Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Yeah!!...Yeah!!...Yeah!!If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!!!!....and...and...and....THE CORPORATIONS!!!...and...and...and...HALLIBURTION!!!!...and...and..and...CHENEY RUNNING THE SHADOW GIMBINT IN THE BASEMENT OF WAL-MART!!!!
ALLBizFROM925 said:Obama decided that he was going to push health care through, no matter what -- despite the fact that it was one of his re-ordered priorities when he was interviewed on CNN by Blitzer. He had no intention of putting it on the back burner then, and is prepared by coerce, threaten and/or probably blackmail Congress to pass his version of "reform" -- which has no elements of reform at all.
Yeah!!...Yeah!!...Yeah!!If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!!!!....and...and...and....THE CORPORATIONS!!!...and...and...and...HALLIBURTION!!!!...and...and..and...CHENEY RUNNING THE SHADOW GIMBINT IN THE BASEMENT OF WAL-MART!!!!
Yeah!!...Yeah!!...Yeah!!If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!!!!....and...and...and....THE CORPORATIONS!!!...and...and...and...HALLIBURTION!!!!...and...and..and...CHENEY RUNNING THE SHADOW GIMBINT IN THE BASEMENT OF WAL-MART!!!!
The 'Paygo' Coverup - WSJ.com
Some things in politics you can't make up, such as President Obama's re-re-endorsement Tuesday of "pay-as-you-go" budgeting. Coming after $787 billion in nonstimulating stimulus, a $410 billion omnibus to wrap up fiscal 2009, a $3.5 trillion 2010 budget proposal, sundry bailouts and a 13-figure health-care spending expansion still to come, this latest vow of fiscal chastity is like Donald Trump denouncing self-promotion.
Check that. Even The Donald would find this one too much to sell.
But Mr. Obama must think the press and public are dumb enough to buy it, because there he was Tuesday re-selling the same "paygo" promises that Democrats roll out every election. Paygo is "very simple," the President claimed. "Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere."
That's what Democrats also promised in 2006, with Nancy Pelosi vowing that "the first thing" House Democrats would do if they took Congress was reimpose paygo rules that "Republicans had let lapse." By 2008, Speaker Pelosi had let those rules lapse no fewer than 12 times, to make way for $400 billion in deficit spending. Mr. Obama repeated the paygo pledge during his 2008 campaign, and instead we have witnessed the greatest peacetime spending binge in U.S. history. As a share of GDP, spending will hit an astonishing 28.5% in fiscal 2009, with the deficit hitting 13% and projected to stay at 4% to 5% for years to come.
The truth is that paygo is the kind of budget gimmick that gives gimmickry a bad name. As Mr. Obama knows but won't tell voters, paygo only applies to new or expanded entitlement programs, not to existing programs such as Medicare, this year growing at a 9.2% annual rate. Nor does paygo apply to discretionary spending, set to hit $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2010, or 40% of the budget.
This loophole matters, because on the very day Mr. Obama was hailing paygo the House Appropriations Committee was gleefully approving a 12% increase in 2010 nondefense discretionary spending, the third year running that Democrats have proposed double-digit increases. Or consider that the 2010 budget resolution included a $2 billion increase for low-income heating assistance as an entitlement change that should be subject to paygo. But Congressional Democrats simply classified it as discretionary spending, thereby avoiding the need for $2 billion in cuts elsewhere. C'est-la-paygo.
Mr. Obama's new proposal includes even more loopholes. There's an exception for Congress's annual alternative-minimum tax "patch," which is worth at least $576 billion over 10 years; for any of the Bush tax cuts that Mr. Obama decides he wants to extend past 2010; and to protect against planned cuts in Medicare doctor payments. These carve-outs alone spare Democrats from having to come up with some $2.5 trillion in spending cuts or new taxes. To add insult to profligacy, the rules also allow the Administration to run huge early deficits for its looming health-care bonanza, and only pay for it later -- say, after 2012.
