What a Lousy Deal [Archive] - Debate Policy

red states rule

07-31-2011, 10:34 PM

If I understand this deal, it is like the following:

You max out your credit card limit of $14,200

You get the bank to raise the limit another $2,200

And you promise to cut your spending by about $20 next month, with future cuts down the road

President Obama announced Sunday night that leaders of both parties in both chambers have reached an agreement on a debt-reduction deal that will "lift the cloud of uncertainty that hangs over our economy" and prevent the nation from potentially defaulting on the nation's financial obligations.

According to the president, the deal means an immediate cut of $1 trillion in government spending over a 10-year period accompanied by a $900 billion increase in the debt ceiling. That will be followed by the creation of a committee to come up with additional cuts worth at least $1.5 trillion to be voted on by the end of the year. The debt ceiling will be raised by $1.5 trillion if the committee recommendations are approved.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/31/obama-announces-debt-reduction-deal-approved-by-senate-house-leaders/#ixzz1TkES48Vm

ConHog

07-31-2011, 10:41 PM

If I understand this deal, it is like the following:

You max out your credit card limit of $14,200

You get the bank to raise the limit another $2,200

And you promise to cut your spending by about $20 next month, with future cuts down the road

More like you max out your credit card and you call the credit card company and tell them to go ahead and double your limit , your grandkids can worry about paying it later. Except that in real life the credit card company could and would tell you to go fuck yourself.

red states rule

07-31-2011, 10:43 PM

More like you max out your credit card and you call the credit card company and tell them to go ahead and double your limit , your grandkids can worry about paying it later. Except that in real life the credit card company could and would tell you to go fuck yourself.

True, but where are the spending cuts needed to show they are serious about paying down the debt?

This is why the credit rating will be reduced. No plan to pay down the debt

ConHog

07-31-2011, 10:46 PM

True, but where are the spending cuts needed to show they are serious about paying down the debt?

This is why the credit rating will be reduced. No plan to pay down the debt

You didn't REALLY think ANY of those jackasses were seriously suggest spending cuts did you?

Simple solution would be to put some housewives in charge of the budget. You know, people who actually have made a budget and stuck with it.

red states rule

07-31-2011, 10:49 PM

You didn't REALLY think ANY of those jackasses were seriously suggest spending cuts did you?

Simple solution would be to put some housewives in charge of the budget. You know, people who actually have made a budget and stuck with it.

Yes, for awahile I thought they would stand their ground

Lets see how many Tea Party freshman vote "NO"

I suspect the powers that be will try to ram it thru like the Dems did Obamacare and try to prevent us from knowing what is in the bill until after it passes

Also, how I want to see how many libs will vote "NO"? The damn thing has not passed yet and I am looking forward to see the final vote in the House

Perhaps the Tea Party will have to offer up more primary challanges in the fall to spinless R's.

ConHog

07-31-2011, 10:58 PM

Yes, for awahile I thought they would stand their ground

Lets see how many Tea Party freshman vote "NO"

I suspect the powers that be will try to ram it thru like the Dems did Obamacare and try to prevent us from knowing what is in the bill until after it passes

Also, how I want to see how many libs will vote "NO"? The damn thing has not passed yet and I am looking forward to see the final vote in the House

Perhaps the Tea Party will have to offer up more primary challanges in the fall to spinless R's.

My friend, we're screwed. No one with any scruples or standards is EVER going to gain any real power.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 05:07 AM

My friend, we're screwed. No one with any scruples or standards is EVER going to gain any real power.

We will see, the vote is set for noon

What the hell happened to the balanced budget requirement? They also have another useless committee to come up with cuts. This makes how many, and Obama ignored his OWN committee recomendations

We are still adding to the debt at a massive rate, the economy is damn near in resceeion with the lousy GDP growth, the unemployment rate does not look like it is going to improve anytime soon, and it looks like the R's caved when they had Obama on the ropes

fj1200

08-01-2011, 06:02 AM

Meh, it was inevitable. It's all about out-year spending and entitlement reform anyway. At least this way we can argue about it in 6 months.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 06:05 AM

Meh, it was inevitable. It's all about out-year spending and entitlement reform anyway. At least this way we can argue about it in 6 months.

If that is the case, if incumbents thought 2010 was bad, just wait until 2012

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 06:37 AM

It seems to me that the Congress got the plan done and that's a win for now. Of that win, the conservatives seem to have won more than could have been hoped for, when they have 1/3 control and the people on their side, regarding the issues.

However, reality is also recognizing that the people do not trust the Republicans. The media has done an excellent job of creating distrust of the 'tea parties' as a name.

The Conservatives got some cuts, basically protected defense from massive cuts, and have included votes on BBA in both houses. Will the votes on BBA lead to passage? Not until conservatives are in at least a 2/3 position. The 'triggers' for a two tiered plan are also included. There are no new taxes. All of these things were supposedly going to be 'deal breakers' or cause Obama to veto. Well, they are in there from what I've read.

Recognizing a win, even one that is not all of what you wished for, is part of making good choices in 2012.

I agree that the US needs some real rollbacks and real cuts in entitlements. Spending increases need to be stopped. First though, some brakes needed to be applied and it seems the train is slowing. More important, the people saw the Republicans put several plans out there, tried to get a BBA through, kept talking. They also saw Obama throw hissy fit after hissy fit. They once again heard about a 'plan' that never materialized. They saw the Congressional leadership tell Obama to shut up, sit down, and stay out of the negotiations.

I've seen lots of analogies to 'family budgets' here and good points are in those. Congress has failed to provide a budget for over 2 years. That's unacceptable, both by law and common sense.

*Families often go without budgets which results in no or much less savings than they could have had. Spending tends to be 'crises' driven or splurges when there's some extra and no crises. The past 4 years though have made many families aware that they have little or no cushion for real hard times. There's some evidence that many have tried to dig out of some debt and have put hard breaks on spending. Truth is though, that the American people thanks to the housing bubble burst, credit cards, and other borrowing are still in worse shape than the US government. Add in that salaries have been flat, costs are going up, second jobs are hard to come by, and for many job loss is a constant worry, stress is on the rise.

One thing they may be able to help control is how much more of their dollars will go to government. Government on all levels. While many do not pay federal income tax; none avoid state and federal taxes-unless homeless. Sales taxes are unavoidable, gas and utility taxes too. Property taxes for most home owners are higher than federal income tax. Indeed people have become aware of government effects them, question is how to convince them to Vote for 'less' and not 'more.'

