So while Athen's sifts through 46 buildings burned down by progressives pissed that their freebies have run out, President Obama introduces a budget which looks to be the blueprint of Greece's collapse – the fourth consecutive TRILLION dollar deficit plan.

Obama's incompetence can not be understated. He and he alone maybe remembered as the one person that brought this great nation down. And a good chunk of our population supports him and cheers him on. God help us.

Rob,

I would respectfully suggest you do some serious reading up on what is going on in Greece. You might get a clearer picture of the problem.

They are broke Phine and we are on the same path. It's really simple. And if you don't see similarities amongst the youth revolt there and the occupiers in Oakland and elsewhere oh well.

Rob,

There are many factors in the Greek problem. Everyone is to blame here. But there is only so much austerity that can be done. Taxes need to be collected. And, just like in many other Western countries, the wealthiest are not paying. The whole situation is like an onion - many layers to it. To try and simplify the problem is not doing the situation justice.

In the long run, both Greece and Portugal will probably end up out of the Eurozone.

Jim Silver, propaganda? What part are you refering to?

Was it the proposal to limit the deductions wealthy taxpayers can claim and certain tax breaks for corporations, including oil and gas companies? Because I know those Oil companys NEED those breaks in order to continue making BILLIONS in profits!

Or was it by imposing a rule named after investor Warren Buffett that would seek to ensure that wealthy people making more than $1 million a year pay at least 30 percent of their incomes in taxes?

or ... was it just because Obama said it so it must be wrong! Much like the repubs in the House, aka the party of NO!

Just wondering...

Yes I suppose Greece could have done a better job in collecting it's taxes but the real problem there is that one in four Greeks work for the government and they retire at 55 or some ridiculous age with a pension and health insurance.

Our entitlement growth is what will cripple this nation not the red herring of the rich not paying their fair share. That is just none sense.

Cut spending not growth in spending but real cuts. Until that happens tax increases of any kind should be off the table.

Phine you said it all, Greece is in the same boat we are, why, because of their rich ship builders. It was mentioned on CNN last night I believe. Their rich and wealthy people and companies are keeping their billions of dollars or EROs to themselves and letting their own country go broke. USA is in same boat, our rich and wealthy people and companies are hoarding their billions and letting the rest of us suffer. Instead of helping their own workers and fellow Americans.

The Greek government has to take the lion's share of the blame here. Each party would promise government jobs for votes. Then, turn a blind eye to tax collection. They also would promise the moon for those employed by the government. They borrowed money without paying it back.

However, now, to get out of this mess, while austerity and major cuts are necessary, they MUST get ALL levels of the populace to pay taxes - not just the middle and lower classes.

Could what happens in Greece happen here? I don't know. My crystal ball is fuzzy there. But, I do know that yes you have to have budget cuts but you also need to raise revenue. How? Well, that is what elections are for.

How? Well, that is what elections are for

Bingo and until a majority of voters vote in candidates that promise to cut spending and vote them out if they don't well we will just continue on the road to a Greece like demise.

Rob, sadly I just don't trust any politician of any party anymore. Seems all of them are more interested in money and power than the welfare of the people they are supposed to govern.

BUFFET PAYS OVER 100% TAXES! Add up his 30% and then add in all of the taxes paid by those working in all the jobs he created. The total exceeds his income!!! The so called Buffet Rule is a colossal MYTH!

The budget proposal confirms that the President will not be keeping his promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. He does not seem to care.

Cantor and Republicans in Congress are so desperate to protect special tax breaks for billionaires and Big Oil companies that they’re claiming that President Obama’s budget, “calls for massive tax increases on hardworking families and small businesses.”

That’s a bold-faced lie and they know it.

President Obama’s plan would simply ensure that the top 1% aren’t paying less in taxes than middle class families.

But until the GOP-TEA Congresspeople open their eyes, begin working for their constitutents and this nation instead of Grover Norquist, the Kochys and their ilk, the President's promise simply could NOT be fulfilled. But that is okay... they will be fired for doing harm to America, and the promise WILL be completed eventually. gopnuts need to get with the program instead of publicly demonstrating their obstinate, greedy loyalty to the 1%.

Financial wonk Ezra Klein did a great review with other budget experts. First is the % of GDP in spending versus cuts, and then where the revenue comes from, and cuts that would be needed to balance the budget.

The % of GDP for the government to properly function shouldn't fall below 20% (and is best at 22-23%). President Obama's budget is about 18%, well below what is needed and actually Bush-like. Teapublicans propose even lower (16%), with Romney's plan at only 17%. In order for Romney to balance the budget with only that much revenue, every entitlement would have to be completely eliminated -- In part because Romney says he wants defense spending to stay the same (and I'd argue if a Republican were to be elected, they would increase defense spending by starting new wars).

On the topic of defense spending, folks are disappointed that there isn't as much savings in the president's budget from ending the Iraq war. That's because we still pay for a large standing army whether they are on the front line or not, and because we have become more reliant on contractors (think Haliburton), which cost two to three times more than regular troops. And if the standing army is reduced too quickly the unemployment rate will shoot back up.

