E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSOur verdict after last night’s debt-deal announcement: Nobody really won, but some lost more than others… What we learned about Obama: He still hasn't mastered dealing with Congress, but he had to put compromise and averting economic calamity (and its real and political impact) above everything else… What we learned about Boehner: He presides over an ideologically similar coalition that acts as if they aren't. And his toughest challenge will come in the next 24 hours… What we learned about the Tea Party and the GOP: They don’t know when to declare victory… A final Senate vote on the deal could come later this afternoon… If you missed Brian Williams’ “Taking the Hill” special last night, you can watch it online… Some 2012 candidates react to the deal (Bachmann and Huntsman) and some don’t (Romney)… Romney’s Super PAC raises more than the Super PAC backing Obama… And a pro-Perry Super PAC is airing a TV ad in Iowa.
*** Nobody’s really a winner: Just like last year’s BP spill, this entire debt debate took a months-long psychological toll on the nation. But unlike the BP spill, it was a crisis created entirely by Washington’s political leaders. And now that it appears this crisis has been plugged -- though the House and Senate still must vote on the agreement reached last night -- it’s clear there were no winners, as NBC’s Tom Brokaw observed on “Meet the Press” yesterday. While Republicans got the cuts they were demanding (and at least got to delay any revenue/tax increases), the past few weeks have throw into question their ability to govern. And while President Obama gets his debt-ceiling increase and gets to avert economic disaster, Democrats are demoralized and commentators argue that the president has been diminished.
*** What we learned about Obama in this debate: He put compromise and averting economic calamity above everything else. His critics say he should have staked out a tougher negotiating stance -- like brandishing the 14th Amendment or producing a liberal-leaning negotiating start point -- but he never did so, which allowed the hard-charging Republicans to win more concessions. As we pointed out last week, Democrats were forced to retreat time and time again: They retreated on their push for a clean debt-ceiling raise; they retreated on the size of the spending cuts; and they backed away from insisting that tax revenues be included (although that still might happen with the upcoming congressional committee and/or the expiration of the Bush tax cuts). But through it all, Obama came across as the reasonable person in the room. Will independents and swing voters reward him for that next year? He can say to Mitt Romney or whoever his GOP opponent is next year: “Can you land the plane like I was able to?” It was ugly and messy, but got done. And there’s this: There’s no longer talk of Obama being a big-government socialist… But he didn't get the big deal, and we saw again that his inability to forge personal relationships on Capitol Hill cost him.
*** What we learned about John Boehner: In the end, he got his deal with Obama, but it wasn’t easy. Balancing doing the responsible thing -- raising the debt ceiling -- but getting his rank-and-file to go along proved to be challenging for the speaker. But his biggest challenge will come in the next 24 hours or so, to convince his rank-and-file to accept the deal. And chew on this: It’s quite possible that more Senate Democrats will vote for the compromise than Senate Republicans, while more House Republicans will vote for it than House Democrats. In the same way some on the left are questioning the president's ability to lead, Boehner's being questioned, too -- him herding cats has not been pretty to watch.
*** What we learned about the GOP and the Tea Party: Perhaps the biggest takeaway is that they don’t know how to declare victory. As bruising as this entire debate was for President Obama, last Thursday’s failure by Boehner to round up the GOP votes for his House bill -- before it had to be amended -- was a body blow for the House GOP. While Democrats lost in the particulars on the deal, Republicans lost in looking like a responsible governing party that deserves control of both the legislative and executive branches. But they still got what they wanted: a sizable bite out of government. But strikingly, just like how the left didn’t celebrate Obama’s landmark health-care achievement (even though it was the biggest expansion of the social safety net since the 1960s), the right isn’t really cheering this deal (even though it represents a historic cut in government spending).
*** Senate vote timing: NBC’s Libby Leist reports that both Senate Democrats and Senate Republicans meet with their respective caucuses at 11:00 am ET. If Senate goes first in voting for this deal, debate would start around noon ET, with a final vote late afternoon at the earliest.
*** Inside Congress: By the way, if you didn’t see last night’s special look at Congress -- “Taking the Hill” -- by NBC’s Brian Williams and his team, click here for the video.
NBC's Tom Brokaw and David Gregory talk about the impact of the Tea Party on the debt deal.
*** Some 2012 candidates react (Bachmann and Huntsman) -- and some don’t (Romney): So how did the 2012 candidates react to the deal? Not surprisingly, Michele Bachmann said she would vote against it. “The president continues to press for a ‘balanced approach,’ which everyone knows is code for increased spending and taxes,” she said in a statement, per NBC’s Jamie Novogrod. “Someone has to say no,” she says. “I will.” By comparison, Jon Huntsman recommended its passage. "While this framework is not my preferred outcome, it is a positive step toward cutting our nation's crippling debt,” he said. And Mitt Romney? His campaign didn’t comment one way or the other, maintaining its relative silence on this story.
*** Super PAC-men: On Sunday, “Restore Our Future” -- the Super PAC supporting Romney -- reported it has raised $12.2 million dollars in the first six months of this year, NBC’s Garrett Haake reports. The Super PAC, which can accept unlimited donations, was funded exclusively by just 86 donors. There were four $1 million dollar donations, and no single donation was less than $2,500. Among the bold-faced names who wrote checks to the committee: members of the Marriott family (on whose board Romney sat until earlier this year), beer magnate August Busch III, and New York investor John Paulson, who was the only individual to write a $1 million check to the Super PAC. By the way, that $12.2 million haul is substantially larger than the $3 million-plus haul by the Democratic Super PAC supporting Obama, Priorities USA Action; its sister group, Priorities USA, brought in an additional $2 million.
*** And a Perry Super PAC is up with TV ad in Iowa: And speaking of Super PACs, one supporting Rick Perry -- who isn’t even in the GOP presidential race yet -- is going up with this TV ad in Iowa. Politico: “Jobs for Iowa is spending less than $40,000 for two week’s worth of air time on Fox News Channel in the state… But the group is rumored to have the backing of wealthy Texas Republicans who have long supported Perry and are considering expanding the ad campaign to other states in the near future.” We thought these Super PACs would be players in the general election, but we never thought they’d also be players in the primaries.
*** On the 2012 trail: Bachmann and Santorum stump in Iowa, while Huntsman campaigns in New Hampshire.
*** Monday’s “Daily Rundown” line-up: Debt deal debriefings with House Minority Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), “Gang of Six” Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID), Tuesday Group Co-chair Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO), and White House Deputy Senior Adviser Stephanie Cutter… And 2012 implications with the Washington Post’s Dan Balz, National Journal’s Ron Fournier and former Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY).
Countdown to Wisconsin recall general for GOP senators: 8 days
Countdown to Iowa GOP straw poll: 12 days
Countdown to Wisconsin recall general for Dem senators: 25 days
Countdown to NV-2 and NY-9 special elections: 43 days
Countdown to Election Day 2011: 99 days
Countdown to the Iowa caucuses: 189 days
* Note: When the IA caucuses take place depends on whether other states move up
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower
Leave a Comment:
As reported last night it appears that the Tea party controlled Congress has won another battle and is on its way to the gutting of our government and destroying Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Medical Research, FEMA, FAA, Food and Product Safety, Education, repealing rules and regulations on Wall Street and Big Business, continue the huge tax cuts for the richest 2% and the economic divide will increase.
The first $1 Trillion in cuts will come from non-military discretionary programs. The second $1.8 Trillion which is supposedly going to be some type of negotiated cuts will have to included entitlements and the DOD. There is not enough left on the discretionary side to achieve this $1.8 Trillion so they will have to hit entitlements unless we have increases in revenues that will offset some of the $1.8 Trillion in cuts.
Now, we all agree that we do have a spending issue is this country – no doubt there, none. But we also have a revenue problem as well. I have no problem with addressing the spending cuts as long as they are across the board cuts and everybody has some skin in the game instead of just one select group. But we also need to address the revenue issues as well which by the very nature of these cuts is going to get even worse. These cuts are going to cost jobs, lots of them, which will drive down Federal and State Revenues and put more strain on UI, Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc. You cannot have one without the other and that is my point. Fix what is broken, get spending under control and increase revenues like creating a targeted Jobs Bill.
Jobs are what we need (and are still the #1 priority of the American People – not the Debt/Deficit) and an Infrastructure Jobs Bill would create hundreds of thousands of good paying jobs reducing unemployment and increase revenues at both the State and Federal levels. That is a win/win.
I keep telling you this was never about the Debt Ceiling which was a contrived crisis by the Radical Right. It was about power and greed and the gutting of the Federal Government. I have not heard a single word about creating jobs as a way to help reduce the debt/deficit.
Unemployment and a soft or stalled economy are pretty much assured for the near future. So while the tea party has won this round, we the American people have lost and lost big time. Wall Street, Big Business and the Millionaires/Billionaires are once again the big winners.
This is just the beginning and the real fight is yet to come. Right now the score is Tea Party +1 | America 0
Missouri Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, called the deal “a sugar-coated Satan sandwich”
Ok so now the GOP/TP has nothing stopping them form creating jobs and improving the economy like they promised in 2010 right. We can now expect to see a flurry of Job Bills and Stimulus Bills RIGHT!!!!
Below is a good article on how we got here in the first place.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/07/29/283515/even-after-proposed-hike-reagan-increased-debt-ceiling-twice-as-fast-as-obama/
Looks like Harry and Barry are serving up a heaping helping of Feisty’s Famous Republican Dirt Pot Pie for the lefty liberals to chew on. I just hope the morons in Washington (both sides) don’t screw this up at the last minute and blow up the economy due to their incompetence. Given the dismal economic news that came out last week showing that, in the first half of 2011, the economy grew at barely a crawl; these morons could easily put us back into recession. This Friday’s jobs numbers are not likely to be very good either. Get this thing done and go on your August vacations. At least you won’t screw up anything more until after Labor Day.
Well done Mr. President:
At approximately 9:53 our President announced a deal on resolving the debt ceiling. By 10:00 pm some liberal media like Huffington Post presented the headline, "It's All Cuts". No unemployment extensions, and economist Paul Krugman is saying, "The President Surrenders". Quite frankly, it annoys me when the extreme left demonstrates that they are as uncompromising as the extreme right. And while I'm at it, words like "surrender" and "caving-in" does not help the political dialogue, especially when we were coming up on a self-imposed economic crisis. John Boehner has repeatedly said he does not like the word "compromise". John is not the sharpest knife in the drawer so don't tell him that to compromise and to negotiate means about the same thing.
President Obama negotiated a reasonable deal. He got what he wanted: 1) A long term deal which should provide some stability to a fragile economy. 2) Discretionary spending will be capped. A reasonable position, as that's what responsible Americans do when money is tight. 3) Keeps Pell Grants to educate our youth. 4) Protects Social Security and Medicare benefits for low income Americans. 5) President's commitment of shared sacrifice protecting seniors and the middle-class, while insisting on shared sacrifice from the wealthy and large corporations is present in the next round of budget cuts. President Obama believes in the process of governing and he knows how to govern.
Both extremes can posture before the cameras, but they are not in the room when the tough decisions are being made.
Joe,
If the Tea Party says "no" to the deal and successfully blocks it will you consider them "morons"?
If the Tea Party says "no" to the deal and successfully blocks it will you consider them "morons"?
____________________________________________
Yes. Anyone that blocks this at the last minute, today or tomorrow, left, right, or center is a moron.
Good Read Navy... jobs? what are you talking about? after republicans took office, they've apparently forgotten what that word job means.... it's debt, debt, debt... and one crisis after another... they will make one crises and turn it into 4 sub-crisis's. Good thing at least Obama's not going to drag out this debt ceiling thing for another 6months.
What have we learned?
We learned Obama can be rolled, out maneuvered, confused, angered, and made to look totally clueless. But we've seen that many times from Barack, so it is really nothing new.
We learned that Obama will lie about anything to get his way, including threatening Social Security recipients with the loss of their monthly checks. That's a dirty trick a Community Organizer might get away with, but not the POTUS.
We learned that the country understands that both the GOP and the Democrats have caused the debt problem, but the only party that is willing to face those mistakes and start to work our way out of the problem are the GOP.
We learned Harry Reid is a confused old man. While he was trying to pass his bill in the Senate, Minority Leader McConnell was down at the White House telling Obama what he was going to sign. Nice job Mitch!
We're learned we're still waiting for a significant economic/budget bill to get passed in Harry's Senate, 800+ days now since the last one. Maybe today is the day. Or maybe Harry will want to talk about the DREAM Act first.
We learned that when Obama says "I will not sign a debt ceiling bill that does not have tax revenue increases in it", that he is lying.
We learned that to a Liberal, it's "Good Uncertainty" if the government injects uncertainty into the markets and private business with threats of excessive taxes, threats of massive regulations, and a constant barrage of criticism of private business in general. But if that uncertainty is injected into the federal government by not raising the Debt Ceiling unless certain conditions are met, well, that's "Bad Uncertainly". Just another way that the pols in Washington are a bunch of hypocrites.
Obama did a lot of damage to the country when his party controlled Congress, especially with his failed $800 billion stimulus bill and (soon to be termed illegal) $1 trillion dollar ObamaCare programs. Since that time, the country has wised up to what a mistake each of those bills are and what a drag they are on the economy.
The Debt Ceiling win by the Republicans was just a small win. Many more GOP wins will be required, but with Obama in office, those GOP wins are a given.
One other thing we learned: Obama quits real easy.
Joanna:
Something we finally agree on.
What did the GOP win?
...and was it worth it?
So FR says there are no winners, which clearly means that the Left lost.
Here is who won FR, a Grass roots movement that is tired of Big Spending, Big Government politics as usual.
Whine all you want, but the Tea Party controlled the narrative of this discussion from the moment they were swept into office and you can hope all you want, but they are not going away any time soon.
Does that mean no one is getting a trophy?
Did anyone notice no Tea party votes were bought by the GOP leadership? No special projects to their districts, no committee seats, no backroom deals, no Corn Husker Kickbacks, no Louisiana Purchases. Just the GOP Tea party Congressmen and Congresswomen getting elected on a their promise to rein in government, and them making good on their promise.
Refreshing!
Navy, thank you for the excellent summary. Of course, it was never about the debt ceiling, nor was it about jobs.
Without jobs, there is no chance in Hades that we will reach the revenue numbers we evidently need to prevent entitlement cuts. And from what I see here, there is no incentive for job creation, no money to do it, and only a snowball's chance that significant numbers of jobs will be created at any time prior to the 2012 election.
In other words, we're in for a VERY bumpy ride.
Good morning, all. It was a pleasure being around you this weekend. And now I'm off to do my day job. By the time I get back, I hope you will have sorted all of this out.
And good luck with that.
I agree. Time to move on and create some good paying jobs or this whole exercise will not mean anything other than continued chaos. Jobs are still the #1 concern of America.
I think this budget debate really high lights the need for a better leader in the White house. In 2008 inexperienced voters elected an inexperienced man to be president. I think the nations young people learned an expensive lesson in winning a popularity contest and leading...... VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012!
We must recognize that what is REALLY needed in this country is TAX REFORM.
From today's Gartman Letter:
Astonishing!
What we learned today? JoannaSmith1 is here to bash Obama.... and make it seem like the Creep (Tea) party are godsend.
Most politicians, republicans or dems do no belong in office with their hyper-partisan views. But the Creep-party is what scares the bajeezzuusss outta me.. they are idealist with no care for what would happen to this country - as long as it's their way or the highway. They scream debt, debt, debt... and then you tell them everything's on the table (they say.... oh no, we can't raise taxes on the rich? wha??? no, no!!!)... they are being idealist to a fault, bearing supreme ignorance.
Hopefully, they learn... or we remove them from office.
Repubs out there, don't get me wrong, I'm for fiscal sanity......raising retirement age, and changing the way benefits are distributed - we are giving away way too much money. If people are eligible for medicare and SS at 70.... it would solve almost all our problems....
If you want to radically lower the deficits, we need to institute a universal health care system..this will make the largest dent to our deficits since this is where most of the money is spent...
The narrative.
Don't hear much about the phony Global Warming, ehh, Climate Change anymore. Don't hear much about another trillion dollar stimulus.
What do you think will be the major topic in next years elections?
Yup, the narrative was won.
Not really the best deal we were hoping for, at least we're getting something passed so we can move on. Your right on this one, NO WINNERS. A least we can look forward to the coming elections when re-elected President Obama will let the Bush tax cuts expire and we can move forward towards fiscal solvency. Added Bonus. There will be far less TPOTTY members in Congress after the election.
See, what you really meant to say was, "No votes were bought that you know of."
Oh, and the Teapublicans can still block the deal. What then?
The debt ceiling is NOT a bargaining chip. The debt ceiling is NOT a hostage. It is a tool that gives the national family the flexibility to meet emergencies and a host of unplanned contingencies. It must be treated as a tool with limits, it cannot expand indefinitely. It is high time that politicians stopped using the debt ceiling to score utterly worthless political points.
This current solution is just the beginning. The two-trillion-dollar agreement is not a CUT in the debt, it simply is a reduction in spending. The debt will still increase. It's a good start, but that's all it is - a start.
The Tea Party's solution of drastic cuts and no revenue increases has exposed their adherents as arithmetic-challenged neophytes, who cannot grasp the complexity and ramifications of federal spending. Look no further than Joe Walsh, a Tea Party loudmouth, a Congressman who is a monumental hypocrite and/or a simpleton with absolutely no grasp of simple math. He cannot pay his own bills and so he "balances" his budget on the backs of his own children. This is exactly what has happened to this nation. To paraphrase St. Ronald of Reagan, Walsh is not the solution to the problem. HE IS THE PROBLEM.
While the TEA Party has largely been discredited and if all goes well, they will be thrown out of office in 2012, it is time to take a serious look at the math-challenged on the left. There's good news in this agreement to raise the debt ceiling. Defense cuts are now an acceptable target for cuts.
However, the Holy Trinity of the left - Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid - are ALL projected to rise in cost at least three times faster than defense. These rising costs must be stanched and the programs must be completely reformed. None of this band-aid BS - complete reform. Means testing cannot be off the table. Indeed, originally Social Security was means-tested. The components of F.I.C.A taxes are going to have to be raised. Medicaid is screaming for help.
It's been easy to beat on Republicans because their solutions have an element of greed, selfishness, and outright meanness behind them. That the Democrats can defend their programs by saying, "Yeah, but we're nice," doesn't make their programs any less expensive, nor does it exempt their "worthy" programs from the realities of those nasty arithmetical principles.
If nothing else, at least we've started. Let's make sure we don't stop until this is completely repaired.
Ron, I agree with you that Obama compromised deal is the first step in dealing with the defict. But I am concerned as I posted on another thread.
As a pundit stated last night, The Age of Austerity has begun, and this is only the beginning". The poor and working class know this reality, but is the rest of the country ready for this new Age".
I
Anna Molly:
Hope you had a great weekend and you are correct. This whole thing was a power grab and it has cost us already over the last 3-4 months. The economy slowed down because of this bickering, Europe and Asia will never look to us as the power house we once were. Their will be doubt on our "Financial Stability" for decades to come.
The only people winning here are Wall Street, Big Business and the top 2% again.
The real fight has yet to be fought. That will come in phase two - the $1.8 Trillion in cuts.
Thanks Navy: The motives for attempting to take down our President from the extreme right are pretty obvious. Sometimes the comments from the extreme left are simply not helpful either. Obama was on a mission to get beyond this crisis and support the middle class entitlement programs. I believe he successfully accomplished that mission.
Obama stomped out of a meeting, after haranguing the republican majority leader.
Obama set down one marker after another- none of which stood a chance of passing the House- then had three temper tantrums on national television.
He invited people to call, write, and email their representatives- completely unaware that it would backfire because there was more support for the republican plan to cut than there was for his ephemeral plan that relied on spending and tax hikes.
He then caved.
What about any of this leads you to the conclusion that he came across as the only reasonable person in the room?
