E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAMES, IA -- In a media avail after a campaign stop here this morning, the former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty said President Obama needs to come out with a specific plan to fix the economy during his remarks this afternoon.
Pawlenty said, "Unfortunately, he spent the first two and a half years of his presidency trying to pass an unconstitutional health-care bill and doing things like trying to shut down the Guantanamo Bay to bring suspected terrorists to the United States. And he should have been working on growing jobs and getting the economy moving and doing the types of things that Standard and Poor's was wanting him to address."
(In fact, what S&P suggested it wanted -- $4 trillion in deficit reduction and a balance of increased revenues and entitlement reform -- was precisely the "grand bargain" Obama wanted to achieve and what congressional Republicans walked away from.)
During his comments to media, Pawlenty also said he does not need to win Saturday's Ames Straw Poll. "Our goal is to move from back of the pack towards the front of the pack. I don't think we need to win it, but I think we need to show some good progress, and I'm confident we will."
Leave a Comment:
Where's timid Timmy's plan?
Unfortuently, Timmy & the rest of the cast of Tea Baggin candidates have spent months on the campaign trail offering NO specifics on what they would do?
Isn't it past time someone in the press asks them? Rather than allowing the continued Obama bashing?
FACTS be damned with him & the rest of the right wing liars!
Was there any doubt that Feisty would be first to post on this?
LOL! (She must sit poised with her finger on the mouse so that she can put that '.' in first... then come back and type something...
Hilarious! Her whole existance revolves around posting first! LOL!
SickOfTheBickering
Looks like you're Feisty's biggest fan :)
Funny but I sure don't recall President Obama ever discussing the issue of a credit downgrade during any of his many speeches in the last few months.
All he ever talked about was a default. Totally different.
Say, you don't think president "vote present" missed this little issue, do you?
Naa, cause it was totally on Geinter radar at all times, right?
So he'll demand that congress returns immediately to come up with more cuts, including tax cuts. That folks is a good thing. Plus it will totally piss of the libbies.
I've told you before SOB -- slow & stupid is no way for you to go through life, GF! ;o)
PS: I'm flattered that with everything going on in the country today - I'm the object of your attention! lol
You're right Amy... I just lover her! Never have I found someone who is quite so entertaining!
(excluding, perhaps... Bev... She is pretty entertaining too! :-)
Spanky, based on your post you must have been watching Republican media only.
Apparently the Republican media missed the fact the S&P wrote "The President's plan for $4 trillion in debt reduction is a step in the right direction."
The S&P repeatedly rejected the Boehner, Reid, and McConnell plans so what did Boehner and McConnell do? They presented the plan that they knew was a failure with only hours left to prevent a default. Boehner and McConnell wanted to prevent default, but crash the economy.
That's why Speaker Boehner even said "it's not my problem" when asked why he presented a debt plan that did not meet the S&P requirements.
Thank you Miss Congeniality... Always polite... Always respectful... A true lady :-)
Spanky
Am also sure you won't recall the president $4trillion grand bargain either. Hey, how come the reasons given by S & P happens to be inline with Obama's request.
The villagers know who offered the village be burnt to save it.
Stick a fork in your hollow opinions, Tpaw.
Dan... apparently you have been watching liberal media only...
You see... the down grade came because the US has not taken necessary steps to address its debt position. Granted.. $4T in cuts is better but ONLY if you don't fritter it away by increasing spending.
What you libbies fail to realize is that it is the 'NET' that matters. What good does it do to raise the debt ceiling if it just allows us to increase spending? All we do is dig the hole deeper.
You can't pay off your debt if you are not willing to make cuts that are not offset by spending in other areas. It is really no different that what happens in our personal lives. You can only raise so much revenue... once you reach that level... the only way to pay down debt is to begin cutting back.
Now... you will all scream about acually raising the reveue... but again, is it really wise to increase taxes given the current economic situation? Most would agree that it is not.
Given these facts... cuts... real cuts are the only way out for now. WHEN WE ARE FINALLY WILLING TO SHOW SINCERITY IN CUTTING BACK... IN LIVING BEYOND OUR MEANS... WE WILL SEE OUR AAA rating return.
"Where's timid Timmy's plan?"
Up his butt with his other talking points?
"Hilarious! Her whole existance revolves around posting first! LOL!"
And YOUR whole existence seems to revolve around.........crying about it?? LOL indeed.
1:45 pm, and still no Obama for his 1:00 pm speech.
Biden is probably trying to lure Obama out from under his desk. He likes Marlboro's Joe.
You could cut the federal budget to 0. Cutting the federal budget won't hire one person. Not one. It will however have a trickle down effect of massive job losses. We all know that's you're real goal, SOB. C'mon you can say it. You love living in vans. We all like vans. You can start an ant collection. You get to live in your own filth. Vans... yeah vans.
Andrew and Mark
Is the above an opinion or what?
Mind sharing Obama's plan, a lot of mainstream guys would like to see it.
If this is really what Obama wanted, why didn't he do it when he had the House and Senate and could have passed any budget he wanted?
If this is really what Obama wanted, why did he try to present a budget that was the antithesis?
Why did he want a "clean" debt bill?
Do you guys have anything that the CBO can score?
If you are going to do the above, interject your bias and shape a story ........ why don't you just blog too?
We would love, love, love, love it.
1:45 pm, and still no Obama for his 1:00 pm speech.
Things are so awful for the righties these days - they've reduced themselves to whining about punctuality...
LMFAO!
Anything to keep from OWNING the fruits of their labor! ;o)
His makeup is probably running from all his crying.
Once again we see that concern about the debt ceiling was all in our heads (not).
The S&P report spreads some of the blame around, but specifically mentions Republicans and only Republicans as a factor in their cause for concern. What Party does Romney and Pawlenty belong to?
Major reasons for the downgrade by S&P were; 1) not raising the debt ceiling in a timely manner via a clean vote, 2) not showing seriousness in reducing debt by including tax revenues along with spending cuts, 3) not ending brinkmanship by agreeing to a one-time sufficient solution and not dragging out the conflict, and 4) not indicating a positive path forward via plans for job creation and stimulating the economy.
Which Party blocked a quick, clean vote to raise the debt ceiling? Which Party refuses to include revenues of any kind even ending tax expenditures? Which Party walked away from a $4 trillion Big Deal? Which Party wanted to drag the debt debate out with multiple votes every few months for political gain? Which Party has blocked any efforts to improve jobs or the economy, and opted for severe austerity instead?
We all know the dysfunction refers to the rift in the Republican Party between the tiny Tea Party caucus in the House and the rest of the nation. We all know Teabaggers like Michele Bachmann vowed not to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances, and many Teabaggers actually favored default. We have McConnell on record, proudly taking credit for hostage taking, and Boehner smiling, saying he got 98% of what he wanted. To get 100% there would have been another vote in a few months, and passage of the "starve the beast" balanced budget amendment dictorship.