As I said at the beginning, it seems to me that the conservatives did a better job, not great, but better than the liberals in getting their reasoning out in this debt limit debate. They didn't blink and cave, they got their agenda written into the package, to the degree possible, while making Obama back down time and again, basically whining to the people to call their representatives and give him back his toys! That's one of the reasons his approval ratings are falling fast and also alienating much of the Congressional loyalties he had from the Democrats.

* http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Americans-Are-More-Indebted-usnews-1268061439.html?x=0

PostmodernProphet

08-01-2011, 06:41 AM

time to start arguing about the 2012 budget......

red states rule

08-01-2011, 06:42 AM

Kat, from what I have heard the so called "triggers" would clip 50% of the cuts needed from DOD

While I am sure there is some fat in the DOD that could cut, 50% seems rather bad considering DOD takes about 20% of the overall budget. HHS has the biggest share of the budget and so far they are giving up nothing

Of course this is better the what the Dems and Obama would have done. We would had had more tax increases and even more spending

But this is still a lousy deal and the debt will continue to go up and we will edge closer to the economic implosion that is ahead of us

Also, it seems those people Obama, the Dems, and liberal media tag "extreme" are the ones who pay their bills on time, avoid ading debt to their credit cards, and live on their income

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 06:44 AM

time to start arguing about the 2012 budget......

Indeed, if the Democrats were smart, they'd get ahead of that discussion now, tying it to the trigger at the end of the year. Obama would be in a much better place when the State of the Union comes along, if he 'owns' a plan that keeps costs in check and working towards reduction in debt. I don't know that they are capable though of doing so.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 06:45 AM

Indeed, if the Democrats were smart, they'd get ahead of that discussion now, tying it to the trigger at the end of the year. Obama would be in a much better place when the State of the Union comes along, if he 'owns' a plan that keeps costs in check and working towards reduction in debt. I don't know that they are capable though of doing so.

Why should they address the budget when they have not bothered with it in the last 2 years?

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 06:56 AM

Why should they address the budget when they have not bothered with it in the last 2 years?

Only if they want the chance to win in 2012. As I tried to explain above, the American people are noticing the sausage making and they are not happy with the 2/3 of governing right now. Heck, they don't like the 1/3 either, but at least they are articulating the problems if not able to solve them right now. (Just like most families today-discussions are underway, small steps are being taken, but the adults know that much more cutting needs to be done and much more quickly.)

Could Obama still win in 2012? Possible, especially if 'conservatives' say 'no' to incumbents that couldn't overcome being only 1/3 of the stool. If they vote in a candidate that scares the voters more than Obama, if the Congressional leaders allow this limited win to lead them to hubris in their actions and speeches next year.

The people were not voting for socialism in 2008 and they were not voting to end government in 2010. They won't be doing either in 2012.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 07:05 AM

Only if they want the chance to win in 2012. As I tried to explain above, the American people are noticing the sausage making and they are not happy with the 2/3 of governing right now. Heck, they don't like the 1/3 either, but at least they are articulating the problems if not able to solve them right now. (Just like most families today-discussions are underway, small steps are being taken, but the adults know that much more cutting needs to be done and much more quickly.)

Could Obama still win in 2012? Possible, especially if 'conservatives' say 'no' to incumbents that couldn't overcome being only 1/3 of the stool. If they vote in a candidate that scares the voters more than Obama, if the Congressional leaders allow this limited win to lead them to hubris in their actions and speeches next year.

The people were not voting for socialism in 2008 and they were not voting to end government in 2010. They won't be doing either in 2012.

and if they address the budget Kat they will screw themselves becuase they have to defend more deficits and more spending. That is why they might press for yet another "continuing resloution" which is what we have lived under for the last two years.

The folks are PO'd Kat but they see the message they sent in 2010 is being ignored by Obama and the Dems and some Republicans

I found it laughable when the liberal media was shocked, surprised, and somewhat outraged the freshmen Tea Party members were actually standing on their principals and doing what they promised to get elected

They do not care about getting re-elected. they don't care about earmarks to buy their votes. They don't care about help in fundraising

The powers that be in the Republican party could learn alot from these freshmen

It is sad to see the R's cave when they had Obama on the ropes, and the momentum on their side. So what if they have 1/3 of the stool? They won BIG in 2010 and they are backing down becuase the heat from the liberal media is getting to them?

Gunny

08-01-2011, 07:06 AM

time to start arguing about the 2012 budget......

Really.

A pet peeve of mine since the 70s. Congress doesn't do crap except run for office. In the meantime, the ONE thing they have to do each year is approve a stinking budget. And year after year it comes down to the wire like now.

What is it we pay them for?

red states rule

08-01-2011, 07:09 AM

Really.

A pet peeve of mine since the 70s. Congress doesn't do crap except run for office. In the meantime, the ONE thing they have to do each year is approve a stinking budget. And year after year it comes down to the wire like now.

What is it we pay them for?

There is still no budget Gunny. Dems have not presented on in the last 2 years even when they ran the House and Senate. They were to busy trying to hide from the voters in the 2010 midterms

Obama sent on over recently and it was dismissed in the Senate by a vote of like 95-0 due to the insane spending and growing deficits

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 07:10 AM

and if they address the budget Kat they will screw themselves becuase they have to defend more deficits and more spending. That is why they might press for yet another "continuing resloution" which is what we have lived under for the last two years.

The folks are PO'd Kat but they see the message they sent in 2010 is being ignored by Obama and the Dems and some Republicans

I found it laughable when the liberal media was shocked, surprised, and somewhat outraged the freshmen Tea Party members were actually standing on their principals and doing what they promised to get elected

They do not care about getting re-elected. they don't care about earmarks to buy their votes. They don't care about help in fundraising

The powers that be in the Republican party could learn alot from these freshmen

It is sad to see the R's cave when they had Obama on the ropes, and the momentum on their side. So what if they have 1/3 of the stool? They won BIG in 2010 and they are backing down becuase the heat from the liberal media is getting to them?

It was the 'new' conservatives that kept the Republicans from just going along with raising the ceiling, I agree with that. If though they refuse to go along with this deal, whether this week or soon, there would be real repercussions, with Obama deciding what is paid and what is not. There comes a point to say, 'cease fire' and wait for reinforcements. Right now, it looks like it could be a huge number and a new leader in 2012, it's the conservatives to lose.

fj1200

08-01-2011, 07:11 AM

time to start arguing about the 2012 budget......

