To call anyone who opposes Obama policies a racist is a false accusation. If we are all racists, then racists voted him into office.

When a Republican was in office John Boehner and Mitch McConnell voted without hesitation to pass raising the Debt ceiling even stating that they hope this passed unanimously.

Years the Republicans voted to raise the Debt Ceiling Bush signed into law

2002 350 Billion in tax cut to big business and 450 Billion increase

2003 450 Billion in tax cuts to Big Business and 900 Billion increase

2004 600 Billion in tax Cuts to Big business and 800 Billion Increase

2006 670 Billion in Tax cuts to Bug Business and 781 Billion Increase

2007 700 Billion tax cuts for Big Business and 850 Billion Increase

2008 450 Billion tax Cuts to Big Business and

Total 3.2 Trillion to Big Business $4 Trillion Debt Ceilng increases under Bush

Total 7.2 Trillion in the Red for the next president coming in 2009.

Republicans voted to raise the Debt Ceiling every time it was brought up while a republican was in office and I goggle there response then it was Boehner and McConnell who said “there should not be any politics come into play when it comes to a increase in our national debt we need to pass this to continue to operate”. Also Mike Pence of Indiana in 2002 said it as a necessity to raise the National debt. Bush a republican was in office then but now the same Mike Pence now says he will not vote to raise the Debt ceiling without cuts to programs in healthcare and Medicare and all of which no cuts for defense or ending the Wars. Now Republicans and Tea Party think it’s a Great idea to play politics while a Democrat is in office.

Defaulting on the Debt Ceiling increase would send us into a Recession that would make the Great recession look like a picnic. Get your head outta your butt pass it and move on. Raise Taxes on the extreme rich top 10 percent to make up for the Last 10 years Giving them so many cuts it put us in the recession and made our National Debt balloon up. Bush Tax cuts have made this deficit possible end them and we will return to a surplus. If they dont end them then its more of the same and that's why republicans were replaced in 2008 and will be again in 2012.

Republican placing there sacred Millionaire cash cows top 3% over the needs of an entire nation. They want to only cut Education, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, planned parenthood, Clean air/food. Then they want no tax on that top 3 percent the millionaire that run them completely like lap dogs. Remember the republicans who placed there needs over your entire nation especially when voting time comes up. Vote for the party protecting those programs you need and rely on - Democrats in 2012...

I still remember seeing the idiots cheering down Health care reform with signs "Keep your hands off my Medicare". Well Republicans have yet again shown there rear-ends to the American public and what they think about us by just going with a Plan to do what the people thought Democrats were going to with the passage of Health care. What I can tell you is republicans care nothing for any American making less then 1 million a year and the more you make the more they care about you because they want your donations to stay in power and that's all that matters to them bedsides giving every scrap they can scrap from the middle class and poor and Hand deliver it to the Rich.

Where are all those same crazy people in those crowds caring those signs about Keeping there hands off my Medicare now? Guess they cashed there Koch checks and are living high on the hog. If we don't make Republicans pay by voting them out and the Tea party out we are Doomed to watch all we worked for bleed for and paid be tricked out from underneath us. We need to Recall Republicans with Democrat's and Independents and raise Taxes on the Rich for the first time since 2001 When We had a Huge Surplus from the Clinton years and use the revenue from the extra income directly to pay off the National Debt while also making sensible reductions in Spending to encourage the economy to keep producing jobs. As the National debt falls the Businesses and Banks can lend money more freely like back in Clinton's time in office and we will have Jobs all over again.

We have Tried the Republican/Bush way with the same same rate and more cuts for the rich the last 12 years and it doesn't Work never has. Trickle down is only the person who makes the most taking a leak on those below. Recall the Republicans Quit Blaming Middle Class and poor and replace those Republicans with Democrats and independents that will reduce the spending as the President stated without killing us in the Middle and poorer classes.

Well, they’ve done it! 235 House Republicans have put themselves on record wanting to privatize Medicare, in order to give millionaires and billionaires, and corporations, additional tax cuts. Democratic-leaning firms lining up to make the 2012 campaign commercials in those 235 districts? You’re welcome.

In the end, only four Republicans balked at the Ryan bill, while one GOPer, a Congressman Reichert, didn’t vote. The House website doesn’t make it simple to figure out who’s who, but the names of the Republican “no’s” are Paul (probably Ron, who votes no on pretty much everything,) Jones, McKinley and Rehberg. Everyone else will probably spend the next week furiously emailing seniors in their districts insisting they really, really do LOVE Medicare.

Needless to say, every House Democrat voted “no.”

Tick tock…!

ORIGINAL POST:

Having already put themselves on the record opposing women’s healthcare by voting to end Planned Parenthood subsidies, Republicans now face a second walk off the rubbery plank: today, they’ll be forced to vote to end Medicare.

You know you’re losing an argument when you have to go around insisting your plans are “compassionate.” No, really, I swear, they’re “compassionate!” That’s just what Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan is doing in an op-ed this morning, as the doomsday vote nears on his draconian, numbers-don’t-add-up budget proposal, which he calls the “path to prosperity,” but which pretty much everybody else, including the Wall Street Journal, calls the “end of Medicare as we know it.” (Other ways of putting it:

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), meanwhile, said Thursday that the GOP budget would mean “throwing many seniors out of nursing homes,” and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.), the incoming chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), suggested the changes to Medicare in Ryan’s budgetwould put senior citizens’ lives at risk.

