Obama: Renewing Transportation Bill Is ‘No Brainer’

Read the article again noz. The President wants a “clean extension”. The current House bill contains quite a bit of language eliminating environmental and safety regulations and reduces spending at the expense of an estimated 500,000 jobs. Though it does have a couple of good ideas in it (the main one being a six year extension as opposed to 2 years). Two years just doesn’t give long term projects enough stable funding to be initiated.

A no-brainer? Well, that certainly describes the Republican politicians in Congress today. They will shoot this down, mark my words. They WANT high unemployment, because they feel that is their best shot at unseating Obama. So they will whine about no jobs while simultaneously killing off jobs. Exactly like they did a year ago when the blocked – for the 3rd time last year – the reauthorization of the TANF program and immediately killed off 240,000 jobs. Sadly typical of the Party that has come to define the word ‘hypocrisy’…….

HE NEED A RIGHT TO WORK AMERICA. UNION JOBS ARE ONLY 20% OF THE WORKFORCE.
THEY HAVE BEEN GETTING TAX PAYERS FUNDS TO CREATE SO CALLED JOBS AND
BUY VOTES FOR OBAMA’S RE-ELECTION. ALL UNION DUES SHOULD BE TAXES LIKE
ANY OTHER BUSINESS. IT IS TIME FOR THE 80% NON-UNION WORK FORCE TO GET
THEIR SHARE OF TAX JOB MONEY.

Insanity is repeating failed policies hoping for a different result.

So these jobs Obama speaks of are only union jobs. Figures.

“The legislation, which has been renewed seven times over the last two years, provides funding for highway construction, bridge repair, mass transit systems and revenue in the form of the federal gas tax.”

Sounds like the debt ceiling. Passed multitudinous times previously with no crisis – introduce the tea party into the Republicans and the result – big crisis, lowered credit rating resulting in teetering markets and more economic instability.

Vote those JOB KILLING REPUBLICANS out of OFFICE

“Regardless of what he says, what approaches he presents, just disbelieve him . . . . sure. Sounds like you’re really thinking.” (Tomster)

Well, testy Tomster, let me rephrase slightly for you, and anyone else without any sense of rhetorically mild humor. I do still believe him when I believe he is telling the truth and making real sense, and not merely blowing vague hot air for self-serving political effect — and these times are very rare indeed. Nearly as rare as snow Jamaica, or mice chasing cats. I am thinking far more continually and far more clearly than any Obama drone or clone, most assuredly. :)

Posted by: BlueDog | September 3, 2011, 10:26 am 10:26 am

We saw the ‘clear’ thinking of the Republican right in the debt ceiling crisis. Posture politically to bring the issue to a crisis that isn’t resolved until the last minute and then watch the country’s credit rating fall because of the political instability. There’s short-sighted ideology for you.

ChicagoBob123, September 3, 2011, 10:21 AM:

“How much less can we borrow and where can we cut is a no brainier Mr. President.”
======================================================================
Bob, we’ve been doing some ‘big time’ “BORROWING and SPENDING” for about 35 years now. In fact, the VERY FIRST president to have the national debt balance increase “in the TRILLIONS” under just his presidency alone was Ronald Reagan, $1.7 trillion in 8 years. ….. before that, we had Carter with an increase in the debt balance equal to $280 billion in 4 years, and Nixon/Ford with an increase in the debt balance equal to $290 billion in 8 years.

So, I wonder if any of these Republican “Borrow and Spend” methods, i.e., “Reagan Tax Cuts” (without cuts in government spending) and “Bush Tax Cuts” (without cuts in government spending) have anything to do with the massive “trillion dollar by each president” debt increases that we’ve been seeing since Reagan and Bush?…. besides of course, the continued spending.

Republicans = the “Borrow and Spend” party
Democrats = the “Tax and Spend” party
Which plan charges interest on top of taxes?

So, I wonder if any of these Republican “Borrow and Spend” methods, i.e., “Reagan Tax Cuts” (without cuts in government spending) and “Bush Tax Cuts” (without cuts in government spending) have anything to do with the massive “trillion dollar by each president” debt increases that we’ve been seeing since Reagan and Bush?…. besides of course, the continued spending.

Republicans = the “Borrow and Spend” party
Democrats = the “Tax and Spend” party
Which plan charges interest on top of taxes?

Posted by: Georgie_Bushie | September 3, 2011, 10:37 am 10:37 am

Shhhh!

Obama is a one termer. Thats a no brainer.

Wait for it…Wait for it… This time Obama really has a plan, really and truly, not kidding this time, folks, and he’s going to tell us all about it in high bombastic fashion on Thursday, (you know, after his very essential vacation in the middle of a crisis.) But you’ll have to miss the NFL to watch this great spectacle and watch the somewhat tardy savior speak, yet again. What a bad joke Obama is, and I confess to being one of the dummies who voted for him last go around. But not again, no way.

