in 2012. Your about to see your used car saleman take a helicopter ride to meet Bush off in the sunset.
GOPisextinct
REPUBLICAN DEFICITS WERE NOTHING MORE THAN A COWARD'S WAY OF RAISING TAXES!!
NEVER,....EVER,...FORGET THAT.
GOPiextinct, excellently said, creative and concise. Needs to become a democratic mantra.
Thank you Doctor. So nice to see you on the boards!!
It has become my mantra! Tax (deficit) and spend republican policies have almost ruined this nation. Eighty-five percent of the current deficits came from just three presidents: Reagan, and the two Bushes.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
Hopefully, the $4 trillion in spending reductions will do help turn that mess around.
Tombilita1: Maher, Matthews,...? I don't even have cable.
GOPisextinct
GOP, good to see you here as well. I'm almost always here reading, but for the most, responding only to new ideas, new info and a creativity and wit such as you often exhibit. Btw, MD is for Maryland not Dr and others have called me the same.
MD for Maryland. Hoo Boy! Do I ever sound like a knucklehead!
Thanks for the correction, but I still think you earned yourself a nickname.
And thanks for the accolades.
I love the 'Ignore author' feature here... My blood pressure is much lower since I no longer have to see the posts from JS1 and Spanky... I'm guessing they are Liz and Dick...
you have a strong dislike for common sense huh?
No Joebuck.
Lyn just has a strong dislike for right-wing, Kool-Aid-drinking zombies..........like you.
The bottom line is there will be no bottom line for any one if there is no compromise! Here's a president who has towed the straight and narrow, leading us out of the recession as the TEA/GOP continue their long war against him! President Obama, being the alpha and omega of leadership in Washington DC, has asked repeatedly to have the debt ceiling be increased to allow the the US to pay it's obligations. The 112th Congress has yet to do so as Boehner, McConnell and other TEA/GOP members hold America's honor and prestige up for ridicule across the world! Every previous president received a "Congressional Housekeeping" Debt increase but this current 112th Congress would rather create a catastrophic event bordering on an apocalyptic dream of world depression rather than handing President Obama any debt increase! President Obama, being the alpha and omega of leadership in Washington DC, has asked repeatedly to have the debt ceiling be increased to allow the the US to pay it's obligations. The 112th Congress has yet to do so as Boehner, McConnell and other TEA/GOP members hold America's honor and prestige up for ridicule across the world! Every preceding president has received this except President Obama! The TEA party led GOP are holding the American economy hostage! What stinks to high heaven is the bigotry and discrimination of the TEA/GOP party.
Admin Date New Limit Increase(Trillions)
Clinton April 6, 1993 4,370 225
Clinton August 10, 1993 4,900 530
Clinton March 29, 1996 5,500 600
Clinton August 5, 1997 5,950 450
Bush June 11, 2002 6,400 450
Bush May 27, 2003 7,384 984
Bush November 16, 2004 8,184 800
Bush March 20, 2006 8,965 781
Bush September 29, 2007 9,815 850
Bush June 5, 2008 10,615 800
Bush October 3, 2008 11,315 700
Obama February 17, 2009 12,104 789
Obama December 24, 2009 12,394 290
Obama February 12, 2010 14,294 1,900
Obama July 20, 2011 (none yet)
Rudy;
Your way out of touch with history; Democrats have controlled Congress since 2007 some of that time Obama voted for the increases. The budget debated today is for 2012. Your quote about a straight line, It's not worth the effort to bring you up to speed.
A Great Quote.
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on on-going financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Governments reckless fiscal policies."
"Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that the buck stops here'. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and Grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."
SENATOR BARACK H. OBAMA, MARCH 2006
Ok, so President, then Senator Obama voted against raising the debt limit in 2006. We all know.
Boehner, Cantor, Mc Connell, De Mint all voted FOR raising it in 2006. In fact, they voted to raise it in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006 and 2007.
What, besides the one you cover with your hat, is your point?
Rudy Gonzales,
Oh Rudy. I couldn't even finish reading your absurd post. I just got to the sentence where you state that Obama is leading us out of the recession....LOL. That's rich. So what do you call the 9.2% unemployment, the record foreclosures, the closed businesses??
Looks to the rest of us as if things are just getting worse. When is he supposed to start this "leading"?? LOL
A Great Quote.
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on on-going financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Governments reckless fiscal policies."
"Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that the buck stops here'. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and Grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."
SENATOR BARACK H. OBAMA, MARCH 2006
you should include that everything Obama says comes with an expiration date....if he says it today, that doesn't mean he will tomorrow...
In December 2010 he stated: this is not the time to be raising taxes...on anyone.
Q: Do you know how to tell when Obama is lying?
A: When his lips are moving.