You keep right on waving those pom poms- I'm afraid that you are going to find that the cheerleading will not have the same result as it did in 2008. Maureen Dowd called it Tulip Mania- and I think she hit it square on the nose.
Obama shelved in 2012.
Yes, they'll no doubt even make money this week from the "relief rally." They can -- and will -- continue to make money without creating jobs -- at least in this country.
God help us all, Navy.
Libbies like Navy have such a hard time understanding the resistance to Obama's spending, are always complaining about the number of times the debt ceiling has been raised for other presidents ……. “No one ever said anything before” they whine.
For those mental giants still oblivious to the obvious …. think of it kinda like a check-up.
You have recently put on a new 4 trillion+ pounds of debt, your economy can’t catch its breathe, your job legs can’t climb 9.2% of the stairs, your gas price pressure is sky high, you have radiating inflation pain, you have numbness in your housing market, your consumer confidence hasn’t been out of bed in 2 years, it feels like the EPA elephant is sitting on your business chest, you have the dead tissue issue of a myo/obama leadership infarction -Dr. Moody along with the specialists at the S&P Center say you absolutely cannot continue …… and the liberal reply is ……. Reagan ate BBQ, you gave tacos and Big Macs to Clinton, Bush got CURLY FRIES EIGHT TIMES! …… I’m not changing……. Not 1% of my chili – cheese fries.
Still don’t get it?
Didn’t think so ……..
If there is anyone that has worked at a childrens hospital ……. Can you explain it to them in terms they will understand?
There is a great way to create jobs or see why tax breaks for the uber rich don't work. Either way it is win win. Just make a "trigger" for the tax breaks that works this way: When any corporation, individual or family can provide documentation that they have created n Jobs (where n equals a number of jobs to be determined) then the tax break kicks in for that corporation, individual or family. Then we will see who really creates jobs and who gorges themselves on profits.
In this latest case, I’m just worn out as everyone else. I wish it would have been a better deal for the people of the United States, because, this whole debt ceiling increase should have been a clean vote to raise the ceiling without the strings attached.
Oh course that what happens when you have the hostage takers, (Republican-Tea Baggers) blackmailing the people of the United States.
For now, I don’t think I would want the President to go with me in negotiating a purchase of a new car.
Leave it to the Teapublican's to be taking a victory lap before the checkered flag... lol
Maybe you all should wait for the ink to dry...
Tunde:
You are on a roll early. Nice job.
The GOP/TP still has nothing to offer this country only that they know how to take this country "Hostage" purely for political gain with no regard to the carnage or the damage they these few "terrorists" are causing over the last several months.
It continues to be all about them. Even winning 80-90% of the pie they are not happy. They still want it all. This is not a Party that I want to lead this country forward as they are really in high gear going in reverse.
We need to move forward not backwards like thy want.
So we have a deal, eh? That's what they're saying, but this thing isn't over until it's over. In particular, it's not over until it passes the House – and that's not a gimme.
As things stand right now, the Tea Party could claim a HUGE victory. First, they've succeeded in dominating the conversation in Washington since their election with a focus on fiscal issues. Second, they succeeded in forcing the debt ceiling deal to exclude new taxes. Third, they succeeded in extracting modest cuts (not "deep" cuts the way the MSM spins it) in projected federal spending – but even though the cuts are modest, they are a significant step in pushing the ship of state onto a more sustainable fiscal course.
All of that is good and all of that is to their everlasting credit because none of that would have happened without their influence. Heck, when outfits like Media Matters and the congressional progressive caucus decry the deal, then you know the good guys have done something right. The question is, is it good enough? Would truly deep cuts be better than modest cuts? Would reforming Social Security and Medicare be better than kicking that can down the road yet again? Does it make sense for defense to risk taking 50% of the cuts in the trigger mechanism when defense accounts for less than 20% of the federal budget? Does it make sense to leave the door open to future tax increases, pending the outcome of the congressional commission?
It's not clear how Tea Partiers will answer those and other questions. What is clear is if they dig in their heels to provide enough votes to defeat the deal in the House, then they will be widely perceived as taking the blame for the massive government shutdown (not "default") that would likely ensue as a consequence of not raising the debt ceiling. That would be politically ruinous for Republicans, and on those grounds alone I would urge those folks to hold their nose and vote for the deal.
But the wild card is the Tea Party doesn't care about that political stuff. They're almost as anti-Republican as they are anti-Democrat, and many may well choose to stand their ground and cast their vote based on the principles that got them elected in the first place – principles which have no room for fairy dust cuts that just aren't quite good enough. So when FR says about the Tea Party: "Perhaps the biggest takeaway is that they don't know how to declare victory" they're not getting it quite right. It's in the interests of FR and other libs to limit the damage to their vision as much as possible and they are fearful the Tea Party may choose to wreak even more havoc than they've done so far. So they portray the Tea Party as unreasonable extremists who don't know how to declare victory. But that's "victory" as seen through the prism of politics-as-usual, which is not necessarily how the Tea Party looks at things. And that's why this thing ain't over yet.
Good Morning Northstar:
Pundits may be right that we are in a new age of austerity, What we are seeing may become the new normal. Not taking care of teachers and our infrastructure does not make us a stronger nation. This weekend I was watching Mecham Auction where they auction off American muscle cars. Those cars are from an era long now past.
Good Morning Anna Molly: I agree with you and Navy that it wasn't about the debt ceiling at all, the Tea Party Republicans continue to want to chip away at our social network and let is decline along with our infrastructure. Have a good day.
The Tea Party needs to take their incremental victory, and look to beat on Obama and the Democrats another day. The Tea Party has thoroughly humiliated the Liberals, now it's time for them to take their focus to the next step in the process and work on the overhaul of the entitlement programs.
Navy
You realize this doesn't effect - doesn't really touch any of the above. Do you even understand base-line budgeting - DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT $1 TRILLION IN CUTS IS ACTUALLY AN INCREASE OF $7 - $8 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT DECADE?
Funny - even not even Harry Reid was stupid enough to put tax increases in his deal because it is such a job killer.
BTW - Did the genuises at CBPP or thinkprogress ever come up with an explanation of how increasing taxes creates jobs? No ...... ?
The first responsibility of the federal government is supposed to do is to protect the country.
The first thing the libs always want to cut is defense.
I thought you were supposed to respect the military, you wear it on your sleeve.
Now you want to cut them first ...... go into another action without them having the best equipment, the best protective gear ...... I guess free abortions, cowboy poetry and puppets are more important, huh?
Conservatives here are quick to declare victory, but the fact of the matter is they didn't get what they wanted.
They don't get to negotiate the budget with their fingers on the trigger of a gun.
They didn't get as much deficit reduction as they wanted.
They didn't get a balanced budget amendment.
They don't get to do it all over at the height of the election season.
Only 1 in 5 Americans approves of how they've handled this.
The President didn't get a plan that Liberals are going to be excited about, but he got what the nation needed--an increase in the debt limit. He got some deficit reduction, which he's been saying would need to come in time from the day he introduced the stimulus bill. Bottom line, he did what was necessary.
The debt ceiling, as I've said from the beginning, is merely a technical detail required to cover spending already approved by Congress. No one is ever happy about it. No one is happy about it this time.
The MSM and the political class always wants to declare a winner and loser immediately. Kudos to FR for realizing that model doesn't fit this situation. Much of the reason is within the deal itself. The further reductions mandated down the road are where the real winners and losers will be determined.
When that time comes the cuts will be negotiated in the budget process, as should be the case. There will be tremendous pressure on Conservatives at that point as half the cuts mandated in the case of failure would come from defense--a source which they prefer to consider COMPLETELY off limits. I predict that at that time the balanced approach will win out. It's the only sensible alternative left.
I would like to ask my right leaning friends a couple of questions. Anyone can answer.....
1) With our economic growth dismal, jobs still being shed, and investment still very cool, how does removing 2.8 trillion dollars from the system impact our staggering economy?
2) Can ANYONE give me one peice of empirical evidence that tax breaks to the top produce jobs? It's been ten years, there should be some sound evidence by now one way or the other....
Thanks,
PS. I'm soooo glad that this is almost over, so we can get back to focusing on JOBS; where the focus should have been this entire time....
JAS1,
We also learned that you are not a mental giant. Cutting spending in a recession is bad business. All you do is spout consevative rhetoric, you should run for president I hear your party will take anyone.
I have said it a 1000 times before and I will say it again, the dept problems are due to W. Bush and the Republicans. Facts are Facts.
$4 trillion in deficit spending in 2.5 years. Where are the jobs?
I LOVE IT!
The lefty nutjobs are crying because the 'Tea Baggers won,' when what really happened is a deal got reached.
The righty nutjobs are crying because, 'Oh noes, we had to raise the debt ceiling,' when what really happened is a deal got reached.
Extremists on either side of the aisle are bawling in their Cheerios, while normal people are nodding their heads and partially pleased that somehow there is hope that thinking minds can work things out. The only people screaming bloody murder are those who turned their ears off and are still more concerned with using the mouth to rant.
It is a good day when both radical extremes go red in the face. A good day.
Is what we learn about JoAnna Smith et al. surprising?
~ Way more engaged in the pro-nun-ciation of words about the President than they ever are about the seriously zero-creativity, seriously non-productive, seriously-slash-and-burn corporate lackeys in the GOP Chaos/Disaster destroy-the-middle-class/US/world party.
Cultural bias or genetic?
You willing to bet the mortgage that this is what they'll do?
You think the tea party has thoroughly humiliated the liberals. The tea party has exposed itself for being for the rich only. They don't care about jobs, the debt, or America, just the rich.
I would be more humiliated if I was a tea partier exposing my hatred of America and my total devotion to the rich and that they don't care how many children starve or don't have clean water to drink.
From what I have seen the tea partiers are not bright enough to understand what they are doing to America for the rich.
I am angry there is a group of elected officials that put the rich above America, but not humiliated.
Republicans of the rich, for the rich, by the rich and the suckers that believe them, now that's humiliating.
BREAKING NEWS: Obama's 2012 re-election slogan released.
"Re-elect Obama 2012 He Won't Fight For What's Right But He Will Tell You How He Feels About Things"
Maybe I wasn't blunt enough.
Baggers lose.
Econuts lose.
Any questions? ;)
Rant
This is not a balanced approach. This is not a shared sacrifice. This is not what America should be about. You can not reduce the deficit on a diet of cuts only. Where is the revenue? History will point to this as a turning point for the worse. For the greate good, the legislation will pass in the Senate. In the house I hope it passes but it is not certain it will. Will the Tea Party know enough to vote for this huge win? Heard a pundit say that the TP couldn't win by TKO they want to win by KO, actually they want to win by premeditated homicide. Democrats in the House should show their principles by voting en masse against this. Let the GOP pass this alone. If it passes the Democrats must pull out the stops to make sure the super committees don't gut SS, medicare and medicaid. They should agree to a hair cut for these programs but not the decapitation that the GOP envision.
Opinion
Nobody is a winner? You must be kidding. The GOP have won. Despite common logic; the elecotrate voted for these clowns in 2010 and we as a nation got what we voted for. I severely doubt there can be a course correction. The GOP can campaign on one issue and work on their idealogy of small government instead. In 2012 unless the Democrats fight, the GOP will control 2 if not 3 branches of power. People will not learn they will vote to hurt themselves, vote to hurt their children's education, and vote to curb social services and the elderly. The GOP can run the following ad commercial and it wouldn't matter. People will still vote for them.
2012 GOP Political ad campaign - Excerpt "It's Twilight in America"
It's twilight in America. Today less men and women will go to work than ever before in our country's history. Nearly 2,000 families today will lose their homes, more than at any time in the past four years. This afternoon 6,500 young men and men will be married, and with unemployment more than what it was just four years ago, they can look forward with uncertainty to the future. It's twilight in America, and under the leadership of the GOP and Tea Party our government is weaker and worse off than ever before.
Why would we ever want to continue funding government another four years?
w bush
BREAKING NEWS: Obama's 2012 re-election slogan released.
"Re-elect Obama 2012 He Won't Fight For What's Right But He Will Tell You How He Feels About Things
==================
Gonna need a small font size to fit that on a bumper sticker.
from all the fake outrage posted by the libs on here, its obvious the American public will be the losers. "over 10-15 years"=you are all morons, and too stupid to realize we are just going to go back on our word later on. Net result of this:
we will be downgraded by credit agencies
taxes will go up on all of us, either directly or indirectly
the conservatives will be blamed for any bad outcome by the liberal controlled press
there will be no balanced budget amendment proposed.
The definition of a career politician is someone who can deceive more successfully than his opponent.
JAS1,
I think that in the last two years the worst quarter of growth came when you morons voted the tea party into office. The unemployment rate was going down until May of this year. They came with the premise that they would create jobs and all they have done is talk about the debt. You never have facts just rhetoric, I hope that one day you are jobless and when your REpub friends step on your neck to get a leg up you will finally understand.
Anybody gonna take this one? The silence is deafening...
I would like to ask my right leaning friends a couple of questions. Anyone can answer.....
1) With our economic growth dismal, jobs still being shed, and investment still very cool, how does removing 2.8 trillion dollars from the system impact our staggering economy?
2) Can ANYONE give me one peice of empirical evidence that tax breaks to the top produce jobs? It's been ten years, there should be some sound evidence by now one way or the other....
Thanks,
PS. I'm soooo glad that this is almost over, so we can get back to focusing on JOBS; where the focus should have been this entire time....
Well, I guess the sky won't fall today. I guess the aliens just went away, for now.... gotta love the Disneyfied outcome of that tale :)
Next up, the budget battle. With 60 days left on the current fiscal year, and DC sweltering, I guess everyone does their thing, the votes eventually pass, "We did it!!" from everybody. Then they take a 4 week vacation, then the House passes another budget which attempts to defund NPR, HUD, the department of Education, the EPA, the FEC, the SEC and everything else other than defense and we start all over.
Only if both parties elect moderates who are more interested in governing than in making points with an obnoxiously loud 10% of the populous will we begin to resolve the issues facing our country.
sure Ted, as soon as you explain why detroit has the same population now as it did 100 years ago!
now thats silence!!!!
On a side note, I made a lengthy post which got relegated to Pg 2. I'd appreciate the commentary from of all of the regular First Read posters, regardless what your political views might be. If you've got a few moment, hop over to Pg 2 and share your thoughts.
I read this blog and all I'm reading from the left is that corporate America won. They didn't
I read this blog and all I'm reading is that I didn't expect more because the TP is holding the country hostage. They didn't
I saw the reports of the "deal" and all I read was there was a "framework" to cut $1 trillion. No specifics.
I heard that that it was just cuts. No revenue. No tax reform.
Phase 2, the President said he would CONTINUE his fight fora a balanced approach. When did he start?
There's going to be a "Super Committee" to figure out where the cuts will come from. Simpson-Bowles and the Gang of 6 Plan have been scrapped? Sure seems so. What a waste.
What did the President get. He got the discussion postponed till after the next election. Wow, big political win for him. That's all he got. The rest of us got screwed.
The I'll never vote for a bill without revenue increases President...well, as usual, he caved.
HCR, he caved.
Bush era tax cuts, he caved.
Debt ceiling, he caved.
He abandoned the Senate Democrats, Reid in particular.
He abandoned the House Democrats, Pelosi in particular.
He caved. He got the Beohner bill...sans he Balanced Budget Amendment to be voted on a later date.
Want someone to blame for this fiasco? Look no further than the worst negotiator on the planet.
Obama never stands his ground, exercise his powers as the President of the US and almost immediately goes for a negotiating position than sticking to his demands and Democrat's core principals.
It's easy to negotiate with a man who already gave away the store before the talks begin.
He gets to not have to discuss this for his re-election and the rest of us will see massive cuts in entitlement programs and programs for the poor and elderly.
....and did someone say no one won.
The TP and GOP are now in control of the art of the deal and with the specifics of this "framework" still to be defined and part 2 next, who do you think is going to have the louder voice...the spine to stand up for what they believe.
There was a huge winner yesterday and it was not the Democrats and not the President.
Ted, Mid Michigan:
I'd like to answer your question: "Can ANYONE give me one peice of empirical evidence that tax breaks to the top produce jobs? It's been ten years, there should be some sound evidence by now one way or the other...."
It is not the only piece of evidence, but the Laffer Curve is an excellent representation that tax breaks do stimulate the economy to the extent that tax rate decreases can actually increase revenues/jobs. It is the sentence following your question that truly makes your question so important.
You quite correctly note that it has been ten years since we have seen any evidence. Dr. Laffer's curve is accurate - but only for a certain period of time. It does not represent an Economic constant. It is dependent on a number of variables, among them sufficient demand, sufficient production capacity, and sufficient capital for consumption. It is then that the curve obtains. Right now, demand in any number of sectors is down. Capital outlays are down for a variety of reasons.
Right now, tax cuts make sense only at lower income levels because that money is going to be spent. At the upper levels, the evidence is clear that tax cuts do not go back into the economy as investments. Yes, there is some increased consumption of big-ticket items, but that hardly registers in GDP.
For all the hand-wringing, there is still room to cut spending, and plenty of room to increase taxes.
Wow, how did "phony Global Warming" get into the conversation? And by the way, for the record, GWB raised the debt 6.1 TRILLION dollars on his watch (Obama 2.0 Trillion). Fiscal conservative. Yeah right.
And I'll just sit here and enjoy 106 in Dallas today and the second hottest summer in 100 years.
Well Mitch, that's pretty easy. Detroit was built on manufacturing jobs. Jobs which have been automated or outsourced at such a level that the city's labor force was unable to sustain itself. Therefore the people have left for areas with more job opportunity. I don't know how this in any way relates to my questions, or with whom, if anyone, to affix blame to this situation. BTW, I am not from detroit. I am from Mid-Michigan. So, my answer is observational only....
Most importantly we learned that Democrats were willing to put together a totally laughable "debt reduction plan" which hinged on false projections of war savings in a disgusting attempt to keep their spending spree going in spite of overwhelming public outrage at government wastefulness.
If their ever was a political party that operates only for it's own interest no matter the cost to the nation Dems have proven they are it.
Raising revenue steps:
1) Double the taxes on any Fortune 500 corporation that has increased profits and done it through cutting employees in the past 2 years.
2) Raid the accounts of all politicians who refused to either cut entitlement program any amount, or refused to raise taxes any amount. Take all their money and let them only earn their salary from being in office.
3)Profit.
"Michele Bachmann said she would vote against it. “The president continues to press for a ‘balanced approach,’ which everyone knows is code for increased spending and taxes,” she said in a statement, per NBC’s Jamie Novogrod. “Someone has to say no,” she says. “I will.”"
Ummm didnt he just approve a historical cut in government spending? How is that INCREASED spending? Bachmann even admits to saying NO. How anyone can take her seriously as a potential President is beyond me. Obama, despite giving up too much and not getting enough, proved to presidential in his ability to compromise, lead, and put his and his party's ideologies aside to strike a deal. The GOP and TP come across as the tantrum throwing kids who got their way for once. Not a mind-set I want running my country. Now that this deal will go through 2012, please keep in mind the GOP hardasses who caused this mess, and vote them out in 2012.
Ted: you may not be from Detroit, but the effects of the decline of the "Big 3" in the state of Michigan, particularly Detroit, are felt throughout the state. For that matter, all over the nation. It is long past time for the United States to take a hard look at what we really "gain" by "free trade" agreements.
Is it to our countries advantage to be able to purchase imported items for 10%-20% less than domestically produced if, in the process, we eliminate 200,000 jobs directly and indirectly involved ? Would the US be better off if we put in place a 20% tariff (eliminate that evil deficit) and possibly give US workers jobs ? Just some thoughts.
Here we go again with the typical left-right bashing. Don't you people ever stop?
Let's consider something folks. This deal isn't done yet. Votes have to be tallied and nothing is certain.
Let's say the vote is in the favorable column and the president signs it. Hooray! Right? The disaster is over and we can trudge along our merry little lives with little concern that the economy is going to do.... what? exactly?
Adding to the debt without reasonable measures to reverse that debt is insane! It keeps piling up...