Sorry Sea but there is absolutely no way at this point Obama could win reelection. He has nothing to run on other than throwing bombs at his opponents. Is that your hope and change?

How many years of the last 60 has the democrats controlled both houses of congress?

The President has perfected the art of the backhanded insult! Anyone who disagrees with me isn’t using their brain! If the President had taken psychology 101 he would have learned that such insults do not foster an enviroment of cooperation. They are most likely the result of an incomplete parenting experience!

Infrastructure bank; ie taxpayer slush funds for Obama to pass billions to his union buddies in “swing” states along with $10,000 signs (like he did w the stimulus) that say “Obama built this road for you” during an election year. “Bank” How about targeted directed projects spread proportionately among the population. It will never happen. Red states, even though they will have to foot the bill from the trillions Obama has already passed on to his buddies, got very little in return compared to how much money the send to Washington and will have to help pay down the debt. This crook showed us already what he does with the credit card when when let him borrow it.

you can pretend and vent the usual vapid and lame dem talking points as you please

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sounds oddly familiar….But you then substitute the usual vapid and lame right-wing talking points instead, with a little meaningless dig about honesty included. Discerning which points are really more honest will require some credible evidence to back them up, which the right-wing talking points are typically lacking.

Ah Skipster, how ya doin’? Are you following me around, or are you just one of the Obamaclone mouthpieces on every story dealing with Obama? I supect the latter, but I am oddly flattered if I have a sillier than silly, abc stalker. Anyway, you peck out a (thankfully) brief and totally general and vague post which seems to call for “some credible evidence” to back up any assertions made. and yet you provide none yourself. That’s like an…irony, I believe. :) You are as inept on this thread as you were on the other one. Call me pessimistic, but I believe it will continue that way.

If we don’t restore economic growth soon by further stimulus efforts the debt is going to balloon…..so if you really want to leave your decedents less debt stop holding up further efforts to increase consumer demand. (from Skip)

That barely makes any sense at all, but it does seem to represent the crazy and convoluted reasoning on the left. The debt is going to balloon further from more stimulus spending, which will NOT “restore economic growth”. The last expensive stimulus was near-total failure. We need to spend less, not more. This is exactly why Obama must be voted out: his only real answer is spend more and more and more.

Yes, trying to pass off mere opinions as fact or truth is right-wing standard procedure.

Hey prez, just tell Harry Reid to do his job for a change and place the House bill in committee. You’ll get to spend even more tax money than the Senate wants and look like a great leader for a change. It’s a no-brainer.

Dos anyone know if this bill, vital to the economy as well as US infrastructure, includes the usage of solar-powered trains, planes and automobiles? If so, I’ve got a great deal for you guys! If anyone is interested, come to my company’s office, it is right by the Brooklyn Bridge.

CATS, SEPTEMBER 3, 2011, 11:10 AM, SAID:

“How many years of the last 60 has the democrats controlled both houses of congress?”
==========================================================================
LMAO!……. and when did our nation’s national debt balance start climbing in the “MULTI–TRILLIONS” vs. billions under each presidential term? …. ANSWER: Only in the past 30 years, ever since Republicans started taking control of at least 2-out-of-3 of the White House, Senate and House:

Jan ’69 to Jan ’77, Nixon and Ford (with Democratic Senate and Democratic House)
National Debt climbs by $292 billion dollars during these 8 years, raising the debt balance from $363 billion (Jan ’69) to $655 billion (Jan ’77).

Jan ’77 to Jan ’81, Carter (with Democratic Senate and Democratic House)
National Debt climbs by $280 billion during these 4 years, raising the balance of the national debt from $655 billion (Jan ’77) to $935 billion (Jan ’81).

Jan ’81 to Jan ’87, so-called ‘fiscal conservative’ Republican Reagan with a so-called ‘fiscal conservative’ Republican Senate (and a Democratic House)
National Debt climbs by $1.3 Trillion in 6 years, climbing from $935 billion (Jan ’81) to $2.2 Trillion (Jan ’87) …… LOL! ….. and that was just Reagan’s first 6 years. By the time the next two years passed, IN TWO YEARS, Reagan and a Republican Senate increased that balance of the national debt by another $500 billion, raising the balance to $2.7 Trillion (Jan ’89).

Reagan (with a Republican Senate) becomes the first president to raise the national debt balance “in the trillions” during his presidency, a result of his “Reagan Tax Cuts” (without simultaneous cuts in spending) policies. Reagan kept big government, fooled his followers that he was a “smaller government/fiscal conservative” kind of guy, and BORROWED (big time) to keep the government he never reduced. You gotta love those “smaller government” (in words only) Republicans.

Jan ’87 to Jan ’95, Democrats control both house of Congress (with Reagan and Bush # 1 tax rates still in place)…. and the national debt balance climbs by $2.6 Trillion during these 8 years.