Pick any one that suits you.

It now appears that not only did President Obama’s deficit speech this week, and his approach of forcing the GOP to go first on a deficit plan, “smoke Republicans out” on their desire to end Medicare, as no less an Obama critic as Robert Reich said on MSNBC last night, it appears the tone of his speech has thrown Republicans completely off their game.

Where they first shrank from the Ryan budget, which stamps anyone who touches it with the “cut taxes for the rich, throw grandma under the train” badge of lack of courage (or as the president put it, 33 seniors get to pay $6,000 more apiece for their healthcare for each millionaire who gets a huge tax cut) — now, pissy GOPers are rushing to embrace the Ryan plan.

Bad idea.

Seniors vote. And scaring them into believing Democrats were taking away their Medicare is in large part the way the tea party Republicans won in 2010. Now, Republicans are reduced to whining on the House floor that it’s the Democrats who are trying to “scare seniors,” as South Carolina Rep. Tim Scott did on the House floor yesterday.

The Republican Party, already on record as the enemy of unionized teachers, cops and firemen (which is even making some of them nervous), not to mention the fastest growing demographic group in the country, Hispanics — who they’re targeting with anti-immigration/profiling bills in maybe a dozen states — and having gone after women, is now going after seniors. Not only will they vote today to end Medicare, which seniors are not going to take lying down, they’re doing it at the same time they’re also pulling an ACORN on the organization most closely identified with seniors: they’re trying to sick the IRS on the AARP. A story I’m sure you’ve missed:

Politico, April 8 – House Republican tax-writers want the IRS to invest

GOP and Tea Party thinks cutting anything for the sake of cuts is progress. And they think we are stupid enough to think by putting in the budget the want to pass with more cuts not to anyone making less then 1 million is the way to go. If you think about it, if you are say running your house they way republicans and tea party in congress want you to do, you will take a huge cut to your wages and at the same time any-money you paid into insurance to help you when you get older to pay for medical will all be gone and what little money you have put away you will burn through to pay for the NON-Health-Care and Medicare bring Gone under there stupid plan would make you pay all you visits out of pocket to doctors and Hospitals.

You have to see and I am glad more Republicans and Tea Party are finally seeing what the Tea party and Republicans are trying to do. Tax Breaks to Rich Only and Big Business and Take away your Health-Care and Medicare that all of us have paid into for decades so they can give more to the Rich and Big Business. Its a plan I am glad they have shown there True colors because this will be there down fall they are now all on record where they stand on that Vote in Congress they made 4/15/11. You can not even begin to believe the whirlwind they are about to feel. People Don't want you to take away Medicare, Health-Care, or Slash the Budget in Areas that are vital for people.

We want to End the wars save 205 billion per year. Protect our investment in Medicare to ensure it remains vailable not disasemble it cause that easier for you to accomplish. Cut the Budget of Military spending from ending both wars and get spending in areas that don't hurt the recovery. Raise Taxes on the Rich not lower it like it is now we have a problem now because we dont take in enough money from all the cuts that have been in the last 11 years. If we take in more money and use that to pay down the debt it will be easier for companies to hire and banks to loan to small business to create jobs. As it was when Clinton was in office we had a huge surplus and jobs where all abundant.

VOTE all these republican bums out in 2012, They will be the ruin of America as we know it.

Hi,

As mentioned before, I have a simple solution for the new Tea Party Republicans in office. Why not just vote on raising the debt limit yes or no? That's it. Republicans voted to raise it when Ronald Reagan had a trillion dollar deficit, and they raised the debt limit for President Bush with a trillion dollar deficit or more..actually Congress has always raised the debt limit since the founding of the country.

By the way, can someome please notify the Faux News viewers that Congress creates the laws in this country, and NOT the Executive Branch (i.e. President). Everyday and all day long Fox News talking heads discuss the President's bill. Furthermore, the GOP members in Congress (McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, etc) go to the press and talk about the "President's" bill; however, it's the Legislative Branch's job not the Executive Branch.

Bye,

American Pie

This is starting to look like WWE -- lots of "whoop your ass" rhetoric -- lots of costume and posturing -- very little main event. Clue to all elected officials: GOVERNING, BY ITS VERY NATURE, MEANS COMPROMISE.

FACTCHECK

The text of President Obama’s 07/25/2011 speech was found here and is also quoted and responded to: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/07/25/address-president-nation

“THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Tonight, I want to talk about the debate we’ve been having in Washington over the national debt -- a debate that directly affects the lives of all Americans.”

True. I think there is no debate over this; that whatever happens with the debt everyone will be effected.

“For the last decade, we’ve spent more money than we take in. In the year 2000, the government had a budget surplus. But instead of using it to pay off our debt, the money was spent on trillions of dollars in new tax cuts, while two wars and an expensive prescription drug program were simply added to our nation’s credit card.”

