E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe New York Times writes that President Obama is now largely standing on the sidelines in the debt debate. “Having already deployed the heavy weapons from the presidential arsenal, including a national address on Monday night and a veto threat, Mr. Obama is in danger of seeming a spectator at one of the most critical moments of his presidency. Having been unable to get the grand bargain he wanted — a debt limit increase and up to $4 trillion in debt-reduction through spending cuts and taxes — Mr. Obama’s challenge now is to reassert himself in a way that produces the next-best outcome, or at least one that does no harm to his re-election hopes.”
Per the AP: “Twice as many Americans as previously reported by law enforcement have traveled overseas to join a Qaeda-linked organization, a congressional investigation found. The findings, discussed in a congressional hearing yesterday, are an indication the Somalia-based terrorist group has an even deeper reach into the United States. More than 40 Americans have traveled to war-torn Somalia to join the terrorist group Al Shabab, an investigation by Republican staff on the House Homeland Security Committee found.”
“The Senate extended the term of FBI Director Robert Mueller for up to two years yesterday, a day after President Obama signed legislation making an exception to the 10-year limit for an FBI chief,” the AP writes. “The vote was 100-0.”
“Massachusetts supporters of President Obama are planning a big birthday party in his absence,” the Boston Globe reports. “On Aug. 3, the night before the president turns 50, they are holding a reelection campaign fund-raiser at Town Stove and Spirits on Boylston Street. The featured guests will be former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and current Deputy Campaign Manager Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, according to the invitation.”
Leave a Comment:
Standing on the sidelines?
President Obama: Here's the way to get off the sidelines. If no deal is reached by Noon on Monday, raise the debt ceiling using the 14th Amendment.
It's time to show courage, leadership, and concern for the damage being done by an angry, misguided minority. Let them sue the Executive Branch. By the time the courts sort it out, it will be over.
So when the next republican president, there will be one some day, and a republican majority does the same thing you will be perfectly ok, correct?
James:
Of course.
If courts find that action Constitutional, there is NO problem whatsoever with it. If not, then not only will Obama be overturned on this, but no future President will try it again.
What's wrong with that?
No, the President has not been on the sidelines. He presented a budget and framework some time ago & has engaged with every idea put forth since with gusto. This is about putting the economy on a sound footing for this century and doing the right thing by the American people. The President wants Congress to do its job. What is needed now is political will.
We have suffered enough and must now have an agreement that goes through 2013. Tell me again why we can't use the routine one-page, one-line debt raising format that has been long routinely used? Ah then we can put away the NewGOP's latest sword of Damacles.
Backhouse,
I keep searching online for that framework (plan) of Obama's but I can't find it. How about providing the link. Thanks.
Krell, Democrats are not proof factories.
Obama has been clear from the start that he wants a balanced bi-partisan approach. He put forward a budget and a framework, has consulted with leaders from both sides from day one and set Simpson-Bowles on task. The way it works is a plan emerges from bi-partisan negotiations, is presented and then voted on.
This Administration has long proposed a $4Trillion reduction in the deficit over ten years, but not by burdening seniors, or by cutting Education, Research, Innovation and Infrastructure. Certainly not by ending entitlements while 98% of us are recovering from the worst recession in 50 years.
On April 13 2011, the President laid out his framework for a balanced approach to "achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over twelve years, based on the values of shared responsibility and shared prosperity". It builds on $1 trillion in deficit reductions in the President's FY 2012 budget and the findings of the Bipartisan Fiscal Commission:
a) Domestic Spending Cuts: Building on past budget agreements with largest 1-year reduction in goverment spending ever. Cut non-security spending to levels consistent with bi-partisan deficit commision.
b) Security Spending Cuts.
c) Health Care Costs.
d) Tax reform.
See whitehouse.gov/2011//04/13/PresidentObama-s-framework-4-trillion-deficit-reduction for the breakdown details. www.WhiteHouse.gov/winning-the-future ~~www.Budget.gov,~~www.WhiteHouse.gov/xfr, ~~www.WhiteHouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2011/04/13/country-we-believe-improving-america-s-fiscal-future
A budget that was voted down by the Senate. tell me how many Democrats supported the leadership the President was proposing on his budget?. Oh nevermind i know you wont answer I will answer it for you ZERO it was voted down 0-97 if thats leadership i say No thanks..
Krell
Backhouse,
I keep searching online for that framework (plan) of Obama's but I can't find it. How about providing the link. Thanks.
================================
...and how about you start 'seeing' what is there vs. acting like you're looking for something you have no intention of finding. You don't care about the President's plan/approach/framework/thoughts/considerations or anything else.