Jan ’95 to Jan ’07, Republicans control BOTH the Senate and the House for OVER AN ENTIRE DECADE, and the debt balance under the so-called ‘fiscal conservatives’ STILL climbs by $3.9 TRILLION.

So you see, CATS, although the Democrats may have controlled the congress for the first half of the past 60 years, it was primarily under the REPUBLICAN philosophy of introducing “Tax Cuts” (without simultaneous cuts in spending) that our national debt has climbed by $13 Trillion in the past 30 of those 60 years. The debt climbed the first Trillion under Democrats controlling congress (the first 30 years), but it climbed the rest of the way under Republican fiscal policy.

“So you see, CATS, although the Democrats may have controlled the congress for the first half of the past 60 years, it was primarily under the REPUBLICAN philosophy of introducing “Tax Cuts” (without simultaneous cuts in spending) that our national debt has climbed by $13 Trillion in the past 30 of those 60 years…”

So you guys are easy to trick (Look what we did for the Iraq War, you fools fell right in line even before Bush was elected! Just thinking about WMDs crack me up…) Hey, read my new book!

Union dues area already taxed…it comes out of their salaries…which have already been taxed. You enjoy a 5 day work week,,,a weekend off….paid vacations…safer working conditions ….all thanks to the unions…so think again…no one will fight for you like they do so stop and think. Their rights are being taken away so I ask….who is going to stand up for you if you are suddenly fired or if your boss wants to take away your benefits or vacations or make you work 7 days a week? These people make me laugh…they have taken all the things the unions fought for for granted and forgetting who made it possible.

DEADWRESTLER, September 3, 2011, 1:09 PM:

“The town of Bensenville property values were flushed down the toilet by the Democratic machine as know one like to live under runways.”
=======================================================================
LOL! ……. and the Chicago International Airport has sat next to Bensenville for how long? Anyone who bought property here without understanding that (A) they’re right next to one of the main U.S.. International airports, and (B) such airports expand over time…. really didn’t understand what they were buying into to begin with.

LOL! ……. and the Chicago International Airport has sat next to Bensenville for how long? Anyone who bought property here without understanding that (A) they’re right next to one of the main U.S.. International airports, and (B) such airports expand over time…. really didn’t understand what they were buying into to begin with.

So Democrats let people get pushed aside by airport development that wrecked their town. Wonder what airport expansion does to the environment too? Then again, not like Dems care, but they do talk a good talk. Obama just screwed over the planet with the EPA deregulation but I’m sure we’ll hear Gore speak up about that any day now. Wish we all lived in nice quiet towns like Chappaqua and could send our kids to Sidwell.

It’s called Obamaland, and it’s a very scary and sadly poor place to live

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If you think it’s bad now just wait till the Republicans impose austerity measures on the public if they ever get the chance…you’re going to just love them. -Ask the Germans, they’re trying them out now and it’s stomping the life out of any chance for economic recovery.

–Ask the Germans, they’re trying them out now and it’s stomping the life out of any chance for economic recovery.–

What is the unemployment rate in Deutschland, meine Freund? Ich habe diese nummer. Schreiben diese nummer?

No comment guys on having your final resting place dug up.
union contracts handed out to the former Mayor Daley pals many who are now
in jail. It is Chicago politics. All you have to do is Google Chicago politicians in
jail and the Letter D stands next to the party affiliation. Democrats have run the city
for all my fifty years.

It seems like solving problems with a speech and a pair of teleprompters no longer works for America.

“Blah, blah, dingy dong, golly gee and blah…Ask the Germans” (Skip, paraphrased.)
Thanks for nothing Skip. It seems you are as truthful about Germany as you are about the Republicans. Why am I not shocked? Spending more and more, as you advocate, and as no-brainer Obama advocates, is just the ticket for further decline and debt, and continued long-term unemployment. Sorry you can’t see that, or refuse to see that.

Bayerische Motoren Werke AG (BMW) aims to hire 800 people at its factory in Leipzig, as part of a 400 million-euro ($577 million) expansion for the production of the i3 electric city car and the i8 hybrid super car. Porsche AG is recruiting more than 1,000 workers for its nearby plant, where it plans to add the new Cajun compact sport-utility vehicle.
______________________________________-

Electric city car, hybrid super car and compact sport-utility vehicle – exactly what this administration has been supporting.

from Reuters two days ago:
UPDATE 3-German growth view darkens on PMI, GDP data

“Quarterly economic growth slowed to 0.1 percent in
April-June, data from the statistics office showed on Thursday,
confirming preliminary figures that dented hopes Europe’s top
economy will continue to underpin the region’s fragile recovery.”

Lack of spending is slowing Germany’s growth to a crawl.

Posted by: GovLvr | September 3, 2011, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm

You’re thinking of the old days under Republican George W. Bush . . . you remember, the one with The Bridge to Nowhere?

