President Obama's cynical blame game

[pjohns]

Doug Schoen and Pat Caddell--both Democrats--recently wrote in the left-of-center Politico that President Obama is using the "sequester" (which he was for, before he was against it) merely to score cheap political points. Not that this is any news to those of us who have been paying attention.

Here is a bit of what they wrote:


“Federal prosecutors will have to close cases and let criminals go,” President Obama said last week, flanked by uniformed firefighters and law-enforcement officers. “Tens of thousands of parents will have to scramble to find child care for their kids.” He went on: “Border Patrol agents will see their hours reduced. FBI agents will be furloughed.”

Scared yet? In his Saturday radio address, the president made clear who was at fault for this impending Armageddon: “Are Republicans in Congress really willing to let these cuts fall on our kids’ schools and mental health care just to protect tax loopholes for corporate jet owners? Are they really willing to slash military health care and the Border Patrol just because they refuse to eliminate tax breaks for big oil companies?”

The president is obviously going all-out — but not to avoid the $85 billion in spending cuts, known as the sequester, set to kick in on Friday. Obama doesn’t want to make a deal with Republicans. His fear-mongering is part of a concerted plan that extends far beyond the sequester crisis: to obliterate the Republican Party as a viable force in American political life.

His self-righteous rhetoric obscures a bitter truth: Obama is not trying to unite the country. He’s waging a class-based battle for political gain. His goal is to win back the House for Democrats in 2014, giving him a united Congress for his last two years in office and allowing him to pursue the most expansive government in American history. [Bold added]

Here is the link: Opinion: President Obama?s real agenda - Douglas E. Schoen and Patrick H. Caddell - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/president-obamas-real-agenda-88288.html?ml=po_r)

[Cigar]

http://s24.postimage.org/qpdw352z9/Senate_Prop2_Avoid_Sequester.jpg

[nic34]

I'm fine with letting the 1% enablers have their little victory. Boehner will keep his job. But when folks begin to get their furloughs and layoff notices, and that will happen just a little bit at a time, it will just insure even more soc....er democratic wins in the coming elections.

[Cigar]

Watching House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on "Meet the Press" yesterday, it was hard not to wonder about the Republican leader's frame of mind. Given the distance between reality and his rhetoric, one question hung over the interview: does Boehner actually believe his own talking points?

For example, the Speaker insisted, "There's no plan from Senate Democrats or the White House to replace the sequester." Host David Gregory explained that the claim is "just not true," leading Boehner to respond:

"Well, David that's just nonsense. If he had a plan, why wouldn't Senate Democrats go ahead and pass it?"

Now, I suppose it's possible that the Speaker of the House doesn't know what a Senate filibuster is, but Boehner has been in Congress for two decades, and I find it implausible that he could be this ignorant. The facts are not in dispute: Democrats unveiled a compromise measure that required concessions from both sides; the plan enjoyed majority support in the Senate; and Republicans filibustered the proposal. That's not opinion; that's just what happened.

"If he had a plan, why wouldn't Senate Democrats go ahead and pass it?" One of two things are true: either the House Speaker has forgotten how a bill becomes a law in 2013 or he's using deliberately deceptive rhetoric in the hopes that Americans won't know the difference. It's one or the other.

What's worse, the "dunce vs. deceiver" debate intensified as the interview progressed.


http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/03/04/17179278-either-boehner-is-confused-or-he-thinks-youre-confused

also ... David Gregory To Boehner: ‘Mr. Speaker, That’s Just Not True’

NBC's David Gregory and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) butted heads during an interview when the speaker insisted that President Obama did not have a plan to replace sequestration and Gregory disagreed. The interview was taped Friday afternoon after Boehner met with the president to discuss sequestration and aired on "Meet the Press" Sunday.

"Mr. Speaker, that's just not true," Gregory said. "They've made it very clear, as the president just did, that he has a plan that he's put forward that involves entitlement cuts, that involves spending cuts. That you've made a choice, as have Republicans, to leave tax loopholes in place and you'd rather have those and live with all these arbitrary cuts."