You people have the dumbest talking points and the media only adds fuel to an already willfully ignorant Public. Even by default, the Executive Branch CAN'T be on the sidelines. You have no respect for the process by which government operates.
Every Branch has limits as they should and frankly, as is the case most of the time, the President seems to be one respecting those limits and responsibilities.
If hear 1 more member of Congress act as though they can't take a sh#$#)*t without needing to be "led" by the White House...
Don't give me the crap out of one side of your mouth that the American Public sent you here to change Washington to blah blah blah... and then out of the other side of your mouth act as though you can do nothing because the White House isn't telling you Go for Green, Caution for Yellow and Stop for Red.
Grow up and work.
Backhouse,
Thanks for replying (seriously)... however, you do realize that if you hired me as a contractor to build you a house, and all I had were ideas, talk, a few notes on a piece of paper, would you hand over the $$$ and tell me to start building?
I only bring it up because of how "things appear"... I'm an engineer and I have no way of "actually" dealing with information unless its written down. This gives me opportunity to mark it up, make comments, ammend, etc. Surely you see that.
As for April 13, 2011 - the links/video is fine but you still need something written down due to details. Why were Chuck, Jake and Chip, etc... hounding Carney for the plan? Most want to see it.
I know you post a lot and know more than I do... maybe the president is not really supposed to get involved at this level, but because he won't stop talking and says he has a plan - let's see it. It really is that simple.
Allen - Omaha,
Lighten up... see my reply to Bachouse. I asked a simple question.
As for grow up and work... I'm an electrical engineer and do work. What do you do?
Krell -
The latter half of my comment was really towards members in the Congress, not to you. I apologize for the subtle segue.
I grow tired of hearing them tout everytime they are on the camera about how the Public sent them there to change Washington and then once they get there they all of a sudden can't proceed with anything w/o being led by the White House. I just find the 2 positions incompatible.
I'm a Systems Consultant in the Human Capital Management space...but even if flipped burgers at McDonalds would my work be lesser than yours?
Allen --
No problem. I find myself laughing at how absurd this entire show is. But, if it were easy, there woudn't be a problem.
As for work - nope doesn't matter. I had to look up your title... you should head to DC and help that place become more efficient.
...there ain't enough efficient in the world... lol
Yeah, tons of title...actual title is Sr. Functional Consultant. I work with an HCM platform called PeopleSoft. The Federal Government and many State and Local Governments actually utilize the system. I'm close to DC...working on a gig in Maryland. See the Capitol everytime I fly into Reagan...wonder every time how something so magestic in its visual beauty seems so whack on the inside.
Krell,
There have been proposals from all sides and a compromise is at issue between all members of Congress, our President and all Americans.
Raising the debt limit has always been a routine one-page, one-liner. No reason to tie the debt ceiling to a big complex issue like the budget, and it has never been done before. Refusing to sign off on raising the debt limit has never been done before either.
This crisis/chaos and threat to undermine the gold standard of the United States has been manufactured by the corporate right wing and their lackeys in Congress for the third time this year. Ask yourself why, don't ask anyone else.
So I'm wondering if the budget/plan presented by President Obama was so wonderful, why did 97 senators (including ALL of the democratic senators) vote against it?
We all know why 97 Senators voted against the Obama budget. Their opposition was to give the deficit/debt talks a chance to succeed:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/federal_budget_us/index.html
So don't try to portray that vote as a repudiation of the President. It wasn't. It was to give Congress a chance to figure debt/deficit thing out.
And we all know how that's working out.
The problem with this Congress & the Carnival Barkers(formerly known as the MSM)is that they were so used to GWB telling the GOP what he wanted, then voteing to give it to him!
Now, President Obama waits while the House & Senate send him something to sign after negotiating. If it does'nt meet his criteria, then he can Veto it & send it back for them to either Rework or try & get 2/3 rds of thier members to Vote to override the POTUS Veto.
Where in the heck did this concept come from?
The Carnival Barkers have forgotten & Congress Daum sure has!
Do your Daum Jobs!
Not that I am objective on the matter, but I think Obama's re-election prospects have taken a severe hit during these debt ceiling negotiations.
The Emperor has no clothes..Obama's undeserved reputation as a calm leader, and as a bipartisan middle of the road compromiser, has been shredded by his nasty class warfare rhetoric and overall failed leadership.
Bob, you hit the nail on the head. Furthermore , if Obama is really on the sidelines, as they report, maybe a deal can be struck! This President is a partisan sniper. I say, leave it to the Senate and the House. They are the real deal makers.
Leona:
Yeah...that's working out swimmingly, isn't it? I'd call it a middle school food fight, but I have too much respect for 7th graders.