Over $200 million was apportioned for the construction of the Gravina Island Bridge in Alaska, which would connect sparsely populated regions at tremendous cost. The bridge came to be known in the national media as the “Bridge to Nowhere,” and is considered a quintessential example of pork barrel politics.

President ZerObama is close to the final stages of a failed political career- ridicule.

This disaster is almost over.

Fridays’ jobs report stated there were NO new jobs created for August. It’s clear that Obama’s policies have failed. Now, Obama is receiving the ridicule that is just deserved. He has lied and decieved Americans for almost three years now. Obama’s tyranny ends next November. “We the People” are taking our country back and giving Obama an eviction notice!

No Plan
No Clue
NOBAMA

It is a total waste of time trying to convince Republican minded people of the dangers we face, do to the madness they created. Most posters talk about the spending during this administration; yet, they refuse to talk about the reasons and solutions to correct the madness they created.
(1) Republicans borrow and spend without tax increases, instead giving tax cuts to the top 5%
(2) Democrats tax and spend by rasing tax to a level where a balance can be created.
The mess left by Bush (yes, you got that right) who spent almost 2 trillion or wars; yet not budgeted, has caused severe problems.
The economy tanked by the housing bust, caused by companies doing shady deals and of course; has not recovered. Unemployment sky rocketed and we were losing more than 500,000 per month. This has stopped since 2009 BUT the uptick is not as much as needed to create more jobs and from those, collect more taxes.
The government could have simply look the other way and did not have to pass a stimulus bill. The fact is that most states would fail and services like teachers, cops, and other emergency services would have to layoff more people. Those services affects you me and John Doe across the length and breath of the country.
Of course, the Republicans see only the government side and they refuse to see the cause (themselves) and at the same time; see only the breaks they can give the same 5%.
The fact of the matter is that voters are very stupid, to continually vote for the people who cause greater harm to their bottom dollar. Republicans are affected everytime essential services are unavailable; yet they blame Washington and the Dems for these problems.
IF in 2012, a Republican become president and the Senate change hands to the Republicans; one thing is certain, millions more will join the list of the very poor. This my friends will be sad but I will have the final laugh at the stupidity of voters.
I for one, will not be bothered and will not be one of those very poor; so have fun at the poles and vote Republican on every ticket. While doing so, forget about where you will be in a few months; I can assure you, you will be on the soup kitchen line,

What do expect he has NO BRAIN!!!

Posted by: Noz | September 3, 2011, 5:15 pm 5:15 pm

Noz the Republicans had better get smart soon. They’re the ones who tried to blackmail the country during the raising of the debt ceiling, suddenly using that routine procedure to posture and play political games. God knows how many jobs were lost just because of that. Standard & Poors said this kind of political brinkmanship and a threatened defaulting on the debt showed the Government of the United States more unstable and unreliable than in the past. The result was a lowered credit rating, teetering stock markets and more financial instability.

It’s time they smartened up. The polls also show people are sick of the ‘win at any costs’ political games of the Republican party. They’re approval ratings are way down.

Posted by: Laura | September 3, 2011, 6:46 pm 6:46 pm

Sorry Laura, it wasn’t the Democrats who tried to blackmail the country during the raising of the debt ceiling, suddenly using that routine procedure to posture and play political games. It was the Republicans.

Standard & Poors said this kind of political brinkmanship and a threatened defaulting on the debt showed the Government of the United States more unstable and unreliable than in the past. The result was a lowered credit rating, teetering stock markets and more financial instability.

Let’s just let the infrastructure collapse. Who cares? Jesus is comin. Right?

Tom…Your inaccurate description of Cut, Cap, and Balance reminds me of a certain healthcare bill, which gave birth to Obamacare. The difference is that the democrats didn’t even know what was in it Obamacare when the voted on it. Oh, and they actually got to vote on it.

Sorry Tom, but nobody, and I do mean nobody, has played politics more than Obama, on nearly any and all issues. He is the definition of a political player, one without much real substance or any workable solutions, as most of us now see. As for the ” routine procedure” of raising the debt ceiling specifically, it no longer is merely a “routine procedure,” since we truly can no longer afford to just keeping going along as we have been going along, spending these ever-increasing, massive amounts and just raising the debt ceiling as we need or want to. Very ironically (and hypocritically), even Obama himself has granted as much (rhetorically) since it is so overwhelmingly obvious to all, but he does absolutely nothing concrete or substantial about it, and he has no real plan to really cut his own wild spending to any great degree either. Instead, he seems to want to just delay and delay and delay the tough decisions about the inevitable cutting (if we wish to remain solvent at all), and then to play juvenile politics by painting anyone who insists on real cuts now as nothing but a blackmailer or obstructionist, just as you are doing, but to no avail. It isn’t fooling very many people anymore, and I believe even fewer will be fooled by next year. Good riddance to Obama, the phony failure.

