E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Larry Downing / Reuters
President Barack Obama waves after he talks about the rising costs of student loans while at the University of Iowa in Iowa City, April 25, 2012.
The president this week drove a message without distraction, but also pushed the limits of “official” travel … Boehner accuses Obama of making the presidency “smaller” – he’s become Mitt Romney’s biggest ally on Capitol Hill … Outside group accuses Obama of being too “cool” to be president … Bill Clinton testifies to Obama’s strength, as the campaign highlights the bin Laden raid … Cold War kids … Obama speaks to troops, women … Romney’s in Ohio – at a college campus with Gov. Kasich.
*** Driving a message and pushing the limits: It was a week in which the Obama campaign was remarkably able to push a single issue without distraction from something (or someone) – on student loans. The president took (justified) criticism for pushing that message on official business with Air Force One in swing states, on college campuses (not one but three), while mixing in slow-jamming the news. House Speaker John Boehner yesterday accused the president of starting a “fake fight,” demanded that he reimburse the government for the trips, said it was “beneath the dignity” of the White House, and even went so far as to charge, “This is the biggest job in the world and I've never seen a President make it smaller.” At the end of the day, Obama was able to get out and appeal to groups in areas that are going to matter to his reelection – and, more importantly from a trip-legitimacy standpoint, there is supposed to be a vote today (the last vote by about noon ET, we’re told), on the “policy” in the House, something that might not have happened without the president pushing the issue. Still, the White House pushed the limit on this when they picked three universities all in battleground states. Had they picked just one in a non-battleground, it would have a little higher ground to stand on.
Daily Rundown guest host Luke Russert is joined by NBC's Domenico Montanaro to talk about the House speaker's comments and whether his attack is a coordinated push with Mitt Romney.
*** A “Stark Contrast”: The Romney campaign pens a memo this morning, highlighting what it sees as the difference between its candidate and President Obama. “This past week previewed the stark contrast facing voters in this election. Governor Romney’s speech Tuesday night in New Hampshire contained a crisp and specific critique of President Obama’s policy failures and his own positive vision for a better America.” But: “President Obama … spent the week slow-jamming the news, striking a Heisman pose, and trying to pick a fight over student loans to help the one-in-two recent college graduates who are either jobless or underemployed as a result of his policies (which is apparently really funny stuff to the President). Unfortunately for him, Republicans agree with the need for a temporary extension, but want it paid for by cutting spending rather than raising taxes. So instead of the fight he was hoping for, he got a debate over taxes and spending – which he wasn’t hoping for.”
*** Too “Cool” for the White House? On cue, Karl Rove-backed American Crossroads is up with a video called, “Cool,” which cuts together clips of Obama wearing 3-D glasses, dancing on “Ellen,” singing Al Green, drinking a beer, killing a fly, calling Kanye West a “jackass,” and slow-jamming the news with Jimmy Fallon. It asks, “After 4 years of a celebrity president, is your life any better?” The ad picks up where John McCain left off with his “Biggest Celebrity in the World” ad, a narrative that was starting to take hold… until McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate.
*** Superficial vs. Serious – Bill Clinton testifies: But the Obama campaign is out with its own strong and sober video, featuring Bill Clinton as a testifier. It is juxtaposition to the superficiality narrative the Crossroads ad tries to create. “There’s one thing that George Bush said that was right,” Clinton says, “The president is the ‘Decider-in-Chief.” It then shows pictures of Obama in the Situation Room during the Osama bin Laden raid. “Nobody can make that decision for you,” Clinton says. “Look he knew what would happen. Suppose the Navy Seals had gone in there, and it hadn’t been bin Laden. Suppose they’d been captured or killed. The downside would have been horrible for him. … He took the harder, and more honorable path.” Then, a graphic comes up asking, “Which path would Mitt Romney have taken?” And highlights this Romney quote: “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” This Sunday, Obama will raise money with Clinton at the Virginia home of Terry McAuliffe, the former Democratic National Committee chairman and former Virginia gubernatorial candidate. By the way, there’s been a lot of talk and about Obama money problems, especially with the Super PAC, Priorities USA. Bloomberg today notes that Clinton backers are waiting for Obama backers to start writing checks to the PAC before they will.