SINCE WHEN IS AMERICA ALLOWING ITSELF TO BECOME BEHOLDEN TO THOSE WE OWE?
The real problem has NOT been addressed. I hate to spill coffee on all your keyboards, but we are not out of this. This is a band aid. A temporary fix. The wound is NOT healed at all. All we've done is kick it down the road for our children and grandchildren to fix, or not. And I say or not because we haven't faced it yet.... that $14.3 Trillion monkey on our back and soon to grow larger.
Most of you were totally weirded out with the thought of our government not passing the debt ceiling increase. Imagine, if you will, a point in time when we can't get credit anymore. The debt ceiling means nothing because we won't be able to get any more money from outside sources. What will you do then? We need to get on board with fixing the problem and stop wasting band aids. We need to fix our debt!!!
Dirp,
You don't have to tell me.....My small town has been pretty much decimated by the loss of suppliers of the big three. Unemployment just about double the national average for my city. A real industrial wasteland. But hey, there's plenty of resteraunts!
Nobody is a Winner!!
Especially the America people.
Chuck Todd-
I heard you say this morning that the President needs to learn how to negotiate with Republicans. Why it is the President has to kiss their ring? Why do you and the rest of the MSM make it the responsibility of the President to play fair even in the face of such open hostility from the opposition?
That’s just like asking the Israelis to negotiate with the PLO who have stated publicly that they are only interested in the destruction of the State of Israel and driving the
Israelis into the sea.
Chuck. Did you forget that Mitch McConnell stated in January 2009 that the Republican Party was interested in nothing but defeating Barack Obama at every turn to ensure that he would be a one term President?
They won’t even vote for their own creations if the President says it is a good idea!
How does one negotiate with that kind of ignorance and intransigence?
President Bush cut brush for eight years and ran up the debt and deficit to astronomical levels yet the MSM continues to frame the debate as if the 14 trillion dollars on the books belongs to Obama. Even when you have Republican guests on your shows you rarely correct them when they start railing against the President about running up the deficit. You know that if President Obama could have left ALL of that unfunded isht in that black box that Bush and “DEFICTS DON’T MATTER” Cheney kept in the bunker, the numbers would look decidedly different today.
You people are shameful and all you care about is ratings. Truth be damned.
Ira - It's easy to negotiate with a man who already gave away the store before the talks begin.
I knew when the president made the comment "Don't call my bluff", that anybody who tells me that they are bluffing is going to get called, he was done.
This just proved it.
Worst.Negotiator.Ever.
BIO of one of the Noted Tea Party House Representatives......AMERICA IS SCREWED NOW & FUTURE GENERATIONS.
Michele Bachmann Alumni of ORU graduated the same year ORU "lost" it's Law Accreditation.
Maybe Michele Bachmann's historical inaccuracies are insignificant to her because such minor facts pale in the shadow of her divine mission.
After all, Bachmann graduated from Oral Roberts Law School, which eventually closed and transferred its library to Pat Robertson's Regent Law School. The Regent Law School Review provides an insight into Bachmann's view on law - and history: "Regent University Law Review seeks to present academically excellent scholarship on relevant issues facing the legal community today from the perspective of a historic Christian worldview. It is committed to a jurisprudence based upon a Higher Law; that is, law based upon the Law of God."
That is why Bachmann, Palin, and others seem to make whatever they want of the Constitution, our legal system and legal precedent. The foundation for the US rule of law in their minds is secondary to whatever might be their interpretation of a "higher law."
Of course, that puts Bachmann in pretty divinely inspired company. According to the Regent Law Review, "Past contributors include United States Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, Judge Edith H. Jones, Attorney General Edwin Meese III, Robert P. George, George Allen, Charles W. Colson, Charles E. Rice, Phillip E. Johnson, David Barton, Nancy R. Pearcey, and James Bopp."
According to Christian extremists such as Bachmann, the Good Lord can't be bothered with facts. "He's" too busy putting the final touches on Armageddon
Tunde Akins
Trunde, please give the personal attacks a rest. Barry O did what he thought would create a better image of himself for the next election, and the MSNBC staff is already spinning President 'Present' as the creater of compromise, working to gather the two group together to stop the debt issue he created.
At the end of any negotiation in Congress, we have the two parties and leaders, to include the WH, finger pointing on who is at fault and who was the leaders that got the job done. What they fail to acknowledge is the losers of the legislation, who in this case are the taxpayers. This process was dysfunctional, it was ugly, and the real 'Party of NO' has to be seen as the Progressives of the Senate. Ya gotta love Harry, Dickie, and Chuckie (Freddie and Fannie are solvent and in no problem position) Schumer. Now how can that trio stand up to the public and lie about this issue and who is at fault?
OK NavyBoy:
Your leader of the Progressive Party ended this by giving in to the Republicans by buying into their program. Time to give it a rest NavyBoy, or is the cause of the issues still George Bush? Hostage and terrorists? Get real NavyBoy. Which group offered up proposals to end this crisis, and which group tabled proposals while offering nothing to the equation? Yep, and did your Progressives ever offer any proposal other than the watered-down plan offered by Reid that mirrored the GOP 2nd plan? Did the Progressive/Democratic Party ever offer up a budget?
Rather than govern as they should, the Progressive/Democratic party failed to do its duty to America, instead doing nothing while complaining about the other side of the aisle. Anything to move the issue from them to the GOP. Now didn't they also attempt to do this during the last election period to save seats and the Republicans took seats due to their inability to govern. Didn't they learn the last time?
As we move into this next election, Barry O, the name that provides you with your excitement, will do anything to create an image favorable to his re-election. Too little to late for Barry and the Progressive/Democrats. Everyone knows what is going on, and people are greatly distrested with the manner in which BOTH parties have worked towards this situation. Barry O, rockstar President, will have another issue to explain to the nation, along with his spending, lack of leadership, inability to govern.
The MSNBC staff, the Liberal Progressive Fan Club of NewsVine and other liberal media outlets can attempt to spin this President's leadership all day, but people can see which party create the impass, failed to lead, failed to negotiate in good faith, and overall - just failed.
NavyBoy, and the rest of those that belive their position may change their lives in this next election should be concerned. It's going to be over folks. A new accounting for government is in the making, and all of you can thank Barry O, Presidential Rock Star, for creating this new trend.
'All Drama Obama' - out in 2012!
White Collar Auto..
He said on national TV last Monday, I am for a balanced approach and will veto any bill that is not balanced (paraphrased).
What happened to the man that ordered the OBL operation?
Ted MM - I am not from detroit. I am from Mid-Michigan. So, my answer is observational only....
Well Ted, I am from Detroit and it has been decades of Democrat Corruption that has led to the downfall of Detroit. Detroit now consists, largely of an illiterate, welfare state of people, who are still waiting for that "Obama Money".
Come on down, I'll show the Democrat handy work first hand. The Cass Corridor is especially nice on a hot summer night.
He dealt with reality, that's what. Polls show America was aligned with the Tea Party, whether liberals ignore Nov 2 or not. What's more likely, he's a coward or his recent drop to an all time low of 40% approval forced him to compromise? At least he's smart enough to recognize he got a shellacking Nov , apparently most liberals aren't.
OBL operation? I could have done that! The CIA found him, the SEALS are trained to do op's like this, all Obama had to do was say yes. Can anyone imagine ANY president saying no? It take zero brains and zero courage to make that decision.
David Walker and Ted -
Economist Joseph Stiglitz examined the question of tax cuts, empoloyment, and economic growth, and discovered that following the 2008 crash, tax cuts did very, very little to create real stimulus of the economy. Instead, he found, savings rates inceased substantially. For those who were not at the very lowest end of the economic scale, very little additional spending was caused by the tax cuts.
Thus the evidence is that cutting taxes so far has not produced the kind of economic activity that creates jobs. You can read it for yourself in Stiglitz' book, Freefall.
As usual, the rhetoric of the right on this subject is virtually a kind of sacred testament - taken on faith rather than supported by any evidence at all. The evidence, instead, is the opposite.
Taking such a huge amoount of public spending out of the economy at this point almost guarantees a return to recession, more lost jobs, and economic disruption. The evidence is available, too - not only in last week's disappointing economic news, but from the Great Depression, when contracting Federal spending in 1936-37 tooik the country back into recession. See Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal, by William E. Leuchtenburg for a detailed treatment of this.
The rigid right has already thrown tens of thousands of public and private workers out of their jobs since the beginning of the year. The rigid right has caused an already-visible slowdown of economic recovery.
What the commentators haven't realized yet is that as the rigid right continues with its ideological rampage, that faction is taking full responsibility for, and political "ownership" of, the nation's economic problems. These insane antics by the rigid right compare to some ancient Roman general partying the night before he falls on his own sword.
Right, left, teabaggers, teapublicans, dumocrats, Odumbo.... There's our problem.... We can't stop acting like fourth graders long enough to work anything out. Let the system go tits up.... Smack the ceiling, dive to the floor and flop like a fish ot of water.... Let gov't checks stop, just make sure congress and the senate is first on the list. Why do we pay this bunch of as$clowns to destroy our country? Why do we let corporations(the same ones out-sourcing our jobs and reporting record profits at our expense) run "our" gov't? Everybody here bit@hes and gripes about the other one's party or agenda...Yet noone can see the light.
I could care less about the "debt ceiling" or the U.S. defaulting on anything. It wouldn't affect me anyway.
WCA,
So, in your world, the outsourcing / automation of the auto industry has nothing to do with the "Motor City's" 30% unemployment rate? Talk about narrow vision!
To think, everyone, all we need to fix the unemployment problem (according to WCA) is route out and stop corruption. Problem solved!
WCA,
I do not disagree that there have been many corruption issues with the city's government, who are almost all Dems, but this is a very short sighted view of the unemployment problem.
Well Ira, from my point of view, the OBL thing was a no-brainer. The only way he screws that up is to not pull the trigger. But don't get me wrong, I give him full credit for pulling the trigger.
I think what you are seeing is something that many of us have thought for a long time. This President is simply in over his head. He is finding out that there is a big difference between campiagn rhetoric and speeches versus actually having to govern.
I have always said he talks a great game, but at some point you have to actually be able to play.
Has anyone ever read the constitution on this, It is congresses resposibility to raise money not the executive branch.
Legislative branch= Make the laws and raise revenue for govt.
Executive branch = Enforce the laws and run the govt.
Judicial branch = Rule if laws are consitutional and ensure govt is run fairly.
Not sure how any of you get that it is the presidents fault when he can't get the children we elect to pass a budget, he is just a referee in all of this, the blame clearly falls on the leadership in the House and the Senate or lack of it. Which in turn falls on us for continuing to elect these fools.
Reid not sure what he has ever done to deserve his position.
Boehner Navy reject yet the house thinks he is worthy of leadership position.
Throw them all out at next election I will not vote for any incumbents at next election.
For all you people that think the cuts are too small -- You need to add in $1 trillion in reduced spending because the 'wars' are ending. Boehner and McConnell called it a gimmick but ending the 'wars' will still reduce the deficit. If the GOP oppose ending the 'wars', then they favor deficit spending and this debate was a total lie on their part. You should also add in the extra revenue beginning in 2013 when the tax cuts expire. It's not going to be possible to 'obstruct' an extension and the TEA Party activists will like be culled next election. Add it all up and it amounts to $4 trillion over ten years - the magic number for the rating agencies.
Let's see if this 'grand compromise' provides a way to work around the TEA Party obstruction. The GOP will be watching the polls and getting ready to scapegoat the TEA Party activists if necessary.
Expect a major theme for the upcoming election = compromise. 'All or nothing' principaled stance is a loser strategy this election cycle. Democrats will try to highlight 'willingness to work for the good of the country' as both a defence against dissatisfaction for this deal and to strike at GOP hard liners.
Depending on the polls, it will be interesting to see if Pawlenty is recruited as 'good soldier' to counter Bachmann. Cain, Gingrinch, Santorium are history but will slowly fade away. Paul never new when to quit so he will probably be around a while. Perry might get in for a VP slot - otherwise no chance. Romney and Huntsman may battle it out but Huntsman came in late, so he is the underdog at this point. Romney and Huntsman can both play the 'compromiser' role. Romney plays better to 'economic issues' - Huntsman has an small edge with evanlegicals and experience with foreign affairs.
The debt sitcom may be the first 'green shoots' for moderates returning to the political arena. Some inertia has been developed by hard liner politics in state houses and the national debate may feed the independents desire for more moderation.
@Valhalla and WhiteCollar: What the hell are you all talking about? Dragging OBL and Global Warming in the conversation.
Whale Ship Hunters are looking for radicals like you on the other side of the fence. You should join them. You could both have non-sequiter conversations together.
Hey Derek, I don't usually say things like this but you, sir, are an idiot.
Ira brought up OBL in one of his comments, and I responded. Try reading, dude, it's fundamental.
I am now officially scared of you. You called me a name. Oh no.
Maybe you should read, though. You're STILL off the freakin' topic. Reading IS fundamental! Try it sometime!
Taken from an actual Republican, as opposed to someone Bagging Tea:
You can't save the system by destroying the system.
Found on a competitor news sight. Since the looney rights seem to be mistakenly cheering for themselves, thought I'd point out their stupidity from someone who knows better. The looney left is already dismayed. Got to just hammer the spike on the Baggers....
Keep up the great work, Derek, excellent posts.
Fascinating that Frum would compare the current state of the Conservative Movement to student radicals. I've been telling people for months that current Conservatism is very comparable to the campus marxism of the 1970s. In those days universities housed a fanatical minority of young people who believed religiously that marxism hadn't been proven to be a superior approach to government only because it had never been tried in a "pure enough" form.
Conservatives here claim the same thing on a daily basis--that Conservatism has never really been given a thorough workout so we don't all see the brilliance in the approach. Deregulation, by this way of thinking, didn't fail because it's never been taken to completion. Privatization doesn't so frequently fail because it's often a bad idea, but because there isn't enough of it. The middle class isn't eroding because Laissez Faire capitalism inevitably leads to it, but because we haven't managed to sufficiently destroy the government.
That level of "purity" can never exist in the real world. Therefore by the admission of Conservatives their preferred approach to government has already failed the most basic of tests...it just doesn't work in the real world.
Why was this comment collapsed? It is a valuable opinion, neither inflammatory nor advertising.
You don't get to collapse a comment because you don't agree with the opinion stated - write your own opinion in a reply!
Every election chicken little comes out of the hen house yelling the sky is falling, it's the end of the world yet next morning here we are. Republicans hate the country no Democrats hate the country. So who cares about the country? Here's a thought how about we the people demand what's right for the country. Can you honestly say we should continue running up debt or that the rich should be getting tax breaks. If business wants to be successful tax breaks or not , they're going to spend. Flat tax where everyone has a hand in helping the country seems the fairest yet we never hear this coming from the govt. why is this? Maybe they just want us divided. Business as usual.
Houston!
Best post of the day~!!!! YOU ARE SO RIGHT.
And the media should not give us none of that false equivalency bull-crap; the republicans have been taken over by zombies of the tea-party.
I still firmly believe Mr. Obama is the smartest one at the table and is thinking 2 steps ahead of everyone.
So now, the GOP/TP think they have won. the country thinks GOP/TP won. So what does that mean? NOW, they are on the hook to produce the JOBS and Economic turnaround they have promised! So when they DON'T (which we know will be the case) THEY will be behind the 8 ball in campaigning on their accomplishments for ALL American people. Then Mr. Obama will step in pointing out how he has compromised and been willing to work it their way (to a point) but NOW there will be NO NEGOTIATION on those tax increases.
This deal, though painful and hard to stomach today, is the precurser to the REP/TP hanging themselves with the rope they reserved for Mr. Obama and paving the way for those tax increases and revenue the country needs as a balanced approach to recovery.
No one said this would be easy or fast. Don't give up, our POTUS has not!!
This country needs to teach the Republicans and Teapartiers a lesson at the polls. It's coming. They have shown their real agenda and this country isn't going for it.
No UAW Pleeeeeeeease,
What we truly learned is that the Tea Party is nothing but a party of obstructionists. Instead of floating their own ideas about what should or should not be in a bill that they would pass, other then no taxes, they have contributed NOTHING what so ever to the debate.
We also learned that the Republicans in the House do not want to put their own sacred cows on the line. When it was mentioned that since they demanded no tax increases that DOD spending was on the table for the "Trigger" effect by the debt committee they basically said "Seriously?!". They do not think they should have to contribute anything to solving the problem but that Democrats have to bend over so far that their spines snap.
We learned that when you put 10 full grown, adult people in a room with the President and tell them to debate the debt ceiling that quickly everyone except Boehner and the President become like bitchy little school girls, technically Boehner does to, but not bitchy; more like overly depressed and emotion school girl in his case.
We also learned that the Republican party is so fractured that they cannot even agree on their own debt bill. The Tea Party is still part of the Republican party and therefore obligated to follow what their Majority leader, Boehner, says but the Freshmen think its all about who is new on the block and have no idea how the Congress is supposed to work. They combated with Boehner nearly EVERY step of the way, refusing to negotiate or compromise with him. They need to seceded from the Republican party and form their own national group.
And lastly we learned that for the sake of protecting the country from economic upheaval that the President was willing to ostracize nearly all of his base. Did we see this from the Republicans at all? Nope, they are not willing to risk their political lives to save this country and that says volumes on how the Republican's think Government should be run.
US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired
You are the dumbest person I have seen on thees sites..........................As Gov. we need to do what is best for all/ for the majority, but as I see you are for those who are in the entitlement line?????? We as a NATION need to provide for those who are in need not those who just STAND IN LINE!!!!!!!!!!!! I am tired of paying for those who will not or wont work for what they want...... Get a life bud!!!! We as AMERICANS will help them who are in need but those who stand in line for what the GOV> will give them is WRONG!!!!!!
Richard,
I am with you on unemployment after a certain span of time, but retiree's require some of our social programs unless you are saying we should be like China and require our population to work until they die.
Not saying cuts cannot be made but it cannot be gutted either, as with some of our welfare programs like food stamps. These just need tighter regulation to stop the fraud that is/can be perpetrated.
US Navy Vet
I think you and your friends are the ones on the wrong side of the issue seeing as before the ink dried on this deal the main credit bureau issued a statement saying this deal is not enough to save the cherished AAA Bond rating. You are in lock step with the democrats position - one which the Republicans gave up Trillions in cuts to give keep from increases in taxes - other than the expiring of the Bush Tax cuts.
Furthermore, there are only 45 Tea Party members in the house. 45 a majority in a body of 435 does not make! Those few lawmakers have the support of just over half of all Americans that taxes should not be raised and deeper cuts should be made.
Sorry US Navy - you are clearly on the wrong side and posting long post damning the other side is only causing more people to abandon the democratic party and Obama.
White Collar Auto:
I am not going to let your post at 1.74 go unchallenged. There is no school that trains Presidents. Every single President of the United States get his training on the job. That's how it is. There is no other job like it in this country.
If, as you say, the President is in over his head, it is because Mitch McConnell is intentionally pushing the President under water. McConnell has specifically said that was precisely what he was going to do. Turning the simple job of raising the debt ceiling into a political football was unconscionable. Playing with the full faith and credit of our country speaks to insanity or treason. Take your pick! This action tracks directly to the House of Representatives.
Republican dogma, which insists that tax cuts are responsible for everything from a booming economy to everlasting life, is demonstrably false. Democratic dogma, which insists that government can cure every ill from poverty to lousy sex appeal at virtually no cost is equally false.
The President is desperately trying to show Americans there is a middle ground. What man or woman is going to show an electorate so ignorant that two out of three tell pollsters that a balanced budget is extremely important, while four out of five say you can't touch Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid the way to a black ink budget?
While this is going on, the right-wing says Obama is a socialist and the left-wing says he's a right-winger.
There isn't a man or woman alive who could overcome that kind of ignorance, while facing opposition that comes from no other source than the stupidity of identity politics.
obama gets $2.4 trillion petty cash to use as he sees fit.... most of it will probably go to his union buddies! America gets a t-shirt that says: Obama 2012..... your friends at SEIU!