The President also revived the myth that paygo was somehow responsible for eliminating budget deficits during the Clinton years. In fact, that brief era of balanced budgets was due to: mid-decade spending reductions by a GOP Congress elected on a balanced-budget pledge; an excessive cut in defense spending to 3% from 5% of GOP across the decade; and an unsustainable revenue boom due to the dot-com bubble. But harking back to the 1990s lets Mr. Obama avoid having to defend his own spending record.
The real game here is that the President is trying to give Democrats in Congress political cover for the health-care blowout and tax-increase votes that he knows are coming. The polls are showing that Mr. Obama's spending plans are far less popular than the President himself, and Democrats in swing districts are getting nervous. The paygo ruse gives Blue Dog Democrats cover to say they voted for "fiscal discipline," even as they vote to pass the greatest entitlement expansion in modern history. The Blue Dogs always play this double game.
The other goal of this new paygo campaign is to make it easier to raise taxes in 2011, and impossible to cut taxes for years after that. In the near term, paygo gives Mr. Obama another excuse to let the Bush tax cuts he dislikes expire after 2010, while exempting those (for lower-income voters) that he likes. In the longer term, if a GOP Congress or President ever want to cut taxes, paygo applies a straitjacket that pits those tax cuts against, say, spending cuts in Medicare. The Reagan tax reductions would never have happened under paygo.
The main political question now is when Americans will start to figure out Mr. Obama's pattern of spend, repent and repeat. The President is still sailing along on his charm and the fact that Americans are cheering for an economic recovery. But eventually they'll see that he isn't telling them the truth, and when they do, the very Blue Dogs he's trying to protect will pay the price. And they'll deserve what they get.
Obama decided that he was going to push health care through, no matter what -- despite the fact that it was one of his re-ordered priorities when he was interviewed on CNN by Blitzer. He had no intention of putting it on the back burner then, and is prepared by coerce, threaten and/or probably blackmail Congress to pass his version of "reform" -- which has no elements of reform at all.
Yeah!!...Yeah!!...Yeah!!If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!!!!....and...and...and....THE CORPORATIONS!!!...and...and...and...HALLIBURTION!!!!...and...and..and...CHENEY RUNNING THE SHADOW GIMBINT IN THE BASEMENT OF WAL-MART!!!!
Wow. It doesn't seem so reasonable when you present what he said as a gross, inaccurate, absurd characterization. Gee, I wonder why.
Try sticking to what people say as opposed to attacking strawmen.
Bill Clinton understood that he was the most powerful president ever, because Congress armed him with tools no other President had ever enjoyed and none have since: Line-item veto and Gramm-Rudman. It also helped immensely that back then, Paygo had some actual teeth instead of this garbage the House passed -- which by the way never made it to the Senate, therefore isn't law yet... -- and even if passed is just a toothless mouse in a house full of feral cats.When you reduce the deficit and cut taxes and promote and atmosphere of competetion the economy thrives even Bill Clinton understood this.
Yeah!!...Yeah!!...Yeah!!If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!!!!....and...and...and....THE CORPORATIONS!!!...and...and...and...HALLIBURTION!!!!...and...and..and...CHENEY RUNNING THE SHADOW GIMBINT IN THE BASEMENT OF WAL-MART!!!!
Wow. It doesn't seem so reasonable when you present what he said as a gross, inaccurate, absurd characterization. Gee, I wonder why.
Try sticking to what people say as opposed to attacking strawmen.
BO already blew a trillion and wants to spend 2 trillion more, and he claims he wants to be fiscally responsible?
You would have to be an imbecile to believe him.
So you believe him?
If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
ALLBizFROM925 said:Obama decided that he was going to push health care through, no matter what -- despite the fact that it was one of his re-ordered priorities when he was interviewed on CNN by Blitzer. He had no intention of putting it on the back burner then, and is prepared by coerce, threaten and/or probably blackmail Congress to pass his version of "reform" -- which has no elements of reform at all.
I don't think he ever told Wolf Blitzer or anyone else that he would put health care on hold. I recall Blitzer (and others) asking what his top 3 priorities would be, if he had to back-burner some, and he specifically said it would NOT be health care, but probably energy, then education.
As far as threatening, coercing and blackmailing Congress, with what? When will you whining losers stop with your stupid fucking assumptions?