In the 915 days (as of July 21, 2011) of President Obama’s Presidency and the Democratic Congress have indebted this country 3.7 Trillion Dollars or 4,061,210,815 dollars per day. [1]

Some of this indebtedness was the 800+ billion dollar stimulus bill that supposedly created some 3 million jobs. These jobs however were just a mathematical projection by the CBO. [2]

Lets not forget the 1.7 Trillion dollar “health care reform” called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act aka ObamaCare. This of course was figured without Social Security and the Postal Service. [3]

Bush, over 8 year, or 2922 days indebted the nation about 4.8 Trillion dollars or $1,676,625,705 per day [4] Some would agrue on a per capita basis Bush tops Obama. This may be very true yet a per capita rate is calculated based on per 1000 people at the current population. In 2010 the Census was completed and the Country rose in population which skew the per capita calculation in Obama’s favor because the population of the United States rose unlike the pervious census had a lower population count for Bush. Naturally, Obama’s per capita rate would be lower since the there is more groups of 1000 people to divide by. Thus the apples to apples time in office for Obama and Bush comparison was used rather than the per capital calculation.

Obama has a 142% higher daily spending rate than Bush. [5]

“As a result, the deficit was on track to top $1 trillion the year I took office. To make matters worse, the recession meant that there was less money coming in, and it required us to spend even more -– on tax cuts for middle-class families to spur the economy; on unemployment insurance; on aid to states so we could prevent more teachers and firefighters and police officers from being laid off. These emergency steps also added to the deficit.”

Obama has had on average unemployment rate of 16.3%.

Bush had an average unemployment rate of 10.5%. [6]

WHY? WHY the high unemployment since 2009 to present? Obviously the Stimulus did not work because it did not create nor save 3 million jobs since that number was a fictional model out of the CBO. So WHY?

THIS IS WHY: 64% of Small Businesses are AFRAID to make new hires and 12% plan to cut jobs. This was according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Why? They are afraid of the new regulations [e.g. Obamacare] and tax policies of the president. This is notwithstanding the Democratic controlled Senate has not ratified several trade treaties because some countries just don’t do the collective bargaining aka UNION thing. Why? Obama has not formally submitted the treaties to Congress. [7] So, what has suffered you and me, and the economy. The President has not mentioned any of this has he?

Also, if memory serves even Ron Emanuel, President Obama’s former Chief of staff way back when the health care law was passed mentioned businesses are scared.

“Now, every family knows that a little credit card debt is manageable. But if we stay on the current path, our growing debt could cost us jobs and do serious damage to the economy. More of our tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on our loans. Businesses will be less likely to open up shop and hire workers in a country that can’t balance its books. Interest rates could climb for everyone who borrows money -– the homeowner with a mortgage, the student with a college loan, the corner store that wants to expand. And we won’t have enough money to make job-creating investments in things like education and infrastructure, or pay for vital programs like Medicare and Medicaid.”

First, there is plenty of money to pay if the debt limit debate continues after August 01, 2011…and Social Security Checks, Veteran Benefits, Medicare and Medicaid will be provided. Remember Social Security through running a deficit has about 2.5 trillion dollars in bonds. [8]

Inflation has occurred because of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury’s quantitative easing. In short, the Federal Reserve is buying our own debt instruments (treasury bonds) and THIS CAUSES INFLATION. [9] In short, there is to much money in the supply… Maybe some of you who are reading this have experienced this INFLATION? Blame Bush? No Blame the Obama Administration (the Treasury Secretary) and the Federal Reserve.

“Because neither party is blameless for the decisions that led to this problem, both parties have a responsibility to solve it. And over the last several months, that’s what we’ve been trying to do. I won’t bore you with the details of every plan or proposal, but basically, the debate has centered around two different approaches. The first approach says, let’s live within our means by making serious, historic cuts in government spending. Let’s cut domestic spending to the lowest level it’s been since Dwight Eisenhower was President. Let’s cut defense spending at the Pentagon by hundreds of billions of dollars. Let’s cut out waste and fraud in health care programs like Medicare -- and at the same time, let’s make modest adjustments so that Medicare is still there for future generations. Finally, let’s ask the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to give up some of their breaks in the tax code and special deductions. This balanced approach asks everyone to give a little without requiring anyone to sacrifice too much. It would reduce the deficit by around $4 trillion and put us on a path to pay down our debt. And the cuts wouldn’t happen so abruptly that they’d be a drag on our economy, or prevent us from helping small businesses and middle-class families get back on their feet right now.”

In a CNN Poll no less 66% (Question #23)of the people polled supported the Republican CUT, CAP, BALANCE legislation that has been already been passed by the House of Representatives. [10] This proposal would cut about 5/6 Trillion dollars, and would not have an effect Social Security and other entitlement programs. The legislation would also put to the States for ratification a balanced budget amendment. [11] In the same CNN poll (Question #25) when people were asked would they favor a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget 74% of the people FAVORED this approach. [12] However, the Democratic Senate has tabled the legislation (will not even consider debating it nor can anyone vote on it). [13] Lately, Harry Reid (D-Las Vegas) has proposed a plan that would trim the debt by some 3 trillion without raising taxes, but would only raise the debt ceiling till 2012 when we would be back to this debate again. Moody’s and Standards and Poor’s rating companies warned the U.S. a band-aid wouldn’t suffice. [14]

“This approach is also bipartisan. While many in my own party aren’t happy with the painful cuts it makes, enough will be willing to accept them if the burden is fairly shared. While Republicans might like to see deeper cuts and no revenue at all, there are many in the Senate who have said, “Yes, I’m willing to put politics aside and consider this approach because I care about solving the problem.” And to his credit, this is the kind of approach the Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, was working on with me over the last several weeks.”