The budget argument is pointless IMO because the real spending is wrapped up in entitlements which the US is bound to by separate legislation other than any yearly budget.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 07:16 AM

It was the 'new' conservatives that kept the Republicans from just going along with raising the ceiling, I agree with that. If though they refuse to go along with this deal, whether this week or soon, there would be real repercussions, with Obama deciding what is paid and what is not. There comes a point to say, 'cease fire' and wait for reinforcements. Right now, it looks like it could be a huge number and a new leader in 2012, it's the conservatives to lose.

Should the deal fail and Obama decides not to send out SS checks or pay the US military he will be the one held accountable Kat

While some of the voters are idiots like Virgil and never blame Obama for anything, but I have confidence that the majorioty will see that tactic for what it is. Obama using the old and the troops as pawns in political power struggle

It would sink him like Watergate did Nixon

The vote is set for noon and lets wait to see what happens

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 08:24 AM

Should the deal fail and Obama decides not to send out SS checks or pay the US military he will be the one held accountable Kat

While some of the voters are idiots like Virgil and never blame Obama for anything, but I have confidence that the majority will see that tactic for what it is. Obama using the old and the troops as pawns in political power struggle

It would sink him like Watergate did Nixon

The vote is set for noon and lets wait to see what happens

It wouldn't be SSI or military that didn't get paid, those are mandated. However, he would choose to cut deeply in those areas that most effect the public at large and that would be noticed and felt by the largest numbers possible, blaming the conservative extremists.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 08:29 AM

It wouldn't be SSI or military that didn't get paid, those are mandated. However, he would choose to cut deeply in those areas that most effect the public at large and that would be noticed and felt by the largest numbers possible, blaming the conservative extremists.

Well Kat Obama has been blaming conservative extremists, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and Pres bush for everything and it has come back to bite him on the ass

Why would this be any different?

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 08:36 AM

Well Kat Obama has been blaming conservative extremists, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and Pres bush for everything and it has come back to bite him on the ass

Why would this be any different?

Because the people want to get something in place and see what's up. If the Congress doesn't get a budget done, there will be hell to pay, imo.

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 08:53 AM

I've seen a few articles that reflect the 'take no prisoners' approach this morning; my thinking is more in line with this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903341404576480653492061150.html?m od=rss_opinion_main

<small>JULY 31, 2011, 11:13 P.M. ET</small>

A Tea Party TriumphThe debt deal is a rare bipartisan victory for the forces of smaller government.
If a good political compromise is one that has something for everyone to hate, then last night's bipartisan debt-ceiling deal is a triumph. The bargain is nonetheless better than what seemed achievable in recent days, especially given the revolt of some GOP conservatives that gave the White House and Democrats more political leverage.
***The big picture is that the deal is a victory for the cause of smaller government, arguably the biggest since welfare reform in 1996. Most bipartisan budget deals trade tax increases that are immediate for spending cuts that turn out to be fictional. This one includes no immediate tax increases, despite President Obama's demand as recently as last Monday. The immediate spending cuts are real, if smaller than we'd prefer, and the longer-term cuts could be real if Republicans hold Congress and continue to enforce the deal's spending caps.

The framework (we haven't seen all the details) calls for an initial step of some $900 billion in domestic discretionary cuts over 10 years from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) baseline puffed up by recent spending. If the cuts hold, this would go some way to erasing the fiscal damage from the Obama-Nancy Pelosi stimulus. This is no small achievement considering that Republicans control neither the Senate nor the White House, and it underscores how much the GOP victory in November has reshaped the U.S. fiscal debate.

No wonder liberals are howling. They have come to believe in the upward spending ratchet, under which all spending increases are permanent. Not any more.

The second phase of the deal is less clear cut, though it also could turn out to shrink Leviathan. Party leaders in both houses of Congress will each appoint three Members to a special committee that will recommend another round of deficit reduction of between $1.2 trillion and $1.5 trillion, also over 10 years. Their mandate is broad, and we're told very little is off the table, but at least seven of the 12 Members would have to agree on a package to force an up-or-down vote in Congress.

If the committee can't agree on enough deficit reduction, then automatic spending cuts would ensue to make up the difference to reach the $1.2 trillion minimum deficit-reduction target. One key point is that the committee's failure to agree would not automatically "trigger" (in Beltway parlance) revenue increases, as the White House was insisting on as recently as this weekend. That would have guaranteed that Democrats would never agree to enough cuts, and Republicans were right to resist.

Instead the automatic cuts would be divided equally between defense and nondefense. So, for example, if the committee agrees to deficit reduction of only $600 billion, then another $300 billion would be cut automatically from defense and domestic accounts (excluding Medicare beneficiaries) to reach at least $1.2 trillion.

This trigger is intended to be an incentive for committee Members of both parties to agree on more cuts, but defense cuts of this magnitude would do far more harm to national security than they would to domestic accounts that have been fattened by stimulus. This is the worst part of the deal, and Mr. Obama's political goal will be to press Republicans to choose between tax increases and destructive defense cuts. The GOP will have to fight back and make the choice between domestic cuts and harm to our troops fighting multiple wars...

red states rule

08-01-2011, 09:03 AM

Kat, with all due respect and you know I love you - but "compromise" and "bi-partisanship" got us in the mess we are in

We still have to see what is in the bill. For some reason the leaders are keeping it under wraps, and this reminds me of Obamacare.

The only good thing is, the Tea Party has taken the debt and made it as big an issue as the economy is. I hope they don't cave

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 09:09 AM

Same here regarding love and respect. Bottom line is, one needs to know when to take what can be got and stop creating a hole for your side.

As for the Tea Party, anyone who thinks that this deal would have been possible without the articulation of smaller government, would be blind. Indeed, that is know to the political elite of both ilks and scares them to no end.

Kat, with all due respect and you know I love you - but "compromise" and "bi-partisanship" got us in the mess we are in

We still have to see what is in the bill. For some reason the leaders are keeping it under wraps, and this reminds me of Obamacare.

The only good thing is, the Tea Party has taken the debt and made it as big an issue as the economy is. I hope they don't cave

red states rule

08-01-2011, 09:12 AM

Same here regarding love and respect. Bottom line is, one needs to know when to take what can be got and stop creating a hole for your side.

As for the Tea Party, anyone who thinks that this deal would have been possible without the articulation of smaller government, would be blind. Indeed, that is know to the political elite of both ilks and scares them to no end.