By the way, Bush’s $3.1 trillion budget submission didn’t include the ongoing costs of the wars, Obama’s $3.5 trillion did.

Tom, just how misleading can you get? I guess the answer is extremely misleading, which seems to show just how desperate (or dim) you really are. You have left out all of Obama’s other spending, besides the “yearly budget”: TARP, the failed Stimulus, the Bailouts, and Obamacare. The national debt has increased by 4 trillion under Obama, and is now at about 14.7 trillion. Now, have the Republicans been great on fiscal responsibility? No, they often have not. I do believe that many of them are sincerely trying to be now, however. But under Obama, we are really going super-duper wild with spending, spending that has produced very few, if any, good results, and which we can no longer afford. Seriously, your silly posting points are somewhat analogous to someone legitimately saying that someone else is a serial bank robber, and you replying that the person accusing the serial bank robber has shoplifted some stuff before. It isn’t working for you, or for Obama, as I said before, and it is working even less as time keeps slipping on by. Goodbye, Obama.

TARP, the failed Stimulus, the Bailouts, and Obamacare. The national debt has increased by 4 trillion under Obama, and is now at about 14.7 trillion.

Posted by: Laura | September 3, 2011, 8:07 pm 8:07 pm

TARP was put in place under Bush. TARP IS the ‘bailout’. TARP was not included in Bush’s budget for 2009 of $3.1 trillion. Same with the stimulus – not included in the budget.

One major difference is Bush did not include the ongoing cost of the wars in his $3.1 trillion budget, Obama did include those costs in his $3.5 trillion submission.

You need to remember that of that 4 trillion increase in debt, much of that is based on 1) the economic collapse that happened on Bush’s shift and the impact of which continue today, 2) the cuts Bush made to taxes which threw the country into deficit after deficit – and which continue today (and are only kept in place because of the destroyed economy Bush also left) and 3) the INTEREST on the debt Bush rang up – that amounts to in the neighborhood of a trillion dollar alone – and again, this can not be blamed on Obama.

“And please don’t give us that lame, ‘nobody knew what was in it’ line. It’s bogus and it’s based on ONE out of context quote pulled from one person.”
POSTED BY: TOM | SEPTEMBER 3, 2011, 7:33 PM 7:33 PM

Thanks, yet again, Tomster. Still funny to watch you indulge so thoroughly in blatant BS maximus. Very few legislators knew all that was in the misguided boondoggle and bureaucratic nightmare called Obamacare. Hence, Nancy Pelosi’s ill-advised, infamous line: “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it…” Nearly every month, new things come to public light that are in that huge, costly mess. Yeah, it was hastily and nearly-criminally crammed down America’s throat, mostly via the typically trite Obama scare tactics and class-warfare miasma that continually wafts from him, and other Dems as well. But…it will be repealed, definitively declared unconstitutional, or simply unfunded anyway, so I suppose all’s well that ends well. :)

OK, Tom, now I see, lol. Let me get your surreal scenario straight. All, or nearly all, of that huge 4 trillion increase in debt merely happened by a magic negative force apart from Obama himself, mostly Bush perhaps, but other naughty, negative forces as well, again lol. Nearly none of it appeared from Obama’s own spending at all (everybody’s been magically and stupendously duped, for sure), and what did perhaps, maybe come from his own wild spending can be explained as real necessary and/or surely inevitable, again mostly because of those other naughty, negative forces continually oppressing poor President Obama. Right. I sincerely believe that few thinking people are stupid enough to buy that at all. And regarding my “most of us” and you knee-jerkily calling me a “right-winger”, well that’s some spoiled baloney not worth the package it was dropped off in, since I actually voted for Obama, but wouldn’t ever do so again, as I clearly and truthfully said on this thread earlier. My suggestion is for you to read posts, read them accurately, and stop trying, and failing, to score points with lame nonsense.

“And please don’t give us that lame, ‘nobody knew what was in it’ line. It’s bogus and it’s based on ONE out of context quote pulled from one person.”
POSTED BY: TOM | SEPTEMBER 3, 2011, 7:33 PM 7:33 PM
Thanks, yet again, Tomster. Still funny to watch you indulge so thoroughly in blatant BS maximus. Very few legislators knew all that was in the misguided boondoggle and bureaucratic nightmare called Obamacare. Hence, Nancy Pelosi’s ill-advised, infamous line: “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it…” Nearly every month, new things come to public light that are in that huge, costly mess. Yeah, it was hastily and nearly-criminally crammed down America’s throat, mostly via the typically trite Obama scare tactics and class-warfare miasma that continually wafts from him, and other Dems as well. But…it will be repealed, definitively declared unconstitutional, or simply unfunded anyway, so I suppose all’s well that ends well. :)

Thanks Skip for not clearing that up for me, the “right-winger”, lol. So, it was mostly “prior financial obligations” that caused Obama’s own increase in the debt. Sure enough, that sounds real good, lol. Can I please tell my own creditors that I can’t pay them right now, or in the foreseeable future, because of “prior financial obligations”? They’ll swallow that, won’t they? And even let me spend more and more pretty much as I please? But anyway, Obama did, even according to you, add $1.5 trillion in new debt, as in really new, brand-spanking new debt, caused by his own volition and action, yes? What else is there to say, except that both you and Tom crack me up immensely, and I see more than ever why Obama must lose and will lose next year.