We all know that the president offered the $4 trillion Big Deal that would have been a large enough sum, that was a balanced approach with both spending cuts and revenues, PLUS savings from entitlements, and had the GOP/TP accepted at that earlier time and not taken their threat-down to the wire, S&P would not have downgraded our rating.
The president continually warned that time was of the essence. The president spoke multiple time to the American people, stating that he had been advised (by many including the financial sector and credit agencies) that the US needed a significant agreement and needed it quickly.
Come on, conservatives, you know the POTUS has access to information that no one else has. That's why, even to the surprise of his own Party, he came out with the $4 trillion Big Deal, with large cuts in spending and savings from entitlements. Hello, he knew, and it was the GOP/TP that refused it!
As for Pawlenty, his own track record is so pitiful he should STFU. Michele Bachmann and her ilk should be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. To those right-wingers who insist on continuing your twisted drivel, turn off FOX Noise and Hate Radio--it's making you stupid! Face it, if you don't jettison the Teabaggers, you're done!
Of course Pawlenty's correct about this, if nothing else.
Plenty of Democrats share his view.
They expect President Obama to lead.
JAS1,
I think you have the president confused with John Boehner. You know the "Weeper of the House".
WOW! All the wierdo's are out today... Vans? REALLY? Of cource you have to take things over the edge... twist them all around to suit your needs...
The point of the post was that we need to begin generating a surplus of cash to be applied to paying down the debt. A simple concept... but apparently still one that you are incapable of grasping. A credit rating speaks to your ability to pay back debt. You want to improve it... try paying back some debt.
(BTW... perhaps you should check your credit rating... www.freetriplescore.com...)
Republicans don't pay their debts. Or haven't you been keeping up with current events? By the way my credit is fine. I make plenty of money. I pay my debts too. I'm not the one that will be sleeping in a van once you guys cut spending and reduce the GDP by 50%.
Remember that van I mentioned. Comfortable, cheap, and there will be lots of them available after all the jobs run out from the Teabagger slashing party. You can take comfort in the fact that you helped kill our government, and reduced your personal share of treasury loads to 0. Well not really because with no business, no government, no GDP you won't ever be able to pay off the debt. My my, you really should study economics. By the way who is whacko? The markets are dropping like a rock. Keep that van in mind when we get to 0.
SOB - rating of a government's creditworthiness is nothing at all like individual credit ratings. It's absurd on its face to make such a statement.
As I wrote here some time back, ratings of a government's credit are based on numerous fctors, but ultimately two key concerns: Can the government in question pay its debt, and, Is the government in question willing to do so?
S&P's explanation for its action, which in my opinion was preciptous and not entirely justifiable, focused on the U.S. government's willingness to pay. That's why it cited the brinksmanship and ill behavior of the GOP during the debt ceiling debate. Had S&P any concern at all about the country's ability to pay, the rating might have dropped much lower, and the rating firm would have said so.
And indeed, if you believe that the country needs to devote more revenue to debt reduction, fine. Where will it come from? Aside from cutting some government spending, which will not produce by any means enough revenue for meaningful debt reduction, there are only two sources: Increased taxes or tax collections, and increased revenues generated by economic growth.
http://langewinckler.newsvine.com/_news/2011/08/02/7231709-how-to-pay-off-debt-and-save-ss-medicare
At the moment, as the poster you rebutted accurately pointed out, cutting government spending at this time is counter-productive.
http://langewinckler.newsvine.com/_news/2011/08/08/7306279-the-case-for-more-spending-to-prevent-a-recession-breakout-yahoo-finance
Now, on the topic of the story - the President just answered Pawlenty, in fact, declaring that he will be brining a series of specific proposals forward for Congress to consider.
Since Pawlenty is part of the tear-it-all-down side of the quation, he's already advocating a losing position.
To the usual right-wing riff raff…
First off, the president did his best to inform the American people—without causing undue panic—getting them to call their representatives, because he knew the severity of consequences and knew it was in congressional hands—not his hands.
It was the NBC(?) reporter that interviewed the president who kept pressing the issue of whether Social
Security checks would go out. You can see the president trying to walk a high wire of not causing panic yet being honest, saying “There are about 70 million checks that go out each month." The reporter still persisted until he forced the president to say he couldn’t guarantee that Social Security checks would go out.
Of course the GOP/TP FOX and Hate Radio propaganda machine seized upon this interview, scaring their hostages, telling seniors it was President Obama who was threatening not to send their checks out.
Second, your “what is the meaning of is?” rationalization takes the cake. Are you really so dense you can’t connect the dots between not raising the debt ceiling and default? Are you really so dense you can’t connect the dots between default and dire consequences like the stock market crashing and a downgrade of our credit rating? Not only was every politician and pundit talking about these things, but how in the heck can you embrace all your outrageous “gateway” conspiracy theories, yet be blind to what is so glaringly obvious? Either you know very well, and are being your usual little sh!ts, or you don’t know and are just that stupid.
The reason there was a surplus at the end of Clinton’s administration is because spending was not increased. You assume the money will just be “frittered” away with no proof. FOX and Hate Radio repeat it so much, therefore it must be true.
How many times do we have to ‘splain to you knuckleheads that the debt ceiling is PAST spending?! It has nothing to do with an increase in spending. It’s money already spent – you know, onwars, and tax cuts for the rich, both of which have continued to drain our treasury to date -- The continued wars and Bush tax cuts are the main reason deficits keep skyrocketing.
Gawd, you conservatives need own up and shut up.
He already did: spend spend spend borrow borrow borrow print print print
That's why we got downgraded
________________________________________________________________________________
Barack Obama, the historic downgrade President
True Deluded Patriot,
Really? How about specifically cutting and pasting that and the reference big boy.
That doesn't even make sense. Do you mean Obama's "clean" bill - the ludicrous one that raised the debt without any notion of cuts?
The one that was so stupid it would have actually insulted S & P, Moody's ......
S & P never mentioned tax revenue, they don't distnguish revenue.
Even Obama's dem Senate understands you can't raise taxes in a stressed economy - it is just one more stressor.
Brinkmanship like threatening grandma's SS and checks to the military?
Actually the repubs have a plan. The special commission had a plan. Why do the dems refuse to discuss any honest plan?
Not very good at this are TP.
I know the last time you got shut down, couldn't respond - you literally said "talk to the hand."
Funny to still hear that inane, stupid rejoinder, but thanks for the laugh anyway.
Since you still have a free hand, why don't you take it and try to remove your head. Actually they will probably take two hands, so I better leave you alone for a day or two.
Have fun.
Hey, bird watchers! Just spotted: The Newsvine screech owl, diving through the trees for another swoop and poop!