Instead of having $10 trillion to spend, Congress now only has about $8 trillion!
No winners here, but the 50% of the American taxpayers who actually pay their taxes get the shaft.....
The only winner with this deal is the President, because it pushes everything off until after the 2012 elections. Taxes will be raised on everyone and at the end of the day it will be those posting here that will be hit the most. You don't get it. No matter what the government does, at the end of the day the rich will still be rich. It's the middle class that is being set up. With so many middle class people living paycheck to paycheck, a tax increase can be the difference of keeping their home or not.
This bill does NOTHING to cut spending. Read the bill, comprehend the bill and realize that this bill kicks the can down the road so it will not interfere with Obama's re-election.
You want to go back to Clinton taxes - then go back to Clinton spending. If this administration has it's way, we'll get the first part, but NEVER the second. If you're okay with that, then there is no reasoning with any of you.
I'm very disappointed in MY POTUS...I believe that he has made a critical error by ignoring the suggestions of every reputable economist in this country and abroad. Cuts...without increased revenue will only spawn recession...especially at 9.6% unemployment. You should have just used the 14th Amendment. Mr. Obama...you should have told the GOP and Teabaggers to GO TO HELL!! Apparently...we are going to continue to "attempt" to solve this budget crisis on the backs of the middle class. Mr. President...you need to grow a pair! That said...fear not Mr. President...you will still get MY vote on November 6, 2012 because you are still the best alternative by far against a group of glorified rednecks that have no aptitude for economics!
BTW Richard-1923090...Us Navy Disabled authored one of the best and most concise posts on this blog. By the appearance of your post...its seems that you have the writing skills of maybe a 3rd grader. Better tidy up that messy house before throwing rocks at the neighbors.
So it seems there are a myriad of posts that clearly transcend being simply considered "suspect;" however, there is one that, for me, is a clear winner. It was posted by "White Collar Auto."
Here's what this guy posted:
"I think this budget debate really high lights the need for a better leader in the White house. In 2008 inexperienced voters elected an inexperienced man to be president. I think the nations young people learned an expensive lesson in winning a popularity contest and leading...... VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012!"
This post, though without outrageous name calling and pointless regurgitation of unsupported talking points, reeks of a puerile analysis of why we are experiencing these current social and economic crises. Furthermore, it ignores a key element of our countries political process.
1. His first line regarding the budget debate is inexcusably myopic. White Collar Auto, we are not having this budget debate simply because we do not have a "better leader in the white house." We are having this debate because a certain political party recognizes this issue provides a key opportunity to grand stand with the hope of scoring political points in preparation for the next election cycle. Considering we have been bombarded on statistics related to budget deficits and debt ceilings, we should all now be quite aware of how many times the debt ceiling has been raised since its inception. What is striking is how often Republican presidents have raised the debt ceiling without having to maneuver through a mess similar to with what our current president and congress are dealing. In sum, Republicans are not being vocal, and at times playing tawdry games, because of their true concern for the budget deficit. History provides more than enough support for that statement.
2. Your second sentence is comical at best because it is predicated on the assumption that people who have voted more than once prior to the 2008 election actually knew and understood why they voted for specific politicians, propositions, etc.... How does one make such a conclusion? Open your eyes and note how easily people are persuaded to join a cause despite not having a clue about how they will be affected by such cause in the future. Several people on this one thread alone have spouted talking points, obviously taken from a biased source, without understanding what is being suggested. Laziness and wanting to identify with a group is inherent in most voters regardless of experience with voting. Such an approach is NOT limited to "inexperienced voters. Furthermore, do you actually believe John McCain and SARAH PALIN (LOL) were a better option? Even if Hillary Clinton was the democratic nominee I highly doubt we would have witnessed a different outcome, especially since she shares a similar political ideology to President Obama.
3. The youth are still learning a lesson - that the president, as one person, cannot be an impetus for change without the support of other key components of government. I will admit that Obama, with his oratory skills, duped many in to believing change can happen overnight. However, anyone with common sense recognizes what was promised could not happen in such a short amount of time even if he received greater support from Congress. The political process does not allow it! Rectifying a problem that began more than two decades ago will not suddenly be reversed in two (or even four) short years.
To make matters worse we currently have a Congress comprised of individuals who would rather stand firm with their political ideology and risk exacerbating the social and economic conditions of their own constituents than seek to make necessary adjustments for the greater good of the country. It is okay to have a political ideology, but it is inappropriate to play russian roulette when facts do not support a position.
White Collar Auto is it remiss of you to assume what you have stated. It almost makes me question your understanding of why you hold such political leanings. I also question your idea of a leader. If Michele Bachman fits within the parameters of your definition then I we know the limits of your thought process.
Mucker you speak as if he had a choice. Remember we are not living in a kingdom where unilateral decisions are made without discussion and debate. No one king rules here (sidebar...except God). The President could have stuck to his guns just like the idiots on the right, but then people would probably curse him for causing a worldwide financial catastrophe.
The president DOES NOT equal the one who alone makes the final decision. Congress is more than just an "advisor" to the president.
I am with you in that I did not want him to back down, and I am mad that he was forced to do so. But I am also happy that he is keeping the American people in mind (at least kind of). In the end, we do need a balanced approach to dealing with this issue. There's no way around it. Spending cuts in ALL sectors must be made, and taxes should be raised back to the rates present during the Clinton era.
I know of a whole bunch dumber - they go by the moniker "Radical Righties". Some call them republicans, The Tea Party or the GOP. I call them AINOS => Americans in Name Only"
See these are the people taht are anti-union, anti-gay rights, anti-women's rights, anti-education, anti-religious freedom, anti-voting rights, anti-medical research, anti-law enforcement, anti-regulations for Wall Street, Big Banks and Big Oil, anti-Social Safety Nets and they all want to repeal/gut/privatize Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. He!! they are anti-everything that this country was founding on. They think deceit, dishonesty, and greed are all virtues, I do not. Not all are stricken with this disease and they may even be a minority but they are a disease in this country and they are the problem that is sucking the life out of this country - make no bones about it.
You are going to have one real hard time convincing people with this ideology are true Americans. They are NOT and it appears you are one of them as well.
Enjoy
John (numbers) -
So it seems there are a myriad of posts that clearly transcend being simply considered "suspect;" however, there is one that, for me, is a clear winner. It was posted by "White Collar Auto."
Here's what this guy posted:
"I think this budget debate really high lights the need for a better leader in the White house. In 2008 inexperienced voters elected an inexperienced man to be president. I think the nations young people learned an expensive lesson in winning a popularity contest and leading...... VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012!"
Well John, you certainly went to great lengths to explain your feelings about this post. Even managed to pretty much call me stupid.
Only one problem there Einstein. I did not post this and you're an idiot. (I guess that's two problems)
John...for the most part I agree with your response to my comments...but I disagree with your point that President Obama didn't have a choice...he did in fact have a choice. There comes a time in deliberation when a true leader has to fall on his/her sword...this was that occasion and opportunity. There should not have been anything tied to a debt limit increase in the first place...this item has always been passed as a "stand alone" bill. The GOP mainstream caved in to the minority Teabaggers and pushed for the cuts and possibly a balanced budget amendment. Mr. Obama telegraphed his negotiating weakness by agreeing to an all cuts rider going directly against his economic advisers as well as Nobel Laureates in economics. His clear choice to send a resounding message to the Teabaggers was to invoke executive privilege by using the clause in the 14th amendment to right the sinking ship...and then discuss budget cuts and revenue increases AFTER THE FACT. Don't get me wrong...I have and will continue to support President Obama throughout this ordeal and I will see him re-elected in 2012...but I and many other Progressives do not agree with his course of action. Sometimes you just have to look your opponent in the eye and say "GO TO HELL!!!"
This is what should have been done!
Dear President Obama...
Please invoke your Executive Privilege given to you via the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America and raise a "clean" unfettered debt limit and tell the Teabaggers to GO TO HELL where they were spawned and surely belong!
Sincerely...The Vast and Overwhelming Majority of American Citizens
California Tom
As for the present proposal to be voted on by the legislators, well, it is just another can kicked down the road until after the elections. Now all of the professional politicians can stand up and say 'I helped to end the crisis.' Meanwhile, the drama will continue again at the end of the year.
Now who will be involved in this Gang of 12 that will present recommendations by Nov? Will they be economists or people with ties to the political establishment? Will they actually have any authority? As we all know, or should know, a law is only as good as today, and can be amended tomorrow.
And will the tide shift from the conservatives to the Progressives with their plans for spending our way out of the depression? I doubt it. Barry O created ownership for a great portion of this financial mess and I do believe he will have difficulty explaining it to the American people.
It is a shame that people still relate to a party, not as Americans with issues to solve.
By the way Navy, get that check in your account? lol, lol
Lol...honest mistake White Collar. I guess I unfortunately attributed that quote to you b/c the rest of your posts are comparable to the garbage (that UAW pleeeeeeee.....ase wrote) I quoted. And since you posted far more BS than UAW posted I just assumed it was you. Oh well........I guess when you have two peas in a pod that present the same it is really difficult to differentiate one from the other....LOL
Mucker,
If the president had invoked his right to do what is described in the 14th amendment we would have had the same outcome. He would have been able to raise the debt ceiling, but he alone cannot demand and ensure the balanced approach to tackling this debt would be implemented. Why use it if it does not guarantee the deal he originally wanted would still not be supported?
Also, how would delaying the discussion of budget cuts and revenue increases change the political chess moves we saw being played? Yes, tackling the budget and solving the issue of the debt ceiling were deliberately linked by the elephants; however, addressing them separately would not have given the pres a better chance at receiving the results he wanted considering the opposition held steadfast to their ideology, which is not dictated by matters related to the debt ceiling.
Speaking of steadfast ideology, has anyone considered the makeup of the Supreme Court in regards the 14th Amendment solution. Is anyone confident the corrupt Conservative majority on the SCOTUS wouldn't find the action of the President unconstitutional? At that point the House would have him up on impeachment charges before the sun sets and the Grand Obstructionist Party would have a whole new circus to distract from their incompetence and devotion to the needs of the wealthy.
JohnB - stop it with the supreme court makeup BS. It is what it is and I am sure that at some future time it will be loaded with more judges appointed by a liberal leaning president. Perhaps you think that the scotus should automatically be made up of only liberals when a liberal pres is in office or vice a versa.
Reality check on infrastructure jobs...
What it isn't - hundreds of workers scurring around a job site with wheelbarrows, shovels and sledges.
What it is...
Road construction... more equipment intensvie than labor intensive.
Bridge construction... A balance between equipment and skilled labor with a constant eye towards safety and lifting ability.
Industrial plants... A balance between equipment and skilled trades such as, but not limited to, electricians, pipe fitters and carpenters. Limited numbers of unskilled labor would be used to help place concrete or follow the guidence of the skilled trades.
Rail... equipment intensive with some labor
Other facilities... skilled labor and equipment as the project demands with limited unskilled labor.
The real bottom line in todays infrastructure world is based more on equipment, skilled and strong labor than bringing in hundreds of thousands of workers with no skills.
Todays labor market is so tight on jobs available vs the number of those seeking work, that a company will hire those with the skill sets that are in line with what they do and are not really interested in providing on the job training to just anyone.
That is just the labor end of infrastructure. the other side relates to the planning, engineering and regulatory approvals needed to start the jobs. Some work I am sure is already good to go only awaiting funding while others are further down the road.
If one wants to look at a more labor intensive government sponsered job programbetter start looking at sending out crews to clean up sites damaged by natural disasters or repairing/upgrading our national and state parks.
If you are really interested in job creation start buying more to create more demand and start paying more attention to value than just price.
Nope, I believe the SCOTUS should be made up of honest people. A majority who'll overturn 100 years of settled law involving campaign financing to establish a system where's it's acceptable for anonymous donors to give unlimited amounts of money to candidates in return for no one knows what isn't honest.
Money isn't speech, it's bribery.
johnb - Honesty is but a judgement call based on facts that may or may not be true and which may very well in large part be unfounded.
However, if I remember correctly, court justices have a higher rate of impeachment proceedings leveled against them than others. Write to boswell to recommend impeachment proceeding on who you think is guilty.
.
RON : Great post to start the week.
The GOP/TP has taken this Country "Hostage" - I hope President Obama now understands that you cannot deal with "Terrorists".
The Tea party has certainly set the theme for next years elections. With all Obama's economic policies having failed, the debate will center on how to recover the economy from the four wasted years under Obama. Obama doesn't have any positive points to be made on the economy, he loses on everyone of them. Unemployment will continue to rise. The long term unemployed may never get back into the workforce. GDP will be lucky to get close to 2.0% for any quarter. The number of people on food stamps will continue to increase. If Obama is really stupid, he'll try to blame Bush again. In reality, it's his only hope, but it's also doubtful anyone is stupid enough to buy it a second time around.
Hostages – Really Navy?
I’ll never forget a National Lampoon with the full cover picture of an All-American “Spanky and Our Gang” dog with a hand holding a gun to its head ….. the caption in bold letters ….. “If You Don’t Buy This Magazine – We’ll Shoot This Dog.”
I loved sick satire and the guys and girls at National Lampoon were really out there. As crazy as they were, I wonder if they ever imagined the President of the United States would do the political equivalent …….. “If You Don’t Give Me More Money – Grandma Doesn’t Get Social Security.”
Obama threatens the other heart-strings too, the military, veteran’s benefits, Medicare etc …. Funny he never mentions cutting money to Greece / IMF, the UN that hates us and we pay 40% of, billions to Petrobas – one of the world’s biggest richest oil companies in the world to drill in Brazil while starving out and demagoguing American oil companies, not giving raises to his $37 million a year White House staff, cutting EPA czars and tens thousands of needless big government bureaucrats …. Nope – he goes for grandma and the military.
While it is hard to imagine an American president would actually choose to do this immorality to the elderly that Obama did, it is more unbelievable that Americans would actually choose to create a more dependent society where everyone could be held hostage to the whims of politicians…… that they would in effect even offer the children as hostages.
So now the dems have created a new future hostage situation with the entitlement of Obamacare, have created a more dependent society.
And aside from placing and condemning our children to this future hostage situation, can you imagine 20 years from now, being someone having a child with cancer, and the next time Congress tries to check some out of control politician, the politician not saying …….”If you don’t give me more money ….. we won’t be able to offer cancer treatments …….
If only it was a tasteless, sick satirical joke, but it is not.
...and this won't be Congress' fault because...?
Because John Boehner and Mitch McConnell said so, silly. It's OUR fault, as liberals. It's always our fault, just by virtue of our being alive.
And now I really have to go. Have a good day.
In this latest case, I’m just worn out as everyone else. I wish it would have been a better deal for the people of the United States, because, this whole debt ceiling increase should have been a clean vote to raise the ceiling without the strings attached.
Oh course that what happens when you have the hostage takers, (Republican-Tea Baggers) blackmailing the people of the United States.
For now, I don’t think I would want the President to go with me in negotiating a purchase of a new car.
DaNoid:
This was and is the agenda of the Americans in Name Only Party (GOP/TP). They wanted and need this economy to go in the toilet. They need to have high unemployment and everything they have done to date is on target to fulfill this agenda.
This is their only path to the WH in their minds and if they trash this country in doing it as Boehner said "So Be It" Say it real fast and it sounds like another word - more appropriate.
Hostage takers? Really?
Obama threatening to withhold social security checks was not "hostage taking"?
Oh. I see.
Well, let me clue you in, cult members- that nasty bit of work was debunked over and over, by people on the left and the right. I'm pretty sure that the use of that outright lie of a threat contributed more than a little to the rapid decline in his approval polls- and I, for one, will be reminding people that it is not beneath Obama to lie and frighten the elderly in order to get his own way.
Only reasonable person in the room indeed.
Obama is a petulant overgrown adolescent who will say and do anything to get what he wants- including lie about his dying mother.
I don't think he caved because he was afraid of default- which was never going to happen, anyway. I'm pretty sure he caved because he was going to miss his birthday party fundraiser.
He just couldn't possibly do that.. . .
Odd. For the Liberals, all during the Bush years everything was Bush's fault. Now all of sudden Congress has something to do with it.
Odd indeed.
$306M in bills this month, $176M in revenue. The people who couldn't see the reality in those numbers before refuse to see the reality in those numbers now. They continue to insist a default would have had no consequences.
That's why the GOPTP is unfit to govern.
Still trying to minimize and trivialize the situation with the ridiculous claim "you think it was all Bush's fault."
That's never been the case. It's ALWAYS been the fault of the ENTIRE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT. GW Bush had a Republican Congress for 6 years and managed to explode the deficit.
Republican Conservatives created this mess.
Republican Conservatives continue to keep us from solving it properly.
The GOPTP have proven themselves unfit to govern.
Bush lied to go to war JAS1, why would that not be his fault.
Job1 said: Oh course that what happens when you have the hostage takers, (Republican-Tea Baggers) blackmailing the people of the United States.
Here we have an example of a person that simply doesn't get it. The one sided view of this person only allows for blame going to everyone that doesn't share his ideology. Of course it's the republicans fault. The democrats had nothing to do with it at all. They are as pure as the wind driven snow, clear as a mountain stream and smell like honeysuckle.
Excuse me while go and yak.
robiscoole - tell me exactly how Bush lied. Tell me how Congress didn't have the exact same intel as he did. Tell me how congress didn't go over the intel and vote to go to war. Explain all that to me, because it sounds to me like YOU are lying.
JohnB - What you say about the republicans is your opinion and you are entitled to it. My opinion is a bit different. When the democrats took over in 06, what steps did they take to get spending under control? When they were in all legs of government from 09 on, what steps did the democrats take to correct the course? Don't give me the damage was already done garbage... if they were worth their salt, we'd be seeing a difference...
The blame game doesn't work. It's both the democrats and republicans fault. For 4 solid years, nothing was accomplished by the democrats to change course...
See how easy it is to blame someone?
By Republican Congress I presume you mean a majority in both houses? Please tell me the dates that make up the six years because I know Tom Daschele was Majority leader in June 2001 to January 2003, and I know Nancy Pelosi was Speaker from January 2007.
First of all the vote to give bush the power to start bombing Iraq was to give him power behind his treats and that war was to be the last option. Congress mistake was giving bush the power to decide.
The weapons inspector would make speeches saying how everything was going fine, he was accomplishing his goal. If there happen to one 10 second soundbite of some site we couldn't get into. On faux that would be all you would hear, not another word the inspector said. Then the talking heads would come on and use that 10 second sound bite to scare the sh#!t out of the people.
With emotions and lies pushing the bush agenda, marching off to war with Iraq. Its us or them. At the same time anyone who wasn't for the war was declared a coward, traitor, terrorist lover, un-American and anybody not with you was against you.
The hundreds of thousands of war protesters were called terrorist lovers and did not even slow down the rush to war.
Or how about the CIA the administration outed because her husbands truthful statement about Iraq not buying yellow-cake to make bombs, that claim was part of Bush's main scare tacit that the Iraq people are out to kill us with dirty bombs. Fear was the prime mover in the Iraq war.
bush even threw the weapons inspector out of the country so bush could start bombing before the weapons inspecor could discover that there were no WMD's. (You know the ones they have never found to date, bush's orginal reason to go to war.)
Unfortunately only liberal were around and can remember what happened.
US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired
There is a time to end childish games and grow up navyboy. Perhaps this is your time. The Americans in Name Only Party - how childish. Your posts are becoming desparate for the Progressive/Democrat side.
By the way NavyBoy, did you receive your disability check prior to the vote? I did!
Brian, that's a deflection. Whatever a small Democratic majority with a Supply Side Republican President did or did not do doesn't absolve the Conservatives who worked WITH that President for the previous 6 years for their responsibility. It doesn't even absolve Conservatives of ALL responsibility for those 2 years as Republicans will claim. The GOP still had the tools of filibuster and veto on their side.