Kat the hole is gettting deeper as we speak. We are currently borrowing $180 million bucks per hour just to cover this years deficit

Also, if I understand this deal, the US will still add another $13 trillion to the debt over the next ten years

If this is a s good as we could get - we need to fire alot of people in 2012 (starting with Obama, the current Republican leadership)

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 09:27 AM

You misread my meaning. Yes, that particular hole, not the making of real conservatives, but certainly GOP hacks that have been the same at the Democrat hacks/elitists is going to grow for quite a long time, regardless of results in 2012. The debt didn't grow in one fell swoop and will not melt away in one either.

However, for real change to happen, those who think of smaller government, free enterprise, need to get elected by the average voter. They are winning on the issues and philosophy in the polls; let them sound extremist though as the media is already portraying them quite successfully, unwilling to work out plans that encompass more than a slice of the citizenry's concerns and they will not win in November.

Now if you believe that saying, 'Regardless of the repercussions, we will not compromise on getting the government moving; we're willing to let the President cut 40-60% of departments of his choice,' ;the American people will flock to the polls to vote for those people that would be delusional. They want responsibility taken, the debt reduced, government shrunk, and business able to grow. They want stability.

The new House members kept the GOP elites feet to the fire, moreso than the President's. They recognize they've no influence with him other than 'No,' which works some of the time. However, they do have leverage over the GOP, which was certainly evidenced during the crisis. If the numbers grown in the House, become a majority of the Senate, and get a conservative President elected next year, now that would be a game changer of magnitude.

November of 2010 changed the opposition's power, but is limited. That so many fail to see that and are clueless when to stop?

Kat the hole is gettting deeper as we speak. We are currently borrowing $180 million bucks per hour just to cover this years deficit

Also, if I understand this deal, the US will still add another $13 trillion to the debt over the next ten years

If this is a s good as we could get - we need to fire alot of people in 2012 (starting with Obama, the current Republican leadership)

red states rule

08-01-2011, 09:31 AM

Allow me to be clear Kat, Pres Bush was a huge failure in his second term when it came to NOT stopping the Republican Congress from running up the credit card. That was only one reason why he got his ass kicked in 2006.

Yet the Dems outdid the R's when it came to spending

I just saw Rep Joe Walsh from IL (I do not know if he is your rep) but he is voting "NO" and is trying to muster more no's because this bill does not deal with the problem of running up the debt

But als, he thinks it will pass and we will continue to dig the hole deeper

The Dow was up triple digits at the opening but now it is back in the red - along with the nations finances. Seems they are not impressed either

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 09:38 AM

Let me be clear. In order to do what you, Walsh, and any others arguing for 'no compromise' want done, they must have the numbers. It will take at least another election in their favor to see happen.

If instead they choose a 'no compromise/objectionist only' position, Obama and the Democrats will win.

We can agree that practical methods of drawing down the debt and financial responsible behavior on the part of the government is to make deep cuts and not raise taxes. Unfortunately the votes aren't there to put that in place, yet. In order to reach that point, seats and Houses need to be won.

Allow me to be clear Kat, Pres Bush was a huge failure in his second term when it came to NOT stopping the Republican Congress from running up the credit card. That was only one reason why he got his ass kicked in 2006.

Yet the Dems outdid the R's when it came to spending

I just saw Rep Joe Walsh from IL (I do not know if he is your rep) but he is voting "NO" and is trying to muster more no's because this bill does not deal with the problem of running up the debt

But als, he thinks it will pass and we will continue to dig the hole deeper

The Dow was up triple digits at the opening but now it is back in the red - along with the nations finances. Seems they are not impressed either

red states rule

08-01-2011, 09:42 AM

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 09:45 AM

The you let the clock run out and force the government to do what has to be done. If you are going to quit smoking you do it cold turkey. It is best way to go to get the job done

Sorry, but all that would result in is paralysis and giving the liberals an overwhelming victory in the next election. You of course would be true to your principles, but lose the argument.

Until the numbers are there, not going to win a war, so win the battle, which was done to a degree that seemed unimaginable not so long ago.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 09:47 AM

Sorry, but all that would result in is paralysis and giving the liberals an overwhelming victory in the next election. You of course would be true to your principles, but lose the argument.

Until the numbers are there, not going to win a war, so win the battle, which was done to a degree that seemed unimaginable not so long ago.

Kat I do not think that would happen. However, I would rather lose by standing by my principals than caving fro the sake of being re-elected.

I don't buy the fact the voters want more of the same. they sent a message in 2010 and so far only a few are paying attention and doing what they were told

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 10:04 AM

Kat I do not think that would happen. However, I would rather lose by standing by my principals than caving fro the sake of being re-elected.

I don't buy the fact the voters want more of the same. they sent a message in 2010 and so far only a few are paying attention and doing what they were told

Undoubtedly we've both put our pov's out here, so I'm not going to continue to repeat myself over a couple different threads. In general we agree with what we'd like to see as governing principles. However, I'm a pro-federalism person, meaning I want separation of powers, between both branches and levels of government. I want stable government, not chaos that could lead to a new system, be it tyranny, anarchy, or socialism.

I'm a realist, as a minority party or position the most that can effectively happen if influence of legislation, in this case a huge feature of the plan. More than could be expected as a minority in the Senate and no power on executive.

The people have enough chaos in their lives right now and that they are paying attention to politics at some level is hopeful. Obama has appeared very badly to them, I want the conservatives to continue to be seen as trying to get control on the debt, not taking their eyes off the bottom lines, making adult decisions regarding cuts, in other words, how they've behaved up to this point.

People are worried, scared, and hopeless to a degree not seen in my lifetime:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/americans-economic-pessimism-grows-gloom-pervasive-polling-expert-140522214.html

Americans’ Economic Pessimism Grows, With Gloom ‘Pervasive,’ Polling Expert Says<cite class="byline vcard"></cite>By Stacy Curtin (http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/author/stacy-curtin/) | Daily Ticker (http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/) – <abbr title="2011-08-01T14:05:22Z">42 minutes ago

</abbr>

While Democrats and Republicans were arguing over how to prevent the U.S. from a default, families across the country have become increasingly concerned about the overall state of the economy, according to the American Enterprise Institute's (http://www.aei.org/docLib/PR-July-Aug-2011.pdf) latest compilation of recent polls taken in various regions.

Friday's worse than expected GDP numbers only reaffirm this notion. The U.S. economy grew less than expected in the second quarter at 1.3%, but the bigger shock came after Q1 GDP was revised down to 0.4% from 1.9%. These numbers suggest the country could be headed for another recession and Americans are definitely feeling the pain. (See: 2011 Is Proving to Be a Horrible Year For the Economy (http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/2011-proving-horrible-economy-152306276.html))

One of the most disconcerting findings in the AEI report is a CBS/New York Times poll from June. It showed that over the last year, more Americans have come to believe the current economic downturn is part of a long-term permanent decline and that the economy will never fully recover. In October 2010, 28% of respondents agreed with that statement, versus 39% last month.