Unfortunately, there's no redeeming social value in that action, not even a few nitrates to make things grow. Nope, this bird just passes vitriol.
So John... how is that ANY DIFFERENT than the factors considered for individual credit?
And so everyone ends up digging deeper into their foxholes and lobbing grenades at the other side. I like the common use of both sides to use the word "Most People" as if they can tune in to the minds of every American and gleem their positions on the matter in a wink. Stop it already, it's opinionation, we get it but it doesn't make it any more correct.
Really Tim... considering the mess that you left in Minnesota the only noise coming from your corner should be crickets and even they don't have much room to speak.
Amen Raz Blaze... but then again... this IS a blog... opinions are what it is all about :-)
bob-1805084 (minus ad hominemm attack):
Do you have a copy of the S&P report? No, I thought not. Here are CNN transcripts (most recent available) about the S&P report and statement from John Chambers of S&P:
The bolds are mine. Get a grip and stop playing the blame game. Own up to the fact that the Teabaggers are anarchists, and no one want's to invest in anarchy.
Taxes are being paid at at the lowest percentage of teh GDP since the 1950's. The cut taxes for the rich and spend policy of the last 10 years clearly does not work as our deficet has tripled since this policy. Especially when you try to pay for 2 wars. Of course we need to look at cutting our spending. It must happen. However, the wealthiest american's should be help carry this on their backs like the rest of us. While their tax rate may be higher, what they actually pay is a far lower percentage of their income then the middle class. So when ever we talk about cutting government spending, which will lead to further job loss, it is ridicilous to ignore the need for additional revenue. Everyone complains about the 700billion dollar stimulus to big business and the banks, well where is the outrage for the 700 billion dollar revenue to loss that was given to the wealthiest americans. Since about 95% of the people do not fall into the wealthiest american's category, I am blown away by middle class and people believing they are upper middle class, defending tax cuts for the rich, a group they are clealry not in. All the while, they want Social Security and Medicare, something that most of them will use as they hope to retire. So they would rather fleece their future for the 3% tax cut of the rich. It is loyal, loyal like a lap dog.
Oh there's going to be a "specific economic plan" alright. It will start with recall of GOP/TP politicians in Wisconsin.
CStomp, it's a waste of BTUs trying to use logic or facts with these right-wing extremists. They don't even know history, for example how Republican policies screwed up recovery from the Depression, or how there is NO evidence that tax cuts pay for themselves (rather than being expenditures), or how tax cuts don't create jobs (obviously not just based on the last decade), or how austerity programs around the world have failed, etc.
Instead of accepting the S&P report about how the debt ceiling should have been raised without delay or hostage-taking (i.e., a clean vote), or how we need a balanced approach that includes tax revenues, or how we need a plan going forward to create jobs and stimulate the economy, what do we see?
We see Reid offer only one repsonse that was a quote from the S&P Report, while Republicans have come out en masse with criticism of the president--obviously learning absolutely nothing from the S&P report about "brinkmanship" and "dysfunction" and partisan "strategery." We have Timmy the homesick Boy Scout blaming the president, and we see conservatives clinging to their "starve the beast" fallacious augmentations, we even saw Michele Bachmann still defending her position not to raise the debt ceiling.
Those who are blind and cannot see who are the adults in the room (the president and Dems), and who are completely off their rock (the GOP/TP) are just as culpable.
Bob - TruePatriot and I don't agree very often, but we're going to have to give him this one - partially. Here is the quote from the S&P report in which they specifically name the republican party as a principle concern:
We have changed our assumption on this because the majority
of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise
revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.
S&P doesn't though let the democrats off scot free "
The statutory debt
ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in
the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our
view, the differences between political parties have proven to be
extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting
agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program
that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently. Republicans and
Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on
discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on
more comprehensive measures."
I have said for some time that anyone that believes this problem can be solved without raising taxes is an idiot and you cannot possibly reduce the size of the federal government sufficiently to meet our needs without also making substantial changes to medicare, social security and defense spending. Without these three on the table there is no need for any discussion. I think S&P's decision was self-centered, ill-timed, based on faulty analysis and premature. If however, it serves to wake up the country and the idiots sitting in Washington then they will have done a service to this nation.
If only we could have as awesome an economy as MINNESOTA... The same Minnesota that briefly became a third-world state because of the mess he left it in.
True Patriot, I am not absolving the Republicans, and agree that TEA Party is wreckless right now, but your stance on this is so obviously slanted and not telling the whole story. At the end of the day, there are those who are ingrained in their ideology, and no debate on Newsvine will change their mind (I imagine you fall in this category). The election will be decided by those who realize that both sides are to blame, and will make an honest effort to decide who is best to right the ship- to this point, neither side seems capable.
I have to say though, I read the interviews with the analysts from S&P. When speaking of revenues, and increased revenues, it seemed fairly obvious to me that they were speaking to bogus revenue numbers based on projected GDP growth and credits for the wind down of the wars, not taxes. The amount of intellectual dishonesty surrounding this issue is exactly the divisiveness they were eluding to, and neither party has the patent on spin and lies.
joemike404 - Thanks for the good information, and partial acknowledgment -- Though I still don't see much in that quote condemning Democrats other than "relatively modest savings on discretionary spending," which still doesn't stick since the Democrat president offered far more in spending cuts as well as putting entitlements on the table (that Boehner, et al, walked away from--again).
"the threat of default have become political bargaining chips" refers to the GOP/TP hostage taking. At no time did Dems support a default.
"differences between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to bridge" refers to the rift between the Tea Party caucus in the House, and therefore GOP/TP refusal to compromise on anything. Whereas the Dems were compromising, and especially the president, who did put all three on the table.
And the Select Committe decision was in lieu of another debt ceiling vote per Boehner's second-try legislation that Dems agreed to because the only other choice by that time was default--precisely what the GOP/TP intended.
No, it's not just "idiots sitting in Washington," it's specifically Teabag/Republicans sitting in Washington who are the idiots.
No, the dems didn't support a default, they did use the threat of what would happen if we did default though- so yes, they did use it as a bargaining chip. Again, you make the quotes support what you want, it is easy for both sides to do it.
What's scary is that there are people like you that think one side is actually doing a good job. Again, that goes both ways.
ChiCity -- "but your stance on this is so obviously slanted and not telling the whole story." Apparently so obviously slanted that you can't provide any substance or details to show exactly how. The S&P report references TAX REVENUES in several ways, for example the Bush tax cuts and whether these will expire.
BS, the Dems did NOT use threat of what would happn if we did default. Warnings were being issued by economists, financial experts, even Wall Street and the Chamber of Commerce. If you ask someone to speculated on what would happen if we default, or if they can guarantee that Social Security checks would go out, they have no choice but to be honest (or lie). This is a straw man argument.
So is the "goes both ways' fallacious argument. There is always a lesser of two evils, and the spin of trying to claim that blame is equal is BS.