*** Boehner, Romney’s biggest ally on Capitol Hill: Back to Boehner’s attack. Of course, Democrats made similar charges against former President George W. Bush in 2004. But as NBC’s Luke Russert points out, Boehner, who stayed out of the endorsement fray, has emerged as Romney’s chief ally on Capitol Hill. “One of the more fascinating developments in the last two weeks on Capitol Hill has been the degree to which House Speaker John Boehner has gone after President Obama and helped to try and frame Obama's general election matchup against Mitt Romney.” Since endorsing Romney 10 days ago, Boehner went on the attack the next day, “accusing Obama of being ‘AWOL’ for the last 6 months and on a ‘constant campaign.’” He accused the president of “failing to lead” on the economy and on legislation related to jobs, student loans, gas prices, and the national drug shortage – instead opting for “campaign theatrics.” The DNC’s Brad Woodhouse responded on Twitter, leveling this: “Let’s be clear: John Boehner is the most useless, feckless, weak and failed Speaker of the House perhaps in American history.” Wow. Here’s NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell’s report on NBC Nightly News last night.
*** Outside spending ramps up: Those aren’t the only ads out there. Americans for Prosperity -- a conservative group with ties to the billionaire Koch Brothers, who made millions in the oil and gas industry -- is actually ON AIR in the next two weeks with a $6.1 million ad buy in eight states – all battlegrounds: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, and Virginia. It once again focuses on clean energy and, in an odd way, outsourcing. “Fact: Billions of taxpayer dollars spent on green energy went to jobs in foreign countries. … Tell President Obama: American tax dollars should help American taxpayers.” There’s also a seven-figure ad buy up in Wisconsin in that recall race supporting Democrat Kathleen Falk ahead of the primary there May 8 to take on Gov. Scott Walker. And the NRCC is going up with $150,000 in ads in the Gabrielle Giffords district, AZ-8.
*** Cold war kids: Vice President Joe Biden was in full attack-dog mode yesterday, lambasting Mitt Romney’s foreign policy, saying that he “mired in a Cold War mindset.” And two Romney advisers added fuel to that attack yesterday when one, former Navy Secretary John Lehman said: "We are seeing the Soviets pushing into the Arctic with no response from us.” And Pierre Prosper, a former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes, said, "The United States abandoned its missile defense sites in Poland and Czechoslovakia, yet Russia does nothing but obstruct us, or efforts in Iran and Syria." Czechoslovakia split into what’s now the Czech Republic and Slovakia… in 1993, two years after the Soviet Union fell. Remember, Romney called Russia America’s “No. 1 geopolitical foe.”
*** Obama signs order on troops, education, then speaks to women: Today, the president pushes the issue of education again in Georgia at Fort Stewart, where he’ll sign an executive order “intended to help protect active-duty troops and veterans from deceptive and misleading practices.” (He’ll make remarks at 12:35 pm ET). And who’s going to disagree with that? Later, the president speaks to the National Women’s Issues Conference at 4:55 pm ET in DC. Women are, of course, a key group for the president. In the latest, NBC/WSJ poll, women approved of the job the president was doing by a 52%-43% margin and favored him over Romney, 53%-41%. In 2008, Obama won them 56%-43%, an improvement from 2004, when John Kerry won them by just three points, 51%-48%. Mitt Romney is in that all-important swing state of Ohio at… a college campus (Otterbein University in Westerville). Coincidence? He’ll speak at 3:05 pm ET. Ohio Gov. John Kasich will campaign with Romney in the afternoon. Kasich, of course, isn’t the most popular politician in the country.
***Elsewhere On the trail: Newt Gingrich continues his farewell tour, with stops in North Carolina. … Ron Paul hosts a town hall in Houston, TX.
Countdown to Election Day: 194 days
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:
Subsidies to big oil is like giving Warren Buffet millions of tax dollars to, well, be Warren Buffet.
If you haven't noticed, the wealth of our nation is accumulating at an alarming rate to the top .05%...
There is a clear choice to be made...keep making the rich wealthier in the vain hope that they give you a job, or take back America from Corporation Control with which they have strangled free trade and monopolized such that the poor stay poor and the middle class struggle.
