E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe man charged with rounding up Republican votes in the House said he expects that whatever debt-ceiling plan initially makes its way through that chamber will include some kind of balanced budget amendment -- or a plan to implement one soon.
“I think it will have some form,” House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) told Chuck Todd on MSNBC's "Daily Rundown."
“Maybe it has a balanced budget amendment right now, maybe it has some vote in the near future,” McCarthy added.
The House majority whip said that Friday’s 51-46 party-line Senate vote to not move forward on the House-approved “Cut, Cap and Balance” bill doesn’t mean it’s over for that approach right now.
“It did not get rejected; it got tabled,” he said.
Asked what happens if the Democratic-controlled Senate strips out a balanced budget amendment in a final debt deal bill, McCarthy responded, “If the Senate dislikes our bill, then tell us what they’re for.”
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Leave a Comment:
Be careful what you wish for - Harry Reid is doing just THAT!
It's my understanding Harry has stripped out ALL entitlement reform in his bill!
This is what happens when you can no longer deal with the party of unreasonable fools!
Give em hell Harry & tell the tea baggers to stick it!
The bill that Harry Reid has come up with includes no revenues, no touches to entitlements, $2.5 trillion in cuts to match the amount of the debt ceiling raise, and it take spending cuts from Paul Ryan's plan. This does two things, it undercuts their argument that the Democrats don't have a bill and if the GOP doesn't vote for the bill, it shows that they aren't being serious seeing as it pretty much gives them what they want. Then the revenue increases will come when Obama lets the tax cuts for the wealthy expire in less than a year and a half.
Way to go! That's a great way to keep all that waste, fraud and inefficiencies!! Just pretend it doesn't exist and just keep your head buried in the sand!! Way to go!!! My tax dollars hard at work!
Here's a story worth reading. This from an ex-Republican congressman who has in the past voted against raising the debt ceiling while serving.
The Morning After (we go into default)
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59827.html
Predictable as the sun rising in the East. Boehner sticks with the Tea Partiers and doubles down on Tea Party demands. The Tea Party doesn't care about the debt, they want to destroy Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Well that just isn't going to happen. The financial community is ready to let the Republicans know that money talks. That crashing sound at your feet, John, is the economy. Something you will not recover from.
It got voted down and it will get voted down again and again. Give it up it is DOA. The Senate will not pass it and President Obama will not for sure pass it.
You repugs keep trying. Let us know when you come up with any NEW ideas instead of the smae old garbage that is going nowhere.
Ok, I'm confused. Doesn't an amendment, such as the one being proposed, not only have to pass both houses by 2/3 but also be ratified by 2/3 of the states as well? How could this possibly be done in a week? Its been hot here & maybe my brain is just slow from the heat? In other words, if this is the case then I see this as a ridiculous part of the current discussion.
Seems to me Congress got into this mess because all wanted a say & had there been a clean vote on the debt ceiling this all would have been a non issue at this point. The insurance issues, aka entitlements, do need to be addressed but that needs to be done with careful consideration & certainly not in a rush. There is too much at stake.
Ron writes, "The Tea Party doesn't care about the debt, they want to destroy Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security."
Sadly, I think you may be on to something. There was only one place, "Starve the Beast," could lead; to the destruction of the US economy.
The truth is that Republicans could raise the debt limit in less than a half an hour. Historically members of both parties raised the limit regardless of what party controlled the presidency. Did they make political theater out of it? Sure, you betcha. But they made sure it got passed all the same.
This "crisis" has far more to do with the Republican Party than it does with the Debt ceiling.
Yeah, give 'em hell Harry!
Last report was he caved.
Rationality has returned. The era of the Democratic agenda is over.
Come 2012 conservatism will be looking pretty good. CC&B will become a reality.
nisl:
Thanks for the shout-out. Another reality is neither the Boehner plan nor the Reid plan has enough votes to pass both houses. Option one is a simple, clean raise in the debt ceiling or option 2. watch a world-wide crash.
Reids bill assumes saving by ending wars in the Middle east now. So you think Obama is ready to tell all the troops to come home this instant.
Reids bill is about as real as unicorns and dragons.
Gloryhound - Reid's bill covers 10 years and assumes the end of the wars in that time frame....no unreasonable.
Doug - You're whistling past the Repubulican grave because they will all be gone in 2012. The Republicans have sealed their fate with the American people when they threatened to end Medicare as we know it. They will be defeated on that principle alone. Additionally, their insistence on cutting Social Security just reinforces American's resolve to get rid of these people before they take these programs away from us. People are well aware of their agenda by now. CC&B is deader than dead.
But continuing to fund them by borrowing 40% of their needs will keep them safe and solvent.
A few VERY important points:
1) There are those in the Tea Party caucus minority who don't want the debt ceiling raised, period--not with a dollar-to-dollar solution or even more aggressive spending cuts. This is cause for alarm!