President Obama's plan is better, of course, because he increases revenue by ending loopholes and requiring a minimum tax on millionaires. We really need to let the Bush tax cuts expire for everyone, but once again, the financial guru recommended this be held off a little longer until the economy improves more.

Romney's plan not only gives larger tax breaks to the rich (imagine that!), the poorest would pay double what they pay in taxes now. Furthermore, the deficit would increase. Romney is lying when he says he'll balance the budget.

Anyone who supports Romney or other Teapublican plans are nuts. It's going to take a multi-pronged and phased approach to balance the budget while preventing the economy from tanking.

sorry carrot top, did I step on your toes? We all know you get a little miffed if you don't get 1st post! Let's hear your accolades for the achievements of the administration..... hello, hello......?

feisty, why don't you answer the question instead of deflecting it with insults?

feisty, why don't you answer the question instead of deflecting it with insults?

Who don't you call in your usual reinforcements - traveling solo can be dangerous?

What insult? Only calling them like I see em - then again coming from a mushroom like you... it makes total sense! lol

Rick Santorum is not someone I could vote for.

Sorry i posted this on the wrong story. Luke Russert's comment on the both parties budget were pretty funny.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL In the meantime, the membership for the Feisty Fan Club is overwhelming and unfortunately for you, you are at the end of the line! ☺

Try grabbing your ankles, it might bring you some much needed relief!

This is the voice of Obama and his supporters? If so, I am very glad to be on the Right side!

Don't hold your breath Jim Silver/Pride and Joy. The one who claims to be Feisty simply refuses to ever state the reasons she supports the democrats. If she did, she might have to defend the reasons she prints. It's much easier for her to just drop in almost every morning, sit there all days seven days a week, posting snippets against the republicans and many of the commenter's.

Feisty can sling nasty personal insults with the best of them, and she is never censored. She seemingly has some special connections with the leftleaning First Read staff, who allow her to say anything about Republicans, no matter how personal, rude and disgusting.

Who else could get away with an icon calling Fox news viewers "dumb fux" .

Maybe she's way up there on the Media Matters food chain. From the news reports today MSNBC is just a cheap subsidiary of theirs?.

Gee people don't blame Fiesty to much, after all she never gets out of her mother's basement. I believe she was home schooled and afraid to get out in the world. MSNBC and First Read is all she knows, I never see her post anywhere else except First Read. I have a hunch she is an overweight, short redhead.

Just ignore her posts and she will go away.

You left yourself wide open with that one, ma'am.

Here's wishing a Happy Valentines Day tomorrow to all the sweet women in our lives!

I never see her post anywhere else except First Read

Gomer,

You don't get out much do ya?

I have a hunch she is an overweight, short redhead.

As usual, you are WRONG again! lol

Just ignore her posts and she will go away.

Try clicking your ruby slippers together 3 x's - it will be about as effective as your wish full thinking! ;o)

Wow. We have major economic problems in our nation, and what do any of the right-wing posts in this section have to do with the article? No, you are nothing but a mob with your torches and pitch forks.

Upset??

You're kidding right? I can't wait to see Harry Reid put this turd up for a vote!

This President and the democrat party are an embarrassment of gargantuan proportions.

Fancy That is right. The President has submitted his budget and he submitted one last year. Last year's was so dismally inept that it garnered no votes from Republicans. And no votes from his own party. This year's budget is the same -- just the same old "tax the rich" mantra, and no substance and no chance of passing.

If the President was a real leader, whose true interests were for the country and not his campaign, his budget would have been doable and would appeal to both sides. I think he submits crazy legislation ideas, and policy ideas that have failed over and over again knowing they will go nowhere just so he can cry about obstruction. The Democrats - his base - always love a victim.

In truth, the House (Republican majority) has passed numerous bills and fiscally sound budgets. The Senate (Democrat majority) has buried all of them. The Senate, led by Harry Reid, is the obstructionist.

Good evening Candice. I have an interesting question for you. What would happen if the independent, CBO, put out a budget? I would imagine BOTH sides would not be happy - but I bet the American people would be.

Phine, now that is a good question.

Hello, phinephancy.

Well, they say a well negotiated deal is one where both sides walk away a little unhappy.

I actually think the American people would be happy if the President led both sides to a reasonable agreement, for the good of all the people. Or, maybe that's too novel an idea.

The CBO is none to swift either. I recall them predicting that obamacare would save us money.

Enough said.

Rob makes a good point.

The CBO has a bit of a history getting it wrong. And as far as "independent?" Sometimes I'm not so sure.

Candice,

Unfortunately, in an election year, it doesn't matter who the president is. It is all pandering to each party's base to gin up the vote. No one will consider working together. Do I sound cynical? You bet. I have seen this for many, many years. I have no faith in any of our elected officials (either party) in an election year.

Rob & Candice,

I was just using the CBO as an example. Any purely independent group would do.

phine,

As I state below, last year wasn't an election year and almost exactly the same ideological budget was presented.

Somewhere along the line, working together went to the wayside --- election year or not. You're not alone in your cynicism. I've no faith in any of them - but my lack of faith is pretty consistent -- not just every four years.