With President Obama nor the Democrats in either house in Congress actually putting a plan for a vote and with the clear disagreements by and between Obama, Harry Reid, and John Boehner the “Balanced Approach” DOES NOT have bipartisan support.

“The only reason this balanced approach isn’t on its way to becoming law right now is because a significant number of Republicans in Congress are insisting on a different approach -- a cuts-only approach -– an approach that doesn’t ask the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to contribute anything at all. And because nothing is asked of those at the top of the income scale, such an approach would close the deficit only with more severe cuts to programs we all care about –- cuts that place a greater burden on working families.”

In President Obama’s own words the “Balanced Approach” DOES NOT have bipartisan support (….The only reason this balanced approach isn’t on its way to becoming law right now is because a significant number of Republicans in Congress are insisting on a different approach…[as does Harry Ried now disagree with the President [14] ].

“So the debate right now isn’t about whether we need to make tough choices. Democrats and Republicans agree on the amount of deficit reduction we need. The debate is about how it should be done.”

This is mostly true. The numbers have been between 3 to 6 trillion give or take a trillion. (Oddly enough these numbers almost mirror the amount of debt the President and the Democrats while in full power of the Congress, have run up in the last 915 days.)

“ Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask a corporate jet owner or the oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get.”

If WE THE PEOPLE do not understand why are you bothering asking us or speaking to us? We understand and can do math.

“How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries? How can we slash funding for education and clean energy before we ask people like me to give up tax breaks we don’t need and didn’t ask for? “

That secretary per see will be paying in or around a net effective income tax rate of 3% or NO income taxes whatsoever. While the “rich” pay in upwards to of 11%, 25%, and higher net effective tax rate. The net effective tax rate is after all tax deduction and all tax credits. This is not withstanding the “rich” are surcharged 35% atop of their tax bracket rate. [15]

President Obama’s statement here is just FALSE.

“That’s not right. It’s not fair. We all want a government that lives within its means, but there are still things we need to pay for as a country -– things like new roads and bridges; weather satellites and food inspection; services to veterans and medical research. “

The Stimulus was suppose to do this, and it FAILED. As previously indicated and proved the regular joe actually do not pay income taxes or pay less than the “rich” [15]

“And keep in mind that under a balanced approach, the 98 percent of Americans who make under $250,000 would see no tax increases at all. None. In fact, I want to extend the payroll tax cut for working families. What we’re talking about under a balanced approach is asking Americans whose incomes have gone up the most over the last decade -– millionaires and billionaires -– to share in the sacrifice everyone else has to make. And I think these patriotic Americans are willing to pitch in. In fact, over the last few decades, they’ve pitched in every time we passed a bipartisan deal to reduce the deficit. The first time a deal was passed, a predecessor of mine made the case for a balanced approach by saying this:

“Would you rather reduce deficits and interest rates by raising revenue from those who are not now paying their fair share, or would you rather accept larger budget deficits, higher interest rates, and higher unemployment? And I think I know your answer.” Those words were spoken by Ronald Reagan. But today, many Republicans in the House refuse to consider this kind of balanced approach -– an approach that was pursued not only by President Reagan, but by the first President Bush, by President Clinton, by myself, and by many Democrats and Republicans in the United States Senate. So we’re left with a stalemate. “

Reagan cut taxes since he faced high unemployment and high inflation. Obama is proposing to raise taxes in his “balanced” approached while there is inflation and high unemployment. Reagan eliminated some deductions yet lowered income tax rates. The top rate of 70% went to 50% and then the top rate of 50% was lowered to 28% by way of the Tax Reform Act of 1986. [16] President Obama wishes to do the opposite in that he wishes to raise the tax rates on those making 200/250k per year.

THUS, the quotations are taken out of reality of the situation and DOES NOT coincide with what Reagan was doing. Unemployment fell under Reagan. The highest unemployment under Reagan was 10.8% in 1982 and the lowest was 5.4% in 1989 [17]

“Now, what makes today’s stalemate so dangerous is that it has been tied to something known as the debt ceiling -– a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before. “

True but we learn and have learned pretty quick…

“Understand –- raising the debt ceiling does not allow Congress to spend more money. It simply gives our country the ability to pay the bills that Congress has already racked up. In the past, raising the debt ceiling was routine. Since the 1950s, Congress has always passed it, and every President has signed it. President Reagan did it 18 times. George W. Bush did it seven times. And we have to do it by next Tuesday, August 2nd, or else we won’t be able to pay all of our bills. “

Two wrongs do not make a right. Which is a logical fallacy if anyone wants to believe that.

“Unfortunately, for the past several weeks, Republican House members have essentially said that the only way they’ll vote to prevent America’s first-ever default is if the rest of us agree to their deep, spending cuts-only approach. “

When WE THE PEOPLE find ourselves in a pinch we have to cut spending only because we have a certain amount of income and that’s it. It should not be any different for the Government. This is in fact the cut only approach…then again WE THE PEOPLE cannot just print more money. This contention by President is a Fallacy.