These are the ignorant extremists who were not vetted in time to be eliminated like Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, etc. -- mostly because they are in the House so don't get as much scrutiny. But these Tea Party representatives are NOT constitutionalists, or Libertarians, or any legitimate faction. They are anarchists, pure and simple, who need to be brought to the attention of the voters in 2012 and thrown out.
2) Republicans who have signed a pledge to lobbyist Grover Norquist are also disconcerting. First, the pledge is NOT to the "taxpayers," certainly not to the majority of Americans, and definitely does not represent me. These oaths to special interests outside the electoral process are unconstitutional.
Add to this Republican fear of Hate Radio shock jocks like Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage--who have even less journalistic standards or credentials than phone-hacking Murdoch outlets like FOX Noise--who are not elected officials but are running the Republican Party. This is another alarm!
2) What these far-right folks want is a one-party state that is a plutocracy, or a Christian theocracy, and possibly a fascist combination of both. We are witnessing much more than a deficit crisis. We are on the threshold of losing democracy, liberties, and freedom at the hands of the far-right GOP/TP as much if not more than any other terrorist threat.
We MUST have a two-party system in which both parties compromise, and in which all Americans have a voice and representation. Any deal MUST be a compromise with a balanced approach of shared sacrifice in order to represent the nation as a whole.
3) The debt ceiling should not, and cannot be used to hold America hostage, not now, not ever again. This alone is despicable anti-American behavior. This alone has further hurt economic recovery. There can be no more uncertainty with incremental ties to the debt ceiling. Triggers of other kinds are the only possibility.
Anyone or faction or Party that ignores the above is treasonous and must be removed from office if not by law than by the voters.
Enough with claims about so-called "job creators" when there is no evidence to support this claim. We have heard the "trickle-down" chicken crap and suffered from voodoo economics long enough! Enough with Duck, Dodge and Dismantle plans like CC&B that are even more draconian than the Paul Ryan plan to end Medicare to give more tax breaks to the rich.
Look at the recall elections, look at the plummeting approval ratings of Republican governors, and look at the rulings against right-wing social engineering legislation. Kick the Tea Party out—It begins now! It ends in 2012!
Tom, thanks for the link
"Congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility. This brinkmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets and the federal deficit would soar. The United States has a special responsibility to itself and the world to meet its obligations."
Ronald Reagan
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59827.html#ixzz1T9CT0n2s
DebC -- you're right about the balanced budget amendment. It doesn't matter if Congress votes to have it -- each state has to vote on it and 2/3 have to ratify it within 10 years. So voting to have an amendment has no relation to whether or not said amendment would become part of the Constitution.
President Obama would never sign the balanced budget bill even if it did pass the Senate so once again the GOP proves they cannot govern. They are spending time debating and passing legislation that will never see the light of day while Americans wait for them to get to work on job creating legislation.
Laurie
How can Reid GUARANTEE that the Wars will end SOME TIME IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS??? If they end in year 9 how can you save 1 Trillion in 10 years. MAKES NO SENSE!!
Laurie - So if I want to buy a car and tell the dealership if I get a raise over the next ten years I will be able to pay you, they are going to let me take that car and start driving it? This is Reids plan for deficit cutting and sounds like smoke and mirrors to me.
I actually want to see a vote on increasing the deficit cap during next years election, cause it will help me decide who to vote for. Increases in our deficit with no plan for paying it down is completely irresponsible. To be honest I would like to see a 6 trillion dollar cut and an additional flat income tax across the board on all Americans that can not be affected with deduction of 2% that is only used for paying down the deficit along with a requirement for a balanced budget until the deficit is paid off. Now that would be fair to all. Those that make more will pay more. Those that don't will still know what it is like to pay taxes.
Stand firm. Let us hit our debt limit. Then President Obama, with the executive power, can adjourn congress. let them know they won't get paid and to layoff all their staffers. He can board up congress and turn off power and water until after the 2012 election. No one will notice. They aren't getting anything done for the people anyway. They aren't helping create jobs. They want to rape paid for entitlements for their wealthy buddies. No one will miss them. Let's get 'r done and close her down!
This is exactly what the 87 freshman want isn't it? Yes it is! Let's get 'r done!
And I'm sure Obama will work for free as well?
I'd assume that he could afford to work for free, he don't make as much being President than from his books. He's already on the record saying he's willing to pay more in taxes because he can afford it, unlike the other "job creating" rich POS.
That would be historic. First time ever in fact. That is the kind of thing Banana Republic dictators do when they don't get their way. Of course this power of the President can only be exercised in the event of a disagreement between the two houses of Congress on adjournment, but lets not leave those pesky facts get in the way of your rant.
Nice try though AB. Source: http://members.mobar.org/civics/Pres%20Powers.htm
The executive branch in independent from the legislative branch. The President does not have this power. If he even tried, Obama would be impeached.