Let's go to school... and take a test...
Do you know how to create jobs? Create demand (sing along here).
Do you know how to create demand? Give consumers confidence (all shake your heads "yes").
Do you know how to create consumer confidence? One hint: It's NOT by criticizing every move and every spoken word of every member of this administration for a solid 2 -1/2 years (oops, now who might have done THAT?)
The Tea Party came in with 10% minority, with little experience, and excessive ideology. Boehner used them to take this country hostage and make Obama fail... Boehner was lead dog when Bush ran up his debt train and now acts appalled at it all... hypocrisy at it's best.
Now who would YOU blame?
TruePatriot, what's the point? You aren't looking to have an honest debate or discussion, neither are the crazy super-conservatives. Supporters of the far right and far left will spin everything to support their own ideology. I have read all your posts above, and it would be an exercise in futility. I only wished to point out that your side is not clean in this. Both sides are covered in it, yet still their die hard unconditional supporters point the finger the other way. Good luck.
We Support Tim Pawlenty's plan for proposed cuts and changes to the budget. Cut ethanol subsidies etc......................
Thank you Tim Pawlenty for the keeping MN UE low and our budget on track. Obama could learn a lot from an experience leader like you.
Independents for a free America. Free from Obama and his health care mess..........
ChiCity, unlike you I have provided direct quotes about the S&P Reports, and debated direct quotes from the S&P Report. I am an Independent leaning to the left (per political ideology tests I have taken over the years). If you've followed me over time, you would see that I often post things other progressives don't agree with, including saying more than once that Dems are not pure as the driven snow. Those who can't agree with a moderate only show how far to the right of center they are.
And to say that both sides are "covered in it" and intimating that both sides are equally responsible for the downgrade is not having an honest debate. It's not even logically possible to have equal fault in anything. There is always one party that is more at fault, and the S&P Report shows it is the GOP/TP--not just my opinion. This "two wrongs makes a right" fallacious argumentation (e.g, you think Bush was bad, what about Clinton) is always used by conservatives, especially when they can't make their case in a legitimate way.
What is the point of having a discussion when conservatives refuse to use logic and Rule of Reason, and most of all facts?
This problem is not a result of the last 2 years (Obama presidency), 2006-2010 (Democratic congress and Senate), 10 years (Bush II and Obama)... So you can try to blame one party over the other, it only shows your bias. Republicans cut taxes too low. Dems increase social spending and entitlements beyond what is reasonable. You can't really assign blame- they are all a part of the same system, and serve the same constituency- themselves.
“We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues, is less likely than we previously assumed,” the company said.
"The Dems increased social spending and entitlements beyond what is reasonable" -- Really? The Dems passed cost savings in Medicare and caught hell for it from Republicans during 2010 campaigns. The Affordable Care Act does not go into full effect until 2014, and includes savings to help compensate for costs, while Republicans ignore rising health care costs and the drag it places on the economy. Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit, and in fact there is an IOU to the people that is still owed.
I do blame Democrats, for things like extending the Bush tax cuts. I just blame the GOP/TP more for passing the cuts in the first place (under reconciliation, with Cheney's vote to break the tie on the second round). Especially during wartime, like WTF were they thinking?
The "controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling" was initiated by the GOP/TP, and it also was "prolonged" by the GOP/TP because they refused to compromise. "Growth in public spending, especially entitlements" was put on the table by the Democrat president in his $4 trillion Big Deal that Republicans walked away from, again. "Reaching an agreement on raising revenue" that is "less likely than we previously assumed" is completely the fault of the GOP/TP. ONLY the GOP/TP is against raising revenues.
Sorry, but even quotes you provide tilts in favor of the Dems and against the GOP/TP.
When your spin is added, I agree. I am done with you. Good luck. If you want to take this as a "win", go right ahead.
You guys can't shut up about Bush, yet you've had control since 2006 and you have the nerve to tell US to own up? LMAO!
The "tax cuts for the rich" amounted to tax cuts for EVERYONE. EVERYONE received tax cuts. Now you guys on the left always say that "they pay less as a percentage than the middle class". I have NEVER seen one shred of evidence to back that statement up. NEVER.
THE ONES WITH THE POWER WHO WRITE THE CHECKS, not the minority who have no power. Blaming the Tea Party for this is like blaming Paul Revere for the Revolutionary War.
Putting full blame on the MINORITY party who has had no power for 5 years is "using logic and rule of reason"??? Uh...........................WOW
Even though they brought healthcare plans to the table but Pelosi REFUSED to allow them to be discussed? Keep up the spin!!
The Tea Party and the Republicans own this mess. We all know it, no amount of the same ole "Blame Obama" will change it. You and your party are just avoiding any and all responsibility for anything...and well, mostly you haven't done anything except hurt this country with your game plan to take back the White House. The American people are not blind and stupid and you were only able to brainwash a small percentage of the population, the rest of us see right through you. So, just keep repeating the same things over and over again...hold that party line...and go down in flames. The rights experiment is over, you are impotent, you have become a joke, and we are sending you to where you belong. The trash heap of history...
We own it? Oh, do explain that one. I'm always down for a good laugh. Please, do delight us and tell that nice fairy tale!
WE avoid responsibility? LOL! That's why Obama CONTINUES the "Blame Bush" mantra that the left can't seem to let go of. The experiment is over? DID YOU MISS THE ELECTIONS OF 2010??????????
Hasta ChiCity. WeiserJG -- Your parroted squawking points aren't worth the time of day.
Ain't that the truth. Pelosi passed 304 bills in the house in her first term, and so far Boehner has passed something like 14. Pitiful!
Pelosi passed all those bills because she was on a spending spree, TruePatriot.
Exactly J-636636. She passed a bunch of wasteful pet projects and ramped up spending. Yay for her! Liberals measure success by how much you spend
Naw... TP & Tbaggers/Republicans would just ignore and oppose it.
I have NEVER seen such obsinate contrariness in my life. Even with W's stupid ideas (let's invade Iraq....Let's lower the tax rate...Let's forget about Bin Laden... etc., etc. etc.) there was NOT as much knee jerk resistence.
This is just plain STUPID and harmful to the United States. Better get over it and follow our President out of the mess we are in.
Not as stupid as yo uthink
Naa.....they want their country back. W Bush looked like them Obama doesn't.
B-I-N-G-O!!!
It is so obvious that when Boehner said he got 98% of what he wanted that he was talking about bringing the country to the brink of default, and hopefully a collapse of the economy so it could be blamed on the President. It has been said by the MSM that Mitch McConnell is the smartest guy in the Senate, well why didn't he know that the games they were playing would end up like this. And if he did know, again I say it was all about -how can we muck up the economy and blame it on Obama!They are evil people and will rot in hell!