Boehner called Gregory's objection "nonsense."

"Well David, that's just nonsense. If they had a plan, why wouldn't Senate Democrats go ahead and pass it," he said.


http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/david-gregory-to-boehner-mr-speaker-thats-just?ref=fpb

[nic34]

Next you will hear that it's Reid's fault for not revising Senate filibuster rules.

Because come on, 45 is more that 55 ..... didn't you know?

[killianr1]

The sequester was designed to address spending cuts. It was not designed as a revenue generator.
Obama and the Senate tried to use it to get additional tax revenues. This was just after the additional taxes implemented at the first of the year and the additional Obamacare taxes. The combination of those two new revenue resources were over 1.2 trillion dollars.
And now they can not come up with 85 billion over two years. The deficit problem will not be resolved until we learn how to control our spending.
Even with the sequester we will still spend more money this year than we did last.

[Cigar]

The sequester was designed to address spending cuts. It was not designed as a revenue generator.
Obama and the Senate tried to use it to get additional tax revenues. This was just after the additional taxes implemented at the first of the year and the additional Obamacare taxes. The combination of those two new revenue resources were over 1.2 trillion dollars.
And now they can not come up with 85 billion over two years. The deficit problem will not be resolved until we learn how to control our spending.
Even with the sequester we will still spend more money this year than we did last.

So you're totally and completely against closing loopholes used for Corporate Jets, Yachts and Oil Corporation? In your opinion, these are Revenue Generators?

But I'm sure you're against Disaster Relief to Americans.

[nic34]

The sequester was designed to address spending cuts. It was not designed as a revenue generator.


It was designed as a bluff to force negotiations....and compromise....

[Mainecoons]

The One Percent enablers? That's that Obama administration, fool. They are better at it than anyone before as you well know since the hard data on that has been posted recently here.

Do you think that repeatedly posting your BS will cause it to be eventually believed?

Here's something else for you to run away from/deny.

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/27/the_progressive_case_against_obama/


The data bears this out: Under Bush, economic inequality was bad, as 65 cents of every dollar of income growth went to the top 1 percent. Under Obama, however, that number is 93 cents out of every dollar (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/04/growth-of-income-inequality-is-worse-under-obama-than-bush.html). That’s right, under Barack Obama there is more economic inequality than under George W. Bush. And if you look at the chart above, most of this shift happened in 2009-2010, when Democrats controlled Congress. This was not, in other words, the doing of the mean Republican Congress. And it’s not strictly a result of the financial crisis; after all, corporate profits did crash, like housing values did, but they also recovered, while housing values have not.

[Cigar]

It was designed as a bluff to force negotiations....and compromise....


... to words the GOP excluded from their vocabulary on Inauguration Night 2009 before President Elect Obama made even one policy decision. So they can't say it's his politics ... because the thing politically he had been up to the that point was Black.

[ptif219]

It was designed as a bluff to force negotiations....and compromise....

By Obama. This is not the GOP's fault this is on Obama and the democrats

[Cigar]

By Obama. This is not the GOP's fault this is on Obama and the democrats

BOTH Parties had the opportunity to prevent it last Thursday ... guess the party who went home instead.

[nic34]

You're the fool 'coons to believe I blindly support the Obama administration. The same with the Salon piece that is critical of them as well.

Its no secret that I'm a social democrat, that unlike many of you on the right, have no problem voting for the lesser of evils that keeps you and your friends in the minority...

[Mainecoons]

Yes, you do blindly support them. I'm not the fool you are which is why all of us have noted your extreme partisanship as evidenced in the "one percenters snipe" I called you out on.

[Private Pickle]

http://s24.postimage.org/qpdw352z9/Senate_Prop2_Avoid_Sequester.jpg

Yeah cause it would have raised the deficit through the end of the budget year by tens of billions of dollars not to mention eliminate payments to some farmers, enact even more defense reductions and impose more tax increases... Of course you're all good with that if you get to say "what's what" with rich people's yachts...