Bill Clinton understood that he was the most powerful president ever, because Congress armed him with tools no other President had ever enjoyed and none have since: Line-item veto and Gramm-Rudman. It also helped immensely that back then, Paygo had some actual teeth instead of this garbage the House passed -- which by the way never made it to the Senate, therefore isn't law yet... -- and even if passed is just a toothless mouse in a house full of feral cats.When you reduce the deficit and cut taxes and promote and atmosphere of competetion the economy thrives even Bill Clinton understood this.
Obama's simply paying lip service to his massive deficit, because opinion polls and focus groups showed that's an area he needed to pay lip service to. This is how he governs, by polls and focus groups. His approval rating is by far the most important thing to him.
BO already blew a trillion and wants to spend 2 trillion more, and he claims he wants to be fiscally responsible?
You would have to be an imbecile to believe him.
So you believe him?
If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
Where did he say that what has been going on over the last 8 years wasn't wasteful? The problem with your statement is that President Obama isn't cutting spending on things that are wasteful (heck he's not cutting spending on ANYTHING), he's INCREASING spending on things that are wasteful or didn't you see his latest budget? I thought the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress Critters were the spend happy drunken sailor champs but this Administration and this Congress is doing everything it can to take their title away.
No shit. So was Gramm-Rudman. What's that got to do with the point I made? It was the law of the land for us to have a balanced budget, and Clinton was given the tools to be able to obey that law.Bill Clinton understood that he was the most powerful president ever, because Congress armed him with tools no other President had ever enjoyed and none have since: Line-item veto and Gramm-Rudman. It also helped immensely that back then, Paygo had some actual teeth instead of this garbage the House passed -- which by the way never made it to the Senate, therefore isn't law yet... -- and even if passed is just a toothless mouse in a house full of feral cats.When you reduce the deficit and cut taxes and promote and atmosphere of competetion the economy thrives even Bill Clinton understood this.
Obama's simply paying lip service to his massive deficit, because opinion polls and focus groups showed that's an area he needed to pay lip service to. This is how he governs, by polls and focus groups. His approval rating is by far the most important thing to him.
Line item veto was struck down by the Supreme Court.
ALLBizFROM925 said:Obama decided that he was going to push health care through, no matter what -- despite the fact that it was one of his re-ordered priorities when he was interviewed on CNN by Blitzer. He had no intention of putting it on the back burner then, and is prepared by coerce, threaten and/or probably blackmail Congress to pass his version of "reform" -- which has no elements of reform at all.
I don't think he ever told Wolf Blitzer or anyone else that he would put health care on hold. I recall Blitzer (and others) asking what his top 3 priorities would be, if he had to back-burner some, and he specifically said it would NOT be health care, but probably energy, then education.
Let me give you a heads-up for future reference, Maggie. I don't throw out bullshit that I can't back up.
In an interview with Wolf Blitzer in Des Moines, Iowa, Obama was asked to name his top priority from a list of issues, including taxes, health care, education, energy policy and immigration.
"[The] top priority may not be any of those five. It may be continuing to stabilize the financial system. We don't know yet what's going to happen in January," he said. "None of this can be accomplished if we continue to see a potential meltdown in the banking system and financial system. So that's priority No. 1: making sure the plumbing works."
Obama said priority No. 2 is energy independence:
"We have to seize this moment, because it's not just an energy independence issue; it's also a national security issue, and it's a jobs issue. We can create 5 million new green energy jobs."
Priority No. 3: Health care reform.
Priority No. 4: "Making sure we have tax cuts for the middle class as part of a broader tax reform effort."
Obama later expanded his discussion on how tax cuts relate to a bigger economic plan.
"The tax cut that I talked about may be part of my priority No. 1, because I think that's going to be part of stabilizing the economy as a whole," he said. (Ooops, that just got bumped up ahead of Health Care Reform)
"I think we're going to need a second stimulus. Part of my commitment is to make sure that the stimulus includes a tax cut for 95 percent of working Americans. It may be the first bill I introduce."
Priority No. 5: Reforming the education system.
Now, if Obama hasn't yet accomplished Priority #1, #2 and #3 (which is the new #1b), please tell me how Health Care is on the front burner.