"Americans are so pessimistic about the economy now ... . And the level of public pessimism is actually higher than the deep 1981-82 recession overall," due to grim personal outlooks on a number of issues like jobs, retirement and health care, says Karlyn Bowman (http://www.aei.org/scholar/7), a senior fellow at AEI who co-authored the report. "Their negative sentiments are affecting the way they feel about their family's future, and interestingly, the way they feel about their state governments.

Usually negative attitudes about the national government don't seep into attitudes about the state government, but this time it is really different. This negative, gloomy mood is pervasive.

Speaker of the House John Boehner echoed these concerns Thursday before one of the many failed House votes to raise the country's debt ceiling. "This is a challenging time for our country," he said. "Americans are worried about their jobs. They're worried about our economy. And they're worried about our debt."

Since the polls in the report were conducted before the debt-ceiling debate really began heating up over the last few weeks, one might conclude that if the same questions were asked today the responses would be even more pessimistic.
Here are other key findings from the AEI report:

...

I want the conservatives to be cognizant, no drama adults seeking answers, not just obstructionists.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 10:08 AM

I am a realist as well Kat. The numbers are being run and the "cuts" amount to cutting 10 days of spending per year

It also amounts to .07% of the outstanding debt

Looks like our credit rating will be reduced since there is not a serious attempt to cut the spending. Which woud be worse Kat? Having the government being forced to cut spending by not raising the debt ceilign or watching interest rates spike? (and paying more interest on the debt?)

This deal stinks and the Republican leadership caved when they should have stood their ground

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 10:47 AM

Practical and what a 'win' is:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/07/31/satan-sandwiches-and-house-democrats/

Contentions Satan Sandwiches and House Democrats (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/07/31/satan-sandwiches-and-house-democrats/) John Podhoretz (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/author/john-podhoretz/) 07.31.2011 - 8:52 PM

A fantastic bit of rhetoric from an enraged leftist Democrat in the House, responding to the outlines of the budget deal: Emanuel Cleaver, a pastor from Missouri, described it as a “sugar-coated Satan sandwich.” And indeed it is. There are no good options for liberal/Left Democrats in the House. If they vote against the bill en masse, they will make Obama look as though he has betrayed his own core principles, and indeed, they may lead to the deal’s collapse if a few more Republicans than agreed to the Boehner bill yesterday decide to vote no. Should that happen, they will destroy the Obama presidency. But if they agree, they are eating that sandwich. Tactically and strategically, this is a political disaster for the Democrats. That won’t mean much to the Tea Partiers in the House, whose opposition to the bill is entirely conviction-driven. But to the extent that a politician’s heart beats within a Tea Partier’s breast, that politician should be able to see the practical benefits to him and his party here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-the-tea-party-hobbits-won-the-debt-fight/2011/07/31/gIQALMrCmI_story.html

How the Tea Party ‘hobbits’ won the debt fight By Marc A. Thiessen (http://www.washingtonpost.com/marc-a-thiessen/2011/02/24/ABwzFYN_page.html), Published: July 31 The Tea Party came under fire from all sides Friday after House conservatives nearly brought down Speaker John Boehner’s debt-limit bill. John McCain went to the Senate floor to mock Tea Partyers (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mccain-criticizes-some-tea-party-linked-lawmakers-on-debt-ceiling/2011/07/28/gIQANUFyfI_story.html) as “hobbits,” and Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen said Tea Party Republicans “are unfit for governing.”

What a difference a weekend makes. The reported debt-limit deal (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congressional-leaders-struggle-to-work-out-bipartisan-debt-deal/2011/07/30/gIQAqdfdjI_story.html?hpid=z1) appears to be a victory for the Tea Party. It includes around $1 trillion in spending cuts and creates a special committee of Congress to recommend cuts of $1.2 trillion more. If Congress does not approve those additional cuts by year’s end, automatic spending cuts go into effect. The package sets an important new precedent that debt-limit increases must be “paid for” with commensurate cuts in spending. According to Sen. Rob Portman, a former White House budget director, if we cut a dollar of spending for every dollar we raise the debt limit, we will balance the budget in 10 years — something that even the Paul Ryan budget would not achieve. And all this is accomplished with no tax increases.

The devil is in the details, of course. There are troubling reports that the agreement may disproportionately cut defense spending. Conservatives should ensure that the final deal, which is still being hammered out at the time of this writing, does not gut defense. They should scour the legislation to make certain it lives up to its billing. If it does, the Tea Party has won.

To appreciate the scope of the Tea Party’s victory, consider: When Barack Obama came into office, he went on a bender of government spending. He signed an unprecedented $821 billion stimulus spending bill (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/02/obama-stimulus-bill-has-new-price-tag----another-one/1). His first budget increased federal spending to 27 percent of gross domestic product — the highest level as a share of the economy since World War II. He then proceeded to ram through Congress Obamacare, a massive government intervention that adds $1.4 trillion in new spending (http://www.tnr.com/sites/default/files/CBO%20on%20HR2.pdf) over the next decade alone. Democrats openly talked about passing a “second stimulus.” And five months ago Obama submitted a budget to Congress that tripled the national debt, raising it by $10 trillion over the next 10 years.

Today, no one is talking about tripling the national debt or passing a “second stimulus.” Congress is about to cut spending by about $2 trillion and put us on a trajectory to balance the budget within a decade. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid complained Saturday evening that Congress has raised the debt limit 74 times since 1962 without conditions. He is right. This is happening for the first time in history, thanks to the Tea Party...

red states rule

08-01-2011, 11:53 AM

If this is a win, I wonder what the loss would look like?

Where are the cuts, the balanced budget, and there are massive tax increases coming Kat. The Bush tax cuts are set to expire and the tax increases in Obamacare

Looks like Obama got his tax increase no matter what

So where is the "win"?

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 11:56 AM

The cuts are not where they should be, I've already agreed that the ratings are likely to go south. However, the answer is not to retaliate against those that at least began the process of shrinking. No, I'm not referring to the leadership, however am referring to the new reps from 2010, that shouldn't be punished for getting the process begun.
If this is a win, I wonder what the loss would look like?