“If that happens, and we default, we would not have enough money to pay all of our bills -– bills that include monthly Social Security checks, veterans’ benefits, and the government contracts we’ve signed with thousands of businesses. “

As previously stated THERE IS MONEY for the mandated benefits. [8]

“For the first time in history, our country’s AAA credit rating would be downgraded, leaving investors around the world to wonder whether the United States is still a good bet. Interest rates would skyrocket on credit cards, on mortgages and on car loans, which amounts to a huge tax hike on the American people. We would risk sparking a deep economic crisis -– this one caused almost entirely by Washington.”

True, Moody’s .. Standards and Poor’s have indicated a possible downgrade of the U.S.’s credit rating. However, Obama’s spending rate is 142% above that of Bush [5] and President Obama’s proposed budgets have been projected to have a $1.6 Trillion dollar budget deficit.-the largest since World War ][ [18]

“So defaulting on our obligations is a reckless and irresponsible outcome to this debate. And Republican leaders say that they agree we must avoid default. But the new approach that Speaker Boehner unveiled today, which would temporarily extend the debt ceiling in exchange for spending cuts, would force us to once again face the threat of default just six months from now. In other words, it doesn’t solve the problem. First of all, a six-month extension of the debt ceiling might not be enough to avoid a credit downgrade and the higher interest rates that all Americans would have to pay as a result. We know what we have to do to reduce our deficits; there’s no point in putting the economy at risk by kicking the can further down the road. “

It is true putting a six month band-aid on things will be insufficient.

“But there’s an even greater danger to this approach. Based on what we’ve seen these past few weeks, we know what to expect six months from now. The House of Representatives will once again refuse to prevent default unless the rest of us accept their cuts-only approach. Again, they will refuse to ask the wealthiest Americans to give up their tax cuts or deductions. Again, they will demand harsh cuts to programs like Medicare. And once again, the economy will be held captive unless they get their way. “

UNTRUE. The wealthiest Americans already pay their fair share for they pay above the middle class and are surcharged. [15]

UNTRUE. The CUT, CAP, BALANCE Act exempts Social Security, Medicare, Veterans Benefits and Services , Net Interest, function….. [11]

“This is no way to run the greatest country on Earth. It’s a dangerous game that we’ve never played before, and we can’t afford to play it now. Not when the jobs and livelihoods of so many families are at stake. We can’t allow the American people to become collateral damage to Washington’s political warfare. “

True. This is why many people are opposing Obama and Obama’s Job Approval Ratings as the time of this write up are sinking like a boulder in a lake.

“Congress now has one week left to act, and there are still paths forward. The Senate has introduced a plan to avoid default, which makes a down payment on deficit reduction and ensures that we don’t have to go through this again in six months. “

Harry Reid’s Plan lasts only to 2012. [14]

Thus UNTRUE.

What does do is takes this issue off the table for your re-election bid-kinda.

“I think that’s a much better approach, although serious deficit reduction would still require us to tackle the tough challenges of entitlement and tax reform. Either way, I’ve told leaders of both parties that they must come up with a fair compromise in the next few days that can pass both houses of Congress -– and a compromise that I can sign. I’m confident we can reach this compromise. Despite our disagreements, Republican leaders and I have found common ground before. And I believe that enough members of both parties will ultimately put politics aside and help us make progress.”

How is it equal or fair for those who get surcharged 35% on top of their rate and already pay more than the middle class [15] -fair or equal? It isn’t.

These things are what scared business not to hire people. [7]

“Now, I realize that a lot of the new members of Congress and I don’t see eye-to-eye on many issues. But we were each elected by some of the same Americans for some of the same reasons. Yes, many want government to start living within its means. And many are fed up with a system in which the deck seems stacked against middle-class Americans in favor of the wealthiest few. But do you know what people are fed up with most of all?”

FALSE- the wealthiest Americans pay more.... [15]

“They’re fed up with a town where compromise has become a dirty word. They work all day long, many of them scraping by, just to put food on the table. And when these Americans come home at night, bone-tired, and turn on the news, all they see is the same partisan three-ring circus here in Washington. They see leaders who can’t seem to come together and do what it takes to make life just a little bit better for ordinary Americans. They’re offended by that. And they should be. “

What should offend EVERYONE is a President of the United State who is just so factually and ever so blatantly wrong that most of that President’s assertions can be contradicted by taking a little time to do some research. There is no reason in my mind thus far why anyone should trust anything that comes out of President Obama’s mouth. WHY? As you read the above his comments that he asserts are to the most part FALSE.

“The American people may have voted for divided government, but they didn’t vote for a dysfunctional government. So I’m asking you all to make your voice heard. If you want a balanced approach to reducing the deficit, let your member of Congress know. If you believe we can solve this problem through compromise, send that message.”

This entire speech as been not about solving the looming debt crisis but to speak to your uniformed base and to DIVIDE people by and between classes (e.g. Class Warfare).

“America, after all, has always been a grand experiment in compromise. As a democracy made up of every race and religion, where every belief and point of view is welcomed, we have put to the test time and again the proposition at the heart of our founding: that out of many, we are one. We’ve engaged in fierce and passionate debates about the issues of the day, but from slavery to war, from civil liberties to questions of economic justice, we have tried to live by the words that Jefferson once wrote: “Every man cannot have his way in all things -- without this mutual disposition, we are disjointed individuals, but not a society.”