Might be a couple of people pointing out the unconstitutionality of it.
Yeah Obama is just ripping the place apart doing stuff for the people. 9.2% unemployment. 1 in 7 people on food stamps. 1.8 GDP. $1.5 trillion dollar deficits.
What help does Obama need? He's already a couple of trillion into his stimulus gig. How much more does he need? And how many more promises will he break about how it will help?
They did something like this in Venezuela. How'd that work out?
Sure, Ana. Let Obama do just that.
Then, when the nice men from the U.S. army come to cart him off, he can explain that he did not try to usurp the Constitution, he was just following your advice.
Even your idol has to follow the rules.
P.S. Whatever he tells you, don't drink the KoolAde.
JK1963
Yes, as soon as W. starts giving back his pensions
and the trillions he stole from US for his veep's companies.
What did I tell you? This is the plan. Force the President to pull the 14th Amendment trigger, and then impeach him, or even worse. They forget, however, that the Senate is controlled by Democrats.
Maybe they figure the Army will follow them. I'd be careful about making that assumption, though. Some percentage of generals are, in fact, democrats.
But maybe they figure the trial won't occur until sometime in 2013 or thereafter, and that President Obama will have to run having that sword hanging over his head.
Now THERE's a question for legal scholars. Would an election victory trump a pre-existing impeachment?
I think it would because the Congress that took over wouldn't be the same one that impeached him. So I just answered my own question.
It's the Army.
Actually at that point he probably would forgo his salary. He does not need the money.
These negotiating sessions must get pretty complicated when Obama starts bringing these things up.
They can try to impeach him but I do not think the Senate would vote for it especially if he ends up saving the Country from itself again.
Well, if that's really the plan, Navy, they would never let him save the country first.
Remember the Shock Doctrine.
"Or even worse." That sounds threatening. Just what did you have in mind AM? You really need to watch your out of control rhetoric.
Sure, the Senate is controlled by the Democrats, but even they know a failure when they see Obama. How much worse could it be with Super Joe in the Big Chair? Not much.
But isn't this a hoot? 2.5 years after Mr Hopey/Changey assumed the position, the guy with the plan to save the universe and stop the seas from rising, and we're now openly talking about the process for his impeachment. My, oh, my, what a failure this man has been.
You people really do drool all over him. It is unbelievable.
For those of us that missed it........when did he save the country the first time?
ANNA - you do not see a problem with the fact that starting with Ronald Reagan the debt ceiling has been raised 39 times with little to no debate or compromise required. Spending was never an issue for George W Bush, two unfunded wars, unfunded prescription drug plan... Now with President Obama it is a problem. Hell, I would like a show of hands, how many people ever even heard there was a debt ceiling or limit? It has never been an issue before, why now? Wait, I know why, I have heard McConnell and all of them say it, "To make President Obama a one term president", GOT IT!
This is about as bad as "Taxation without representation" gets. These guys are not working for us, the Tax Payers, they obviously have another that they answer to. Signing pledges and commitments to not raise taxes, against abortion and signing them and making deals and pledges above their oath of office. They broke their oath as soon as they committed to their special interest.
The stimulus. JoAnna admitted just the other day that it saved a lot of jobs, at least temporarily, which means that unemployment would have been even higher than it was, and we might have gone straight through recession into depression.
Then again, it was either that, or admit that Scott Walker was responsible for the loss of 3,400 public sector jobs in Wisconsin in June.
Granted, those weren't very good choices, but then again, I don't traffick in good choices.
Certainly if you borrow a trillion or so dollars and throw it at the state union jobs like Obama did, the states were able to manage to keep their union workers around for a while. But the point of borrowing the money was to put it into jobs that would stimulate the economy. Obama picked badly on that account.
Like what's happening now.
Of course, I see that, Robert.
Does anyone really think there isn't an ALEC or similar plan for Congress?
The only things that are possibly served by all this useless time-wasting are the Republicans' overall desire to weaken goverment and Mitch McConnell's pledge that Obama would be a one-term president.
And that's why I'm scared.
By the way, I just heard Senator Charles Schumer say exactly the same thing: The only thing that explains why the Republicans remain so intransigent on the debt ceiling is that "they WANT a default."
whos fault is all of this mess? It is our fault, the voters! Since George H W Bush we have voted OUT one party and voted in the other in almost every election, not much thought for issues and productivity we just blame who is in office and put them out when we get a chance to vote again. Party Ideology is ruining our democracy! They all take the same oath to uphold the Constitution and pledge their allegiance to it, not their party!
JAS1 - The only ones making a Banana Republic out of us are the Republicans. As you indicate that somehow union workers are a bad word, let me tell you that union workers are the only ones getting living, middle class wages these days. I should realize though that you're not on the side of the middle class. That's painfully obvious so anything you say is suspect. Actually, I suspect you're quite un-American in many respects.