This is not socialism...I can show how corporations have reduced their tax liability since 1950 by a huge amount, while personal taxes have increased to pick up the corporate slack.
DionysusOmega
Of course in absolute terms the wealthy are getting wealthier. The poor are getting wealthier.
The Federal minimum wage is now $7.25 an hour. When I first started working it was $1.15 an hour but then again everything costs more. So whose fault is that?
Rick,
I will give you a real life example. ( perhaps you have one of your own )
When I was younger ( long ago in a galaxie far away ) I started working when I was 15 years old.
I could pay for my studio aprtmt, my car, my insurance ( mostly ) and still have money to eat...working a minimum wage job.
In todays world, you would have to work THREE minimum wage jobs at full time to pay for the above expenses.
The poor are getting a higher wage than 30 years ago, but the cost of living has far outdistanced the ability to survive on that wage.
Look it up...working wages have been flat for years while wealth has been piling up to the upper .05% at record levels.
The fault is in a system that is rigged so that wages and taxes favor the wealthiest, while decreasing the ability of the poor and middle class to move upward in income scale.
Diony
Just how could you do all that on 1.25 Hr.(1963-66) to 1.60(1968-73)?
My rent was in the $125-150 per month range. Utilities in the $25 per month range. I clipped coupons for my food. At that time a local store,Jordano's,would take any coupons up to $1.00 for any purchase. I bought a car for $200,gas was 28.9 for Regular. And at 50 bucks a week clear(?) I was struggling.
Counting for inflation 1.60 per hr in 1973 is the same as 7.76 so today. Not much different now is it? I couldn't qualify for food stamps then I was single. Today my brother gets $200 per month in food Stamps with a minimum wage part time job.
There was a time when it was almost impossible to become wealthy on a one time windfall. With the tax code changing it has become easier as can be seen by the record number millionaires created recently.
But now voters like you want to change that. What gives?
Hoping this is not a repeat post....if it is my apologies....managed to fat finger things a touch...
A good day for hating, it seems, on a Friday.
But -
Obama is doing nothing wrong when he goes out and campaigns - all presidents before him and all to come do precisely the same thing, so why the right wing outrage?
A couple of questions - why exactly do the left seem to think that absolutely all the conservatives/republicans are racist and hate the poor? Why is the left so darn convinced that all republicans are members of the 1%, and want to see the 99% destroyed? And why is the left so convinced that the goal of the republicans/conservatives is to completely destroy the social safety nets no matter what the cost.
It seems fairly obvious that none of the above are actually true, but all of the above would appear to be articles of the liberal faith, and I am truly curious, not trying to pick a fight or attacking.
For the right - why do all of you here seem to insist on calling Obama a socialist or a communist? Why do you all insist that tax cuts, or at minimum not raising taxes, is an absolute requirement, while truly massive cuts to the social safety nets is also necessary? And really - is it necessary to call the president names, other than his own?
Of course, the name calling is plentiful from both sides, so I suppose I could direct that to both sides....
Again, not trying to pick a fight - I am curious, and trying to understand. For the record, I am a conservative republican type, but willing to consider alternate points of view when logically and reasonably presented.
Read the Ryan Budget...it is self explanatory.
Dion - I said logically and reasonably presented, not a talking point. I can see that you dont like the republicans, or the Ryan budget proposal, but you failed to say why, in terms that are reasonable.
What you are calling self explanatory comes across as reflexive without explanation.
notalking-the deeper tax cuts for the wealthy (job creators) and corporations at the expense of social security, medicare and other social programs is probably all the explanation needed.
By the way-we don't care what you said. You're not in charge here and probably nowhere else. Poser with a wannabe 1% dream.
So what's next? Obama onstage playing guitar in a U2 gig? Is he gonna tell us he's fighting to keep the Republicans from raising concert ticket prices?
Those of his supporters who love America more than they hate Republicans ought to privately consider whether this office is really in the hands of a pretentious imposter, who happens to have a gift for public speaking.
Is that Boner you talking about?
Romney on Job Creation...
As Governor, his state was second to LAST in job creation.
By any metric known that is a FAILURE!