It's only obvious to liberals who think that this country can keep spending like money is water, taking our debt to the limits through spending $3.2 Trillion in less than 3 years... increasing regulations on small businesses, passing monumental social programs that no one knows how they will be paid for... you know, little things like that. Watching liberals blame everyone but themselfs is getting real sad. The only bright spot is they lose credibility everytime one of them opens their trap. Blame is their game.
Again Obama follows suit... blaming everybody under the sun... the S&P, the republicans, the American public... everyone but HIM. He must think he poops chocolate cakes and pees lemonaide.
Do you use hearing aids?
If not, you should!
This whole debauchary reminds me of the medic alert system where the old lady say "I've fallen and can't get up". Except it is an entire nation KO'ed on the floor due to the idiocy of legislative measures taken by elected fools. We really need some smelling salts and a game plan that works. Who can do it now is beyond comprehension.
Brianb -
You know what? I'm sick of you and every little two-bit conniving hate-junkie out there throwing around the word "liberals" like you know or give a damn what it's really about.
Let me just say this: I'm a liberal. I'd rather live in a free-spending out-of-control budgetary nightmare, then spend a single minute cowtowing to your ridiculous religious agenda and your plans to control every aspect of life for everyone (except yourselves, and anyone who claims "God forgave me, why can't you?"). I'd be one of the first in line rioting under your supposed "austerity" measures, which just happen to tack on all sorts of rules restricting behaviors and access to government by anyone who doesn't look like Pat Robertson or pray at the right church (you know, only ones with Jeeeeeeeezzzzuuuussss in the title). Yes, the poor who get poorer would all of a sudden find themselves in debtors jails, working for nothing (not even enough food to feed their families and keep a roof over their heads) on grand public roadways and such that you need to drive your gas-guzzling mondo Hummer H4 on to your big job. And gods forbid you hit one of them and their family actually sues you for negligence. I mean, who do they think they are... People?
No, the neoconservative movement, along with the Tea Party people, are just a bunch of whiny entitlement freaks. Thinking nothing of the future because, guess what, that would require thinking. They've latched onto one issue and pushed it to prominence in the media in the hopes that people won't notice the other crap they're pulling. They get elected on a slogan of "jobs, jobs, jobs," yet their big issues seem to be limitting abortion, putting jebus back in the schools (I agree, he probably does need to be back in school what with his failed carpentry business and his Roman era middle-eastern educational standards), making sure women know their place (under their rapists' thumbs), making sure that we can go ahead and undo the last five decades of progress since segregation ended (Civil Rights Bill? If it's good enough for me to discriminate, it should be fine for everyone!).
You know, it just goes on and on and on. They haven't done a thing except CUT jobs in a recession. They haven't done anything to help stabilize economic forecasts. They haven't done anything but repeat the mantra that the US has the highest corporate tax in the world (it doesn't), and that the debt is all the fault of spending (it isn't), and therefore god.
Know what? Just blow. Keep on blowing, blowhard. I'm sick of listening to your moronic underpinnings, your "values," your pathetic failures at basic arithmetic (we're not even into algebra and you still can't keep up), and your complete and utter contempt for scientific research and data. So, just blow on.
Hello, Tim Pawlenty would not sign the Tea parties pledge. Try to keep the truth out there and keep your lies to yourself. Tea bagger he is not. Blue koolaid is dangerous to your health. How can anybody follow that loser in the Whitehouse is beyond any reason. It must be the blue koolaid..........Obama just needs to keep blaming everyone else while he is so laser focused on jobs and the economy. LOL.
Independents for Tim Pawlenty. A man that will do as he states.........
OMG, what are you whining about???? Thinking nothing of the future???? Yeah, trying to cut out of control spending and trying to reform grossly under water programs like Medicare/Medicate/SS. Gosh, that has NOTHING to do with thinking about the future. Yet those on the left REFUSE to address these issues.
The big issues seem to be limiting abortion and putting Jesus in the schools? Really? You're gonna go with that, because those are TINY issues that have NOT been talked about for a LONG time. Sorry, but I haven't heard ANYONE talk about putting Jesus in the schools and I have no idea where you are pulling that out of.
"They haven't done a thing except cut jobs in a recession"???? What are you talking about????
FYI: we have the SECOND HIGHEST corporate tax rate in the world, right behind Japan. You can look it up if you like.
And you are complaining about people blowing on? Take a look in the mirror.
WeiserJG -
Firstly, you're right, we have the second highest corporate tax rates in the world. Our PERSONAL tax rates, though, put us at 23rd in the OECD 2005 data. Now, when you take into account that we are one of the few countries in the world with the S-type corporation that allows a person to incorporate yet keep the personal income tax level, where would that put us? Also, what is the REAL tax rate? How much of that 39% is actually paid? I keep hearing about corporations using loopholes, write-offs, etc. to get their effective tax rates down between 10-20%. That's pretty low. It would be interesting to see what the effective rates were in other countries, but I'm guessing it's still higher.
When I said they haven't done anything but cut jobs in a recession, well, they're cutting jobs in a recession. All those government workers getting laid off: teachers, administrators, janitors, building personnel, etc. You know, those "fatcats living big off the government dime" (note, the average teacher makes way below the educationally equivalent person in the private sector; they aren't getting rich).
As for putting jebus back in the schools, look at the Texas Board of Education. Look at Michele Bachmann's platforms and sayings. Look at the right-wing evangelical movements that are STILL managing to get "Intelligent Design" proposed for school curriculums, which is just going to cost the school boards more money in lost lawsuits (Dover trial, anyone?). Abortion restrictions seem to be popping up all over the state level, with states like Texas, South Dakota, Indiana, Ohio, and others putting in new restrictions to attempt to make abortions harder and/or incapable of being attained. They don't go right out and illegalize it, but they're pushing the boundaries, and it will cost more money in lawsuits, win or lose. Look at Indiana's new laws restricting abortions to only less than 20 weeks, and others in South Dakota, Georgia, etc. that run in a similar vein.
As for Medicare/SS, I haven't seen one of them run a decent proposal that could actually follow some guideline that would save the program, only blathering on and on about it, but when push comes to shove, they back down. I'm not saying the Dems are doing any better on it, but I'd rather have them in charge of it since they would prefer to save it rather than eject the elderly into the "free market" health care system outright.
And Medicaid under the TP? It would be less than a joke, more like a dirty word. The TP line is that the poor are poor because they are lazy and stupid and therefore have no right to anything that us rich folk enjoy. Straight out of Ayn Rand.
Complexity is something that evades the TP, libertarian, and fascist mindset. Complexity like not having the time to be a perfectly rational agent, not having the wherewithal to get a full education, be it due to money, time, circumstance, or intellect. Complexity like luck (unknown agency) being more of a factor in determining which businesses survive and which fail after 5 years than anything we can identify. Even complexities like "you can't dump your pollutants into the river because it causes problems downstream" seem to escape the Tea People.