Why, yes. Just like. So what's your point? By your own admission, it's just a temporarily delayed reaction from the Bush recession, exacerbated by Republican efforts to deflect attention on the jobs issue and the corporatists' strategy to keep the economy on hold, while they continue to pile up profits and make money in the stock market, until the 2012 elections. After which, they will have the keys to the money printing presses.
(And I don't mean that literally, so don't bother to go down the red herring inflation track.)
You may be underestimating JoAnna by several respects. She's got it nailed.
Obama felt the same way, back in January, when he submitted his FY2012 budget that contained $1.65 Trillion in deficit spending. Apparently Obama didn't get the message from the Nov/2010 election that "It's the spending stupid" because the Senate rejected his budget 0-97.
John B., of Des Moines, IA summed it up well recently when he commented on that vote - "Changing circumstances".
Changing indeed.
???????
What?!?
Okay, so how does Karl Rove's weather machine fit into this scenario?
You Obama haters are laughable! A gaggle of fools really! Despite all your carping you have yet to identify anyone on your side of the aisle that can fully appreciate the complexities of these situations let alone manage them with any proficiency. No less than your poster boy George Will recently lamented the fact that America wouldn't trust any of the current crop of GOP candidates to run a lemonade stand. Your penchant for rewriting history doesn't change the fact that Dumbya and some of the same hypocritical Republicans who bobble-headed their way through 7 debt limit increases have changed the course of American fiscal soundness for years to come. Spin it, twist it, flick it, bop it any old way you want to and it still comes out the same: tired, failed Republican horses**t got us in this mess! Now you want to get all self-righteous and profess your stewardship of the economy by heaping unreasonable conditions and demands on what was essentially a fait accompli in America's history. Well, ain't gonna happen cause smarter people will prevail and ultimately send all of you back to the insane asylums, gutters and sewage pits you crawled out from. In the meantime, let me use a little street vernacular to illustrate the sentiment of a majority of the American people: cut, cap and balance this!
Never said 'union workers' were a bad word (that's actually two words), I said that's where much of the stimulus money went to.
Whatever floats your hate sweetie.
Yes spending on tax cuts that we can't afford.
Spending on wars that we can't afford.
The collective amnesia that the republicans have developed is quite amazing as they seem to think all the spending was done in the last 2 1/2 years.
Regan ----deficits don't matter
Bush I ---deficits don't matter
Clinton---- republicans make hard turn to fiscal conservative, but at lease allow us tax increases to pay down Reagan's debt.
Bush II---Reagan proved deficits don't matter as the republicans run up the largest debt in history.
Obama---then suddenly, OMG the democratic spending is killing us as the republicans nearly fall over themselves as to prove who is the more fiscal conservative. We are no longer allowed to raise taxes as it worked to turn the country around before and we can't have that again.
Why is it the republicans are only interested in balancing the budget when a Democrat is president?
So it looks like a republican president is the worst thing we could for American as the republicans seem to care more about our country when a Democrat is president.
ANNA -
This is scary stuff! No one really knows how bad it could have been without the stimulus, now I am afraid just the idea has already made the world start to react to our broken governments ability to run a country.
Hmm... maybe Ana is on to something. I wonder how long this ridiculous dance would continue if we just said no paychecks for congress until they start actually getting something accomplished. If Social Security checks will not go out if we default, will congressional paychecks also stop?
Not as so..
YAWN! Another day and yet another reference to the past...It must be in the Democratic owner's manual..."Make a daily insult to President Bush!!"
Nobody deserves that more than "W."
Well..Obama is coming in for the lead...and he's only been in office 2 1/2 years!
The Senate is for spending money without EVER submitting a budget.
The Senate is for "continuing resolutions" and "raising revenue" (which just means more and higher taxes), and NEVER cutting spending.
The Senate is for voting down each and every bill that comes out of the House that calls for this nation to actually STOP spending money it doesn't have, to STOP printing money that has no backing at all and just weakens the dollar, and to actually spend ONLY what you have available.
The Senate is for protecting Obama while he does nothing except talk about "investing" (spending money we don't have), "revenues" (taxes), and NON-existent plans that Democrats NEVER bring forward but Obama defends while attacking those that actually do bring forth budgets and spending plans.
The Senate is made up of worthless, greedy, corrupt, "social justice" Democrats that care more about re-election than they do the nation.
And they are supported by blind fools that worry more about their "entitlements" and spreading filth and hate than they are about anything else.
Speaking of blind fools .....
Wow....
Last I checked, there was plenty worthless, greedy and corrupt GOP types in Congress too. Glad to hear you cleared that up, Cheryl.