As far as threatening, coercing and blackmailing Congress, with what? When will you whining losers stop with your stupid fucking assumptions?
The Associated Press: Obama says health care changes must come this year
Obama urges senators to get job done on health - Capitol Hill- msnbc.com
Obama to take on health care at town hall - CNN.com
Use your imagination.
ALLBizFROM925 said:Obama decided that he was going to push health care through, no matter what -- despite the fact that it was one of his re-ordered priorities when he was interviewed on CNN by Blitzer. He had no intention of putting it on the back burner then, and is prepared by coerce, threaten and/or probably blackmail Congress to pass his version of "reform" -- which has no elements of reform at all.
I don't think he ever told Wolf Blitzer or anyone else that he would put health care on hold. I recall Blitzer (and others) asking what his top 3 priorities would be, if he had to back-burner some, and he specifically said it would NOT be health care, but probably energy, then education.
Let me give you a heads-up for future reference, Maggie. I don't throw out bullshit that I can't back up.
In an interview with Wolf Blitzer in Des Moines, Iowa, Obama was asked to name his top priority from a list of issues, including taxes, health care, education, energy policy and immigration.
"[The] top priority may not be any of those five. It may be continuing to stabilize the financial system. We don't know yet what's going to happen in January," he said. "None of this can be accomplished if we continue to see a potential meltdown in the banking system and financial system. So that's priority No. 1: making sure the plumbing works."
Obama said priority No. 2 is energy independence:
"We have to seize this moment, because it's not just an energy independence issue; it's also a national security issue, and it's a jobs issue. We can create 5 million new green energy jobs."
Priority No. 3: Health care reform.
Priority No. 4: "Making sure we have tax cuts for the middle class as part of a broader tax reform effort."
Obama later expanded his discussion on how tax cuts relate to a bigger economic plan.
"The tax cut that I talked about may be part of my priority No. 1, because I think that's going to be part of stabilizing the economy as a whole," he said. (Ooops, that just got bumped up ahead of Health Care Reform)
"I think we're going to need a second stimulus. Part of my commitment is to make sure that the stimulus includes a tax cut for 95 percent of working Americans. It may be the first bill I introduce."
Priority No. 5: Reforming the education system.
Now, if Obama hasn't yet accomplished Priority #1, #2 and #3 (which is the new #1b), please tell me how Health Care is on the front burner.
As far as threatening, coercing and blackmailing Congress, with what? When will you whining losers stop with your stupid fucking assumptions?
The Associated Press: Obama says health care changes must come this year
Obama urges senators to get job done on health - Capitol Hill- msnbc.com
Obama to take on health care at town hall - CNN.com
Use your imagination.
So you believe him?
If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
Where did he say that what has been going on over the last 8 years wasn't wasteful? The problem with your statement is that President Obama isn't cutting spending on things that are wasteful (heck he's not cutting spending on ANYTHING), he's INCREASING spending on things that are wasteful or didn't you see his latest budget? I thought the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress Critters were the spend happy drunken sailor champs but this Administration and this Congress is doing everything it can to take their title away.
Only 3% of the budget involves Obamas priorities. 10% if you include the stimulus package.
and your point would be?BO already blew a trillion and wants to spend 2 trillion more, and he claims he wants to be fiscally responsible?
You would have to be an imbecile to believe him.
So you believe him?
If Bush neglected America for 8 years because he wanted to spend all our money on the rich, and American infrastructure suffered, and none of Bush's spending went towards America, how do you not understand that BO is now spending on shit that should have been done before he even got into office?
And BO is cutting spending on things we told you the last 8 years were wastful. Instead of agreeing that stuff was wasteful, you defended all Bush's spending and watched him double the debt. And we got nothing to show for it.
Where did he say that what has been going on over the last 8 years wasn't wasteful? The problem with your statement is that President Obama isn't cutting spending on things that are wasteful (heck he's not cutting spending on ANYTHING), he's INCREASING spending on things that are wasteful or didn't you see his latest budget? I thought the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress Critters were the spend happy drunken sailor champs but this Administration and this Congress is doing everything it can to take their title away.