Chub.

[Private Pickle]

You're the fool 'coons to believe I blindly support the Obama administration. The same with the Salon piece that is critical of them as well.

Its no secret that I'm a social democrat, that unlike many of you on the right, have no problem voting for the lesser of evils that keeps you and your friends in the minority...

Exactly. The ability to compromise one's own values in the face of a dissenting argument is a staple of Liberalism. Congrats, your parents must be proud.

[ptif219]

BOTH Parties had the opportunity to prevent it last Thursday ... guess the party who went home instead.

Obama refused to let go of tax increases

[Cigar]

Obama refused to let go of tax increases

So closing Loophole for Corporate Jets, Yachts and Oil Corporations are a Tax Increase?

... and this is a benefit to you personally how?

[Boris The Animal]

I'm fine with letting the 1% enablers have their little victory. Boehner will keep his job. But when folks begin to get their furloughs and layoff notices, and that will happen just a little bit at a time, it will just insure even more soc....er democratic wins in the coming elections.So you do advocate one party Communist rule. I thought you were a Bolshevik.

[Boris The Animal]

You're the fool 'coons to believe I blindly support the Obama administration. The same with the Salon piece that is critical of them as well.

Its no secret that I'm a Communist, that unlike many of you on the right, have no problem voting for the lesser of evils that keeps you and your friends in the minority...Corrected for truth as there is no difference.

[Mainecoons]

So, Nic, you're a communist, eh? And you wonder why I think you the fool. Clearly, you can't learn from history or learn from ideas that don't work, never have worked and never will work.

BTW, I find it interesting that you apparently think it is OK to invest in fat cats so long as the label is "Democrat."

Are you a communist or just one poorly educated and very confused young fool?

[nic34]

So, Nic, you're a communist, eh? And you wonder why I think you the fool. Clearly, you can't learn from history or learn from ideas that don't work, never have worked and never will work.

BTW, I find it interesting that you apparently think it is OK to invest in fat cats so long as the label is "Democrat."

Are you a communist or just one poorly educated and very confused young fool?

I suppose I'm whatever BS lie that boris wants to make up. I guess he can "correct" stuff all he wants because he's a good ___________ and not a communist.

As for ideas that never work, how long were we supposed to wait for the magic that the Bush tax cuts were to create? Was that before or after the crash of 2007-2008???

[lynn]

Table 469. Federal Budget--Receipts and Outlays: 1960 to 2011







[92.5 represents $92,500,000,000). For fiscal years ending in year shown; see text, Section 8. See also headnote, Table 471]


Fiscal year
In current dollars (billion dollars)











Receipts
Outlays
Surplus or deficit (-)










1960
92.5
92.2
0.3










1970
192.8
195.6
-2.8










1980
517.1
590.9
-73.8










1985
734.0
946.3
-212.3










1990
1,032.0
1,253.0
-221.0










1991
1,055.0
1,324.2
-269.2










1992
1,091.2
1,381.5
-290.3










1993
1,154.3
1,409.4
-255.1










1994
1,258.6
1,461.8
-203.2










1995
1,351.8
1,515.7
-164.0










1996
1,453.1
1,560.5
-107.4










1997
1,579.2
1,601.1
-21.9










1998
1,721.7
1,652.5
69.3










1999
1,827.5
1,701.8
125.6










2000
2,025.2
1,789.0
236.2










2001
1,991.1
1,862.8
128.2










2002
1,853.1
2,010.9
-157.8










2003
1,782.3
2,159.9
-377.6










2004
1,880.1
2,292.8
-412.7










2005
2,153.6
2,472.0
-318.3










2006
2,406.9
2,655.0
-248.2










2007
2,568.0
2,728.7
-160.7










2008
2,524.0
2,982.5
-458.6










2009
2,105.0
3,517.7
-1,412.7










2010
2,162.7
3,456.2
-1,293.5










2011 estimate
2,173.7
3,818.8
-1,645.1
























Anyone can see right here that Obama has a large spending problem.

