Obama ‘Abruptly’ Walks Out of Debt Talks

[Samson01]

Let me summarize it for you iIn a nutshell. Those who claim to support shared sacrifice either disappeared or feigned boredom when asked if they wanted to join the sacrifice side of the equation.

Ok, I got that part! Thanx

 

[kimmielittle]

Please discuss this a bit.

blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/07/white-house-threatens-to-veto-cut-cap-and-balance.html?nwltr=politics_featureMore

 

[beckers]

Let me summarize it for you iIn a nutshell. Those who claim to support shared sacrifice either disappeared or feigned boredom when asked if they wanted to join the sacrifice side of the equation.

I think the bigger point is that some people keep talking about these grand ideas yet will not talk about the specifics to get them.

Case in point: People keep saying the rich need to pay more but yet no one will declare what is truly rich, who is the middle class is and what is considered a fair tax.You can’t have a discussion if you can’t talk specifics.

 

[estesbob]

http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/default/files/nfs/uploaded/u12/photoshop_071811_A.jpg

 

[stinkcat_14]

I think the bigger point is that some people keep talking about these grand ideas yet will not talk about the specifics to get them.

I think the same thing can be said of the more conservative types on this board. Everyone say’s cut spending, but then they leave out Social Security and Medicare, they leave out defense spending, and nothing much can be done about interest on the debt, at this point it is virtually impossible to balance the budget.

 

[stinkcat_14]

The way I see this debt problem is: It was the “Feel Good” positions that created the mess in the first place.

“The Bush did it” …I don’t buy.

Congress had the Democratic seats for the most of that era and most of Mr Obama’s.

Actually, the Republicans controlled the Congress and the White House from 2002 -2006, did we get any balanced budgets then? Who pushed through medicare part D? The republicans certainly do not have any moral high ground when it comes to government spending.

 

[estesbob]

I think the same thing can be said of the more conservative types on this board. Everyone say’s cut spending, but then they leave out Social Security and Medicare, they leave out defense spending, and nothing much can be done about interest on the debt, at this point it is virtually impossible to balance the budget.

Paul Ryans budget cuts all that

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Actually, the Republicans controlled the Congress and the White House from 2002 -2006, did we get any balanced budgets then? Who pushed through medicare part D? The republicans certainly do not have any moral high ground when it comes to government spending.

Both parties are two sides of the same coin. They manufacture political issues so they can “appear” to be fighting against the “bad guys”, but in the end, all we get are more taxes, more regulations, more government regardless of who is in charge.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Both parties are two sides of the same coin. They manufacture political issues so they can “appear” to be fighting against the “bad guys”, but in the end, all we get are more taxes, more regulations, more government regardless of who is in charge.

Ronald Reagan and George Bush say hi.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Both parties are two sides of the same coin. They manufacture political issues so they can “appear” to be fighting against the “bad guys”, but in the end, all we get are more taxes, more regulations, more government regardless of who is in charge.

I wouldn’t say the same coin.

I wouldn’t give a plug nickel for a Democrat. Might give a quarter, depending on the Republican. Bit more for Ron Paul probably.

 

[kimmielittle]

Actually, the Republicans controlled the Congress and the White House from 2002 -2006, did we get any balanced budgets then? Who pushed through medicare part D? The republicans certainly do not have any moral high ground when it comes to government spending.

Who cares who has high ground back then?
We can sit and finger point all day long for sins in economic policy
…but you know what…that doesn’t stop the fear that me and many of my friends have about our futures.

We will be the ones without jobs… unless of course we get government jobs that seem to be secured against the problems of normal jobs.

Why should government employees have protections over anyone else?

We see it as a run away government…striving to secure itself…at the cost of free markets.

Government jobs do not promote anything but their self…they do not grow economies…they grow dependence on status quo.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I think the same thing can be said of the more conservative types on this board. Everyone say’s cut spending, but then they leave out Social Security and Medicare, they leave out defense spending, and nothing much can be done about interest on the debt, at this point it is virtually impossible to balance the budget.

Actually Monte RCMS has repeatedly talked about the Indiana Plan for health care and the Galveston Plan for Social Security.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I wouldn’t say the same coin.

I wouldn’t give a plug nickel for a Democrat. Might give a quarter, depending on the Republican. Bit more for Ron Paul probably.

Ron Paul is that crazy old unelectable white guy from Texas, right. Real fringe nutcase, wants to LOWER the debt ceiling, cut out vast swathes of the government, put us back on some type of sound money, audit the Fed. Real looney.

 

[kimmielittle]

Actually Monte RCMS has repeatedly talked about the Indiana Plan for health care and the Galveston Plan for Social Security.