Where are the cuts, the balanced budget, and there are massive tax increases coming Kat. The Bush tax cuts are set to expire and the tax increases in Obamacare

Looks like Obama got his tax increase no matter what

So where is the "win"?

red states rule

08-01-2011, 12:03 PM

The cuts are not where they should be, I've already agreed that the ratings are likely to go south. However, the answer is not to retaliate against those that at least began the process of shrinking. No, I'm not referring to the leadership, however am referring to the new reps from 2010, that shouldn't be punished for getting the process begun.

I do thank the Tea Party for at least stopping the pwers that be from only adding 7 trillion to the debt and not 10 trillion

Damn Kat we "saved" 3 trillion bucks in one day!

The Dow is off by about 100 points and a recession on the way. What more can we ask for?

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 12:06 PM

I do thank the Tea Party for at least stopping the pwers that be from only adding 7 trillion to the debt and not 10 trillion

Damn Kat we "saved" 3 trillion bucks in one day!

The Dow is off by about 100 points and a recession on the way. What more can we ask for?

So, how would you have balanced the budget in one year even if conservatives had both houses and the presidency?

How would you cut 10 trillion over 10 years, with this Congress and President?

Even if both the above were attainable given the circumstances, exactly how would your leadership prevent the markets from doing what they are today?

red states rule

08-01-2011, 12:11 PM

So, how would you have balanced the budget in one year even if conservatives had both houses and the presidency?

How would you cut 10 trillion over 10 years, with this Congress and President?

Even if both the above were attainable given the circumstances, exactly how would your leadership prevent the markets from doing what they are today?

Kat the bottom line is this bill does not come close to doing what they know has too be done to avoid a credit downgrade. $4 trillion was needed per Moody's and S&P

The R's could have called Obama's bluff and wait 48 hours then make their demands.

Instead we have this and it looks like tax increases are coming and that is all we need given the recession that is right around the corner

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 12:16 PM

Kat the bottom line is this bill does not come close to doing what they know has too be done to avoid a credit downgrade. $4 trillion was needed per Moody's and S&P

The R's could have called Obama's bluff and wait 48 hours then make their demands.

Instead we have this and it looks like tax increases are coming and that is all we need given the recession that is right around the corner

I agree that Ryan's plan was better. So was Coburn's. They couldn't get them passed. For that matter, Simpson led committee plan to Obama was better, alas. So that's the dilemma they faced.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 12:20 PM

I agree that Ryan's plan was better. So was Coburn's. They couldn't get them passed. For that matter, Simpson led committee plan to Obama was better, alas. So that's the dilemma they faced.

and Obma will be coming after the middle class Kat. This "committee" will target the Bush tax cuts

So you and me will see a 33% increase in our tax rates

Thank you Mr Boehner and McConnell. With R's like these who the hell needs Dems?

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 12:26 PM

The solution lies in next election. The right needs to support those that kept the elites feet to fire, not say they 'have to go' because they held out and then got it done.

Whining about it now is pointless, it's the best that could be reached at this point, with this political make up. Use and build upon the beginning.

If you fear what the liberals 'might do' in future, make sure the future is dominated by those more aligned with your thinking. They have to be elected and that won't happen if they are forced into extremists positions.

and Obma will be coming after the middle class Kat. This "committee" will target the Bush tax cuts

So you and me will see a 33% increase in our tax rates

Thank you Mr Boehner and McConnell. With R's like these who the hell needs Dems?

red states rule

08-01-2011, 12:32 PM

The solution lies in next election. The right needs to support those that kept the elites feet to fire, not say they 'have to go' because they held out and then got it done.

Whining about it now is pointless, it's the best that could be reached at this point, with this political make up. Use and build upon the beginning.

If you fear what the liberals 'might do' in future, make sure the future is dominated by those more aligned with your thinking. They have to be elected and that won't happen if they are forced into extremists positions.

Well Kat that is why they are so hellbent to rush this thru. Time to get ready for the next election. Screw you, me, and the workering class folks who will get hit with higher taxes, and higher interest rates

This is why the libeal media is spinning this as a "win" for the Tea Party. So when the shit hits the fan we will think Tea Party and not Obama, Boehner and McConnell

Another fact, if this bill passes the first and second biggest increase in the debt ceiling wil occur in back to back years and under Obama

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 12:35 PM

If Obama wins, the dems retake house and keep Senate, you will be proven right.
Well Kat that is why they are so hellbent to rush this thru. Time to get ready for the next election. Screw you, me, and the workering class folks who will get hit with higher taxes, and higher interest rates

This is why the libeal media is spinning this as a "win" for the Tea Party. So when the shit hits the fan we will think Tea Party and not Obama, Boehner and McConnell

Another fact, if this bill passes the first and second biggest increase in the debt ceiling wil occur in back to back years and under Obama

red states rule

08-01-2011, 01:02 PM

Boy, did the Republican leadership stick it to Obama and stop the spending spree in DC

WASHINGTON (AP) — The first phase of a deal to raise the government's borrowing limit would pose little threat to the economy in the short term because almost none of the spending cuts would occur before 2014.

Discretionary spending, which excludes Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, would be cut by $21 billion in 2012 and $42 billion in 2013, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. That's a small fraction of the nation's $14 trillion economy.
"The immediate economic impact of the ... deal should be relatively minor," Brian Gardner, an analyst at Keefe, Bruyette and Woods, said in a research note. "As is usually the case, most of the cuts" have been put off for several years.

The first phase of cuts would reduce spending by $917 billion over 10 years. A congressional committee would decide on a second phase of cuts totaling $1.5 trillion.

The Obama administration had said the government would have run out of cash to pay its bills without an increase in the $14.3 trillion borrowing limit by Tuesday.

http://news.yahoo.com/small-spending-cuts-little-economic-impact-144415767.html

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 01:45 PM

red states rule

08-01-2011, 01:52 PM

It could still fall apart. I'm hearing the House may try a vote tonight. So, if the new folks in House vote it down, what do you think the next move should be if that happens? It doesn't actually look like the US will be out of money for another week or so, should they just copy the Dems plan on the budget and ignore the ceiling? Let cuts take effect for simple reason they can't pay for them?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60390.html

First the vote was set for noon. then it was pushed back to 2PM. Now Joe Biden is on TV saying nothing.

If it falls apart, Obama nd the Dems will have to give in to some REAL cuts

Biden is on TV talking about "investments" so it is clear he does not get it

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 01:59 PM

First the vote was set for noon. then it was pushed back to 2PM. Now Joe Biden is on TV saying nothing.