Romney had an over whelming Liberal State Legislature, while governor. ENOUGH SAID.
Dev-not enough said. Mitt as a corporate raider destroyed thousands of American workers jobs and their families and communities in the name of $$$$$$$$$ (speech). That should disqualify him from running for this office not make him "the family values candidate". check out Ampad and King of Bain.com
From reading the post I guess there is one thing we can all agree on isthat 50% of the people are idiots.
Somehow we need to break this cycle of voting between dumb and dumber.
Perhaps we should do like Douglas Adams said in Guide to the Galaxy...find the most qualified person to be president ( that would exclude all lawyers ) and MAKE them be prez...no choice.
It looks like David and Backhouse had a lot of fun with that piece of pure fiction they came up with.
Unfortunately it looks like pure fiction is all we can expect from the liberals on msdnc.
Facts are so darn inconvenient aren't they Rick?
DionysusOmega
I think David and Backhouse would not know if that were true or not. I Googled what they posted and could find absolutely no reference to what they posted with the exception of Backhouses original post.
Rickey - See Feisty's post #1 on this thread - genius.
Rickey - Correction - Feisty's Comment #1 is on Obama retains map edge thread. Should explain David and Backhouse's posts.
This is so typical of this guys lying to and stealing from the tax payer. He knows this is campaigning. We all know it, but he's going to try to tell us that it's official. The only way to tell if this clown is lying is if his lips move.
Obama's plan...divide Americans pit one against another. It is easier to conquer when the enemy is divided. His class warfare is the biggest example of this. No one ever tells the public that the top 10% of earners pay 70% of all income taxes.
While 49% pay no federal income tax at all. So Obama wants to blame the fact that he over spent every year as president by 1.5 trillion dollars a year. That is 1,500.000.000.000 a year, on the rich as if they were the ones who spent the money.
If Obama the king of the US took all of their money 100% it would be 800 billion dollars a year, again he is over spending by 1.5 trillion. So it would not stop the debt from growing.
His war on women. It is a made up war. Why would any party go to war with half the country? No one is stopping women from getting birth control or healthcare. Well except Obama and his government healthcare.
Do the world a favor do not vote for Obama.
Can you say...forced vaginal probe?
DionysusOmega
Explain what you mean by "forced".
I think he means when someone shoves a Rick up there when you don't want them to.
Kind of like the Republicans want to do to any woman seeking a legal medical procedure.
Dev-there is a Republican war on women and as a father, husband and brother of women it makes me very cross. Rush Limbaughs comments on Fluke-echoed by numerous ignorant posts, Virginia's vaginal probe law, failed Governor Scott Walker's Wisconsin law denying women equal pay, Jan Brewer and Arizona's anti reproductive rights law, Boehner tying student loan rates to defunding women's healthcare and multiple other Republican proposals to deny women the right to choose. I agree-I don't know why Republicans think they don't need the women's vote-I guess they think they will vote the way their husbands, fathers and male bosses tell them to.
"You should all be mad at those rich people, if they don't give me more money I can not keep giving you hand outs" President of Welfare.
If you don't give me more money, how will I continue the war that never ends?
President wanna be of War.
What at stupid a** comment. Why don't we just sit back and starve while the rich steal everything!
dev-at least the rich can be confident that a wannabe like you is still there to give them mental hand jobs and adoration.
The NBC's the ABC's the CBS's the CNN's and of course the FOX networks are all in the tank for the Repugs and that Corporate Raider Romney let there be no doubt about it. Guess what?....It still won't stop President Obama from being re-elected and all you haters should already know that.
Q
What a crock of s*** about "Driving the message and Pushing the limits". After three years of the absolutely despicable actions of the Republicans in opposing everything the President has tried to do the improve the lives of the average citizen just so they can get the black man out of the white house and put themselves back in power so the can continue to strip this country of all the wealth they can accumulate, you have the audacity to criticize the President for being - THE PRESIDENT!!
See, Rmoney is "unemployed", so he can campaign full time.
But, if the President goes out and speaks to some of his citizens about legislative matters directly effecting them, then that's "campaigning", which is "pushing the limits".
All the while, NBC's own recent polling has Iowa as Lean Republican, but for purposes of criticizing the President, it is suddenly back to being a Swing State somehow.