By the way, please link to the proof of you claims. I'd like to see the evidence for myself that the GOP is blameless.
what actually is coming from the house is a bill (cut cap, & balance) that will keep the rich and corporations from getttin their taxes raised from now on......not funding for SS from now on, not funding for medicare from now on, not having the same no taxes from now on for the middle class, just the rich and corporations......that madness has to stop !! and thats exactly what it is .....teagagger madness !!! and by the way the house is made up of corporation puppet teagaggers that are as off the wall as can be !!!
Why do conservatives never seem to mention that the tax cuts are spending.
cut spending, cut spending, just don't look at that 2.7 TRILLION DOLLARS we have been spending for tax cuts.
Back to our regularly scheduled program: cut spending and its President Obama's fault.
Care to cite some links, Americans?
Waaaay off topic:
News from the Motor City:
Formal contract negotiations between the UAW and Chrysler began today. The current contract is set to expire on on September 14, 2011.As a symbol of a new spirit of cooperation, both sides wore maroon jackets emblazoned with the Chrysler and UAW logos. (Dark red hides the blood......)
Interestingly, this year, due to the terms of the governments "bailouts" of Chrysler and General Motors, the UAW is prohibited from striking. If the two sides can not reach agreement, the only recourse is binding arbitration.
So this ought to be interesting. Chrysler and GM will do everything they can to continue their paths to profitability, while the UAW will be looking to improve upon some of their concessions due to the bankruptcy of the two companies.
Most of the world doesn't pay attention (they should), but this is pretty good theater here in Detroit.
My bet is they settle around Labor Day (unheard of in the past) due to the incredible stress the Auto Industry is still under.
At the wrong time, with the wrong message... SO what else is NEW?
Well actually nothing as far as JAS1 is concerned!
shake my head in pity.........."congress in captive".
Feisty - There's nothing ever new with JAS1....same ole nonsense different day. LOL!!
Tell me about it! ;o)
Between her & NJNB, I'm not sure which one earns the title Rerun Queen!
Ah huh... she said Whip. I was just wondering if the Government will get a past due notice.
What's this about whips?
Does Spanky know? ;-)
Anna - Don't know if Spanky knows but JAS1 might!!!
I think that the lasting image that America walks away with, in this debt ceiling issue will be that the GOP, on their mantle of "debt reduction" walked away from three trillion dollars in cuts, including left leaning sacred cows of entitlement reform, over any notion of increasing taxes to assist in the debt reduction.
A secondary lasting theme will be that the GOP focused all of the debt reduction squarely on middle / lower class, while absolutely refusing to ask those that can most afford it to pony up.
I don't make a ton of money, but enough that I do feel the taxes. I would gladly pay more taxes, to ensure the promises made to generations past...
(Just for you, GOPisextinct ;-) )
Check this out Ted.
From 1970 to 2000, the average rise in compensation (adjusted for inflation, etc.) for all income earners was $0.05/hr over the entire 30 years. Over the same 30 years, the average rise in compensation for the top 1% of those same income earners was $646.00/hour . . . every single year.
It's obvious that we shouldn't ask those poor people in the top 1% of income earners to sacrifice anything to help this country, we need to make sure the other 99% bear all of the burden. After all, the bottom 99% get the equivalent of a whole nickle more an hour than they did in 1970, they can afford it more than the upper 1% who only got the equivalent of $19,380.00 per hour more than in 1970.
And its only gotten worse since 2000, due to the Bush tax cuts.
That is a breathtakingly staggering statistic there Matthew! Do you mind if I ask for the source of that info?
Thanks for the stat!
I'll be happy to provide it, Ted. David Cay Johnston's 2003 book "Perfectly Legal", pages 32 - 41. He gives all of his sources and a very good comparison that goes beyond what I posted.
Let's default I can cover my family including the elderly, but of course the federal government has never done anything for my family. Lets see who screams first I bet its those who live off the governments teat.
Yes, because everyone who gets government assistance is just lazy. You understand how moronic you sound? I live off the 'government teat' but then again I earned it by coming back from Iraq screwed up as well as many other veterans who rely on that assistance. My guess is you'd still scream first. In fact, I would welcome a default as it would hurt the GOP for the very long term.
Tek:
Thank you for your service.
You do NOT live off the "government teat." You earned everything you get. But it will never be enough to repay the service you and your brothers in arms performed for everyone one of us.
One of the beneficiaries of your sacrifice would obviously be Bob Jones. He just has some emotional problem that prevents him from showing his gratitude.
To republicans it seems that they think everyone who is not rich lives off the government teat. Meanwhile the rich steal trillions for their undeserved tax cuts that went on our debt.
Republican are so busy watching the poor to make sure they don't get an egg while the rich carry off the entire henhouse unnoticed.
For the republicans for being such war pushers sure don't seem care much about our veterans when they come home.
I was against these wars from the beginning, I saw how our government treated the returning Vietnam vets. Then I watched Reagan close the care homes where the Vietnam veterans were living. One day to the next homeless vets were everywhere.