So the question returns to how we got to this state. The answer is Supply Side economics, a failed Conservative ideology that needs to be jettisoned.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
It isn't just my opinion, it's what the numbers show. Feel free to disprove them.
Actually Americans First, if you will go back and read the speech given to the UN, by Bush, on September 12th, 2002, you would find that Weapons of Mass Destruction was not the impedus to go to war. The main reason was humanitarian. Of course this country has an adopted resolution that we don't go to war for humanitarian reasons (except Obama (Libya)), so in order to expedite the overthrow of Saddam for killing approximately 300,000 of Iraq's citizens, WMD's was pumped up based on Saddam's threats. The liberals, through their "hate Bush" campaign launched the where is the WMD's mantra when they weren't found within the first couple of days of the war. The media bought it and who knows where the WMD's went. Iraq is a fairly large country with many hiding spots and roads leading to other Islamic countries. Of course only a reasonable mind would give creedence to these things.... a liberal mind? No way.
Another deflection, Alan. Feel free to disprove my contention that the debt exploded from the moment GW Bush took over. The important point is the failure of Conservative economics.
John B said: The answer is Supply Side economics, a failed Conservative ideology that needs to be jettisoned.
I love easy retorts. Jettisoned for what? Kenysian economics? It's really working now, isn't it?
LMAO.......John B is going to have an answer for that! He always does, thats why I dont bother with his challenges!
About half the income taxes paid are paid by the rich. And they earn about one quarter of the income. Seems to me, and I'm not rich at all, that their fair share is already covered.
It might be true there are no real winners, but there is one clear loser. Well, millions and millions of clear losers--your kids, grandkids, great-grandkids, and beyond. So that we can live beyond our means today we've been stealing from our unborn heirs. This began MANY decades ago and has continued unabated, even during the so-called surplus years of Clinton. Bush 43 ramped it up to levels that produced a Tea Party formation (despite what you leftist loons think the TP, when founded, was not a response to Obama). And now Mr. Obama has taken what Bush did and doubled down, and then doubled down again.
It is one thing to go into debt in order to produce a better, more prosperous future for your heirs. It's another thing to go into debt on THEIR back so that you can have a car, or house, or medical treatment today. We are the most immoral generation for this, and to the extent you want these thigns for yourself or others you are the problem. It will be very disruptive to reform ourselves--the economy is artificially inflated by governmental debt spending, our medical system is a mess in large part because the gov't spends hundreds of billions on it, our SS system is nothing but a ponzi scheme that if you operated it you'd go to prison for, and so on--but our nation's future, and our heirs' future prosperity is at stake.
This "deal" might cut two or three trillion. I doubt it given Congress' history with cuts in the out years, but let's stipulate that all these cuts will occur. That still means that under Obama's vision of our near term future we will have 7 to 10 trillion in deficits. That is, with this deal Obama is still set to more than double the nation's debt by the time he leaves office assuming we stupidly re-elect him. You aren't going to pay this. Your heirs are. And it's wrong.
Brianb-999431
Something can't work if it can't be used, and the teabaggers running amok in Congress certainly will never allow it. The 2009 stimulus bill could barely be called Keynesian, because it was too small and 25% of it was tax CUTS. What would have been better would have been a multiyear program to repair the nation's crumbling infrastructure. That kind of spending is what is called "investments" except by Republicans, who can't see any difference between, say, blowing a trillion dollars on a war of choice in a foreign country and repairing bridges that are about to fall down in this country.
Why is this the fault of the Republicans? Because they turned a 'routine' debt-increase bill into an economic war. Why did they do this? What could possibly be wrong with a no-strings routine debt-limit increasing bill? The answer requires liberals to open their eyes and take in the whole situation, rather than just their side. The Dems and established GOP have been raising the debt limit and spending money on anything their hearts desire (or, more specifically, anything their constituents' hearts desire) for decades. They've turned a simple idea of war-time spending into a runaway debt train that all economists know can't last, and is quickly running us into ruin.
To try to avert this and change the course, the Tea Party Republicans tried to, essentially, grab the wheel of a speeding car. Sure, it's not safe to do so, but it's probably safer than letting the car continue to speed away and ram into a brick wall. The Republicans tried to do this in '95, too, but they lost then. Dems continued to spend away, and then Bush came along and did the same thing. And then Obama. And then we had the threatened gov't shutdown over the budget earlier this year, and the Reps managed to win a little. And now we have the debt war, and the Reps have, again, managed to win a little, though not much.
Dems claim the Reps were unwilling to compromise, but the reality is that the Dems put up their completely uncompromising idea as the standard and then claimed the Reps were compromising by caving in to it.
For the record, the bill that's being voted on today isn't much of a compromise for anyone. It continues the debt past the election, which is what the Dems wanted, but requires repeated congressional action and places the bulk of the weight on Obama, which is what the Reps desired. It cuts spending, which is what the Reps desired, but it does so primarily from defense spending, and doesn't touch entitlement, which is what the Dems desired (point to the Reps for being willing to cut defense spending). It also requires a bi-partisan sub-committee be formed to look at future cuts (with everything on the table), tax reforms, tax increases, and then restricts Obama's future debt-taking ability based on that sub-committee, with some quite unsavory results for everyone if the committee can't come up with something. (No points awarded there both because it's all potential and because the potential hits both parties equally.)
So, all told, in this war, the Reps get one credibility-point, while the Dems get none. That's a pretty disappointing show all around, but at least the Reps made a bit of an effort.
Oh, and now both sides are threatening to vote against this bill. Great.
That goes for the usual right-wing riff-raff on this board. I don't have to read through their garbage in this thread to know.
Let's hope NOT. If the GOP/TP are getting the most of this deal, let Boehner round up his cats to do it. If they want to balance the budget with cuts only, leaving loopholes for corporate jets, Big Oil, etc., causing more harm to the economy and job loss, let it be on them with the majority vote. And if they can't get the votes, a default will be on them as well. They started this mess of tying the debt ceiling to the budget, so let them clean it up.
Either way, the voters are going to be reminded over and over of the machinations in Wisconsin and other states, of the hostage-taking of our nation, and who these Teabaggers really are as we head into 2012. It will not be forgotten in six months. We will make sure of that.
Rich, that's"rich." The rich pay around 15% to 18% in taxes. Thanks to lack of third-party reporting (W2) and teams of accountants, 57% of tax evasion comes from the richest 5%. The rest is measly loss of revenue from the poor who make so little that tax credits allow them to pay little to nothing.
Hi John B.,
There isn't anything you've written that I can find agreement with. Too bad. But this fixation you have with trying to blame everything bad today on Bush 41 is way off the mark. I don't mean to say that those who only blame Obama are right either, in fact what I mean is that all of us who've voted to take someone else's money to spend on programs not found in the constitution because we think we are smarter, or more charitable, or more compassionate, than the person who earned the money we are taking are the problem.
Would that be you? I think so given your claims. Would that be most democrats? I think so given their propensity to elect people who do just this. Would that be most republicans? Unfortunately, I think that is true too. Certainly fewer republicans pose an existential risk to the USA compared to democrats, but the fact that some republicans want free stuff too, whether for themselves or someone else, paid for by someone else can't be ignored. At a minimum it lends validation to the insane ideas of your political side. We need to stop this game of robbing our heirs so we can live beyond our means. Whoever does this first will get my vote every time.
I hate The Tea Klan and this is the reason why they will always have the upper hand until everyone wakes up.
If they cut taxes which reduces revenue, they can say see we spend to much.
Cutting taxes or government spending reduces revenue twice the pace thus. See we spend to much.
Then they will say we need to cut more because we have this huge spending problem.
Based on those terms they will always win until we go into a very deep deep depression were almost everyone is out of work. During which time the rich got super super super rich.
Therefore creating no voice for the poor or needy. Ending the American dream for the average person. And eliminating the middle class. Cutting all safety nets, no EPA, FAA, SEC and any other program designed to protect the American Public even if millions die.
Does anyone in here remember how Obama got his health care passed? it was pushed down our throats by a so called special vote. After which Obama and Nancy Pelosi bragged how they didnt need the Republicans.
Now if that was not holding the counrty Hostage and a act of Terrorists what is?
what I want to know is this , why is it that we pay Congress in the frist place ? I have never seen a poor person win office so they dont need the money,yet they are paid $100,000.00's each every year, they get free health care for life, and even get a retirement, that is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they said "a government of the people , by the people ,for the people". President and Congress where not meant to be careers the were meant to be an Honor .
Keep saying that I'm trying to blame it all on Bush...it's never been true and never will. Keep trying to spread the blame far enough to keep Conservatives from taking their share of the responsibility...that's been a lot more successful but people are waking up to reality. This is a failure of Supply Side extremists. No matter how hard you try to turn "Keynesian" into an epithet that attack on language won't deflect from the facts;
Republicans got us into this mess, hewing farther to the TP orthodoxy will only make it worse.
Sorry, but the question should be "will this help or hurt the country?" not "will this help or hurt certain politicians' careers". I don't give a damn about any politicians' careers, I care about what they are doing to my country in order to serve themselves (and that goes for BOTH parties)
Try sitting in that President chair, and see how well you do. We got a lot of "experts out there". Talk is cheap when your looking in.
TA....Obama is experiencing that now.....
Hi Houston!,
I think your understanding of Keynesian economics leaves a lot of room for improvement. And please don't look to John B.'s post for help. Tax cuts are one component of Keynsian economic manipulation. Government spending is another. But there are other options Keynes would advocate too--fewer restrictions on production, for instance--that he would argue are stimulative.
Supply-side is related to Keynesianism, but because it was designed to simply allow people who earned their income to keep more of it rather than have the government incentivize (or punish) business or personal behavior you, meaning the "left", dislike it. Regardless of the economic model I think the concepts which lead to more personal liberty are better than all other alternatives. Which is why I can see no wisdom in liberal policies--those policies lead in every case to less liberty and more dependence on the government. Couple that with their abject failure and I think liberal economic policies are a lose-lose proposition.
Are you kidding. Obama has spent more in the last 2.5 years than the country can stand. He has consistently decreased the value of our currency. He has done everything he can to divide the country. His tired old class warfare is lame. He was not speaking the truth when he said that SSI wouldn't go out. You and I know if the checks had not been sent out it would have been because of his decision. He would have been the one to decided who got paid and who didn't. I am on Social Security, I got sick young so I get the minimum. But I would rather have 10% or 15% less to help (if the President would also be willing to cut more spending) than have business people be taxed more and then pass it on to me anyway. BTW they could have raised the debt limit before the GOP gained control of the House, but the Dems did not want to take on the responsibility of raising it by themselves. Only far-left loons want the country to spend so much. The rest of us want it to decrease spending by exponentially.
Bush at times did spend like a drunken liberal, but he never reached the lunacy of the current administration. As for him "lying" about weapons of mass destruction, that is a bogus made up liberal lie. All the intelligence agencies from around the world believed there were WMD. But WMD was an excuse not to go to war. If Saddim had come clean and gave the inspectors free rein then there would have been no war. It needed to be done and by his actions Obama has verified that. If he still believes it is an injust war, or an unneccesary war, then he is killing his own soldiers.
The "Tea-Party" is the reason that $3 Trillion less is going to spent. The real crisis, that is our nation spending more than it can repay, would have not even been a topic of discussion. They did not get all they wanted, but the did a great deal of good.
Tax cuts do not create jobs. It'd been proven that when the tax cuts went into effect in 2001 the unemployment actually went from 4.3% to 5.7%. When they enacted the 2003 tax cut the unemployment stayed basically the same. Around 6% unemployed. All the tax cut do is give the wealthy more money to buy votes. That's why the Republicans want to protect the tax cuts.
What creates jobs are tax breaks for small businesses but the Republicans have block those bills. Why?? Because they don't want the economy to improve under a Democrat president and are doing everything in their power to see that it doesn't happen so Obama will be a one term president. Ask McConnell.
Hi True Patriot,
Sorry, but I think you misunderstood my post. What I wrote was not what percentage of their income they pay in taxes, but that "the rich" pay about half of all personal income taxes and earn about one quarter of all personal income. Whether they use tax provisions to reduce their income or not is irrelevant since it's legal. Just as you might use a child care tax credit, or a mortgage interest deduction--it's all legal. It should all end too, but that is another argument.
Anyhow, if you think you can stay on topic and respond to the point then we might find some common ground.
The only problem with this is that your assumptions are dead wrong. We are not raising the ceiling to spend more money for these programs. The money for them has already been spent. We are raising the debt ceiling to PAY the bills spending that money have generated.
We cannot do this without raising the debt ceiling because we do not take in enough taxes. Even if we cut spending by 5 trillion without tax reform and tax increases we only solve half of the problem and we only get half of the results.
JohnB, I couldn't disagree with you more. Obama's Keynesian $800 Billion Stimulus plan failed miserably and only exacerbated the problem, proof that Keynes was an idiot.
.....................................Jan 2009....TODAY.......% chg...Source
Avg. Retail price/gallon gas in U.S..$1.83.......$3.95.......115.8%..1
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel)...$43.48......$99.02......127.7%..2
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel)...$38.74......$91.38......135.9%..2
Gold: London (per troy oz.)..........$853.25.....$1,504.50...90.5%...2
Corn, No..2 yellow, Central IL.......$3.56.......$6.33.......78.1%...2
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL...........$9.66.......$13.75......42.3%...2
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. Fob.....$13.37......$35.39......164.7%..2
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall.7.6%........9.4%........23.7%...3
Unemployment rate, blacks............12.6%.......15.8%.......25.4%...3
Number of unemployed.................11,616,000..14,485,000..24.7%...3
Number of Fed Employees..............2,779,000...2,840,000...2.2%....3
Real median household income.........$50,112.....$49,777.....-0.7%...4
Number of food stamp recipients......31,983,716..43,200,878..35.1%...5
# of unemployment benefit recipients.7,526,598...9,193,838...22.2%...6
Number of long-term unemployed.......2,600,000...6,400,000...146.2%..3
Poverty rate, individuals............13.2%.......14.3%.......8.3%....4
People in poverty in U.S.............39,800,000..43,600,000..9.5%....4
US Rank in World Economic Freedom....5...........9...........n/a.....10
Present Situation Index..............29.9........23.5........-21.4%..11
Failed banks.........................140.........164.........17.1%...12
US Dollar/Japanese Yen exchange rate.89.76.......82.03.......-8.6%...2
US Money supply, M1, in billions.....1,575.1.....1,865.7.....18.4%...13
US Money supply, M2, in billions.....8,310.9.....8,852.3.....6.5%....13
National debt, in trillions..........$10.627.....$14.052.....32.2%...14
Just take this last item: In the last two years we have accumulated national debt at a rate more than 27 times as fast as during the rest of our entire nation's history. Over 27 times as fast. Metaphorically speaking, if you are driving in the right lane doing 65 MPH and a car rockets past you in the left lane. 27 times faster, it would be doing 7,555 MPH!
Sources:(1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. Of Labor; (7) FHFA; (8) Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC; (13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. Treasury
Hey Larry,
All other things being equal tax cuts are stimulative to the economy. Your post is nonsensical. You ignore the context in which tax rates are considered. For instance, in 1993 we were in the middle of a tech bubble that would burst several years later but which fueled job creation in the short term. We also have to compare our situation to that of our trading partners, or even their trading partners. We can raise taxes so that the government gets a larger share of the GDP and still benefit if other nations implement policies which negatively affect the business climate even more.
I have the feeling that I am writing to someone who lacks the capacity to see beyond party label, but I hope you will consider these ideas. They aren't partisan. And they point out the near impossibility that exists for economists to tell you with precision what will happen. But what we do know is that your conclusions make no sense to anyone who successfully completed even an Econ 1A course with a professor that wasn't unconscious.
Rich, keep spinning. The fact is that tax cuts to the wealthy have never created jobs and the data proves it. When taxes were raised in 1993 the unemployment went down. When they were cut in 2001 the unemployment went up. The Republicans talking points that tax cuts to individuals will create jobs is the biggest lie to ever be perpetrated on the American people. Tax cuts to corporations and lower income will create jobs but not to the wealthy. The Bush tax cuts benefited the wealthy and we are paying for that collisional mistake.
You believe you have the mental capacity to understand that?
Hi Larry,
Same answer regardless of the group you intend to benefit with the tax cut--all other things being equal it will be economically stimulative. You could argue anything you want, but there is no economic theory of any kind which claims that increasing the taxes paid increases employment overall. I'm not arguing the rich need a tax cut, but I am saying that since they already pay about half of all income taxes while making about a quarter of all personal income that the "fairness" claim is false. Unless fairness to the advocates of it, think that ratio isn't high enough.
Corporations don't care about tax rates nearly as much as you might think since every penny they pay to the government, at whatever level it is charges, is money that comes from the customers of those corporations. You could, for instance, raise the corporate rate to 80% and so long as you offset that lunacy with personal income tax decreases the net effect to the firms wouldn't be much different than it is today. I'd rather we end the business tax charade and eliminate all business income taxes and increase the personal tax rate to compensate. You vote, corporations don't, so you should know with more precision your actual effective aggregate tax rate. Hiding what you pay as a business tax means voters don't know how much they actually pay to the government and incentivizes voters to ask for more free stuff from the feds since the "deal" seems more favorable to them.
There is no way to give income tax cuts to lower income persons because they don't pay net income taxes as it is. You could, if you wanted, given them more money (welfare) so they would spend it, but this won't alter the rate of poverty or alter the rate of employment. IF you are serious about wanting more employment in the USA, and I have no reason to think you are, then you have few choices left to choose from. Allowing for more production (non-subsidized) would be a start, but there is no way in our country today that a majority would support more mining, more drilling, more smelting, more manufacturing, unless it's "green". And green, so far, is a failure without subsidy. BTW, please don't offer the dumb reply that traditional industries are subsidized. There should be NO subsidies for any business or product. The market, meaning all of us, should decide winners and losers, not which politicians were able to capture enough donations to get a subsidy bill passed.
Lastly, the Bush tax cuts affected anyone with a tax liability. That you don't know this makes you little more than a partisan hack.
Rich-281385
Hi, Rich. Or should we, in honor of Republican political correctness, call you Job-Creator-281385?
Your understanding of written English leaves a lot of room for improvement. I suggested that spending money repairing bridges is preferable to spending it on stupid wars, and that the Obama stimulus was just barely what Keynes had in mind. Nothing you wrote had any relevance to what I wrote.
Yes. And the Republican approach to economics, which concentrates power in the hands of a few, is one of the worst alternatives imaginable.
Rich, you numbers are just wrong. The top 10% of Americans hold 70% of the nations wealth. You've already told us they pay half the US income taxes. So much for your complaint that the wealthy are overtaxed. http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
"Rational One", your statistics dangled in thin air are meaningless. The economy contracted 5.1% in the huge recession that began in 2007 and didn't end until 6 months after Barack Obama's presidential inauguration. We were losing 700,000 jobs per month when he took office. Even CONSERVATIVE economists acknowledge the stimulus worked http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/End-of-Great-Recession.pdf and that's with 1/3 of it in the least effective form (tax breaks) because Republicans insisted.
So no one has a fact-based defense of Supply Side economics or a fact based refutation of a proper economic toolbox consisting of Keynesian and Monetarist approaches depending on the situation. I'm not surprised because Supply Side economics is based on ideology and wishful thinking instead of facts.
US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired
Still can't give it up NavyBoy? Keep up the preaching, perhaps someone other than the Gang of 15 from the Progressive Fan Club will buy into it. How's you check Navy? Did you receive it over the weekend?