It all gets very confusing, this fair and balanced stuff.
Dumbama who? What a friggen phony.
You don't get subliminal.
It was a rainy and cold October day when the sheriff evicted the laid off Ampad worker. She wondered through her tears why 34 years of loyal work was destroyed by an unseen corporate raider whose company had made $100 million dollars taking ampad apart. She did not know what a car elevator was.
"If government is the answer, how stupid was the question"?
The results of this administration speak for themselves. Obama's recovery has a GDP growth of 2.2% per year. During FDR's recovery in 1933 - 35 the growth was between 8% and 10% in GDP for each of those years. Obama is no FDR!
+2.2% is quite an improvement over the -9% Bush left him. And, better than the negative GDP reported by several European countries suffering under their own self-imposed Ryan Budgets.
The same "austerity" measures by rightwingnut@!$%#tards world-wide are failing right before our very eyes, but Ryan, Rmoney, and virtually all the Congressional Republicans say we need to follow their lead.
I'll take the +2.2% any day compared to where the Republican Budget Plan would leave us.
Europe's other option to get out of the debt problem is hyper-inflation. It seems that Germany's hyper-inflation in the late 20's got us Hitler. Austerity means going through painful financial cuts. Like when someone loses their job.
The Europeans, do not want to bite the bullet and pay for their loose spending all these years. When the Euro is worth 2% of what it is today, let us see how the socialists feel at point.
In the US we are lucky, we can lower the rate of growth in government spending and move toward a balance budget in about 10 years. Not cuts from current spending levels, a decrease in growth of spending.
Also, the problem in Europe assumes that government spending is the solution to providing money to the economy. Private sector spending actually improves economies and grows jobs. Europe has reached the point many countries such as PIGS depend on government to spend ~50% of the GDP, we are at just under 25% in the U.S.
And, yet, here we are managing to have modest growth with inflation in check.
And, all without the Ryan/Republican Budget, which is so similar to what's been taking place in Europe.
And, that's some how a bad thing, according to you.
How many different ways to you want this?
To really have the job growth we need the economy needs to be growing around 3% to 3.5%. The 2.2% will quickly go away if the Euro-zone goes further in recession or worse. The Ryan plan slows growth of government it does not cut from current spending levels like the austerity programs in Europe.
If we reach a national debt level of 130% (we are currently at $15.6 trillion in debt and a GDP of just over $15 trillion) we will lose our credit ratings and no one will lend to us. Then we will have to either cut every program we have or go to treasury's printing presses to inflate our way out. Either way would be a disaster.
I do not understand the need for all of this travel. The law makers that vote on legislation are all in Washington DC. Presidential speeches can all be given at the White House. What ever happened to fire side chats? Presidential speeches can be televised and text of the speech made available on the Internet. Texts of all the Presidents can be all emailed to law makers in Washington. I believe that most lawmakers in Washington do no how to read of at least have someone on staff who knows how to read. Students at most colleges and universities nowadays have access to the Internet and most of them, especially at the more select institutions, know how to read. If the major networks will not cover the President's speeches, networks like CSPAN, will. Remember that the President promised the American people that he would go over the health care law "line by line" with my congressman and every other law maker in Washington that requested it. I wonder when the broadcasts are scheduled to begin.
Rather than traveling the President needs to stay in Washington and work on keeping his promises to the American people. The President promised that the 2012 federal deficit will not exceed 229.27 billion dollars yet his own White House is predicting that the 2012 deficit will be more than 5 times what the President promised. The President's Promise was not contingent on anything to include any action of congress. The President needs to stay in Washington and work on keeping his promise. The President needs to work on his promise and on telling the American people how he is going to keep it. He needs to do this immediately because the fiscal year is already more than half over. The President needs to generate a plan for the federal government to pay back all of the money that it has borrowed. We need to know how it is going to be done, how long it is going to take and how much it is going to end up costing the taxpayers. I estimate that any new money borrowed now will end up costing the tax payers 9 times the amount borrowed to repay over a period of 170 years but that is just my estimate. I want our President to provide a plan.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Mathewsicon-quoting the works of michael savage/weiner disqualifies you from serious thought.