I saw these wars as a continuation, if you die you are a hero and if you come back wounded you are an entitlement that needs to be cut.
It truly is NOT about the debt ceiling, deficits, spending, or revenue. It IS all about trying to get rid of President Obama, no matter the cost to the economy or ordinary citizens.
http://thinkprogress.org/special/2011/07/25/277717/trump-reject-debt-deal/
Well if Think Progress says so, it must be true.
LoL Matthew. See my post above. I hear you. Completely.
And I don't even read Think Progress.
But the fact that Think Progress says it doesn't make it false, either.
And if it was true, one might expect that people who were forwarding that idea would try to divert attention from it, wouldn't they?
I'm not mentioning any names of these "people," or anything .... Just sayin' ;-)
Matthew, the Republican Party some time ago became the guardian of corporations and the wealthy, to them if you were not born into that category or immoral enough to do what it takes to break into that category, you are a subclass who's only reason for existence is to serve their needs, fight their wars and pay their taxes. Obama thinks all people should be treated respectfully which makes him repugnant to Republicans, a real thorn in their side.
Someone said that I should keep posting this all week, so here it is again:
From 1970 to 2000, the average rise in compensation (adjusted for inflation, etc.) for all income earners was $0.05/hr over the entire 30 years. Over the same 30 years, the average rise in compensation for the top 1% of those same income earners was $646.00/hour . . . every single year.
It's obvious that we shouldn't ask those poor people in the top 1% of income earners to sacrifice anything to help this country, we need to make sure the other 99% bear all of the burden. After all, the bottom 99% get the equivalent of a whole nickle more an hour than they did in 1970, they can afford it more than the upper 1% who only got the equivalent of $19,380.00 per hour more than in 1970.
And its only gotten worse since 2000, due to the Bush tax cuts.
The top 1% pay a considerable amount of taxes for this country. How much more do you suggest they pay?
But Obama said it would be better by now. Was he lying, or ignorant?
JoAnna - I think Matt's point was that the top 1% have paid even less taxes since the Bush tax cuts. The top 1% need to go back to paying what they paid before the tax cuts. What is that, a whole 4% increase? To someone who makes over a million dollars every year, 4% is hardly going to be noticed. And yet they are willing to crash the entire economy of the country to save 4% for people who already have more money than they could possibly spend. I make less than $20,000 per year and I would be willing to pay 4% more if it would really help my country. You guys should be ashamed.
Heartlight3, JAS1 is on my ignore list, but since you answered her I decided to open up her comment to see what she had to say. It is evident that she does not understand sarcasm, thinks that just because the rich pay more in absolute terms, then they are taxed enough (never mind they pay less as a percentage of their income, especially the top 1%), and, since she could not dispute anything I put up, decided to try and slam the president with a non sequiter (btw, big failure, JAS1, it made no sense).
For all of these reasons, I will continue to ignore JAS1 since she doesn't have a clue about what she is talking about, is very disingenuous, and has been shown to be lying on more than one occasion. The best part is that she is going to try to answer this and call me all kinds of vile names or challenge what I've said here, but it won't matter as I will ignore it all and not answer her.
Here is a prediction: she will try to 'prove me wrong' by bringing up all kinds of statistics about the top 10%, maybe even as high as the top 2% (although I doubt it). Those statistics may actually be true, but it will be disingenuous since I am talking about the top 1%, and that makes a very big difference. Notice she didn't give a figure for the top 1% she mentioned? It's because she knows it would prove my point. She even tried the deflection tactic of asking how much they should pay.
She truly is NAWO.
While we are all distracted by this gamesmanship, our poorly educated populace is being led by the Judas goats of ALEC quietly to the slaughter. The Republican legislatures they were hoodwinked into electing last cycle is passing their legislative agenda of voter restriction, union killing, education defunding, and corporate tax giveaways. I wonder if enough of us will wake up in time to at least turn them out in 2012. I see very little attention to this in these posts. Is anyone paying attention?
I think some people are paying attention---the people working for recalls in Wisconsin, for example. Is it enough? I do think liberals are more aware than ever that elections have consequences and will roll up our sleeves and work hard in the 2012 elections.
Read my own posts on First Thoughts, almost every day. I'm only banging the drum for one state, however. Others have to pick up the slack for other states.
And First Read might do us a favor and throw us a state topic now and then, too.
Hint, hint. ;-)
Corporate America's Trojan Horse in the States
The American Legislative Exchange Council
I find the whole concept of ALEC very scary. I think the spotlight should be shined on them and what they are up to so that everyone in the country understands who they are and what they are trying to do.
q
CUT MEDICAID BUDGET only help the truly needy. We can do this NOW we don't need to wait till 2012.
The program is to broken to prevent waste and fraud unless the budget is cut
the only problem is where the budget would be cut. The bureaucracy is so huge and so screwed up the people needing help would be the ones hurt, not the bureaucrats within the system.