President Obama promised to cut the deficit in half during his first (and only) term. Still waiting. By the way, remember the last budget he submitted. How many democrats voted for that one. Sure, he’s serious about reducing spending.

when need capitalist solutions

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=

And what would they be? Oh let me guess…tax cuts and deregulation. The trouble is businesses are already sitting on piles of money they aren’t investing. Telling us they need even more to sit on is just plain voodoo economics.

Any idea what percentages of business are sitting on their piles of money? 5 percent, 20 percent, 50 percent?

NOZ, September 3, 2011, 6:55 PM, SAID:

“14.683 Trillion dollars does not instill confidence at Standard and Poors.”
===============================================================================
LMAO! …… Sorry Noz, Tom is correct.

Standard and Poor’s didn’t down grade the U.S. credit rating because it wasn’t sure if the United States government would “BE ABLE” to pay it’s bills, it downgraded the credit rating because it wasn’t sure if REPUBLICANS “WANTED” to pay the bills. …. There’s a huge difference here.

The Republicans have operated the federal government off of HUGE “Borrow and Spend” policies, i.e., the Reagan Tax Cuts and the Bush Tax Cuts. Both tax cuts NEVER coincided with reduced spending, and BOTH resulted in HUGE increases to the national debt balance as never seen before either president (Reagan or Bush # 2). …. Basically, the Republicans love to live off of that credit card to pay for things like 2 wars, MEDICARE Part D, and the Department of Homeland (all introduced while simultaneously introducing “tax cuts”, which result in deficits). Then, all of a sudden, a new set of Republicans come in and threaten to suddenly stop paying for all of these programs which have been being paid for off of borrowed money since their inception (i.e., we owe debts because of these programs introduced along with Bush Tax Cuts).

Now, the new set of Republicans come in, saying, “you know what, now we don’t think we’re going to pay for any of these programs that we purchased on the government credit card” (i.e., raise the debt ceiling).

To look at this in a simpler example, it’s like the Republicans have been shopping at Macy’s for the 10 years under Bush, buying lots of nice stuff on the “credit card” (2 wars, Medicare Part D, Department of Homeland Security, paying for Katrina, etc.)… and then, now they’re calling their bankers and saying, “Hey Banker, my wife really enjoys all of this stuff that we’ve already bought, but now, I’m not sure if I want to pay the bills.”

LOL!… Basically, Republicans are debt beat credit recipients. They made all these credit card purchases during the time that they controlled the congress, and now they don’t want to pay the credit card bills for all those purchases… LOL!

That, my friend Noz, is why the S&P down graded the U.S. credit. Again, it wasn’t a question of whether or not the U.S. could pay it’s bills… if it was, then why did U.S. Treasury Notes sell like hot cakes AFTER the S&P downgrade? …. S&P downgraded the U.S. credit rating because the question of whether or not the Republicans wanted to pay their bills was at issue.

I’m sorry Skip, but your answer sounds like it came out out of a 60s college textbook. “Republicans successfully impose austerity on Americans and continue their campaign against consumers.” Come on. Why would a Republican businessman be interested in doing something like that which would hurt his sales. Because Republican businessmen are stupid?

Academia tying to tell business people how to run a successful business. That pretty much sums up the Obama administration and libs on sites like this one.

CHUCK, September 3, 2011, 10:28 PM:

”Cut, cap and balance would have averted the downgrade since it is the only serious outlook on the debt.” – David Beers, S&P”
===============================================================
LMAO! …… I’ve looked all over the web, to find one new article that says that David Beers actually said this. And haven’t found anything but News blogs, where “Chuck” says, David Beers said this.

Please provide a reference.

Academia tying to tell business people how to run a successful business.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Next I guess they’ll blame the housing bubble, financial crash and collapse of the investment banks, the Gulf oil spill, and failure of the auto industry on academia, as well as Barney Frank and low income borrowers.

Actually, Barney Franks has already been blamed (accurately) for the housing mess. Bush warned him a number a times. I do blame Bush for not taking the problem directly to the American people and bypassing congress. But the bottom line was that Frank was at least equally at fault. No, I am not blaming that on academia.

Actually, Barney Franks has already been blamed (accurately) for the housing mess. Bush warned him a number a times.

++++++++++++++++++++++=

I guess i didn’t realize Barney Frank was really the one running the country at the time.

academia types have NO credibility in giving advice to the business community

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

-because successful businesses never hire people who have a formal education in economics and business which they got from academia.