So yeah, I'm not arguing that our system is perfect. I'm arguing that the solution does not involve rampant amputation and praying to some sky-fairy that everything works out okay. And if you deny the rampant religious fervor, the ultra-libertarian bent, and the mind-numbingly stupid detractions against science, art, education, and other forms of progress we've made in the past 100 years, then you deny what most of the Tea Party base has been going on about.
So we are actually listening to a former Gov. that caused his admin to shut down the state and he wants a plan? What next, listening to a former Gov. that quit during their term? Or a former Gov. that as a business owner felt compelled to get comprehensive Health Care for his state with an individual mandate - and he wasn't considered a socialist? It'll never happen here in the U S, right? Oh, wait . . . All I need is a few dedicated Democrats to stand up and stand with my president. Even the normally "on message" republicans didn't overtly run from Bush - regardless of his ineptness. When I see titles and subject matter of articles like this one it reminds me of what Lawrence O'Donnell wrote as script for Richard Dreyfus character in the American President. He said, "In a character fight the press becomes an inattentive accomplist! (sp?)" It seems, since the attacks on the president seem always a tilt to the personal, even when you call it political, even FR is an inattentive republican ally.
"listening to a former Gov. that caused his admin to shut down" Clueless "mitc" absolutely clueless.......
Just keep following Obama, he has us halfway over the cliff now, just keep following him........
Independents for the repeal of Obama and his health care mess. We the middle class can not afford it.
B.S. Republican trying to convince the independants that the Republicans aren't responsible....We all know the Tea Party and the Republicans are responsible for this mess...
I'm no fan of the TEA Party, but you think they are wholly responsible for a mess that, in reality, is several decades old? Maybe they didn't handle themselves appropriately, but this mess has been caused by decades of unchecked spending, and the refusal to do anything about it.
What are your feelings about Obama's proposed budget that got "0" votes? Did you think it was a serious effort to address the problems of spending, entitlements, and revenues? I know he advocated for additional taxes (which I am fine with), but how about those other issues that S&P referred to?
Oh, good grief. There's a point at which stupid gets old. More of the same from Pawlenty, Romney and the "gee, we didn't create that massive debt and cause the economy to collapse" crowd. President Obama has offered many plans to fix the economy, they sit on the shelves in the Senate gathering dust because the GOP filibustered them. How many jobs bills has the GOP offered? Zero.
Rachel has more lies for you to spout. She is on MSNBC shortly, you should watch because the same old one you tell here are an insult to your intelligence.
Repeal the great American liar and his health care mess, and his economic policies.
Where are these "plans" you speak of? Oh that's right, THEY DON'T EXIST. Maybe you should take a look at the last budget he tried to pass that got ZERO VOTES.
1:00pm.....1:30pm......Obama can't even tell time!
How original.
Obama delayed on purpose. He was too busy telling Turbo to flood the markets with futures buys. He has to do something to stop the tumbling stock market. Don't be a bit surprised if by the end of the day you'll see an upward trend and tomorrow they will be in the black. Watch!
Market dropped another 100+ points after Obama's little "Chat with the nation".
That's what happens when you have a so called leader that repeats the same old tired lines about infrastructure, jobs, unemployment insurance, . . . .
It's a wonder he didn't work "corporate jets" into it.
After WHAT spinning JoAnne?
Can you read headlines? Can you understand what is written? Do you ever get dizzy from so much spin? (or is your dizziness natural?)
"(In fact, what S&P suggested it wanted -- $4 trillion in deficit reduction and a balance of increased revenues and entitlement reform -- was precisely the "grand bargain" Obama wanted to achieve and what congressional Republicans walked away from.)"
Just wanted to thank NBC and the rest of the non-Murdoch owned media for pointing out that the President's "grand bargain" plan was endorsed by the S&P as well as the business community.
He never had a plan.
Correct totas... he had rhetoric.. that's all.
The MSM is acting like the "grand plan" was never on the table.
Again, the Republicans have changed the narrative from "we're not going to raise the debt ceiling and so what if we default" to
"Obama and the Dems did not cut spending enough and therefore S & P had no choice but to diwngrade the debt!
Priceless.
On Morning Joe today, Meka did ask Mr. Chambers from S & P why didn't they downgrade our debt back in 2008 when we went into the ditch and he did not provide a cogent response.
The fact that S & P can gloss over the $2 trillion dollar math error does not make me feel very confident in them as a rating agency.
Just saying.
I think there is a conspiracy to be hatched out of this debacle!!!!
Now there.
You and the Obama cheerleaders who pass for "professional journalists" on this site.
WHAT grand bargain? It was a TALKING POUNT.
Plans are written down. They can be evaluated, scored, if you will.
Obama's constant blather is not a bargain, grand or inferior. It is rhetoric.
Two hundred thirty five years- and Obama gets the credit rating of this country downgraded.
Not one budget. Not one. Plenty of spending, though.
And unemployment. And debt. And foreign policy failures.
Fewer delusional worshippers, however- though you would not know it on this site.
Who except NJNB knew Standard & Poor's is 235 years old?
OH WAIT -- it's nothing more than another bold faced lie from the NJ nut job! lol
Can you tell us another fib NJNB?
We could use a good laugh! ;o)
Hey Feisty...
If you want to try to put someone down... perhaps you should make sure you know what their point is first... 235 yrs old refers to the USA... not Standard & Poors.... (Einstein!)
LOL!
(Now Quick! Take a lame shot at me! Muahhhhhahahahahaha)
Hey SOB -- maybe you should take some of your own invaluable advice!
NJNB has been all over the board today inferring that we have been under 'credit watch' for 235 years...
I also take offense with her claim that this is HER COUNTRY -- this happens to be OUR COUNTRY!!
So... in closing it's back to the bench for you, it needs some more warming! ;o)
Oooooo..... Looks like I hit a nerve :-)
BTW Feisty... you cannot say that NoJo inferred anything... she IMPLIED... you (in the first person) infer. (once again... grammar lesson... its simple... remember that the OTHER people imply and I (or you in this case with your statement) infer. Also note... this is one of your entertaining moments... trying to look all intelligent and SH!T!!! LOL!
Also, she can claim it as HER country just the same as you can... quit nitpicking.
Now I will go back to my luxury box to view the entertainment... Eat your heart out GF!
"Fiesty" needs to go sit under her blue grow light for a while. Obama is a failure, and the biggest mistake we as voters have ever made.
Independents for a free America, free from the great America liar, his ecomonic policies and his health care mess.
B.S. Republican
Andrew and Mark
Is the above of an opinion or what?
Mind sharing Obama's plan, a lot of mainstream guys would like to see it.
If this is really what Obama wanted, why didn't he do it when he had the House and Senate and could have passed any budget he wanted?