Ditto to Robert's comment. And, if you ask me, making drastic cuts is about the surest way possible to ramp UP waste and fraud. Private sector health care being profit-driven, someone will try to make up those losses somewhere.
Sometimes I am astonished to find that conservatives cannot see past the end of their grasping fingers.
And sometimes not.
Don't you know anything about Medicaid? The hoops jumped thru by the poor to get a pittance help on their medical bill would be rejected as draconian by any one of you who have no experience with it.
Our political system only protects the affluent; it is a dismal failure for the other 95% of the population. As the cold hard truth sinks in over the coming months that there will be no "recovery" for most in this country, the safety nets paid into over ones lifetime gutted, and a government that's meaningless lip service has lost its ability to ensnare a gullible populations attention, change will come. The kind of change that an oppressed population has no choice but to invoke, the kind of change those in power always tell themselves will never come because they are untouchable, until it does.
pure hypocrisy:
on one hand, giving the molester credit for balancing the budget, on the other, refusing a balanced budget amendment.
MItch:
Obama the "molester?" Really? What proof do you have that he's a "molester?" Link please to your evidence. And if you can't, then stop making stuff up and presenting it here as factual.
Obama opposes the balanced budget amendment. So do a lot of conservatives:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/272154/against-balanced-budget-amendment-rich-lowry
http://perceptionasreality.blogspot.com/2011/05/conservative-case-against-balanced.html
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/20/is-a-balanced-budget-amendment-a-good-trade-for-a-debt-ceiling-hike/
http://www.ombwatch.org/node/11766
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/mccain-opposes-balanced-budget-amendment-in-debt-deal/2011/07/06/gIQA3cy70H_blog.html
http://conservativesonfire.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/a-balanced-budget-amendment-__-a-bad-idea-and-unconstitutional/
I could go on, but I think you probably get the point.
Let's stop playing political theater. The Balanced Budget Amendment is a very bad idea, and even YOUR GUYS KNOW IT. So don't pretend it's a solution. It's really pure political chicanery.
You got it Bilweeler!
Mitch J is apparently supportive of the double-standard, hypocritical wingnut talking point faction.
IF THEY TRULY BELIEVED IN OR WANTED A BALANCED BUDGET, why did they support W Bush in UNBALANCING Clinton's economic policies????? We HAD a balanced budget that they and W. opposed and dismantled at their first opportunity. Do NOT come back now crying for it.
Two faced politicians, the lot of them. Overt display of the lack of integrity in our House of Representatives, and the Tea Party itself. Shameful!!!
Lets see, the markets around the world opened down this morning, but I guess the GOP is right to hold out and let us crash.
The GOP walks out, AGAIN when there was more being offered up that they wanted originally, if it weren't for those pesky tax hikes that 76% of Americans want. Perhaps they are really just doing all they can to make the President look bad. Although he is sticking his neck out going against his party, against a lot of ideologies that Democrat believe in.
Perhaps if the GOP/TP members had not signed agreements with special Interest groups they might be able to do the job our country expects them to do. Maybe if they took their oath of office seriously and held America on a standard as high as their special Interest groups and financial backers, we might be better off and things might be getting done to get jobs and help the economy.
Business leaders and Financial Markets have said, it is not the issues that are holding them back from hiring and growing, it is the uncertainty of Washington DC that is holding the world back. Historically about the same number of jobs are created with higher taxes as lower taxes. No one is willing to invest in a future if they are uncertain of what the future is and waiting on a BROKEN government is as uncertain as it gets!
The problem is the republicans PERIOD. All they CAUSE is TROUBLE. What a reckless lying bunch of hypocrites they ALL are.
The President will be speaking prime time at 9:00 tonight.
If a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution ever passed, we might as well crown Grover Nordquist King and be done with it. This republican legislation would require 2/3 majority to pass any tax increases while only a simple majority to spend money is required. It is insanity GOPTP style.
The four biggest drivers of the current deficit are the two wars George Bush put on the credit card and the two tax cuts he put on the credit card.
Absolutely CORRECT Charlie. UNfunded wars that made his pals rich. What he could not drain out of social security and medicare funding, he just RAISED the debt ceiling...8 TIMES in 8 YEARS.....8 TIMES....8 TIMES..
See my post below on how that money could be REPAID. I think its a darn GOOD IDEA.
Damn those stupid founding fathers - they actually authorized debt during the first congress. It is so good to see these new representatives doing the 'right' thing and opposing federal debt (with the balanced budget amendment). And they are doing this in spite of right wing think tanks - who are uniformly saying that this would be disastrous for the country. But there are bright sides. Just think - we could never go to war again (unless we cut off Social Security) because we would not have the money (unless the war was against terrorists - then the amendment is allowed to be ignored). Hey - we gotta keep Haliburton working...