Weiner was a beatnick/liberal who went south because of quotas.
Obama has tried as hard as he can. And he has failed. Time for a new president.
I see the third shift of rightwingnut@!$%#tards has arrived with all their Ditthead talking points. Let's see if we can summarize:
Obama should not be allowed to give speeches to US Citizens. He should have to stay in DC; the fact that Presidents have been making speeches to citizens since the country was founded notwithstanding.
Obama's recovery isn't good enough; the fact that the US GDP is still growing while many austerity countries in Europe have slipped back into recession notwithstanding.
Obama shouldn't be allowed to stay in DC, he should be made to go out and face citizens regarding all the "promises" he has yet to fulfill; the fact that only rightwingnut@!$%#tards know what these "promises" are,and are unable to point to any actual quotes, notwithstanding.
Obama hasn't DONE anything. And, verifiable lists of his actual accomplishments thusfar don't count.
Obama has failed; at what we can't substantiate, but trust us, he's failed.
This is just like the Great Depression, and FDR did better; the facts that "this" isn't that much like the Great Depression, FDR had much better number in Congress to work with than Obama, and Roosevelt was a privileged white patrician with a famous family name working with an entirely different country notwithstanding.
Ru@!$%# is smiling and counting the dollars he screws you Dittoheads out of.
it would help if he stayed in DC sometime. And it would help if he didn't view the US Treasury as his own personal war chest to spend as he pleased. It would help if he actually tried to conduct the nation's business.
Mega Dittos, dupe.
These figures on the increase in federal government employment. You can see it is growing and we only go to March 2010. the 2011 figures are not tabulated yet.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT (from census.gov//govs/apes/ )
Mar 2001 ALL FUNCTIONS 2,697,602
Dec 2008 ALL FUNCTIONS 2,768,886 ( increase of 71,284 employees in 8 years )
Mar 2010 ALL FUNCTIONS 3,007,938 ( increase of 239,052 employees in 1 year and 3 months )
Mar 2011 ?????????
This all means more agencies, larger agencies, more expense, more debt and we are already at ($16,000,000,000,000 in debt).
You realize that 2010 was a Census year, right?
And, your figures accounted for that, right?
See, since you made no mention of that whatsoever, and all.
Just like a good little Dittohead.
JC, they are not my figures, they are the figures of census.gov, as I stated. Nothing like a lib to avoid facts. Lies are what you believe in, so continue drinking in the puke that comes from MSNBC talking heads and democrat leaders like Nancy Pelosi and Debbie Wasserman Schultz. There are two people that never tell the truth, about anything. me, I will keep posting facts here. So prepare yourself.
JV, just to make you happy I went back and found that only 65,667 of those new employees were permanent employees. But still, that is only in one year 3 months. Bush did increase the permanent employment by 106,471 in 8 years. Lets see ( avg 13300 per year), Obama (avg 52,533 per year). Bush had to gear up to fight Al Qaeda and to secure the nation from repeat attacks, also had to rescue New York and all the airline industry from financial ruin. Obama had to shove a huge new entitlement (healthcare) down our throats, and add lots of new employees to run it plus more IRS agents to make sure you toe the line. Remember we haven't counted 2011 yet.
Here's a longer view. http://www.opm.gov/feddata/HistoricalTables/TotalGovernmentSince1962.asp. It comes from the Office of Personnel Management and shows that we had fewer Federal employees in 2010 than we did during Ronald Reagan's presidency. It also shows 2,776,000 civilian employees of the Executive Branch in 2010. I cannot pull up the webpage you posted, Steve. Maybe you could show that as a link?
Try looking at the Federal Personnel Office figures. They go back to 1962, IIRC.
Then, see if you can think of any reason why a country that is constantly growing in population might need to have more government employees as time goes on.
Oh, and whether or not increases in federal personnel have been due to Executive Branch hiring on its own or in response to mandates from the other two branches.
You know, a little research beyond what you are instructed to do by the AM radio.
the link is census.gov//govs/apes/ with www in front. I have tried to place proper links in here before and they are eliminated by this page for some reason. So, I leave off the www.
JC from LA your post "
Then, see if you can think of any reason why a country that is constantly growing in population might need to have more government employees as time goes on.