Houston, your last comment was nonsensical. Rich provided a very coherent intelligent logical explanation of his economic beliefs. Your one sentence response saying"republican approach to economics whch concentrates power in the hands of the few, is one of the worst alternatives imaginable." I dont even know what that means. Give me an example. Are you saying Buffet has too much economic power? What about the CEO of McDonalds, Hertz, the owner of the Chicago Bears etc? He provided a very well thought out response and you provide a throw away line. What happened to celebrating success in this country and good old fashioned values of personal responsibility and accountability. Where did this country's values go wrong where people truly feel entitled to government handouts rather than doing it on their own? I can believe the number of people who dont want their social security touched even though they get 3 dollars to every 1 they contributed plus earnings. They dont want their medicare touched even though it costs 10 dollars for every dollar of premium they pay. They dont want their mortgage interest touched but want corporate deductions eliminated. They somehow feel like the tax code should be used to level their version of an economic playing field. Nothing is stopping anyone from opening up their own business, working 14 hour days 7 days a week to become successful. Did it occur to anyone that maybe success comes from hard work, the education gap, talent, perserverance, ambition, performance, choosing to enter a profession with upward mobility that rewards merit and success? Is it possible that the education gap, behaviorial choices such as early motherhood, drugs and alcohol abuse, professional choices such as wanting to be a teacher, fireman, policeman, government employee, or other union job knowing that it doesnt reward merit, performance or provide upward mobility, risk aversion to trying a new profession or lack of any personal ambition might account for income inequality? When did it become ok to ask your neighbor to pay for your education, your lifestyle, to level the playing field so you didnt have to have any personal responsibility or accountability?
John, lets imagine a world where there is a huge education gap, a huge number of low skilled labor and although the number of immigrants entering the country has slowed, the current number of legal and illegal immigrants are significant. That education gap defined as having a high school diploma or less and includes are immigrants and this makes up 50% of the population. Lets imagine a world in which union employment makes up a little less than 10% of the work force and although this group is paid relatively well with decent benefits, there is chance for upward mobility or reward for merit and performance. Lets also imagine a world in which a significant portion of that wealth is held by seniors over the age of 55 in which we plan on continuing to pay significant benefits from the government in the form of medicare and social security from which this cash is coming from the younger not in the higher income brackets. I understand we have an education crisis in which we have thrown and enormous amount of money at and for the most part, just throwing money at it has shown to be ineffective. However, most of the other aspects of your so called wealth gap is explained in the aggregate by behaviorial choices people make, you still want to punish those who are successful? What happened to your values? When did it become ok rely on the government to solve your problems or level your playing field because its not enough?
Hi John,
We don't have taxes on wealth in the USA. We tax income. But I'd like to go after you a bit on your claims--not whether they are factual or not, but whether you can make any sense of them given your obvious desire to spread the wealth more evenly (as you see it). High marginal tax rates on income don't harm the wealthy in the way you want. To avoid those high taxes they convert less of their wealth to income, and you don't get the taxes you want. What you do get is more assets held by fewer people.
See, high marginal rates DO hurt those people wanting to accumulate assets and become wealthy themselves--they need the income (which you would more heavily tax) in order to get the assets you seemingly despise. So the wealthy would show less income--this is how Buffett can explain away his lower tax rate than he thinks fair--but would remain "asset rich", and workers who want to achieve a higher level of wealth would be discouraged by the higher cost to achieve it. But there are other consequences as well.
If those assets of the wealthy don't flow throughout the economy our capital formation rates tank, our business investment becomes stagnant, and so on. In short, everything you claim by implication to favor is made less likely to occur given the policy you imply you want (higher tax rates). I think what you mean you want, but aren't exactly sure why except a liberal somewhere told you to be for it, are taxes on wealth to dispossess those you despise--the wealthy--of their assets. Couple that with your higher marginal rates on income and you will almost be able to create your worker's paradise you don't outwardly claim to want.
Nonsense. Are CEOs contributing more to the economy now that they make 500 times what the average worker makes than they were when they "only" made 200 times the average? Have they created more jobs under the lower taxes and wages of the world according to Bush than they were under the higher rates of President Clinton? Should all us mere average mortals be GRATEFUL that layoffs are increasing almost as fast as corporate profits?
I don't despise the wealthy, I'd like to find a way to work (yes, WORK) my way up to that level one day. Please explain to me how taxing the hedge fund managers and other members of the investment class AT A LOWER LEVEL THAN THE MIDDLE CLASS hinders those of average means from reaching their level. Simple logic tells you the OPPOSITE is true.
Ooh, "workers paradise." Why don't you just call me a marxist--you know you want to. Only problem is it isn't true. I've worked for a living all my life and I don't plan to stop anytime soon. I don't despise wealth...I despise those who are working to set up a paradise for the wealthy, those who are trying to take away the promise of upward mobility and set up a class system in its place.
Nice try, JohnB, but the results don't lie. The stimulus didn't work as shown by meaningful statistics that you blindly ignore. Every one of those statistics has a source. Don't even try to use the sorry excuse that "it would have been much worse without the stimulus". There is no way to prove that. But the statistics I show prove we are in a much worse condition after spending $800 Billion stimulus with an additional $4 Trillion in deficit spending since Obama took office. Keynesian economics failed miserably, and his theories are bunk. Governments cannot get out of debt by going deeper into debt because of their inefficiencies.
A bunch of republicans got together and decided tax cuts unfunded for the richest was the thing to do.
Then they started two wars both unfunded and didn't even think they should raise taxes.
Yes we are in debt. Why are we rushing in to punish the American people for something a group of republicans did. We need to get out of the wars which the republicans won't vote to do. We need to raise taxes something we should have done when we started the wars something the republicans won't do.
You're listening to republicans that voted to get us where we are today. Still with the same plan. Cut taxes on the rich and make America pay dearly.
Hi John,
I think you are missing the point. Again. Don't tax firms. Don't tax hedge funds. Simply tax the distributed income from them. This should satisfy your thirst for those person's money. To your other points...CEOs making whatever they make should be absolutely none of your business unless you are a customer and have a moral or financial objection to what a private firm pays its people, or you are a shareholder and the piece of the company you own gives you the right to vote on who sits on the Board of Directors. Otherwise, it's none of your business.
No firm should be penalized for laying off employess, just as no firm should be rewarded for hiring employees. Firms hire and fire based upon the needs of the firm to maintain profitability. This doesn't sit well with you, it's obvious, but it's also an economic truism. So the solution exists for you. Become your own boss, hire your own staff, make your own profits, and reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of your own hard work. You will become more free in a sense, though I can attest that the hours are long and often unrewarding. But at least you will stop sounding as if you think you are owed something by everyone else who's done better than you.
It's not very American. It isn't what made the USA great. And it's not the way to continued prosperity. It is the way to serfdom.
We get it johnb - for you and others it will always be the rights fault. Got antother BS to dazzle us with?
Hi John B.,
I'd like to add one thing to Rational One's response to you. You claimed in your earlier response to him that tax breaks were put into the stimulus because republicans demanded it. You can have your own opinion, sir, but you cannot have your own facts. Your claim is false. No republican voted for the stimulus. Obama and Congressional democrats put into the stilmulus only those things they wanted. It might have made sense if the goal was to peel off a few republicans, but this didn't happen and wasn't the goal. The position Obama took was that he won and he'd do what he wanted because of this.
The stimulus is ENTIRELY a democratic party creation, and you own the results of it. Be a man and take it.
John, Rich is exactly right. Typical of the progressive approach, fix a relatively minor issue allowing hedge fund managers to get capital gains via a carried interest by taking a sledgehammer and pummel all those you feel dont deserve success. So fix this issue and move on. Rich is also right about your fixation with CEOs and executives who make too much money in your eyes. If you think its too much start an activist shareholder group and get involved as otherwise its not your business how much they make even if it offends your sense of fairness. I personally think Lady Gaga makes too much money because her music doesnt appeal to me and I could name a few overpaid athletes too but again using the tax code to level the playing field for compensation inequities (at least in your mind) is wrong.
OK, so you're all in favor of upward redistribution of wealth. Thanks for your input.
As far as "having my own facts" that would be projection on your part. The Stimulus plan was loaded with tax breaks demanded by Senate Republicans just to get out from under a filibuster;
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/05/us/politics/05stimulus.html
Hey John,
No one is advocating any flow of wealth upwards or sideways or anything else on my side. That is your claim, and it's not found in reality. What we don't argue for is the preposterous idea that if only we tax some rich guy more it'll make our lives better. You paying more taxes won't make my life better, so why would me paying more taxes make your life better?
And no, the stimulus bill was put together by democrats, for democrats. It was clear fairly early on that republicans were having none of it. Did republicans want lots of things to come aboard--sure. Did democrats refuse the vast majority of those things--sure. It's why, in the end, republicans all voted no. It's your party's stimulus. It's failed, and failed miserably by any metric you want to apply. You own it, and if you were a man you'd accept it.
Just do it.
All’s you’ve proven is there is no lie you won’t tell, no innuendo you won’t use, no hostage you won’t take to protect the interests that would beggar us and make one man fail.
Me I’m going to do what 98% of us have to do. Get up at o’dark thirty and head out and keep on making chicken salad out of chicken sh!t till I have a chance to do something about it.
When it comes up to a vote that’s the one thing you can’t take away from me although you’re doing the best you can. The only thing I have left.
Enough
Time to end this madness.
Hoping enough of us can hold out long enough to make it happen.
IR:
You and Ron are right on target.
Now lets see if we get a Jobs Bill out of the House. If not, all they have done is prove to America once and for all, this contrived Debt Crisis was just that. An open assault on the Government of the United States and its Citizens. It had nothing all to do with the Debt Ceiling and the deficit. Just a pure power grab.
You just summed up exactly how I feel simply & succinctly Navy...
The light at the end of the tunnel is MAYBE now they'll get to work on what they were elected on; JOBS!!
Anyone else remember?
For some reason I won't be holding my breath!
Exactly, IR. I see no reason to think this will change things one iota. No incentive here for the wealthy corporatists to create jobs or do anything more but sit back and feast. Heck, they'll even make money from this week's "relief rally" on Wall Street -- yet another artificial by-product of our current sham of a political system.
They can afford to wait it out till November, 2012.
After which, all bets are off.
Morning Anna. Exactly. We can fight here daily over the ins and outs but it becomes obvious that we are going to have to wait for the next election to get some relief. And to be very honest we're not even going to get that if enough people believe this old tripe of both parties do it. Call it for what it is. B.S. and be done for it.
Truer words were never spoken. We're all done for it.
And good morning. Have a wonderful day, if you can after all this.
I'm going to work as hard as I can to make sure we get every possible Republican-Tea Bagger voted out in 2012. It's time we get rid of the ones who killing the poor and the middle class.
Raise Revenue, cut defense spending and spend baby spend to get our infrastructure re-built, and the people back to work.
Job1, Absolutely, I will do what I always do, put in my time, energy, and work to elect local, state candidates and the re election of Obama.
Please explain to me what a "jobs" bill should/will look like? Please use examples of past "jobs" bills from any previous Congress to explain your point. Actually, Obama ought to be the one to stick his neck out for once and propose legislation for Congress to consider that will create jobs -- cause his neck will be chopped off in 2012 by the voters.
From wikipedia:
As governor of New York, FDR had run a similar program on a small scale. Long interested in conservation, Roosevelt was aware of the numerous forestry programs set up in 1931-32 in the U.S. and Europe designed to relieve unemployment by sending young men to work in the woods. An important theme was the healthy nature of outdoor work versus the debilitating environment of city slums.[7] Now, as president, he proposed to Congress a much larger national program on 21 March 1933:[8]
He promised this law would provide 250,000 young men with meals, housing, uniforms, and small wages for working in the national forests and other government properties. FDR issued Executive Order 6101 on 5 April 1933 which established the CCC organization and appointed a director, Robert Fechner, a former labor union official who served until 1939. The organization and administration of the CCC was a new experiment in operations for a Federal government agency. The order indicated that the program was to be supervised jointly by four Cabinet departments: War, Labor, Agriculture and Interior, by means of a CCC Advisory Council composed of a representative from each of the supervising departments. In addition, the Office of Education and Veterans Administration participated in the program. To end the opposition from labor unions (which wanted no training programs started when so many of their men were unemployed)[9] Roosevelt picked a union official, Fechner, and took William Green, head of the American Federation of Labor, to the first camp to demonstrate that there would be no job training involved beyond simple manual labor.[10]
The legislation and mobilization of the program occurred quite rapidly. Within ten days after being introduced to Congress, the ECW Act was signed on 31 March 1933. On 5 April Director Fechner was appointed and War Department corps area commanders were given the task to commence enrollment. The first CCC enrollee was selected 7 April and subsequent lists of unemployed men were supplied by state and local welfare and relief agencies for immediate enrollment. On 17 April the first camp, NF-1, Camp Roosevelt, was established at George Washington National Forest near Luray, Virginia. By 1 July 1933 there were 1,463 working camps with 250,000 junior enrollees (18–25 years of age), 28,000 veterans, 14,000 American Indians, and 25,000 Locally Enrolled (or Experienced) Men (LEM).[11][12]
so, Like this....Except instead of national Parks and the like, We focus on infrastructure and alternative energy sources....
Now that the GOPTP finally has something they can declare victory on (regardless what the facts show) maybe they'll do something to improve the economic climate...though I doubt it.
Anyone remember Republican Conservatives chanting "jobs, jobs, jobs"?
Thanks Ted We need more of this and less of Yahoos telling us about what we can't do. Anybody else see the editoral in the New York times to day saying that it's a bad idea to cut spending in this economy. All brought to you by our friends the Republicans/T.P. An unhoilier allance has never been struck. Buckle your seatbelts it's going to leave a mark when we hit bottom again.
IR said: All brought to you by our friends the Republicans/T.P. An unhoilier allance has never been struck.
Unusual statement since the republicans at the top hate the Tea Party as much as the democrats do.
Me, I admire the Tea Party. It's about time a group of people stepped in the break up the status quo. A challenge, a threat... and no matter what you may think about it, the movement is growing and will continue to grow. It's the established parties that need to take note... The TP didn't lose any credibility during this battle of wits... Only in America can people speak out against those who are actually trying to turn things around with our broken system.
Well said, IR. We still have our votes and we still have the right to speak out everywhere we can be heard to point out what the consequences of our votes can be.
Good luck with that BrianB. Without help from the Republicans looks like your T.P. just fades don't it.
NorthstarDFL - "Job1, Absolutely, I will do what I always do, put in my time, energy, and work to elect local, state candidates and the re election of Obama."
What a surprise, the unemployed working to keep their "free" handouts going despite an obviously horrendous administration.
pjam09
Why do you nut jobs on the right always assume that anyone who supports President Obama and the Democrats don't have a job?
Remember President Obama won with more than 60,000,000 votes.
So, you folks wonder why we Progressives think of you guys as a bunch of dumb a$$e$. You prove it everyday.
@tom- this type of working program is exactly what i think we should do:
Create an Infrastructure job corps similar to the peace corps, teach for America. Those that get in are trained for 6 months in an area of expertise (pavement, steelwork, etc) and then are sent to where they are needed the most (in or out of state) to complete an “x” amount of jobs before their term of service is complete (two years minimum). These people will be getting paid a set wage that would also cover the cost of training, room and board. Once the term is complete, they can be hired at a more competitive wage and/ or be trained to manage new works.
How does the tea party defending the rich at all cost breaking up the status quo?
Isn't this just business as usual. Stealing from American to give to the rich.
Try climbing out of the teapot. You might find things look differently out here.
Ben,
Little late to the game i see. It was Boehner himself that claimed the "shellacking" in November was all about JOBS. Check it out on his website. So if that was the referrendum by 30% of the voters in the UNited States, why have they sopent most of their time attacking the social safety nets leading up to a presidential election? Oh wait...i think i answered my own question.
Thanks for playing today Ben, there are no consolation prizes, unless of course you consider cutting off your nose to spite your face a consolation.
Vote Obama 2012.
hey navy , would you please tell me how the house and senate create jobs? all they can do is make a climate conducive for for hiring.
for me as a small business owner there is sill way to much uncertainty going around to hire.
You want to know why the Reps haven't put up a 'jobs' bill? Let's look at the situation. Corporations and companies are holding onto record-level war chests of raw, liquid money. That's cash that's un-invested in anything. Bad, evil corporations, right? But wait, let's think. Why on earth would a corporation hold onto money like that? If the company wanted profits, it'd be better to invest it, either in their own company (infrastructure, expansions, new jobs, etc.) or in other companies/groups (stock market, bank loans, etc). If the business owners wanted to get rich(er), they'd spend that money on their own perks, bonuses, and benefits. Neither of these things are happening. The money is being held, untouched, in high-liquidity cash reserves. If greed of the individual or greed of the corporation isn't to blame, what is? Why are these corporations doing this?
They're holding such high volumes of cash ready because they fear the new taxes, regulations, and restrictions the liberals want to impose on them. The liberals has absolute authority in 2009 and look what they did to their first target: health insurance. Health insurance companies are paying many times what they used to pay to cope with all the new taxes, regulations, and restrictions in the Health Insurance Bill the liberals passed. Some companies are going out of business. Most are raising fees. Next, look at what happened with Wall-street. That wasn't nearly as devastating, but it easily could have been, especially considering the rhetoric going on at the time. Finally, let's look at the rhetoric that was, and still is, coming out from the Dems, from Obama, and from liberals in general. It's still heavily class-warfare centered, with lots of 'evil corporations', 'rich fat-cats', and attacks on anyone who has or makes money. The Dems are even trumpeting their old 'raise taxes' horn on top of it all (and in these economic conditions, to boot). Put it all together, and it's no wonder that anyone who owns or runs a business of any kind is nervous and is stocking up on raw cash to cope with whatever is coming.
As Frank said (3.21), and as everyone else is saying, it's uncertainty. Specifically uncertainty about what taxes, restrictions, and regulations the liberals are going to pass down next. The best thing the Dems could do for this economy is to kill all the class-warfare rhetoric and say once and for all that they won't raise taxes until the economy is stable again. The best thing the Reps could do is exactly what they are doing (with maybe a little less rhetoric themselves). The best thing YOU could do is vote out all the class-warfare spewing Democrats come next November (mind you, those who aren't engaging in class warfare aren't a part of this problem).
If you help the poor working class to get educated they in turn have a better chance to get a better job and thus become middle class. If you take everything from them and say make it on your own. They will continue to stay in the poor working class and subtracting from the middle class by not replenishing it.
There must be a balance way to grow higher education jobs and at the same time direct there educational choices with incentive's toward what the country needs.
But if we continue to elect people who hate the middle class, poor and needy we will go backwards as a country.
Whats a "Jobs Bill". Not sure how the government is suppose to create jobs, maybe they can create a new post office and make millions in profits.
Frank, great comment, What i want to know is why after having so much time, the Dems didn't do it, now the republicans are expected to do it in 8 months. Every politician on both sides of the aisle are to blame, as are we the American people who manipulate short term systems to our advantage so we can continue our lazy trend. What happened to the REAL American dream? The one where if you work hard and make good choices, you can succeed? Today its more like, "if you are lazy enough and live in the right area you can get stuff handed to you."
JFK2112. Right on. The Government can not create JOBS. We keep hearing from the Talking heads and Politicians HOW Government needs to create JOBS.
Very good statement but no substance. The last Job creation bill by Congress was the CCC Camps during the Depression. Actual People went to work for $1/day plus housing and food.
The new Debt Reduction Law will create at least an additional 1/2 point in the Unemployment rate.
Less Government Money being spent on Defense equals less people working. The down sizeing of our Military will dump 50K ex-G'"s into the Labor pool. What do they do?
I hope the TEA Party members do not need a JOB after we throw them out on their Butts.
@Bryan -- Actually it doesn't make any difference what the Speaker says. The Tea Party candidates said it differently. From Day One, the freshmen in the House said they would uphold the Tea Party platform on which they were elected. See for yourself.
http://www.teaparty-platform.com/
All I asked was what does a "Jobs" bill look like?
C. Smith, what makes you believe the wealthy elites AREN'T enriching themselves? CFO wages increased by 19% last year vs less than 2% for the average. CEO wages are now 500 times the average worker! Are they doing a better job than when it was "only" 200 times the average wage? Meanwhile HSBC announces that they've made record profits but plan to lay off 25,000 employees.
The Conservative war against the middle class continues.