If this is really what Obama wanted, why did he try to present a budget that was the antithesis?
Why did he want a "clean" debt bill?
D you guys have anything that the CBO can score?
If you are going to do the above, interject your bias and shape a story ........ why don't you just blog too?
We would love, love, love, love it.
Bob, why did the Republicans vote for the Ryan budget plan that did nothing to solve any problems during the first 10 years?
At least President Obama came to understand that we need $4 trillion in debt reduction without 29% immediate cuts like the Republicans wanted.
Cap, cut, and balance would require 55 million Americans receiving Social Security in 2011 to take a 29% cut. It would also require over 40 million Americans receiving health care through Medicare to take a 29% cut in their care.
Millions of businesses have said cap, cut, and balance's immediate 29% cut would result in major layoffs and unemployment exceeding 15%. It would result in states having to make major cuts to schools.
Those who love cut, cap, and balance fail to understand businesses depend on their customers having money.
I would rather stand up and defend 50 million Americans from pay cuts than defend a handful of millionaires and multi-billion dollar corporations tax loop holes. I would rather stand up and fight for the businesses who depend on those 50 million Americans receiving their Social Security check, military pay, health care.
Bob, I unintentionaly hit the like button when in fact I was just trying to reply. Please allow me to point out one interesting fact about a very important thing about something called the Constitution, you know, the same one that the Tea Party squawk about all of the time? According to the Constitution of the United States, it is the RESPONSIBILITY of Congress to enact the Laws and to control and present the budgets of the USA. Not this President or any President, past, present or future. The President does not have the authority to spend money, If in an extreme emergency, he makes a request it must be voted on by both Houses in the Congress. The Congress, both Houses failed to do the duty that they took an oath to do. Boehner presented a plan that he knew would not be passed in the Senate, therefore, he did not do so in good faith. Boehner and Cantor walked away for the Grand deal that included 4 trillon in cuts because it included an increase in revenue. As we all know, many of the Tea Party members signed a pledge for Grover Norquist not to vote to increase taxes "ever".So, they threw a monkey wrench into the proceedings and now we have all witnessed the outcome. They can try but, they can't distance themselves from this. I read the article and it is clear that they knew yet, chose not to listen to the majority of the people.
(In fact, what S&P suggested it wanted -- $4 trillion in deficit reduction and a balance of increased revenues and entitlement reform -- was precisely the "grand bargain" Obama wanted to achieve and what congressional Republicans walked away from.)
Fayse, they also questioned the validity of the deficit reduction because they were based on bogus projections. That $4 trillion would not have produced $4 trillion, and everyone knows that. One easy example is that the reduction, among other things, was based on increased revenue from a growing economy. This year they accounted for a 4% growth- this despite the fact that at midyear we were >1%. It was smoke and mirrors, and faulty accounting. That "grand bargain" would not have stopped S&P from downgrade- they have been talking about downgrading us for months.
bob-1805084
moonbat, is that statement True or false? For mainstream guys like you, that was Obama's grand plan.
Since he didn't get the clean bill, you guys gave him 98% of all Boehner wanted. True or false.
do you now believe in CBO scores?
Faux news is right there at the corner, join them and i betcha, we'd love to see that moonbat.
what an idiot
It is amazing that you don't even understand the contradiction of a clean bill and Mark's statement.
simply stunning
Obama's plan as of 4/13/11
whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/13/president-obama-s-framework-4-trillion-deficit-reduction
not taking sides but i am saying that it existed.
Don't present truth jaycrib...folks get too close to it and instantaneous combustion breaks out.
One side of their mouth...'the President's framework isn't on a napkin to be seen...' Other side of their mouth 'the President upped the revenue request from Boehner's plan...' (which was also not written on a napkin to be seen, but is somehow taken as gospel truth)
So in the end, the Speaker somehow gets credit for offering 800 Billion in revenue though not on paper and the President does not get credit for 4 Trillion in cuts because it is not on paper.
GOP world order at it's finest.
jaycrib - Thank you. It always existed. Allen - You speak the truth.
Did you look at it? There are no specifics at all. The front of one page, and a little pie graph is not a plan. "We're going to cut domestic spending"- how? "We're going to cut security spending"- how?...
Just read the transcript from his "Fiscal Responsibility Summit" in 2009. He vowed to do many of these same things, including cutting the deficit in half by the end of his first term, while acknowledging what he "inherited". Why would anyone believe that this time he would do it?
This is not a plan, it is vague generalities stating where everyone knows cutting must take place, but can't make the difficult decisions to do so.
it is a shame that the debt ceiling "negotiations" were not on C-Span.
So much for promised GOP transparency. They also broke their promise to publish the text of bills online at least three days before a House vote.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/gop-pledge-o-meter/promise/664/publish-the-text-of-bills-online-at-least-three-da/
Why would one provide specifics to the Repbulicans who do not operate in good faith. All they want is failure.
The republicans have written and passed a bill in the house outling very specific budget actions. Obama laid out an outline that was rejected 97-0 in the senate.
Be nice if you'd finish the entire breakdown. The Senate rejected the 3.8 Trillion dollar budget from the WH because that budget had been replaced by a plan from the WH to cut $4 Trillion over 12 years.
You may refuse to accept it, but every budget Republicans have presented has been flatly rejected by the majority of the American People. I could care less how many lies Republicans tell or how many times they try to bash the POTUS, we know who's on our side, and who are just screwing up more and more.
Republicans have just dealt even the rich a blow by crashing the stock markets all over the world with their representation of even a minority of Republicans on their side.
I'll tell you, the hardest thing in the world to do is to educate "stupid" who keeps wanting to run things that they don't even understand.
Well then, that would make the Senate just as guilty as the House. Neither of them did their job. They all need to be replaced.
When in God's name will the politics in Washington STOP and these knuckleheads decide to come togehter and do what is right for this nation. It is becoming obvious that to right this nation everyone will need to take a hit and the hits should be spread across all levels of society. Will this happen? Not as long as the current oliticos are around. There needs to be a major housecleaning of Congress. Start with the tea partiers, then get rid of the obstrucionist in BOTH parties, and demand in a massive graqss roots display like never has been seen in this nation a Congress that right this ship.
Term limits TOM!
Yes, but they will never vote for that, we will have to make the decision for them and vote them out.
Hey Tim ---- you're running for president -- tell us YOUR plan. And if it's more tax cuts and more deregulation, forget it. We tried that and it FUBARed everything.
Charlie, Yes less taxes would stimulate the economy big time. The problem with lowering the tax rate is there isn't one. the enrie tax code is written for business not the individual. the other problem is 40-50% of the people of this nation don't pay taxes. We need a tax code for the individual person. Like a value added tax or a flat rate tax or a consumption tax.. im lower middle class and i pay close to 50% in taxes if you add all the taxes up. that is out of control. I can't imagine what a person who makes a million a year pays. If they work for a company they pay more then i do. there will be a tax revolt in this country if things continue in higher taxes.