[zelmo1234]

So you're totally and completely against closing loopholes used for Corporate Jets, Yachts and Oil Corporation? In your opinion, these are Revenue Generators?

But I'm sure you're against Disaster Relief to Americans.

How about we cut the subsidies to green energy that have no customers and have no profits and thus pay no taxes.

that is 92 billion so we are 7 billion to the good. Oil subsidies are only 4 billion in the form of decreasing depreasion times

[zelmo1234]

... to words the GOP excluded from their vocabulary on Inauguration Night 2009 before President Elect Obama made even one policy decision. So they can't say it's his politics ... because the thing politically he had been up to the that point was Black.

Use of race when loosing an argument 10 liberal brownie points, could have gone for a double word score with bible thumper or gun toting!!

[zelmo1234]

So closing Loophole for Corporate Jets, Yachts and Oil Corporations are a Tax Increase?

... and this is a benefit to you personally how?

Maybe he is one of the people that will keep their job because of those tax cuts?

[zelmo1234]

I suppose I'm whatever BS lie that boris wants to make up. I guess he can "correct" stuff all he wants because he's a good ___________ and not a communist.

As for ideas that never work, how long were we supposed to wait for the magic that the Bush tax cuts were to create? Was that before or after the crash of 2007-2008???

Nic what caused the crash of 2008?

here once again is the jobs and revenue numbers after the Bush tax cuts?

http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=2000_2010&view=1&expand&units=k&fy=fy11&chart=F0-total&bar=0&stack=1&size=l&title&state=US&color=c&local=s

One would have thought that the revenue would have plumeted after those tax cuts, but it increased dramatically

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

HOW!!!!!!!!! look at those unemployment numbers drop after those nasty tax cuts.

So now NIc are you at leas willing to admit that the GWB tax cuts did increase revenue and lower the unemployment rate? Or are we just going to ignore the facts!!!

[nic34]

Tell me zel, how long did all that last before it crashed? All the credit card spending, all the bank de-regulating..... free money for Irak..... great times.

Wasn't Bush prez up until Jan. 2009?

[Chris]

It was designed as a bluff to force negotiations....and compromise....

Yes, first raise taxes, then, by sequester, if nothing else, cut spending. That was what Obama proposed, that is what everyone compromised on in order to raise the debt ceiling.

[Chris]

Tell me zel, how long did all that last before it crashed? All the credit card spending, all the bank de-regulating..... free money for Irak..... great times.

Wasn't Bush prez up until Jan. 2009?

If Bush was wrong, as I agree he was, then Obama is wrong for the same damned policies.

[zelmo1234]

Tell me zel, how long did all that last before it crashed? All the credit card spending, all the bank de-regulating..... free money for Irak..... great times.

Wasn't Bush prez up until Jan. 2009?

What caused the crash, and what government polices were in place that forced such lending policies????

Yes he was President until Jan 2009 Obama has been president since,a nd been promising to raise taxes ever since! Why have the job and revenue numbers remained so low?

[pjohns]

I'm fine with letting the 1% enablers have their little victory. Boehner will keep his job. But when folks begin to get their furloughs and layoff notices, and that will happen just a little bit at a time, it will just insure even more soc....er democratic wins in the coming elections.

So, you--like President Obama--are viewing this through the lens of political strategy...

[pjohns]

It was designed as a bluff to force negotiations....and compromise....

And President Obama's idea of "negotiat[ing]" a "compromise" is to demand higher taxes (through increased marginal rates), immediately followed by more higher taxes (this time, through the closing of tax loopholes)...

[Chris]

At least nic didn't call it balanced.

http://i.snag.gy/8Cxpw.jpg

[ptif219]

So closing Loophole for Corporate Jets, Yachts and Oil Corporations are a Tax Increase?

... and this is a benefit to you personally how?

Where are the spending cuts for entitlements? Obama protected his special interest groups entitlement spending

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323478304578332543799317924.html