Democrats demoralized?!! ROFLMAO!!!! I guess fiesty and navy and all the other PAID bloggers out here can now be called PLAYED bloggers!!! When will you self absorbed, cut and paste, psuedo-intellectual wanna-be's realize that you are but mere pawns in a much larger game that you will never get to play. Grow up and get smarter. You are all currently lacking , severly, in both catagories.
John B -- You do realize that HSBC is headquartered in the UK right? You do realize that the United Kingdom and the United States are two different countries right? You do realize that the wage increases you cite came under this administration's watch right? You do realize that companies have a right to operate within the legal parameters of the law and pay their employees/executives what they please right?
xxx
that link to your porn site ain't working. Will you post it again?
Penguin,
It wasn't funny the first time you said it. What makes you think it'll get any attention this time? Move on Mr. Penguin. Move on.
??
x
I haven’t really had an opportunity to learn the ins and outs of the possible debt deal. But I do know that once again, revenue is left out. Another win for the corporate people . . . but then, I didn’t expect anything else.
The only thing I find increasingly funny/sad is how no matter who screws up what, it is always President Obama’s fault. No other adult’s are held responsible for their actions (or lack their of). It used to make me angry, but now I find it quite entertaining.
I have come to realize that much of America is not looking for human President, they are looking for a kindly and all knowing wizard to tuck them in at night.
Good luck with that.
P.S. The other entertaining thing to me is how folks get all upset with the President for not “fighting harder” for Progressive values, but these same folks are the very ones who are the always ready to jump ship at the first clap of thunder. Tell me, how do you “fight” the opposition with an “army” that deserts daily?
P.S.S. The great thing about being a Republican, is that no matter how bad you #$@# up, you never have to take the blame, because “both sides” are always there to cover for ya . . . this crisis was created by "Washington political leaders" First read? . . . lol . . . its like having one kid who sets the house on fire and the other who didn’t make their bed; and lamenting that “both kids” have done some bad things. Seriously? :o)
The country has come to know President Obama not so much as a kindly wizard, but more like the Scarecrow, the Tin Man, and the Lion.
No brains, no heart, no courage.
President Obama got an historic healthcare reform bill passed with a Democratic House and divided Senate, which lowers the federal deficit by $130 billion in the first ten years alone, and gets everybody covered with health insurance for the first time in history, but FR journalists think President Obama doesn't know how to deal with Congress? Republicans are coming out of this debt ceiling crisis with tanking approval ratings, but FR journalists think President Obama doesn't know how to deal with his opponents in Congress? Am I the only one seeing this?
Obama is the only one in this whole mess who has acted like a leader. It took superhuman moral strength to be a leader in this situation, yet he has been criticized by both sides: The Left for not being progressive enough; The Right for being too liberal. In particular it seems like there is an official script for the Tea Party and neocons that never changes, regardless of the facts. Any Republican who dares to go "off script" is dead to them and re-election. Washington appears to be in a death spiral in the throes of deadlock.
Absolutely correct, Lynne. With EVERYONE screaming for the President to make this a High Noon, only one man walks away moment he made a deal to prevent the crash of the economy. Republicans certainly weren't going to do that. And yet Republicans didn't get the majority of their demands.
Mr. President, I won't pretend to be happy with this deal, but when dealing with the terrorists of the GOPTP at least you behaved like an adult.
Had Mr. Reid and Mrs. Pelosi raised the debt ceiling in december when they still controlled all 3 branches of government we wouldn't have had this circus of a debate. BUT Mr. Reid is ON RECORD saying he didn't want to even bring up the debt ceiling because he wanted the Republicans to have to be responsible for the outcome. He wouldn't raise the debt ceiling for PURELY political posturing, so lets stop with blaming republicans for holding the country hostage, lets blame Reid for being political. So Reid and the democrats have put our country in dire straights for PURELY POLITICAL reasons, how do ya like them apples.
Lynne, I agree. The President played his role exactly as the founding fathers envisioned the executive behaving, and so called "Tea Party" (in reality, the furthest thing from the original patriots), describes him as "weak"... for trying to broker a compromise with them!
He could have pulled a fast one and raised the ceiling without them, but he went for a bipartisan, legislative soloution - and they're are whining about it! What a heap of criticism Obama is getting for NOT being dictatorial. None of this makes sense to me.
Wow. Obama cannot get over himself, and he has a dwindling cult membership extolling his "virtues".
Well, here's one example of his "leadership"
http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/other-news/174465-obama-use-of-bully-pulpit-may-have-backfired-on-twitter
The story appeared on the 29th. From what I've read today, he's lost more than a hundred thousand followers- and they are still counting.
How out of touch with reality can you be?
Great post, Nash. I expect gloating and bashing of the President from the right--they don't have ideas of their own and have nothing else to say---but I am fed up with the folks on the left who don't support the President. If they had been better advocates and campaigners, perhaps the elections of 2010 wouldn't have put the Tea Party where they could act like little children and pitch a tantrum. I am glad that our President didn't draw lines in the sand with our debt ceiling and put our fragile recovery at risk. I have never regretted my vote for him and am proud that he is our leader.
Same as the REAL GOP From The Past !
Because of LYING TEA - POSERS ! They are Voting Democrat From Now ON !
Google Your SENATE TEA-POSER and SEE Thier PORK ? ( They ALL DID IT )
Forked tongued Piece of BACHMANN'S!
I Want To SEE How Big the CORPORATE TAX CUTS are in this BILL ARE ????????????
Amy B - "President Obama got an historic healthcare reform bill passed "
Why no mention of the backroom deals and promises to Hispanic congressmen for "immigration reform" (amnesty) in return for their votes? He bought the bills passage at great cost to everyone's future.
Be sure you remember that it was Obama in 2014:
U.S. will pay for half of all health care costs by 2020 - July 28, 2011
"Total health care spending is expected to nearly double to $4.6 trillion in 2020, from $2.6 trillion in 2010.
Health care spending per capita is forecast to increase to $13,708 in 2020 from $8,327 in 2010, the report said.
By 2020, nearly 30 million additional people are expected to have health insurance because of reform.
Over the 10-year period, the report showed that the biggest annual jump in health care spending will happen in 2014 when health reform is fully implemented.
CMS estimates that in 2014 about 23 million uninsured consumers will gain access to health insurance, mainly through government programs such as Medicaid and through the creation of federal and state-funded health insurance exchanges.
As a result, the government expects Medicaid spending to surge 20% in 2014 and private health insurance spending to increase 9.4%.
Norwalk said the estimated sharp surge in Medicaid spending just in one year, is very concerning given that states are already struggling with their budgets.
As millions more gain access to health insurance, the government expects spending on prescription drugs, physician and hospital services to increase as well.
CMS expects prescription drug spending to jump by 10.7% in 2014 and to account for 11% of national health spending by 2020. Spending on physician and clinical services is forecast to rise by 8.9% by 2014, representing 19% of overall health care spending."
http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/28/news/economy/healthcare_spending_forecast/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=hp_bn3
P.S. Keep in mind these are even the government released numbers, the reality will be much worse.
No he didn't. He passed historic Healthcare Insurance Reform and he had 59 votes in the Senate. Go read some of the statistics about how long it takes to get an appointment in Massachusetts, if you can actually get a doctor to take Medicaid. He did NOT reform healthcare.
I agree. The congress of 2009 through 2011 had the ability to pass a budget, raise taxes back to the Clinton years (through reconciliation if needed as that's how they were passed in the first place), and increase the debt ceiling. All these positions required political courage on the part of the Democrats because they would involve pain. Democrats love to say "We want to save/protect Medicare and Social Security", but they never give ANY details on how much this will cost in taxes, either now or when the 80 million Baby Boomers retire. They were a bunch of (political) cowards in that congress.
Now, NEITHER party is will to admit the cost of these entitlement over the next 20 years nor has a realistic plan to pay for them. Even the Ryan plan, as has been pointed out, will add to the debt. So when is either party going to come up with a solution? If Nancy Pelosi thinks this is the age of Austerity now she ain't seen nothing yet.
President Obama got an historic healthcare reform bill passed...on purely party line votes. Historic maybe but it lacked any bi-partisan support.
http://www.beavoter.com/congressorg/issues/votes/?votenum=165&chamber=H&congress=1112&printer=1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Which is still as wildly unpopular with the general electorate as it was when it was being debated.
for-38% against 51.2%
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html
___________________________________________________________________________
Which caused an historic loss of seats in congress,
http://www.politico.com/2010/maps/
_________________________________________________________________________
Despite this quote (or alleged and unrefuted quote) from the president
They just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.”
Asked today by ABC News’ Yunji de Nies if the president said that, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs pleaded ignorance.
“I have not talked to the president about that,” Gibbs said, employing one of his favorite dodges.
Gibbs seemed to suggest that he shared that view, whether or not President Obama said it.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/01/the-big-difference-between-2010-and-1994-is-me-president-obama-says-per-congressman.html
___________________________________________________________________________________
Everyone is coming out of this with tanking approval ratings, and deservedly so, but on the deficit/debt ceiling crisis the republicans have controlled the narrative throughout and that has been the case for most issues seemingly from the day the president was sworn in. He will be signing a bill with NO revenue increases and trillions of dollars in budget cuts. It has the imprimatur of the tea party and will likely pass with only token democratic support;
Pelosi, however, has not publicly endorsed the deal.
She told reporters, “I have to meet with my caucus [Monday] to see how they wish to proceed. We may not be able to support it, or none of us may be able to support it.”
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/174635-debt-limit-deal-puts-pelosi-in-the-drivers-seat
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Failure to support, endorse, embrace his own debt-commission's bi-partisan findings left the president open to the kind of unbalanced, uncompromising "deal" he and the democrats have been forced to accept.
So, I don't think the President has done a very good job when it comes to dealing with the legislative branch, and this latest, one sided deal is another example.
Steeler Fan - It does show a lot about these right leaning posters. You would think they would let up; their side just orchestrated a huge win. Crack a smile let out a laugh righties, it may do you some good. Guess the righties never learned about being good winners.
Regarding your note about criticism, I don't point my finger at Obama solely for this huge loss. Lets face it the TP and GOP where happy to risk the entire economy and another recession to prove a point. Not one to be an Obama apologist but his hands were tied. Despite my realization that there needed to be some cuts to address the deficit this was a bad way to address the problem. Who knows what severe cuts during a weak recovery will do. As I'm sure you will agree there is no shared sacrifice in this so called compromise. There was no compromise on 95% of the GOP talking points, they got everything they wanted.
I support this president, but will continue to criticize him. Perhaps it will move him to shift back to the light? I hope now he will learn to stop leaving the center and running to the right. For all his movement, the right will still demonize him - see GOP post above. Look, Obama will probably lose in 2012, there is no further need for him to move right to garner votes. Now in his last year he needs to stand for the people who voted for him. Write down a plan for the cuts in these second round of super committees Mr. Obama stand up for the big entitlements and the country. Stand for us Mr. President and I will stand with you.
And, his HCR will be repealed in 2013, if not struck down by the court before that time.
Nobody wants it.
Nobody RICH Wants IT !
The Health care deal should have been stronger. However, we needed to do something. All ready, my company plan is giving more benefits due to the Health care law. I'm paying less for routine wellness visits and I'm only paying a few dollars more per month.
It’s time we catch up with the continue Health Care for all.
I want it No Jo, I do.
It puts insurance in the reach of more American's, Which should contain or lower costs, it cuts the deficit, It is morally the right thing to do.
You, like your GOP puppetmasters, need to stop trying to speak "For the American People" Your at least HALF wrong ALL the time....
The republicans hate money spent on the poor, it takes from the money for their rich friends.
You never hear quit borrowing and spending on the tax cuts for the rich. Wonder why that is?
I want it.
Anybody who has ever had to deal with serious medical issues wants it. Read this:
I know so many families who have been in situations like this. The Health Care bill would be the safety net for families like these. Make sure you note the stat: 62% if all bankruptcies are initiated by medical issues, and make sure you also note how difficult the insurance companies make it for people like this to avoid that death spiral.
But what do you want Ted, affordable Healthcare Insurance or affordable Healthcare? There's a difference.
Wake up no joe, you're dreaming again.
Which benefit of Affordable Care would you like to repeal first:
Closing the Medicare donut hole?
Tax breaks for small businesses to help them afford health plans?
Ability of dependents to stay on their parents' insurance to age 26?
Elimination of preexisting conditions clauses?
Enhanced consumer protection for insurance customers?
Required coverage of preventative benefits?
Capping insurance companies gross profit on policies at "only" 20%?
Programs to bring down malpractice costs?
Reducing costs by allowing some chronic patients to be treated at home instead of requiring them to be confined to a health care facility?
Enhanced programs aimed at controlling fraud and abuse?
http://healthreform.kff.org/Timeline.aspx
Please educate us which of these initiatives are so destructive to the lives of average Americans.
Repugnacant rant " If the black guy wanted it I don't"
With the current atmosphere in Washington, everything that needs to be discussed is squarely placed into the context of the budget. Everything remains a political discussion, not a policy discussion and we need to change this if we are going to come up with solutions to the challenges ahead. It comes as a result of last year's election of Tea Party faction members to Congress, as well as, others that have thought it politically wiser to 'just say no.'
Even yesterday's announcement about reaching a bipartisan agreement was a result of this continued politics over policy escapade in Washington. We have been screaming for job creation and have gotten nothing but political rhetoric. There has been no discussion about job creation policy; energy policy; or global warming policy only about what it will do to the budget deficit. Election-mode; not governing-mode. Sadly this has permeated our society like the black plague.
Our media and politicians have confused society with government, leaving little or no distinction between them; they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our desires, and government by our excesses. Society promotes our happiness by uniting our desires and encouraging interaction; government by restraining our immoral habits and creating distinctions. Until the media and politicians get these distinctions right, we are doomed to fail.
The United States is not a 'corporate society' but one based upon community and concern for each and every individual citizen.
Nash:
You are right on. We, for sure, have a spending problem. But we also have a revenue problem. We need both to get out of this mess. Cutting Spending alone will not work for the long run as virtually every leading Economist has been screaming.
All the cutting and cutting will do is destroy this country as we know it. We will be throwing seniors, children, veterans, the disabled and low income families into the gutter to fend for themselves while the top 2% go have their lobster and filet lunches.
The rest will be living on the street in card board boxes hoping for a Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich on stale bread that the AINOS tossed in the garbage.
The ELITE GOP // TP Dream!
Taking THIER COUNTRY BACK !
Are They Giving back to The NAVAHO'S ? == SIOUX ?
You know The ACTUAL AMERICANS ............................................
Divided gov't? I think not. Rather, this gov't is being run by the radical minority tea party faction of the Republican party, with a gun to the rest of gov't head threatening to pull the trigger if they don't get what they want, even if it's not supported by the majority of Americans.
The Teapublicans are monomanical about "cutting spending" but they have no ideas about growing the economy, getting out of Afghanistan, improving our educational system, combating global warming, taking care of an aging boomer population, developing alternative energy, or dealing with immigration.
The Tea Party is short sighted and unbalanced. And very dangerous.
Oh, Jesus will get us out of it. Just like he helps local high school's win football games in Texas.
To funny, TPokeys. LMAO
Liberal media: "Nobody Really a Winner"
Translation: "Obama The Biggest Loser"
No Bob the American working man is the biggest loser, a loser who doesn't have anything left to lose because it's all been taken already.
bush - That would have been if Reids "plan" had been passed.
I have said it a 1001 times before and I will say it again, the dept problems are due to W. Bush and the Republicans. Facts are Facts.
pjam, exactly WHO'S plan do you think was passed? It certainly wasn't that garbage that came out of the house. not even close. Oh wait, you don't have any idea what passed do you? You're just here as usual blabbering on.
job1 - you can say it a trillion times - but it doesn't make it right. I hope 1 Term 0bama & the libs run against Bush 43 again in 2012 - it worked out so well in 2010 didn't it?
I realize wishful thinking requires for you to repeat it about 100 times per day, but I don't blame GW Bush exclusively for this economic mess.
The ENTIRE Conservative Movement is to blame.
And thanks for saying it so often, it just provides more opportunities to counter your empty rhetoric with facts;
What liberal media? Big business owns it all.
What in the world does this mean First Read? How in the hell is President Obama supposed to forge "personal relationships" with these nitwits? The President has consistently reached out to these folks, and I sure as hell don't see nobody reaching back.
Why in the hell should the "personal relationship" trump the JOB these clowns are being WELL PAID to do?
This is the type of inside the beltway "analysis" that lets me know that corporations are in control.
The next time I don't get my job done, I am gonna tell my boss it is because my and my coworkers don't have a good "personal relationship". I am sure that will go over great.
Nash:
It means that like most "journalists," the First Read people are deathly afraid of being accused of liberal bias, so they must always allocate blame equally between Democrats and Republicans no matter what the situation (and maybe a tad more blame to the Democrats just to be sure the right wingers won't write angry blog posts about them).
first president ever to be expected to negotiate with terrorists. unprecedented, right?
crazy,...and the media won't call it,...wonder why?
They're half way sane, and you're not.
The President was never going to get the big deal and I suspect he knew it. How on earth can he forge a personal relationship with someone who says his main focus is to prevent the re-election of the President? Or Boehner, who won't even attend state dinners (despite the open bar)? Or people who interrupt national addresses to yell "you lie"? The fact that the President does not have personal relationships with these folks is to his credit.
Nash:
FR and the rest of the MSM get a real kick out of telling the President that he is not strong enough or smart enough to play with the big boys on Capitol Hill.
They never say what a bunch of idiots we have running the country (D and R); just that the President can't keep up. Well those well- paid parrots aren't doing any work and that is the President's fault!
Delicious!
I wonder if they'll 'test' him this week? Isn't he overdue for yet another 'pop' quiz?
Oh look a personal attack from Jabber the Hut,...whatever JAS1, whatever.
this whole thing has thought me that we have to not only take voted for president as a big deal but also voting for congress might be a even bigger deal
So the teabaggers hold the country hostage, and after all that, the t trillion in cuts over ten years amount to about 100,000 billion a year - which is less than what it is costing us each month in Afghanistan. These cuts are not all up front cuts and encompass cuts over a ten year period. Progressives are whining and complaining about President Obama instead of holding a gun to the heads of their colleagues like the teabaggers did to us. Way too much whining and complaining on all sides. Hear this, if this country wants the middle class, seniors, their kids, and yes, entitlements, and if you want higher taxes on the rich, then you had better vote the majority in Congress back to the Democrats. Otherwise, the teabaggers are just waiting for another hostage taking, and this time, it will be jobs. The Republican party took the majority in the House in January of 2011, and they have not created one job - not one, and all they have done has been hold this country hostage, hold jobs hostage, and do their best to hurt the President. All they have done is burden us further and have embarrassed us royally around the world. The GOP is absolutely going down hard in 2012, and good riddance, because they have proven to the world that they are a danger to our country and to our way of life, and their pledge to Grover Norquist is more important that seeing this country and it's citizens through the recession they created, the debt the GOP racked up, and the jobs they have let be lost in this country. The GOP is into power and money only - not jobs, not insuring the middle class get ahead. So in 2012 throw the bums out who have screwed us again and protected their pledge and who are more than willing to let us pick up the tab for their rich friends, again. Give the power of the numbers back to the Democrats and watch how things change. Otherwise, we are strangled by the GOP and Grover and we will sink. The world and this country has seen the danger the GOP and teabaggers represent to us, the people. Throw them out, or live with the awful consequences of your actions by giving anything to the crazy loons of the GOP.
Joannasmith1: What planet are you living on?
Middle Earth. Don't feed the trolls.
The American people won! The "Tea Party" which isn't really a political party as much as a warning cry has been saying that our Federal Government is bloated and that we are taxed too much. This manufactured crisis has awakened the US voters that insane spending and borrowing is an issue.
But an opportunity missed was the highlighting of the fact that jobs will cure all of this just like it did in the Clinton administration. And all this time, all the willing media would talk about is the fine points of credit rating, corporate jet owners, and class warfare, and we temporarily forgot the real and only issue here -- private sector JOBS. If we now demand job numbers and the economy right up until November 2012, we'll maybe elect some folks who are rational and will really represent us.