And for those uneducated among us - this amendment would mandate the federal government to lay off employees during every recession. This is exactly what is needed during any recession. FYI - unemployment goes up during recessions, and laying off federal employees due to an arbitrary mandate of % of GDP does nothing but increase the recession (and possibly turn the recession into a depression).
Ah - I love these republicans. They want to be known as the party that caused 2 depressions in the USA. Their supporters should be proud.
Republicans CERTAINLY caused the great depression of 1930. They practiced supply side economics (voodoo) in the years leading up to that one. They have DONE it AGAIN. Republicans have done ONE thing only during their 30 year reign of terror....made a FEW people FILTHY RICH. LESS jobs than EVER before...but their RICH PALS STILL made money. Wages have stagnated for 30 years. NO ONE can afford healthcare. ONLY PART of middle class workers are paid enough to buy homes anymore. Republicans voted to raise the debt limit 8 TIMES....8 TIMES...8 TIMES...8 TIMES....8 TIMES....8 TIMES IN 8 YEARS under the reign of george bush jr. Bush jr started and PAID for an UNfunded war with OUR social security and medicare money. I want congress to pass a WAR TAX to repay social security and medicare. The people who made the money off the wars....the rich...will pay a much higher rate. After all, if you own MOST of the wealth in this country, you should pay MOST of the cost of protecting that wealth. YOU LYING REPUBLICAN HYPOCRITES.
CJ - you are incorrect. The republicans were a major contributor to the great depression because they pushed through the Smoot-Hawley Tariff act through congress. This placed high tariffs on imports, and other countries retaliated. This caused many businesses involved with import/export to fail or downsize - massively increasing unemployment.
However - banks also own a significant responsiblity - see http://americanhistory.about.com/od/greatdepression/tp/greatdepression.htm.
Supply side economics had nothing to do with it. There is no reason to embellish. The truth condemns republicans more efficiently and accurately.
Both President Obama and John Boehner advocate the need for “compromise”, “bipartisan cooperation”, “balance” and to “set politics aside”. This is what the people have wanted for some time and today what they clearly see as a desperate need. Ever since the 2008 elections it has been obvious that the Republican Party has played politics with everything; aggressively and stubbornly faulting and blocking all efforts to address problems and clearly attempting to facilitate failure, aimed to greatly support their criticisms and political ambitions ... all irresponsibly done without any conscience for the costs passed to the people It worked for them in 2010 and helped with their supporters’ creation of the Tea Party, as they continually just focused on creating and exploiting discontent for their political purposes. Does Boehner’s statements now signal a change in those indisputably negative tactics?
President Obama has extended the proverbial “olive branch” and has been receptive to significant spending cuts, adjustments and modifications to entitlements and a “balanced” approach, with having fair and equitable revenue changes, including letting the excessive Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy expire and to reduce the substantial considerations given oil companies and some major, highly profitable corporations ... all representing real “compromise”. To accomplish this “bipartisan cooperation” the President is ready to face and overcome any resistance within his own party. The polls clearly show that the American people are for this approach but are the Republicans and are they sincere in wanting “compromise”, “bipartisan cooperation”, “balance” and to “set politics aside”?
Their sincerity not only is highly questionable but there literally seems no “compromise” on their part and with their continuing arrogance and stubbornly offered deceptive rhetoric, no “bipartisan cooperation” is evident. They haven’t given an inch on revenue, they still are focused totally on their political ambitions (not “setting politics aside”) and want to force a return to these same stalemate tactics in 2012 for the elections, rather than responsibly address the problems now, Throughout all of this the Republicans completely fail to demonstrate any deviation from their “puppet” performance to benefit the very few who strongly support them and who “pull their strings”. Together with those powerful, influential and very wealthy supporters they constantly attempt to con and manipulate the public with criticisms of the Democrats and deceptive appeals to fears, biases, prejudices and emotions. They talk of creating jobs but only try to justify the same tactics, giving more to the wealthy, that Bush-Cheney clearly proved are a total fraud only making the wealthy wealthier and soliciting political support. We see their controlling efforts with 3rd party intimidations (who brag of being able to “make/break” anyone) of their own representatives to squelch any independence or individual consciences, completely financed by “big money” and can recognize all of it in their constant focus on self-serving efforts. We saw it in 2001 - 2008 with Bush-Cheney and their total concentration on using their offices and America’s resources for the sole benefit of the few, while greatly costing the majority ... and this is what they are trying to return to.
The subterfuge is obvious as well as is the arrogance and cocky confidence from past successes (2000, 2004 & 2010); the question is will the public let them get away with it or call them down for it? The only way they will, or ever can, change is when they are firmly and completely rejected for what they have become and then when “big money’s” control becomes ineffective, with an inability to just repeatedly con and manipulate the public. It would really be great if the voters can force them to return to being the Grand Ole Party, again with integrity and a conscience.