Raise the taxes on the rich and you think this bump in stock market looks bad now these are the people who fuel the stock market. they will just invest less to make up the difference. this will slow corperate growth even more then it is today.
on the subject of jobs - stop asking the government to create jobs. - - the only way the government can create jobs is to borrow money and expand and create high cost of opperation. deregulation of some sectors is the only way to create jobs without raising the debt or increasing spending. the other way to create jobs in this country is to tax and terrif anything coming into this country to make it a level playing field and double the tax for any American company who imports into this country. Watch how fast job growth becomes.
none of this will ever happen becouse there in no political gain to do so by either side.
President Obama said that he would provide specifics on entitlement reform in the coming weeks, so I'll reserve judgement until that happens.
He mentioned tax reform, but immediately specified increases on the wealthiest Americans. Just another class warfare reelection talking point IMO. Taxing "the rich", individuals and companies, at 100% would not square the yearly deficit, much less our total debt. This assumes that that additional revenues would be used on deficit reduction. What then? If he wanted to back the Republicans into a corner he would come out with a comprehensive tax reform plan such as the one in recommended by Bowles/Simpson.
This Super Committee (if we kick the can down the road long enough it will wind up being the "Super Duper Extra Special Committee) is a joke. If the government does nothing in the interim then we deserve further downgrading. Politicians need to roll up their sleeves and show us some specific ideas to keep our country from going down the toilet. I want to see plans that can be scored by the CBO, anything less is unacceptable.
It would also be nice if people would tone down the facist, Nazi, terrorist, traitor rhetoric. Everyone is culpable and have been for decades. The people who continue to spread such vitriol are, IMO, simply ignorant and unproductive.
The Poor and the middle class have nothing left to give...after all these years of the wealthy riding on the backs of labor, there is nothing left, that's why they want our future money. How many pensions have been raided by the heads of corporations, how much has been lost in 401Ks. How many people have had to live off their 401ks after their job went overseas. As far as I'm concerned, the Tea Party and the Republican party held the country hostage and threatened to blow up the economy, that is terrorism. They put their pledge to Grover Norquist above their pledge of office...that is treason...They should be punished as such.
Ron Paul is the only Candidate in the field who has a clear and logical plan to deal with the issues before us, and to put us back on the road to prosperity. Come on people, it's not that difficult. The Government needs to live within it's means. That does not mean that we boost taxes sky high to pay for all of these programs. It means that some of these programs need to go the way of the dinosaur. We need to make cuts, and he is the only one talking about making cuts to the sacred cows of both sides. This needs to happen no matter what. Anyone who tells you otherwise is trying to sell you something. Beware!
Ron Paul 2012.
Sorry 10, But even if Ron Paul were to get the nomination and he won't. There is no way that he could get his backward ideas through the Congress. No president can be a dictator, No president can just impose his will or ideas. That is why we have a Constitution. Go check it out. The responsibilities for each branch is clearly laid out. Besides, we now live in the year 2011 not 1700.
Your right Ron Paul would make a great president but the people would have to be far more educated then what they are now. Like our constitution - way ahead of his time.
If Andrew Rafferty and Mark Murray want to parenthetically quote S&P, they should include DECREASE IN SPENDING!! "increased revenue and entitlement reform" just doesn't get it. What does entitlement reform mean? What does increased revenue mean? The president does not have a plan he has some words with no substance. You guys are water carriers for Obama and you continue to spill and slop it all over the place.
The President is not the one that carries the responsibility to present "plans" Go read the Constitution for your self. It is the responsiblity of Congress to present plans and budgets. They did not do their duty in good faith.
I don't suppose any of them can quit mouthing off to give this country the much needed boost in confidence it needs? Right now I would vote for Obama just to show them being nasty does not pay. Such little people.
The sooner we embrace this, and get it over with, the sooner we can take our place at the top back again, and we can all go back to work. It's like pulling a tooth, doing it slowly is long and painful, but if you yank it quickly, you're done and rolling in just a little time.
The brave knight sir Tim Pawlenty is riding to the rescue. Catch up with the pack first Tim, and then you might be heard!
What's said about this is that the president and Boehner could have had a grand deal close to $5T+ if the tax loopholes, corporate subsides and defense were on the table.
Obama's plan was smoke and mirrors. It really didn't save a dime. He's plan was like a spouse that just bought something they didn't need for $400.00 that was originally $800.00 and then bragging about the $400.00 they just saved!
And if that $400.00 item is a necessity that you will HAVE to get at some point, then you really did well.
Congress whole inability to come together for the country's good just wiped out a bunch of wealth. Dumb, dumb, dumb. The worse Congress in history and they are blaming Obama? LOL.
The republicans walked away from tax increases that did not add enough to do anything but stop growth. That was smart.
If it was such a grand plan for NOBAMA why didn't he lower the amount to tax the so called millionaires (those that make $200,000 are today's millionaires) and give in some as he could see the republicans would not give in? I guess increasing the taxes on those that provide jobs is more important to this president then reducing our debt. I blame him not the republicans.
As an company owner I will not add jobs until the country stops penalizing me for doing my job and growing my company. Motivate me properly if you want me to add jobs. Don't make me give up money to those not only UNWILLING to work but unwilling to LOOK as well. I say unemployment should be set up with 2 days of work and 3 days of looking. 2 days that work is picking up trash and many of the other important things we need people to do. Prove you are looking or get nothing.
Lets get the other 50% of Americans that pay no income tax to pay something as well. Why is it only good to take money from the 50%? Do you drive our roads? Do you enjoy medical care? Pay for it or shut up!
Because people who live below the poverty level don't usually pay federal income tax, though they do pay sales tax, payroll tax, etc.. You think the recovery should be paid on the shoulders of the poorest Americans?
They pay taxes on what we give them in welfare money. Paying with some elses money is not paying anything, "clothc"
Pawlenty for President. A man who will do as he states. A man who would not sign the Teaparties pledge. It is time for a tough president to do what is best for this country. Tim Pawlenty is the man..........
Independents for Tim Pawlenty
Republican trying to devide and conquer...there are no independents for Pawlenty
Independents for Tim Pawlenty. Their are many of us in MN. Try the truth once in a while "tim"
We the Independents and moderates spoke loudly in 2010. We will finish our direction in 2012.
Caradjt.... No wonder your country is going down the tub, you and others like you are truely stupid !
Ever heard of the minimum wage ??? Millions live with the minimum wage, do you truely believe they can pay taxes when they even cannot afford health care ?
Pawlenty left Minnesota $6.5 billion in the hole. He is no better on the economy then Obama.
Eat some more lead. How clueless can one be, just ask "ledp"