At least 75% of what Obama wants is good for our country. Politically his opposition will oppose that good to only satisfy their lust for his job. The American people DO see this and will support Obama heavily again in 2012!

If you believe choking the private sector, increasing taxes on EVERYBODY(except those who don’t pay any)and expanding government is the answer, then take a look around.

Posted by: dbright | September 4, 2011, 2:13 am 2:13 am

We saw the result of Bush cutting taxes – more borrowing from China, big deficits, bigger debt, and Cheney said “deficits don’t matter; Reagan proved that”. Thank goodness there was the payoff finally after all the running up of the debt. What was the big payoff to balance the debt? Why an almost complete economic collapse. The Republicans are hypocritical liars and no stewards of the economy or government.

Obo spent $50 billion on mile markers and signage and repaved high visibily roads that were already in good shape and left thousands of other roads pot hole laden…and he wonders why we think he is incompetent?

NOZ, SEPTEMBER 4, 2011, 7:34 AM:

““Cheney said “deficits don’t matter; Reagan proved that”.” – Tom

I guess that explains why Barry Hussein O’Bama continues to rack up higher and higher deficits.
I didn’t know he was following Cheney’s advice.
=========================================================================

LMAO!………. Here’s the difference “- – tard”, Obama wants the Bush Tax Cuts to end for at least those in the top 5% income brackets so we can start paying for those programs that Republicans implemented (2 wars, Department of Homeland Security, MEDICARE Part D)… while Republicans want to continue paying for government by “BORROWING”.

Republicans = the “Borrow and Spend” Party
Democrats = the “Tax and Spend” Party
Which one do you pay the additional burden of interest on?

In 2008, the last full year of G.W. Bush (and the Bush Tax Cuts), the federal government paid out $451 billion in “annual interest” on the nation’s debt. …. LOL…. “Half-a-trillion” of revenue went towards interest payments. Thanks Republicans, for those “Bush Tax Cuts”… LOL!

“LMAO!………. Here’s the difference “- – tard…”
POSTED BY: GEORGIE_BUSHIE

Evidently you adolescently enjoy LMAO at your own moronic nonsense. Obama wants to tax “the rich” (which nearly always really means taxing the upper middle class, in fact, rather than merely the super-rich), so he can continue to spend and spend, rather than make any of the tough cuts necessary to return us to somewhere in the galaxy of solvency, and even that revenue, if he gets his way, won’t be enough to get the job done.
And what? “Republicans want to continue paying for government by “BORROWING” Really? I thought that the lib blab-point was that the Republicans were “blackmailers” for so meanly opposing the knee-jerk raising of the debt ceiling without substantial cuts being made simultaneously. Which is it, then, libsters? The real truth is that most Republicans now want to very substantially reduce “Borrow and Spend”, and Not try to replace or supplement that with an ineffectual and doomed-to-failure policy of “Tax (more) so we can still Spend (more)”.
So… the real truth is this:

Democrats = the “Tax (more) AND Borrow (more) AND Spend (more) Party”

Then you cite the “$451 billion in “annual interest” on the nation’s debt” in Bush’s last full year. Uh, and duh… that annual interest on the debt also goes up as the deficit goes up, quite naturally, so that annual interest on the debt that you decry and deride is also growing astronomically under the financial failure known as Obama. Is that funny or sad, or both? Get real.

The reference of “No Brainer” President Obama is making is about the the constant stalling of progress in the Republican led Congress… Conress is so poorly run on behalf of the American people Perhaps a pun as well “No Boehner” but that will certainly come true in the next election cycle, Boehner and Cantor will be out of a job…

The Rebublicans blame the Democrats. The Democrats blame the Republicans.THE CURE:
TERM LIMITS
.If they all were not afraid of losing their cushie jobs MAYBE they could get something done.They were never intended to be life-long jobs.

Now that is some funny reverse-reality, 3RiversCrossing. It will obviously be Obama who is soon (but not soon enough) out of a job. And it seems you define “progress”, like many on the left, as more worthless deficit spending that produces nearly no real jobs, and certainly no reduction in the deficit. Thank God someone is “stalling that progress.” Much more “progress” like Obama’s and we’ll simply be a very large third-world country, probably licking the boots of the Chinese. No-Brainer, for sure.

Only in politics can one claim success while staring straight into the eyes of their own abject failure. Only in politics can one unashamedly seek another term on the heels of their own disaster. Only in politics can one who has stubbornly refused to abandon a purely social agenda in spite of economic Armageddon, continue to promise the same level of failure and maintain the support of a “no brainer” constituency, most of which will continue to suffer excessively under the clueless “leadership”. Again we see politics turning reason, common sense, and truth upside down.

“If anybody is “licking the boots of the Chinese” it’s the Republicans.” – Skip

Gee Skip, I think the last boot licker over in China was Joey Biden and last time I checked he was still a Demo.
Now I’ll throw you a bone and admit that Nixon started the boot licking.
Although the media called that a diplomatic success it really was an uber-failure.
It would have been better to leave China a few centuries behind in bare feet without money for boots.