FALSE. America has been about taking a STAND.. let me say this again…

AMERICA IS ABOUT TAKING A STAND.

“History is scattered with the stories of those who held fast to rigid ideologies and refused to listen to those who disagreed. But those are not the Americans we remember. We remember the Americans who put country above self, and set personal grievances aside for the greater good. We remember the Americans who held this country together during its most difficult hours; who put aside pride and party to form a more perfect union. “

LINCOLN TOOK STAND.

REAGAN TOOK STAND

“That’s who we remember. That’s who we need to be right now. The entire world is watching. So let’s seize this moment to show why the United States of America is still the greatest nation on Earth –- not just because we can still keep our word and meet our obligations, but because we can still come together as one nation. “

Exactly, come together, to take a stand, which the Tea Party peoples have. Like I have. Like many other people have in the aforementioned polling that goes against YOU, Mr. President.

“Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.”

WE are going to need all the help we can get.

[1]

President Obama assumed office in January 20, 2009

The number of days in office for President Obama as of July 07/24/2011 is:

915 days in office.

The national debt was when Obama assumed Office:

10,626,877,048,913.08

As of July 21, 2011

The national debt is:

14,342,884,944,996.28

SOURCE:

United States Treasury

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

Difference:

(14,342,884,944,996.28 - 10,626,877,048,913.08) =

3,716,007,896,083.20

3,716,007,896,083 / 915 = 4,061,210,815 Per day

[2]

"A new White House report says last year's $862 billion stimulus law has now "saved or created" between 2.5 million and 3.6 million jobs."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/14/politics/main6677228.shtml

"The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) based its estimates of the economic effects of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) on information from a variety of sources: macro econometric forecasting models, general-equilibrium models, and direct extrapolations past data."

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/106xx/doc10682/11-30-ARRA.pdf

[3]

Just 940 Billion? NO.

Senate Bill = 940 Billion

Reconciliation Bill = 794 Billion

1.7 TRILLION DOLLARS _not— 940 Billion

…save 138 Billion…

1734 - 138 = - 1.5 TRILLION in --RED INK—(deficit).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35928063/ns/politics-health_care_reform/

"Although CBO completed a preliminary review of legislative language prior to its
release, the agency has not thoroughly examined the reconciliation proposal to verify its
consistency with the previous draft…..Approximately $85 billion of that reduction would be on-budget; other effects related to Social Security revenues and spending as well as spending by the U.S. Postal Service are classified as off-budget. CBO has not completed an estimate of the potential impact of the legislation on discretionary spending, which would be subject to future appropriation action."
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/hr4872.pdf

[4]

President Bush assumed office in January 20, 2001 and left office January 20, 2009

The number of days in office for President Bush is:

2922 days in office.

The national debt was when Bush assumed office:

5,727,776,738,304.64

The national debt when Bush left office:

10,626,877,048,913.08

SOURCE:

United States Treasury

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

Difference:

(10,626,877,048,913.08 - 5,727,776,738,304.64)

4,899,100,310,609

4,899,100,310,609 / 2922 = 1,676,625,705 Per day

[5]

Obama: $4,061,210,815 Per day
Bush: $1,676,625,705 Per day
Obama has a 142% higher daily spending rate than Bush.
http://www.percent-change.​com/index.php?y1=167662570​5&y2=4061210815

[6]

Bush Unemployment v. Obama Unemployment

2004-

Annual Unemployment Rate: 9.6

2005-

Annual Unemployment Rate: 8.9

2006-

Annual Unemployment Rate: 8.2

2007-

Annual Unemployment Rate: 8.3

2008-

Jan: 9.9

Feb: 9.5

Mar: 9.3

Apr: 8.9

May: 9.4

Jun: 10.3

Jul: 10.8

Aug: 10.7

Sep: 10.6

Oct: 11.1

Nov: 12.2

Dec: 13.5

Annual: 10.5

The above you could say is Bush...who topped out at 10.5%

OBAMA:

2009-

Annual Unemployment Rate: 16.2

2010

Annual Unemployment Rate: 16.7

2011-

Jan: 17.3

Feb: 16.7

Mar: 16.2

Apr: 15.5

May: 15.8%

Jun: 16.2%

Jul: TBA

Aug: TBA

Sep: TBA

Oct: TBA

Nov: TBA

Dec: TBA

Annual: TBA

AVERAGE AS OF NOW (Jun): 16.3%

Source:

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab15.htm

**(I clicked all the boxes)**

Bush - 10.5%

Obama - 16.3%

[7]

‎"The biggest obstacles to job growth are uncertainty about the economy, uncertainty about the policies and regulations being pushed in Washington, and a lack of sales, according to the survey...."

"Mr. Donohue said Congress could boost the jobs environment immediately by passing three pending trade deals with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama. Lawmakers also need to raise the debt ceiling, before the nation defaults on its loans, among other things, he said. Approving the three trade deals quickly would save 380,000 American jobs and create thousands more. “Immediate jobs are at stake,” Mr. Donohue warned. But the pacts, which were originally negotiated by the Bush administration, have long been delayed as Republicans and Democrats fight over the rules to implement the agreements.