Leona 2986819 - President Obama is a partisan sniper? That's ridiculous. This whole debt ceiling debate has been Republican theater. They turned down the Grand Bargain of deficit reduction to focus on creating political drama. I wish President Obama would just pull a fast one and raise the limit without their "help."
Hey Amy, go back and READ Obama's speeches. If things are not Bush's fault, they are the Repubs fault. According to Obama, the Dems do everything right ( except when it comes to sex scandals and cheating on their taxes.)
Leona:
Really?
You don't really want to compare Dem sex scandals to the GOP sex scandals, do you? Neither party has a great record, but I don't think I'd want to defend the litany of GOP types who can't keep it zipped...
Just saying...
"... If things are not Bush's fault, they are the Repubs fault..."
And why is it wrong to point out the truth about all this?? I know all on the right would like the subject of the prior admin to cease, but why the hell should it? It is what it is.
drive-by-observer
If you are looking for the truth, which I have noticed that most Libs aren't, Obama is a big loser. When he was campaigning he said "the buck stops here", since then he has pointed the blame on everyone else instead of accepting responsibility for his failure as a leader. The little boy man always wants things his way or he pouts and points. He says this is what the people want.... He must be talking about the people of Libya or Africa because he has always turned a deaf ear to us in America.
The GOP should just send him out for coffee while they make their decision. Obama loves to procrastinate until someone else steps up to the bat, then he takes the credit.
When 2012 gets here toss him out and get a real leader.
Leona
Didn't you watch the President's speech on Monday night? He blamed the size of the federal defict on "both parties," which I thought was overly generous, considering Bush took the surplus he inherited and spent it all on two wars, the prescription drug program for seniors and huge tax cuts.
Then, the economy tanked on Bush's watch and Obama had to spend more to stimulate the economy and keep people working. Sorry you don't like re-hashing the results of Republican policies, but it is what it is.
drive by, the TRUTH is that both the left and right are complicit in any passed legislation that is adequately debated before passage, as is the potus.
Wonder why obama didn't want to encourage "adequate" debate on many bits of legislation he personnaly pushed thru. Seems that his buddy rahm emmanuel had the right approach to the healthcare bills, but that obama just had to do it all at once.
.
The fact is that no one has presented any details about their plans for dealing with the current or future economic crisis. Here are the facts about this situation: (i) The issue of the debt ceiling, which in the past has been a routine matter both in the Congress and Senate, is now a negotiating tool in a totally fabricated crisis which incompetent politicians, on both sides of the proverbial aisle, are using to preserve their shaky political careers (ii) Bundling such issues as the deficit, overspending, entitlement programs (all those cliches which mean nothing to the voters) with the single issue of increasing the debt ceiling is the greatest scam being perpetrated on the country by those crooks in Washington posing as legislators (iii) These fakes whom we elected to make reasonable and rational decisions to protect the integrity and virtues of the US, are a disappointment to the responsibilities of their office and the wishes of their constituents.
We are witnessing the greatest show of cowardice by 535 holders of public office, a spineless administration which refuses to use the mandate given to them by the Constitution, and none of whom has once displayed the qualities of statesmanship which used to be the distinction of our chosen representatives. What we have here are people for whom we have voted and in whom we have placed (misplaced is more correct here) our confidence based upon their promises only to see them use us as pawns in their negotiations for their egotistical, and often egomaniacal, goals. None of this will change regardless if the current situation is resolved to someone's satisfaction because they will not be fulfilling the wishes of the american people. And this is the very bottom line, folks.
Chandra - although I'm in agreeement with the general direction of your post, I question what you are holding over the President's head here. You're maintaining that the Congress has work but then calls the Administration spineless for refusing to use the mandate given to them by the Constitution.
When was that threshhold passed where the President gives the space for the Congress to do what it SHOULD be doing vs. when you think the Executive Branch should disregard the Congress and go it alone? (IMO, something I think the Country generally dispised about the previous Administration for doing all too frequently)
"I know all on the right would like the subject of the prior admin to cease, but why the hell should it? It is what it is."
You mean President Obama is a Bush-blamer and a Republican-blamer. "It is what it is."
if the agreement lacks new tax revenue, the t-pubs win and the dems lose at the polls?
what is wrong with the dem party? no new taxes=a no vote. the wealthy must pay their fair share!
kr - care to tell us what the "fair share" is? Really, what is fair share to you?
Based on Internal Revenue service data for 2008 those earning less than $33,048 contribute only about 2.7% in income taxes. those making over $380,354 (top 1 %) pay 38.02 % of income taxes.
Hardly seems fair that the bottom 50% only contribute 2.7% in income taxes to fund many of the programs that benefit them the most.
http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html