Oh, and whether or not increases in federal personnel have been due to Executive Branch hiring on its own or in response to mandates from the other two branches.
You know, a little research beyond what you are instructed to do by the AM radio."
It is typical of a liberal from LA to have such a smart mouth . Did your parents ever teach you any manners. Try having a conversation with a person and not be a jerk sometime. In regard to you population comment. I think the population was growing as well in the Bush presidency years, but somehow the need to grow the government was not that great.
Or, don't think beyond what the AM radio tells you to, Steve. Your choice.
Oh, and, Steve, look a little closer at your browser: It's I A, not LA. And, in point of fact, I have been a registered Republican since 1974.
Steve, I hit reply on your post to respond to JC, the growth of government employees from 01/2009 through now, after the Census workers were laid off was 234,000. This is growth in government and cannot not be written off as temporary.
From an article on another site:
According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the U.S. gross domestic product reached $15.17 trillion at the end of the third quarter 2011. That number is higher today, though a formal report on fourth quarter 2011 growth still has yet to be released. But with the national debt currently at $15.23 trillion and set to go up with the president's latest debt ceiling increase, the 100 percent GDP-to-debt threshold has been reached.
What does 100 percent debt-to-GDP spell? Not quite Greece, though, it's not far off from what sank the European nation."The Greek economy is broken. The U.S. economy is not broken," said former Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Holtz-Eakin, head of American Action Network. "But if we were so foolish to do things as we are now," the U.S. economy will break, Holtz-Eakin warned, noting that the debt is equal to the median income of Americans 300 million times over. "Every American (would have) to give up a year of income to pay it off," he said of the debt.
In his 2008 run for office, then-Sen. Barack Obama said stopping the deficit spending is the first step to recovery. "The first thing you do when you're in a hole is what? ... You stop digging. So the first thing that we're going to have to do is to stop adding to our deficit," he said.Republicans readily point to that statement as they blame the massive increase in debt on Obama's economic stimulus plan and health care reform measures -- $5 trillion during this administration as the Treasury Department's own figures show.
When will this president do something to pay down this debt?
Steve--This president has proposed solutions to the debt--restore a fair tax system. That's the way we paid down the debt the last time our debt reached 100 percent of GDP. Yes, we've been there before, right after World War II, but then we had a sense of shared sacrifice and those with more, paid more instead of looking for ways to pay less. You are aware, of course, that despite Republican carping, the non-partisan CBO states that the Affordable Health Care Act will reducde the deficit. See http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2012/04/10/affordable_care_act_reduces_the_deficit_277371.html
And, yet, every time anyone proposes increasing taxes of any kind, Grover Norquist snaps his fingers and every Republican kisses his ass.
Just the idea that people in Rmoney's situation might have to pay 30% instead of 15 or less got that finger snap just recently.
Of course, at today's interest rates on our debt, slipping back into another recession from prematurely curtailing the economic stimulus of Federal spending is a much greater threat than the debt.
As we are watching, LIVE!, in Europe right now.
It would be good if democrats would be a little bit more frugal with taxpayer money. Obama and the dems went crazy wild spending, then come back and say the reason the debt is so big is the evil rich don't pay enough in taxes. BS. All you liberal supporters of Obama's nutty policies don't want your taxes raised, no, no ,no, no. You want other peoples taxes raised.
Steve, just how much of the Dittohead horse@!$%# are they paying you to peddle?
Anyone who has been paying any attention at all knows perfectly well that it has been the REPUBLICAN borrow-and-spend policies of the past three decades that have brought us to where we are today, primarily those of Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II. It is in the historical record of this country in black and white, simple arithmetic.
Combined with REPUBLICANS trashing Federal regulation of the economy to the greatest extent they could, we now find ourselves in the position of having to spend on the Federal level in order to ward off total economic collapse.
Yet, it is REPUBLICANS who have held the United States government hostage to their wishes for prematurely whacking Federal spending, and it is REPUBLICANS who now propose to re-neg on the deal they made just last summer!
Just how much of this @!$%# do you and Rush think the American people are going to buy?