Doesn't look much like a budget but rather an idealistic outline.

Good luck with that!

Well, I do have faith in one thing - my ability to bake a great red velvet cake (the secret is Kahlua). I am off to bake one for tomorrow's Valentine's Day dessert. Check in with you all later!

Candice you are 100% correct all Obama has is the obstruction blame game. He has nothing else. Paul Ryan put forth a serious budget proposal. He and the Republicans took alot of heat for it. Was it perfect? No, but it was a serious and genuine attempt at starting the debate. Democrats never came back with anything serious just the fair share ruse.

People really need to wake up. If we don't get our house in order the recession of 2008 will be remembered as the good old days.

Phine can you send me your recipe for red velvet cake?

Rob, "Obstruction blame game"?

There is a reason for that ... It's true!

The republicans could earn a black belt in Obstructionism, they're so good at it!

They have made filabustering a fine art!

UAW.

Again, add up the number of bills passed by the House and obstructed in the Senate. Add up the number of bills passed by the Senate and sat on by the House. Then decide who is obstructing whom.

The CBO is a fairly objective source as both parties use them to promote certain policies/agendas. The right cries foul only when a CBO report counters their rhetoric.

while watching bloomberg TV earlier one of the analyst (peter cook) held up a paper copy of obamas budget. Thought he was going to have a hernia hefting that stack of paper dreams.

I like obamas assumptions, one of which inflation will be less than 2 % from 2013 going forward, that GDP year over year hovers near 4% and that his budget proposal will be approved as written. In an election year even.

Someone should remind obama that in a nation of over 300 million individuals we weren't all born last night.

For further info on this budget see...

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/13/10398405-obama-budget-sees-recovery-gaining-speed

In an election year, both parties will put out budgets that will fire up their base. Nothing will get done (unless it is for their own benefit).

It wasn't an election year last year....no budget was passed. Nothing got done. No one did benefit.

True, but when on party says on day one their whole goal is to make the president a one term president, it isn't a good omen that much will get done in that 4 years.

My husband once said he just doesn't understand why people get so excited about politics. All it is is a game of one upmanship. Not one politician or political party cares at bit about the people. All one can do is just try to survive. I hate admitting when he is right.

"when on party says on day one their whole goal is to make the president a one term president"

Spare us us the faux outrage that Republicans want to make the failure in the White House a 1 term President. Thank goodness we have the opportunity to save the country from his massively failed leftist polcies.

The Democrats fought tooth and nail, used every dirty trick in the book against George Bush for two full terms, he didnt whine about it.

You moonbats think Obama is God. He is in the White House at our whim, and we will correct our error in 2012.

Politicians say a lot of stupid things, Phine. Most are disregarded. Some stick like glue. ----57 states, one term president. Most misspoken comments need to be let go.

Turns out, though, Senator McConnell was right. He wasn't speaking personally about the President, although Obama supporters are still so offended. Who thought at the time Mitch McConnell knew the far left policies and style of governing would damage our country?

We really can't take four more years, I'm afraid.

I agree with your husband as well. It is sad but it is true.

Politicians say a lot of stupid things

...And so, unfortunately, does bob (and some other blind, unthinking posters on this vine.)

Harry Reid said he would not bring the budget to the floor. So is it already DOA? If that's the case, why did they bother? The man hours, the expense writing the budget, knowing all along it would go nowhere.

Its insulting the way they throw our money around.

Bob in Va.,

Effective rate, maybe. But how come we never hear the numbers. How much in U.S. dollars did Warren Buffet actually pay?? And he is but one man.

Buffet is a fraud. He stands to make a hundred million from Obama's mortgage policy.

He has cashed in on his political connections; Buffett has become a crony capitalist.

Bob I've heard that Buffett's secretary makes up to 500K per year.

Buffett also made a huge score with the keystone deal getting shot down.

Hi, Bob.

Buffet stands to make millions on nixing the Keystone pipeline, too. No pipeline. Oil and gas gets transported by rail. Which rail? The ones Mr. Buffet owns.

That the President continuously cites the ultimate capitalist, Mr. Buffet, is a bit odd and disingenuous, don't you think?

The vast majority of the 21 Dem Senators up for reelection would never vote for that monstrosity, they would lose in November.

Exactly, that's why McConnell should insist it be voted on so that it can be shoved right straight up Obama's rear end.

So Reid says he won't even bring the budget up for a senate vote, who is the obstructionist now? Its been over a 1000 days since the senate democrats have even voted on a budget. Uhmmmm do any of the libs on this site even know how the process works? The house proposes and votes on their proposed budget, then the senate votes on a proposed budget..... then the two houses of congress go to conference and stike a deal on the budget. Then the budget is submitted to the President for his signature or veto. Since the senate refuses to even submit their proposals, again who is the obstructionist.

Perhaps the President should get a Chief of Staff that knows how the process works, he seems to think that you need 60 votes to pass the budget. Reid only needs a simple majority (which the dems have) to pass the budget, but he is a pure partisian who refuses to vote on any budget, in order to protect his democratic collegues.