Are you as tired as I am of "agendas"? How about an Administration that administers and a Congress that represents. Just fix the problems that your agendas caused. Kick the agendas down the road, not the American people!
Hey Tom, How are we supposed to create Jobs when the house has closed off all investments in this economy. They say we can't spend anymore. We can't tax anymore.
So, in your opinion, what type of jobs program bill is available to consider without capital to fund it?
Taxed too much? With the lowest rates in almost 6 decades (the highest deficit also...duh)? I'm at a loss for words....
I always thought "conservatives" were people who didn't take un-necessary risks...but I just watched today's so-called "fiscal conservatives" playroulette with American's tripe A credit rating.
I thought "conservatives" were people who respected rules and time-honored procedures, but I just watched today's "fiscal conservatives," wreck havoc on our legislative system, and thumb their noses at an establishment of economic experts, the global community, the President, their Speaker, fellow citizens, and Wall Street investors.
I thought "conservatives" aimed to keep the country safe, but they managed to scare the crap out of me and millions of other Americans. Seems the Tea Party has turned the Republican Party into the opposite of what I'd called conservative...more like a radical right.
What have we learned?
The Tea Party, campaigning on the premise that government is broken, have been elected...and only broken it further. The Founding Fathers wrote The Constitution in such a way that no one branch of government would have more power than any other. The Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches were designed to work together.
The Teapublicans do not see themselves as being part of the political system. They see themselves as its enemy. Cooperation is not in their vocabulary. Rather than fixing what is wrong in Washington they want to blow it up.
...and they do so by claiming this is what the framers of The Constitution intended...a toothless, stripped down government with no power. They claim the legacy of Reagan while failing to understand one thing...Reagan may have said, "government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem," but that did not stop him from governing.
The deal on the debt ceiling is not complete and the Teapublicans can still block its approval. They do so at their own peril. Obstruction of this deal will cost them next November as the "Do-Nothing Congress" they claimed to want to fix in 2010 will becom the "Do-Even-Less-Than-Nothing Congress" under their watch.
President Obama shows respect for the political process, and commentators call him "weak." He pushed for compromise, for working out a bipartisan plan for lowering the deficit, and resisted taking uni-lateral action to raise the debt ceiling and his detractors savage him over ...what? being reasonable? Being a true American? Putting country before Party? And this is supposed to be a bad thing? When did America come to prefer dictators over Presidents?
Amy,
At the risk of being cliché, I blame the GOP for President Obama being called "weak". For 6 years, President Bush had Republican majorities in both the House and Senate. Congress became his "staffers" and gave him whatever he wanted. The irony is the party that preaches smaller government unwittingly created a stronger central executive figure and now has the audacity to call anyone who does not follow the blueprint "weak".
Amy: A very thoughtful post. Sometimes people cannot discern between reasonable and weak. Our President was reasonable, but not weak.
DaNoid --- Well Said!
Obama has lost any credibility, how can he ever expect to "negotiate" with Republicans on any issue when they know he will give them what they want in the end, I mean he will never be able to get any concessions from the Republicans now. I don't even want to hear the term "shared sacrifice" again, cause it ain't going to happen, the corporate/wealthy/Republican party will do what they please and the American Citizen will pay the price for a President and Democrat party that refuse to stand on the principles they were elected to uphold. Sometimes you have to take a stand for what you believe to be right and let the cards fall where they may, it takes courage and integrity both of which seem to be missing from the Dem's. Compromise that only comes from one side is not compromise, it's failure. Fact is contrary to the beltway spin the average citizen would have suffered much less in the event of default than the fat cat bankers/financiers and wall street, now the "only" people that will suffer is the average citizen, how damn far is our government going to beat down working Americans? You know who has the well being of this country and it's citizens at heart in D.C. ? Nobody.
w bush
President Obama has his eye on the long term game plan. Check back in two years: Koch industries will be up to their neck in investigations, Rupert Murdoch will be in jail, and FOX News will be owned by Adrianna Huffington. I guarentee it.
I hope you are right Amy, I just hope we can get through 2 more years, needless to say my confidence in our government to do even the most trivial thing geared toward the working and middle class is somewhat low, the country needs jobs and yet in D.C. jobs seems to be the only thing not on the agenda.
@Amy...from your keyboard to God's ear...
Hey Amy, "You Guarantee it?" Care to put your money where your mouth is? How about $10,000 at 5-1 odds that none of what you think comes true?
Sorry, White Collar Auto, I'm a Liberal, I don't gamble. I work for what I want to see happen.
Just in general, I don't like taking unnecessary risks. For example, I think playing Russian Roulette with a triple A credit rating to score political points is beyond stupid.
I prefer slow and steady growth, long lasting improvements, stability in my government, dependablity in the House of Representatives, adherence to law and order, rationality, ...you know, those Liberal Democratic values.
What happen to the baseline? I thought the republicans wanted a big fat no to the automatic yearly increases to the baseline.
Also, the cap's on spending, has anyone ever seen a cap on spending that really worked?
At least Obama got what he wanted, remember his bottom line was to extend the debt ceiling issue until after the election.
All this drama, and now we add the Tea Party to shake things up, but at the end of the day its Washington as usual.
Good one Amy.
Amy,
I prefer slow and steady growth, long lasting improvements, stability in my government, dependablity in the House of Representatives, adherence to law and order, rationality, ...you know, those Liberal Democratic values.
Since when?
I know it must be a long time for you, but just look back at the Clinton presidency. He raised taxes and had our economy growing and several increases in revenue to pay down the debt. You know, democratic values to repair our economy without killing American.
It was working until the republicans decided it was more important to give tax cuts to the richest. Even in the midst of two wars, the republicans could not bring themselves to raise taxes.
Now that we are here, the republican answer is to not raise taxes on the richest. Protect the rich at all cost and all the cuts have got to come from the poor.
Republican values, steal from the poor to give to the rich.
I would love to see the Clinton tax rates back.
LMAO......I was thinking the same thing as I was reading Amy's post!
I would love to see the Clinton era tax rates back as well. Then a lot of the people who aren't paying Federal Income taxes would have to start paying them. The bottom 50% would go crazy if we really went back to the Clinton rates for everyone!! While we are at it - lets go back to the Clinton era spending rates as well - you know the $2 trillion per year budget that the Repub House & Senate passed and Clinton finally signed. I would even take the 2006 spending levels that was passed by a split House and Senate!
thetotas
Since when? Isn't it obvious? Since whenever Republicans get into power they nearly destroy the economy.
wow Amy....... Im not sure I can ever take what you say seriously. Hey do they have that condom store down by the waterfront anymore. I figured you might know!
We had 53 months of consecutive economic growth from 2003 - 2007 and then the Democrat spending policies kicked in and we have gone into the Dodd-Frank housing crisis and then the failed Keynesian economic policies of 1 Term 0bama. The debt has almost doubled since the Dems took control of the purse strings in Jan 2007 and will double by the time 1 Term 0bama leaves office for good on Jan 20, 2013.
Amy,
So the democrats had nothing to do with it?
The Democrats regained control of the US House and US Senate in the 2006 elections, and of the White House in the 2008.
If anything its worse.
The 53 months of economic growth you're so proud of represented gradually increasing unemployment and the fist time since the 1930s the median income didn't rise to pre-recession levels before once again falling into a recession. And what a doozy of a recession it was, too, worst one since the Great Depression. Not exactly a record of which to be proud.
Speaking of that recession, you're right on the talking point that it was a housing crisis. In reality it started in the DERIVATIVES market, a pure failure of the religious Conservative devotion to deregulation. Dodd-Frank didn't even exist then, it's the legislation required to prevent another bubble just like the Bush Recession...if Republicans don't succeed in pulling all the teeth out of that law. They haven't learned from failure it would seem.
All that and I haven't complimented you on your math skills. Current debt is at $14.3T. As of 9/30 2009, the end of the last fiscal year for which GW Bush was responsible the debt was $11.9T. At what point did a 20% increase come to be defined as "double"? http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm
The best solution will be for the Dems to win a super-majority in congress overall, so the Baggers can't win, simply by pushing deadlines to the wall.
jbird
Now we have seen what the Tea Party ideology looks like in practice, voters will not be so tempted to give them more power. Jeez, Louise! They just scared the heck out of the country, scared the global markets, scared the investors, and they even scared the Chamber of Commerce!
Bush ran on a re-election platform of "I'll keep you safe." Worked with the soccor moms. No Republican this time around can claim that. Who wants to vote for an economic terrorist?
Your going to be very surpised! You liberals just dont get that your the M I N O R I T Y! Which means........ that with out us Independents you lose. And for the most part we are center right at this time. Unless something changes that.......long day in 2012!
hardly jolly. When you (teapublicans) control more than just the house come talk to us, until then YOU are the minority. You were given a job in the mail room to see if you could hack it at the big desk. What did you do? You jammed up all the machines and set the building on fire. good luck moving to a desk on the executive floor.
On Nov 6 2012 - the Senate will move to the GOP hands as well as the White House. Democrat pundits have already admitted that the Senate will turn GOP in less than 470 days. There are 23 Dem house seats to defend and the GOP has only 10 that are up. You can stick your head in the sand if you like but the GOP will control all 3 segments after Nov 6 2012 - Jan 20, 2013 is 1 Term 0bama's last day in office - Thank God!
black_belt3:
Good luck with President Romney or Bachmann:
Neither of those idiots will want to increase the Debt Ceiling in 2013. They have already telegraphed
their response to that issue.
Can you say "Economic Meltdown???
Shelia, Im an Independent.......so in reality you and the right are Minorities. But you can believe what ever you want to. Us Independents will choose the next president. And as far as I can tell from my blog of over 2200 independents, We are mostly still Center right. Even though I would love to debate this with you..... I dont do that any more on this because liberals only believe what they want to believe. I dont take what the far right says either. But they dont try to convince people that they are right like the left does.... they just state what they think and leave it at that.
Sheila - as long as it is a GOP candidate in the WH and not 1 Term 0bama I am pretty confident that we will be much better off than we are now. As Rep D. W. Schultz - your DNC chairman has said - the Dems own this economy. Raising the debt ceiling in 2013 isn't going to be an issue because the GOP will own all 3 segments and if it needs to be raised - it will be. What is more likely to happen in 2013 tho is that there will be massive spending cuts, 0bamacare spending will go away and the economy will start to recover.
Well bb3, the Tea Party bought the economy today. They held tight until the GOPTP got massive spending reductions in return for raising the debt ceiling, cuts that will take $2.4T out of a fragile economy.
You wanted it, you own it.
In 1773 the Tea Party created a better country and that tradtion still continues today. Thanks to all the brave freshman politicians who went to Washington in 2010 and stood up to the status quo. VOTE FOR MORE CHANGE IN 2012!
Baloney! The original Tea Partiers fought against taxation without representation. They were patriots. They loved America.
The modern day Tea Partiers fought against asking the wealthiest to help pay for two wars, and a bailout of banks after a near economic collapse. Modern day Tea Partiers love personal wealth more than they love their country. They are killing us.
Yeah right. No better than Terrorist Hostage Takers. We will vote these Terrorist Hostage Takers in 2012.
I see UAW has been to the Palin/Bachman school of US history. LOL
I'm sure there were some in 1773 (who wern't paying taxes) who also beleived staying under the care and feeding of the British was a better deal for them.....
Its ok they (liberals) see whats going on now and they are going to react to it. Next will be the so called recall elections. Since there has been one successful single person recall since 1929 if they get a couple I will be surprised. If they get none, they will blame it on big money buying the votes but that will spell the end! They are saying the same thing about Michigans Gov Snyder. He has accomplished more in 6 months than the previous Dem Gov Jenny (from the block) Grandholm did in 8 years.
jollyoldsoul1- look at Minnesota and weep. Recall elections are the least of the teabaggers and righties problems. We the people don't appreciate being sold out for a shill again by the GOP, or having a political gun held to our head for the crisis which the GOP created. Let's be clear - the deficit the righties have their panties in a twist about was created by the righties in the first place. Another fact, the righties have not raised one dime to pay down the debt they created, and they have not created one job. So recall elections are hardly their biggest problem. Righties far and wide will be sent packing in 2012. We the people see their loyalty to their pledge and oath of faith and loyalty to their teabaggers and Grover Norquist. That, I can assure, is not acceptable to us, and we far outnumber old grover. The GOP is going down, very very very very hard in 2012, and good riddance.
More like voter fraud, since the Koch brothers Tea Party front group has been caught red handed trying to trick Democratic voters into returning their absentee ballots too late to be counted. http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0811/AFP_Wisconsin_ballots_have_late_return_date.html?showall
The GOPTP must be pretty worried about this when they have to stoop that low to subvert democracy.
This reminds me of toady's competitive sports for kids. EVERYONE gets a trophy.
Well, everyone in Washington at least. Meanwhile We, the taxpayers, get ready to bend over and slather a tube of KY.
I don't think the taxpayers can afford KY. This is going to hurt.
First Read:
FALSE EQUIVALENCY ALERT!!!!
A few on "the left" were unhappy that Obama adopted a conservative Republican free-market approach to universal health insurance with the individual mandate rather than a public option. The public hasn't been all that thrilled with the individual mandate, either. But most Democrats support the president and were happy to see some form of universal insurance even though it took some compromise to get conservative Democratic votes (and no Repubs) in the Senate.
That's not exactly the same as Republicans being unhappy about getting all the demands met that they had made a few months ago and successfully blocking any compromise on raising revenues. As much as the media likes to pretend that Republicans and Democrats are always equally to blame, the debt ceiling "crisis" was 100% manufactured by the Republicans in Congress, who are a new kind of right wing extremists who bear no resemblance to conservatives of the past.
I love "FALSE EQUIVALENCY ALERT!!!" and think we should track these. And I do think that many on the left did celebrate the HCR---just because we wish it had been differently crafted didn't mean we didn't recognize that it was a huge step forward.
Steeler Fan-380417
Progressives don't think "compromise" is a dirty word. Of course, neither did mainstream conservatives until the lunatics took over the GOP. That's the big story of the past two years that the media doesn't want to report: American government is now divided between centrist Democrats and extremist Republicans who are using a form of economic terrorism to get their way.
Shame on the whole lot of them, especially the Democrats and President Obama for caving in to the Repugs!
You prefer a recession versus a President who is just saved ours and the world economy? Really?
First, Obama did not come across as reasonable. He came across as a petulant child.
Second, while the may be no clear winner, there is certainly a clear loser.....the American people. The can has been kicked down the road. There are no real cuts. There will be no real cuts.
And we take another step closer to being left with the repercussions of one-hundred years of feckless governance.
Says you. Thanks for your opinion. I support the notion that the Speakers retort was contrived and off topic. "Blank Check" what the hell was that all about? Petulance?
The $1 trillion is an imaginary number then? You know the blow to the economy that is to happen immediately? I think this is a smart move, as it will give the GOP/TP a good sense of how to furhter wreck a fragile US economy. It will also allow them to back pedal after the first round of cuts.
The "blank check" comment was particularly ridiculous considering the money will only be spent on appropriations previously made by Congress.
The whole thing was a bunch of political C**P. Just "smoke & mirrors" to keep the US public scared to death. Of course, in reality, they should be scared because the government is not doing a thing to help them - they are losing their jobs, their homes, what healthcare there was, etc. I am very surprised there is not an uprising against the government by the US citizens in the works.
It is another day in the spiraling decline to the USA. A disgusting thing to watch but the sprial, it seems, is beyond repair. A wondeful country ruined by total incompetents.
Seems to me D.C. has already decided there will be no "normal" economic recovery because our corporate masters intend to keep all the jobs overseas, which means reduced revenues to pay the governments bills, the wealthy don't want to pay, wall street is not interested in making up the short fall, the banks can't be bothered with the problem. Let's see we need someone that has no pull in D.C. to make up the difference, someone who doesn't bribe anyone in D.C. to get preferential treatment. Guess who that is?
If no one is a winner than perhaps it means compromise was required by all. That's the way of the world folks. Nobody gets it like they want it unless you're a dictator. There's going to have to be much more comromise in the next 6 months. This time could we make the process a little more smooth? Hanging all of your dirty laundry out for the world to see is not a good way to go. We don't need the drama. There's enough bad news for working people in this country without adding more uneccessary stress.
no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase!
no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase!
no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase!
no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase!
Please, articulate & make your position known!
chortle
ok, we are all winners. no tax increase! The DEMS lost on that point.
Amen brother! GE and the Big Oil companies should never be required to pay taxes and the middle class taxpayer needs to man up and realize they must continue to fund these crucial tax breaks/credits even while the country goes further in debt.
Who are we as middle class taxpayers to suggest that these fine companies start paying taxes? Do we really want to go down the path of tax reform/increasing taxes, which would surely result in the reduction of bonuses paid to hard working CEO's and possibly limit the number of companies that could afford to utilize corporate jets? I think not!!
It is high time the middle class taxpayer realize there is not enough money left to fund social welfare programs like Social Security, Medicare and retirement programs for our military and federal employees, and still fund important corporate tax breaks and loopholes
no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase! no tax increase!
you may tax the wealthy all you want, it will not come close to covering the spending going on in DC. Sorry as painful as it will be SS, medicaid, medicare, even military spending, and federal pensions will ALL have to be reworked. something is better than nothing, unsustainable
The WEALTHY & CORPORATIONS scammed The CITIZENS Again...................................
how?
well I would agree with no tax increases... IF by chance that the tax breaks and loopholes and subsidies we have handed ourt actually produces well paying jobs with benefits.
but they haven't so I'm on the side of increase taxes on them and use the money to fund major infrastructure projects that wil produce high paying good benefit jobs..
Either they do it or will do it for them...
people with money will spend it and that will increase revenues exponentially as well as jump start the economy
Trickle down economics does not trickle all the way down.. Tax breaks given to corps and the wealthy are used for stock buybacks, dividends and bonuses while these corps wait for demand for products to increase. However infrastructure projects that stimulate the working class by creating good paying solid benefit jobs will increase demand for products which will trickle all the way to the top were raw materials, manufacturing, and banking resides..... The more money being spent by the citizens, the working classes will increase demand for products which will increase the need for raw materials and manufacturing which will increase the need for investments
common sense 101..
No NEW TAXES !
While WE GET CUTS and PROPERTY TAX INCREASES to COVER Them ............
Your Increases will Be NEXT Spring and You Will Blame LOCAL GOVERNMENT !
Simple Math AND History.
The ONLY thing to TRICKLE Down Is higher =FOOD COSTS and HOUSING INCREASE!
Of Course LESS PAY and Benefits !
Now We GET CUTS and TAX INCREASES to COVER This SAVE the RICH ONLY BILL !
The root cause of the problem is debt based monetary system. Money is created when we borrow. We borrowed and spent trillion, doing so created new money, and that had a minimal effect to increase the GDP a paltry 1.3 percent. Without borrowing and spending, GDP will be going down fast. So, how long can we keep borrowing? Not very long. This is the end game for decades of credit inflation.
For decades, FED made credit easy and we borrowed. When we borrow, banks create money. This new money inflates the money supply. Almost all money supply is bank credit. It has principal+interest to pay:
www.kondratieffwavecycle.com/web-of-debt/
When entire money supply is debt, it must keep expanding, otherwise the money to pay interest does not exist. Well, can it keep expanding? No. Why? Because as debt expands, it has interest burden to bear. When the real economy cannot afford to service existing debt, they stop borrowing because they are unable to make monthly payments.
I agree with sambat, you hit the nail on the head, exactly correct.
Why is it exactly that Republicans are so determined to keep taxes at a level insufficient to support the spending in their budgets?
This news source sure back Obama no matter what he does, everyone else, according to it, doesnt know what he is doing. Still wondering what he did that will be of any good to the US in the end. The end, that is a good way of putting it, the end of the US is coming, just depends on how long they can convince people to invest in a sinking ship.