If it falls apart, Obama nd the Dems will have to give in to some REAL cuts

Biden is on TV talking about "investments" so it is clear he does not get it

So you predict if the tea partiers, for want of better term, hold fast as you want, that the Dems will totally cave. We'll have a Balanced budget amendment, 7-10 trillion in cuts, no tax increases? It's just a matter of time?

red states rule

08-01-2011, 02:03 PM

So you predict if the tea partiers, for want of better term, hold fast as you want, that the Dems will totally cave. We'll have a Balanced budget amendment, 7-10 trillion in cuts, no tax increases? It's just a matter of time?

Considering Pelosi has said to other Dems she is not doing anything to muster Dem votes. Many Dems are saying if Obama wants the votes he has to round them up. So Obama is not getting much help from his own side

I do not see what else the Dems can do Kat. After all, according the Obama and the liberal media, the world will end as we know it if "something" is not done

However, they just passed the "procedural vote" so it looks like it will happen later tonight.

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 02:24 PM

Considering Pelosi has said to other Dems she is not doing anything to muster Dem votes. Many Dems are saying if Obama wants the votes he has to round them up. So Obama is not getting much help from his own side

I do not see what else the Dems can do Kat. After all, according the Obama and the liberal media, the world will end as we know it if "something" is not done

However, they just passed the "procedural vote" so it looks like it will happen later tonight.

Well perhaps we'll know more tonight, tomorrow. I'm off to work shortly, this has been a very interesting day. I do hope you are right and somehow magic happens and the tea partiers win all they want. That would be a very good deal indeed.

red states rule

08-01-2011, 02:27 PM

Well perhaps we'll know more tonight, tomorrow. I'm off to work shortly, this has been a very interesting day. I do hope you are right and somehow magic happens and the tea partiers win all they want. That would be a very good deal indeed.

One thing I did find out a few minutes ago Kat is that in the CBO report it is assumed the Bush tax cuts do expire - so there is the tax increase Obama was looking for

Of course the dollar amount enough for him, the Dems, and the liberal media. That should do wonders for the economy given at the same time the tax increases included in Obamacare take effect

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 02:33 PM

The expiration was built into the baseline, I read that early this morning. Yes, they would be added to 'revenue creation', but also to salary reductions, resulting in further economic pullback. We'll see how this goes, they are rushing everything through, but those on the edges of both parties could throw in some mighty large wrenches.
One thing I did find out a few minutes ago Kat is that in the CBO report it is assumed the Bush tax cuts do expire - so there is the tax increase Obama was looking for

Of course the dollar amount enough for him, the Dems, and the liberal media. That should do wonders for the economy given at the same time the tax increases included in Obamacare take effect

red states rule

08-01-2011, 02:35 PM

The expiration was built into the baseline, I read that early this morning. Yes, they would be added to 'revenue creation', but also to salary reductions, resulting in further economic pullback. We'll see how this goes, they are rushing everything through, but those on the edges of both parties could throw in some mighty large wrenches.

The news just came over the radio and "reports" are more Republicans in the House are finding out about the tax increase and are starting to balk

You are right Kat, there could be several wrenches tossed into the machine :clap:

fj1200

08-01-2011, 10:01 PM

The news just came over the radio and "reports" are more Republicans in the House are finding out about the tax increase and are starting to balk

Tax increase? How else do you expect the CBO to score it? They have to assume what is the law on the books right now.

Kathianne

08-01-2011, 10:54 PM

red states rule

08-02-2011, 02:57 AM

Tax increase? How else do you expect the CBO to score it? They have to assume what is the law on the books right now.

So are you saying it is not a tax increase if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire? Also, don't forget about the tax increases in Obamacare that will kick in at the same time

That double whammy should do wonder for the Obama economy

red states rule

08-02-2011, 03:06 AM

It passed the House, so likely to sail through the Senate and Obama will sign. It's not a good plan, but unlike RSR, I don't think more time would likely have helped and may have hurt the country more. Soooo, it's important to know who's running for your representatives next year and those that recognize what's wrong with the plan, just like Obamacare, and want to fix it, vote for them. If the conservatives get their super majority in House and majority in Senate, even if Obama wins they will make a difference.

It's the conservatives to lose.

I am trying to figure out if the current debt is the problem how will more debt solve the problem?

You are right Kat, now it is time for the Tea Party to start recruiting candidates for the upcoming election. Jim DeMint has already chimed in on possibly backing those candidates

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/01/source-demint-might-back-primary-challenges-against-republicans-who-supported-deal/

red states rule

08-02-2011, 04:34 AM

Another example of the "objective" journalism from the liberal media. Nora O'Donnell is upset "we" did not get anything out of this deal

She must have forgot about the above mentioned tax increases as well

<IFRAME height=349 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LtxR_qri17k" frameBorder=0 width=425 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

fj1200

08-02-2011, 07:28 AM

So are you saying it is not a tax increase if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire? Also, don't forget about the tax increases in Obamacare that will kick in at the same time

That double whammy should do wonder for the Obama economy

Did you read what I said?

I am trying to figure out if the current debt is the problem how will more debt solve the problem?

You are right Kat, now it is time for the Tea Party to start recruiting candidates for the upcoming election. Jim DeMint has already chimed in on possibly backing those candidates

Much of the problem is that revenues have fallen so far below the historical average that the deficits look much larger than they normally would be. Republicans do not have a birth right to fiscal responsibility, they need to earn it back. But yes, much of the problem is too much spending.

Kathianne

08-02-2011, 09:21 AM

As things currently stand the Republicans did their best, mostly because they were forced to from the newly elected congressmen. It's imperative to keep watching for, supporting, and getting out the vote for those that agree with smaller, more efficient government. Then when they are elected, watching that they remain what they promised. With that said, they must also evaluate when to hold and when to fold, I think the new folks did quite well:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/08/dems-eat-satan-sandwich-gop-looks-next-course

Dems eat Satan sandwich, GOP looks to next course
By: Byron York (http://washingtonexaminer.com/people/byron-york) | Chief Political Correspondent Follow Him @ByronYork (http://twitter.com/ByronYork) | 08/01/11 8:05 PM

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo.speaking on Capitol Hill in Washington on Wednesday, July 20, 2011. "This is a Satan sandwich, there's no question about it," said Cleaver on Monday.

There's nothing like a vote on federal spending cuts to make one of the most liberal lawmakers on Capitol Hill sound like a Tea Partier.

"We're going to read this document," Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, said Monday, referring to the debt ceiling agreement reached Sunday night. "We're going to understand it before we vote for it."

...