Oh Gosh, Bush’s CIA had a close working relationship with the dictator Gaddafi. What a surprise for a ‘freedom fighting’ right winger.

Anybody who wants to vote Republican in 2012 must have amnesia. It was Republican policies of tax cuts for the wealthy, huge spending increases, mismanaged expensive wars, encouraging American jobs to be out-sourced that led us to our economic troubles. Today they promise to decimate Medicare and Social Security, despite their necessity to our elderly.

NOZ, September 4, 2011, 11:51 AM:

“Gee Skip, I think the last boot licker over in China was Joey Biden and last time I checked he was still a Demo. Now I’ll throw you a bone and admit that Nixon started the boot licking.”
=============================================================================
LMAO! ….. Nixon? Try G.W. Bush.

According to the Treasury.Gov, “Major Foreign Holders of U.S. Securitites” webpabe, when Clinton left office and G.W. Bush took office (January 2001), we owed China $61.5 billion.

When G.W. Bush left office (January 2009), we owed China $740 billion….. LMAO!…. TWELVE TIMES what we owed them BEFORE Bush took office!

You right-wingers crack me up… blaming Biden just because he walked in their country. Go look at the record for once. Republicans “sold us out” to Communist China.

Posted by: Georgie_Bushie | September 4, 2011, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm

Obviously you don’t like deficits and borrowing money from China.
So we all here will understand your disappointment in Obama for being Bush-on-Steroids and increasing the deficits and borrowing. It upsets me too that the Sell Out to China continues to gather steam under Obama.

Figures Obama wants to SPEND, SPEND, SPEND and of course, considering we are broke and near bankrupt, BORROW, BORROW, BORROW. Once again Obama will try to convince us that ONLY by borrowing more money in order to spend more money we DON”T have, will fix the problem caused by TOO MUCH BORROWING AND SPENDING BY BUSH AND OBAMA! Sadly, some will think this insane idea will work….even though it never has before!

“Oops, you forgot again about the massive economic collapse Bush handed Obama and the major impact that had on demands on government resources, services – and the deficit.” – Tom

I think I’m beginning to understand the point you are trying to make Tom.
Obama had no choice but to increase government spending. He is doing the best he can given the economic challenge he inherited. Although he has been ineffective and has fought hard against cutting government spending we should be understanding and stop complaining even though there are thousands of other leaders who could have done a better job. He is our President and we need to support him no matter how incompetent he is.

btw, we should all stop calling Barry Bush 3 because there are many differences between the two. One such difference is that when Bush had to deal with his big disaster he didn’t complain that Clinton left him with the problem of Osama Bin Laden but O’Bama continues to this day to complain that the big economic downturn he has had to deal with is Bush’s fault.

when Bush had to deal with his big disaster he didn’t complain that Clinton left him with the problem of Osama Bin Laden but O’Bama continues to this day to complain that the big economic downturn he has had to deal with is Bush’s fault.

Posted by: Noz | September 5, 2011, 10:26 am 10:26 am

Obama took care of bin Laden and he’s dealing very effectively with the massive economic collapse left by the last Republican Bush.

p.s. – you avoided the issue. The issue was Obama you were complaining about Obama’s spending. Obama’s spending has not been hugely more than Bush’s, and that is given Obama was left a massive economic collapse by Bush – that put huge strains on government resources and programs and on government revenues. That’ s the point you always leave out, even though it describes what has had the most massive effect on the American economy and government deficits.

Posted by: Laura | September 5, 2011, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm

I see you were incapable of posting a single fact to compare actual spending between the two Presidents. Not very convincing.

I’ll give you one fact you can chew on – the interest alone on the debt Bush left has amounted to a TRILLION dollars added to the national debt, and that has nothing to do with President Obama.

“he’s (Obama) dealing very effectively with the massive economic collapse left by the last Republican Bush.” – Tom

That last statement has to be a joke.
You can’t be serious.

“the interest alone on the debt Bush left has amounted to a TRILLION dollars added to the national debt, and that has nothing to do with President Obama.” – Tom

Yep, and President NoBo’s debt interest is now more than the Trillion dollars added by Bushie.
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a President that stopped adding debt and interest on that debt adding to the debt.
I guess we’d have to elect a Conservative for that to happen.

2012 Vote Conservative and give the country a fighting chance.

Joint sessions of congress in the past have only been held for momentous historic occasions. The timing of his pitch for more spending is very suspect of political posturing and has no more credence than a high pressure salesman. This Chicago neighborhood hack has not only made a mockery of the Presidency, the Oval office, and the Whitehouse; but our National pride and it’s place in the world. The pretzel logic of the dyslexic left at least has the hope they can live on the change in their piggy banks.