 

[kimmielittle]

I think the same thing can be said of the more conservative types on this board. Everyone say’s cut spending, but then they leave out Social Security and Medicare, they leave out defense spending, and nothing much can be done about interest on the debt, at this point it is virtually impossible to balance the budget.

Since Moral high ground was brought up…

IMO it is a wicked thing for ANY politician to keep threatening the ones on these programs, to kick them to the curb – If he doesn’t get his way.

Personally, I expect better from Administration…AND I think this tactic will bite him on his butt.

 

[mary_bobo]

I think the bigger point is that some people keep talking about these grand ideas yet will not talk about the specifics to get them.

Case in point: People keep saying the rich need to pay more but yet no one will declare what is truly rich, who is the middle class is and what is considered a fair tax.You can’t have a discussion if you can’t talk specifics.

We have not had the first specific out of the president. He will not say what is rich, just the usual cliche’s about big this and that and now private jets. And he has not said one thing that he will cut. And yet polls show that people blame the GOP for the stalemate. Go figure.

 

[Alan55]

Actually, the Republicans controlled the Congress and the White House from 2002 -2006, did we get any balanced budgets then? Who pushed through medicare part D? The republicans certainly do not have any moral high ground when it comes to government spending.

Not only did the Republicans not give us balanced budgets, but they incurred enormous deficits:

Bush came into office with a $230 billion surplus. Due to a $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001, a $1.5 trillion tax cut in 2003, and a massive defense buildup through the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Bush quickly blew through that surplus. After the financial crisis at the end of Bush’s second term and the ensuing bailouts, Bush’s budget deficit ballooned to over $1 trillion. Budget deficits swelled under Bush because his supply-side tax policies slashed revenues while failing to deliver strong economic performance.

While purporting to be deficit hawks, the Republican-led Congresses from 2001 to 2006 rubber-stamped the Bush agenda that created the current fiscal crisis. Now they want to portray Obama as the creator of the recession and deny him the opportunity to govern by slashing spending, despite the warnings of most economists that cutting government spending will likely reduce the growth of the economy, not stimulate it.

 

[sub_rosa]

Not only did the Republicans not give us balanced budgets, but they incurred enormous deficits:

Bush came into office with a $230 billion surplus. Due to a $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001, a $1.5 trillion tax cut in 2003, and a massive defense buildup through the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Bush quickly blew through that surplus. After the financial crisis at the end of Bush’s second term and the ensuing bailouts, Bush’s budget deficit ballooned to over $1 trillion. Budget deficits swelled under Bush because his supply-side tax policies slashed revenues while failing to deliver strong economic performance.

While purporting to be deficit hawks, the Republican-led Congresses from 2001 to 2006 rubber-stamped the Bush agenda that created the current fiscal crisis. Now they want to portray Obama as the creator of the recession and deny him the opportunity to govern by slashing spending, despite the warnings of most economists that cutting government spending will likely reduce the growth of the economy, not stimulate it.

Thank you. A voice of reality!!

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Not only did the Republicans not give us balanced budgets, but they incurred enormous deficits:

Bush came into office with a $230 billion surplus. Due to a $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001, a $1.5 trillion tax cut in 2003, and a massive defense buildup through the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Bush quickly blew through that surplus. After the financial crisis at the end of Bush’s second term and the ensuing bailouts, Bush’s budget deficit ballooned to over $1 trillion. Budget deficits swelled under Bush because his supply-side tax policies slashed revenues while failing to deliver strong economic performance.

While purporting to be deficit hawks, the Republican-led Congresses from 2001 to 2006 rubber-stamped the Bush agenda that created the current fiscal crisis. Now they want to portray Obama as the creator of the recession and deny him the opportunity to govern by slashing spending, despite the warnings of most economists that cutting government spending will likely reduce the growth of the economy, not stimulate it.

Both parties have dropped the ball.

 

[Arkadin]

Not only did the Republicans not give us balanced budgets, but they incurred enormous deficits:

Bush came into office with a $230 billion surplus. Due to a $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001, a $1.5 trillion tax cut in 2003, and a massive defense buildup through the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Bush quickly blew through that surplus. After the financial crisis at the end of Bush’s second term and the ensuing bailouts, Bush’s budget deficit ballooned to over $1 trillion. Budget deficits swelled under Bush because his supply-side tax policies slashed revenues while failing to deliver strong economic performance.

While purporting to be deficit hawks, the Republican-led Congresses from 2001 to 2006 rubber-stamped the Bush agenda that created the current fiscal crisis. Now they want to portray Obama as the creator of the recession and deny him the opportunity to govern by slashing spending, despite the warnings of most economists that cutting government spending will likely reduce the growth of the economy, not stimulate it.