JC, you can blame $120 billion of the annual deficit on Bush's wars. You can blame $287 billion in interest on pre-Obama debt. That leaves about $800 billion of the deficit as owned by Obama.
Steve, that is a very a good point. When we reach about 130% debt to GDP ratio (probably around 2015) we will lose our credit rating and the house of cards will come down.
Why is Obama trying to bribe college students? Polls show he leads among young voters. He must be afraid young voters aren't energized this election, so a bribe is needed. Except for kids already brainwashed, this underhanded strategy won't help.
poncero-you are wrong, again. He believes that these rates need to stay low. He actually paid back student loans and knows how hard it is.
Romney just received $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ from his family and is clueless about student loans.
Impeach this fraud.
He is playing on your affections as if he deserves to sit in the Oval Office today when he ignored our wishes to end the combat in Afghanistan and bring our soldiers home.
Mackie...get a f'n clue will ya? The time-table has been set.
There are many reasons not to vote for Mitt Romney and the Republicans in 2012
1. The War on Women-see laws in Virginia, Wisconsin, Arizona, South Dakota, Mississippi and other Red states.
2. Anti worker/union laws-see Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin (failed gov. Scott Walker should be recalled) and other Red States.
3. A corporate raider who destroyed American jobs and American families is the "family values candidate"
4. The Supreme Court will have openings and it already is re-writing laws and being judicially active for right wing causes. Clarence and Ginny Thomas are also making money from his seat. Very, very , very wrong.
Keep drinking the cool-aid, or better yet, go get a job.
"war on women"....please....are you naive or stupid or both?
President Obama is taking the fight to the GOP and all they can do is whine and rant. Mitt is spinning faster than a toy top and is starting to alienate the very base he had to go so far to the right in attempt to win the nomination.
Just wait till he tries to deny, lie, flip-flop, walk back, all the far right/religous nonsense he had to spew during the primary...all those far right/religious zealots heads will implode!
What ever you do just DONT talk about the economy !! With GDP numbers and job growth well BELOW the very modest economist expectations last quarter, MSNBC and all of their bleeding heart liberal democRAT reporters don't want you to focus on the fact that Obama's policies are stymying the free markets. Debt and Dependency are no path to prosperity and JOBS. Think about THAT in November amid all the Deceit and Distractions of Obama and the Mob Mentality Media who treat us all like we are just a heard of sheep running towards the cliff.
A recent report by ABC has confirmed what many have claimed for years; infrastructure jobs in the USA are going directly to foreign countries, particularly China.
Regardless of the fact that US law usually requires American companies to be picked first for infrastructure jobs, multiple Chinese companies are currently working on U.S. bridges and roads throughout the country.
We pay for and sent Automobile manufacture jobs to Finland (Yes, We are paying them).
ETC.
They say Americans cannot do the jobs, but the TRUTH is not only can we do them, we do them better, plus we create better base materials to build them out of. But if we are working and not worried about OUR individual "economy", (our house payments, getting a paycheck, food, etc) then we have more time to pay attention to what is going on within our government.
This has been, and still is, deliberate to get us under one world government. Don't think so? Well then, why:
Over Obama's years in office, he and his administration has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations over the US Constitution, the United States of America, why?
Why did President Obama sent a letter to Speaker of the House in which he boldly asserting the “Authority” of international powers over and above the US Constitution?
Then why did Obama, Panetta, and Dempsey openly declared that they do NOT represent the American people; They are representatives for a global dictatorship that has usurped the sovereignty of the United States?
Or why did The Pentagon - Gen. Martin Dempsey, President Obama, along with US. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta basically declare a Coup D’etat (takeover by a foreign entity, person, or nation) on our Constitutional Republic form of government by giving the United Nations "Supreme Authority" over the US?
Why has Obama outsourced jobs to foreign nations that Americans can do here in America?
Why did Hilary Clinton refuse assistance to American citizens wh lost their homes to natural disaster, yet the folloing day send that money to rebuild homes in Pakistan lost to floods?
Nice to see that they are "representing" the USA and NOT foreign nations.
Foreign aid going to 150 foreign nations yearly, none to the USA, and it is OUR money.
Corporate welfare going to mega corporations NOT based here in the USA yearly.
The list is pretty long, so etc.