Meeting with his own members, Boehner tried hard to overcome concerns that the supercommission created in the bill would give a big edge to Democrats who want to slash the defense budget. "I told them this is the best defense number we're going to get," Boehner said, which many members found both truthful and depressing.

Making a deal after a long struggle left Republican leaders in a strange mood: relieved, happy to have prevailed, but eager to move on as quickly as possible. "Boehner created the framework of dollar-for-dollar cuts and increases in the debt ceiling," said one GOP strategist involved in the fight. "That has been a huge change in the debate. At a tactical level, everything may not have been achieved, but at a strategic level this is a huge change in direction."

Republicans know they're on the right side of the spending issue. But they're also acutely aware that federal spending, while critically important, is not the public's No. 1 concern.

"People still want to focus on jobs and the economy," says the GOP strategist. "So the challenge for Republicans is to make sure that connection is made. How do you make sure that you're constantly putting this debate in the context of the larger issue?"

That's the hard truth Republican leaders remember each time the spending fight threatens to overwhelm everything else in Washington. The deal they hammered out in talks with President Obama and the Democratic leadership -- $2.5 trillion in total cuts and $2.4 trillion in debt limit extension -- is important, but not the most important issue to most Americans. "The number that's really going to matter is the one that comes out at the end of this week," says the Republican strategist, referring to the July unemployment figures that will be released on Friday.
As the debt fight was at its height, Washington Post pollsters asked people for a one-word description of the battle. Three-quarters of those surveyed, the paper reported, answered with negative words; the top answers were "ridiculous," "disgusting" and "stupid."

Republican leaders firmly believe this fight was worth it. But they know they have to move on to still more important battles.

Kathianne

08-02-2011, 09:33 AM

A view from across the pond and it may be a tell. Perhaps it's not just the tea parties, but the fall of socialism by state?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100099357/the-real-story-of-the-us-debt-deal-is-not-the-triumph-of-the-tea-party-but-the-death-of-the-socialist-left/

The real story of the US debt deal is not the triumph of the Tea Party but the death of the Socialist Left
By Toby Young (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/tobyyoung/) US politics (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/category/us-politics/) Last updated: August 2nd, 2011

For British conservatives, the US debt deal is a thing of beauty. Under the terms of the deal, the federal government will cut spending by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years and there won’t be any corresponding increase in taxation. That is to say, the American Government has agreed to tackle its deficit by spending cuts alone. The British Government, by contrast, is planning to cut its deficit through a combination of spending cuts and tax rises – and it’s cutting it by a smaller amount.

Even if the Tory Party had won an overall majority at the last election, it’s hard to imagine it adopting such a bold fiscal policy. Yet the American Government is on the verge of adopting this plan in spite of the fact that the Democrats control the Senate and the White House. A year ago, American conservatives were showering David Cameron with praise for adopting such a radical approach to reducing Britain’s deficit and contrasting him unfavourably with their own spendthrift President. Now, our Prime Minister looks like a weak-kneed liberal in contrast to the hard-headed Obama. Whatever happened to the stimulus?

Most pundits are crediting this U-turn to the political muscle of the Tea Party and it’s true that President Obama would never have agreed to this deal if the Tea Party Republicans in the House of Representatives hadn’t engaged in the brinkmanship of the past few weeks. But to focus on the Tea Party is to ignore the tectonic political shift that’s taken place, not just in America but across Europe. The majority of citizens in nearly all the world’s most developed countries simply aren’t prepared to tolerate the degree of borrowing required to sustain generous welfare programmes any longer.

As I pointed out in a blog post last May (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100087179/its-not-just-the-labour-party-%E2%80%93-the-left-is-in-meltdown-all-over-europe/), tax-and-spend Left-wing parties have fared poorly in election after election over the past two years:

...

red states rule

08-02-2011, 03:47 PM

Did you read what I said?

Much of the problem is that revenues have fallen so far below the historical average that the deficits look much larger than they normally would be. Republicans do not have a birth right to fiscal responsibility, they need to earn it back. But yes, much of the problem is too much spending.

Yes I read what you sai. You posted "tax increases?" as if you were saying there was no tax increase. Of course there at least 2 coming down the pike

As far as revenues falling you can thank Obama's polices for driving the economy further south, looking at the private sector as an enemy, and Obamacare which is and stopping alot of hiring due to the increased cost of adding an employee

And Wall Street loved that debt deal today. Not only did the Dow tank today, but just wait until the jobs report bill comes out Firday and if the nations credit rating is downgraded. There could be another 2 blows to Dow

Obama siad he would transform America and damn, he is doing it

red states rule

08-03-2011, 04:20 AM

and of course the 265 drop in the Dow yestereday was not the fault of the sinking economy - it was the fault of the Tea Party for blocking a "good" debt deal. Forget about the bad economic data that came out

<IFRAME height=349 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/M68vYq2RfNI" frameBorder=0 width=560 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

fj1200

08-03-2011, 09:43 AM

Yes I read what you sai. You posted "tax increases?" as if you were saying there was no tax increase. Of course there at least 2 coming down the pike

As far as revenues falling you can thank Obama's polices for driving the economy further south, looking at the private sector as an enemy, and Obamacare which is and stopping alot of hiring due to the increased cost of adding an employee

And Wall Street loved that debt deal today. Not only did the Dow tank today, but just wait until the jobs report bill comes out Firday and if the nations credit rating is downgraded. There could be another 2 blows to Dow

Obama siad he would transform America and damn, he is doing it

Just enough to roll into your talking point screed. The debt deal doesn't add tax increases, other legislation has tax increases. And yes, BO and his policies do suck and don't help but he is still POTUS and gets to veto and there is no way that deal would have gotten passed that included both extending the Bush cuts AND rolling back BOCare.

red states rule

08-03-2011, 04:56 PM

Just enough to roll into your talking point screed. The debt deal doesn't add tax increases, other legislation has tax increases. And yes, BO and his policies do suck and don't help but he is still POTUS and gets to veto and there is no way that deal would have gotten passed that included both extending the Bush cuts AND rolling back BOCare.

No talking points just facts. The deal has zero cuts, it adds to the debt, Obama got his wish and no debt increase until after the 2012 election. Not one of the R's have come out and reminded the voters Obama has already got his tax increase in Obamacare and a second one if the Bush tax cuts expire. They should be telling the voters this is the third tax increase Obama is demanding

R's caved because they did not want to get blamed by the liberal media if the government had to shut down. they were scared of Obama even thiugh he is tanking in the polls, and his polices continue to wreck the economy

R's are pretty good at winning elections but so far they stink at governing