Republicans want all three agreements approved immediately, but Democrats have raised questions about Colombia’s record on labor unions. Mr. Obama has yet to formally submit the treaties to Congress as negotiations continue."

http://m.washingtontimes.c​om/news/2011/jul/11/survey​-finds-small-businesses-no​t-ready-to-hire/

[8]

‎"However, according to the Daily Treasury Statements published by the U.S. Treasury Department, the ongoing flow of federal tax revenue since the Treasury declared that it had hit the debt limit on May 16 has been more than sufficient to cover the combined costs of federal spending on interest payments, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Veterans Affairs department and federal workers wages and insurance benefits (including wages and insurance benefits for military personnel).

Specifically, according to the Daily Treasury Statements, as of the close of business on May 16, the federal government had taken in $1.333454 trillion in tax revenues since the beginning of fiscal 2011. By the close of business on July 7, tax revenues for fiscal 2011 had grown to $1.629630 trillion. Therefore, between May 16 and July 7 the federal government took in a total of $296.176 billion in new tax revenue."........

http://www.cnsnews.com/new​s/article/official-treasur​y-reports-coffers-full-e

“PARKERSBURG, W.Va. (AP) -- The retirement nest egg of an entire generation is stashed away in this small town along the Ohio River: $2.5 trillion in IOUs from the federal government, payable to the Social Security Administration.”

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/03/14/social-check.html

[9]

“The increase in the money supply thus stimulates the economy. Risks include the policy being more effective than intended, spurring hyperinflation, or the risk of not being effective enough, if banks opt simply to pocket the additional cash in order to increase their capital reserves in a climate of increasing defaults in their present loan portfolio..”

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-quantitative-easing-2010-8

“Investopedia explains Quantitative Easing

Central banks tend to use quantitative easing when interest rates have already been lowered to near 0% levels and have failed to produce the desired effect. The major risk of quantitative easing is that although more money is floating around, there is still a fixed amount of goods for sale. This will eventually lead to higher prices or inflation.”

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/q/quantitative-easing.asp

[10]

‎66% Favor-33% Oppose Cut-Cap-Balance.

"CNN Poll: Two-Thirds of Americans Support ‘Cut, Cap and Balance’ Plan"... CNN #23 "In another proposal, Congress would raise the debt ceiling only if a balanced budget amendment were passed by both houses of Congress and substantial spending cuts and caps on future spending were approved.

http://blog.heritage.org/2​011/07/21/cnn-poll-two-thi​rds-of-americans-support-c​ut-cap-and-balance-plan/

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/c​nn/2011/images/07/21/rel11​b.pdf

[11]

Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011

Bill Summary & Status

112th Congress (2011 - 2012)

H.R.2560

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.2560:

SEC. 317. CERTAIN DIRECT SPENDING LIMITS.

`(a) In General- It shall not be in order in the House of Representatives or the Senate to consider any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that includes any provision that would cause total direct spending, except as excluded in subsection (b), to exceed the limits specified in subsection (c).

`(b) Exempt From Direct Spending Limits- Direct spending for the following functions is exempt from the limits specified in subsection (c):

`(1) Social Security, function 650.

`(2) Medicare, function 570.

`(3) Veterans Benefits and Services, function 700.

`(4) Net Interest, function 900.

`(c) Limits on Other Direct Spending- The total combined outlays for all direct spending not exempted in subsection (b) for fiscal year 2012 shall not exceed $680,730,000,000.'.

SEC. 320. ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES.

`It shall not be in order in the House of Representatives or the Senate to consider any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that would cause the most recently reported current GDP outlay limits set forth in section 319 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to be exceeded.'.

(b) Table of Contents- The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 315 the following new items:

`Sec. 316. Discretionary spending limits.

`Sec. 317. Certain direct spending limits.

`Sec. 318. Enforcement of discretionary and direct spending caps.

`Sec. 319. Enforcing GDP outlay limits.

`Sec. 320. Enforcement procedures.'.

….

SEC. 301. REQUIREMENT THAT A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT BE SUBMITTED TO STATES.

(a) In General- The Secretary of the Treasury shall not exercise the additional borrowing authority provided under subsection (b) until the Archivist of the United States transmits to the States H.J. Res. 1 in the form reported on June 23, 2011, S.J. Res. 10 in the form introduced on March 31, 2011, or H.J. Res. 56 in the form introduced on April 7, 2011, a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, or a similar amendment if it requires that total outlays not exceed total receipts, that contains a spending limitation as a percentage of GDP, and requires that tax increases be approved by a two-thirds vote in both Houses of Congress for their ratification.

(b) Amendment to Title 31- Effective on the date the Archivist of the United States transmits to the States H.J. Res 1 in the form reported, S.J. Res. 10 in the form introduced, or H.J. Res. 56 in the form introduced, a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, or a similar amendment if it requires that total outlays not exceed total receipts, contains a spending limitation as a percentage of GDP, and requires tax increases be approved by a two-thirds vote in both Houses of Congress for their ratification, section 3101(b) of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking the dollar limitation contained in such subsection and inserting $16,700,000,000,000.

[12]

CNN Poll

25. Would you favor or oppose a constitutional amendment to require a balanced federal budget?

July 18-20

2011

Favor 74%

Oppose 24%

No opinion 1%

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/07/21/rel11b.pdf

[13]

“WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate is moving to cast away House Republicans' budget-cutting plan Friday, clearing the way for increasingly urgent talks over raising the nation's debt limit. President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner searched once more for an ambitious $4 trillion grand bargain, but officials said wide differences remained….”

http://my.news.yahoo.com/amid-debt-talks-house-budget-plan-faces-senate-071918522.html

“WASHINGTON The Senate on Friday blocked a House Republican bill to require Congress to slash spending and pass a balanced-budget amendment before raising the nation's borrowing powers. The vote left unresolved, with just days to go, the urgent issue of how to lift the debt limit to avoid a U.S. government default. The 51-46 Senate vote against the tea party-backed measure - which had been expected in the Democratic-run chamber - came shortly after House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters he and President Barack Obama had not reached a separate agreement to resolve the debt crisis.

http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2011/07/21/2110743/boehner-house-will-compromise.html

[14]

“Senate Democratic boss Harry Reid proposed slashing $2.7 trillion in spending and raising the debt ceiling through 2012 to avoid a market meltdown…..The offer "meets Republicans' two major criteria: It will include enough spending cuts to meet or exceed the amount of a debt ceiling raise through the end of 2012, and it will not include revenues [NEW TAXES]," Reid said in a statement.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2011/07/24/2011-07-24_john_boehner_gop_prepared_to_move_on_their_own_to_unveil_debt_ceiling_plan_sunda.html

[15]

"About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That's according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nearly-half-of-US-households-apf-1105567323.html?x=0

"Taking into account both taxes and tax credits, the average household in this group paid a total income tax rate of just 3 percent. A good number of people, in fact, paid no net income taxes..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/business/economy/14leonhardt.html

Incomes over 200k are pay the TAX RATE AND THEY PAY A SURCHARGE of 35%. SEE page 98 of the 2010 Tax Tables at:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf​/i1040tt.pdf

[16]

“The top tax rate was lowered from 50% to 28% while the bottom rate was raised from 11% to 15%. Many lower level tax brackets were consolidated, and the upper income level of the bottom rate (married filing jointly) was increased from $5,720/year to $29,750/year. This package ultimately consolidated tax brackets from fifteen levels of income to four levels of income.[1] This would be the only time in the history of the U.S. income tax (which dates back to the passage of the Revenue Act of 1862) that the top rate was reduced and the bottom rate increased concomitantly. In addition, capital gains faced the same tax rate as ordinary income.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Reform_Act_of_1986

See also:

"Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History". TaxFoundation.org. 1913–2009. Retrieved 2009-03-06.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/federalindividualratehistory-200901021.pdf

[17]

United States Department of Labor

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS14000000

Seasonally Adjusted

Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate

Labor force status: Unemployment rate

Type of data: Percent or rate

Age: 16 years and over

Years: 1981 to 1989

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

1981 7.5 7.4 7.4 7.2 7.5 7.5 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.9 8.3 8.5

1982 8.6 8.9 9.0 9.3 9.4 9.6 9.8 9.8 10.1 10.4 10.8 10.8

1983 10.4 10.4 10.3 10.2 10.1 10.1 9.4 9.5 9.2 8.8 8.5 8.3

1984 8.0 7.8 7.8 7.7 7.4 7.2 7.5 7.5 7.3 7.4 7.2 7.3

1985 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.3 7.2 7.4 7.4 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0

1986 6.7 7.2 7.2 7.1 7.2 7.2 7.0 6.9 7.0 7.0 6.9 6.6

1987 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.3 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.0 5.9 6.0 5.8 5.7

1988 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.4 5.6 5.4 5.4 5.6 5.4 5.4 5.3 5.3

1989 5.4 5.2 5.0 5.2 5.2 5.3 5.2 5.2 5.3 5.3 5.4 5.4

Click all boxes and adjust the dates and run the historical numbers.

http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab15.htm

[18]

Obama budget projects record $1.6 trillion deficit

By Lori Montgomery

Washington Post Staff Writer

Monday, February 14, 2011; 4:26 PM

President Obama rolled out a $3.7 trillion budget blueprint Monday that would trim or terminate more than 200 federal programs next year and make key investments in education, transportation and research. The plan is aimed at boosting the nation's economy while reducing record budget deficits.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/14/AR2011021400906.html

“Barack Obama to forecast $1.6 trillion deficit in budget

President Barack Obama will forecast a record $1.6 trillion deficit in the 2010 fiscal year, the biggest since World War Two, when he presents his budget today.”

The grim forecast adds to the challenges facing Mr Obama, who is emphasizing a message of fiscal discipline but is also seeking stimulus measures to boost the struggling economy in the short term.

Mr Obama's budget proposal for 2011, to be released on Monday morning, will predict a narrowing of the deficits to $700 billion by 2013 before they gradually rise back to $1 trillion by the end of the decade, said sources in Congress. He will submit his spending blueprint for the 2011 fiscal year that begins Oct 1 and runs through Sep 30 next year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/7125551/Barack-Obama-to-forecast-1.6-trillion-deficit-in-budget.html

What would they do if millions of Americans simply refused to pay taxes?? Not enough prisons for all of us, is there??