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.
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.
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.
That those laws were later struck down by DEMS in the SCOTUS, isn't relevant to what Clinton actually had when he had 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?
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.
Well hell, was that interview conducted when Obama had just won Iowa? Frankly, health care has been his Number One priority for at least a year, but if you want to put a checkmark next to Liberty =1, Maggie =0, that's fine by me. Whatever floats your boat.
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.Line item veto was struck down by the Supreme Court.
That those laws were later struck down by DEMS in the SCOTUS, isn't relevant to what Clinton actually had when he had it.
Clinton didn't face the massive economic problems we have today, so it surely isn't clear how he would have handled the current situation. Clinton definitely would have gotten more cooperation from Republicans, that's for sure. As for PAYGO, Bush allowed that to expire in 2002, I believe, knowing full well that as we went to war, there was no way the rules could be met.
Congress could have brought it back any time. And when they finally did, in 2007, it was totally toothless and ineffectual. And still is. Now, it's not only not even a law, it has zero enforcement ability. It's a House "guideline" that also doesn't even affect the Senate.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.Line item veto was struck down by the Supreme Court.
That those laws were later struck down by DEMS in the SCOTUS, isn't relevant to what Clinton actually had when he had it.
Clinton didn't face the massive economic problems we have today, so it surely isn't clear how he would have handled the current situation. Clinton definitely would have gotten more cooperation from Republicans, that's for sure. As for PAYGO, Bush allowed that to expire in 2002, I believe, knowing full well that as we went to war, there was no way the rules could be met.
Only 3% of the budget involves Obamas priorities. 10% if you include the stimulus package.
That its not his priorities which are overwhelming the budget. They are but a small fraction of the overall amount.
Now we're getting somewhere and I'll buy into that comprimise, so what would you cut first ?Sealybobo said:I suspect that if we sat down and were forced, half the shit you want to cut out could be cut and half the shit I think is wasteful probably is too.
And that would probably fix our deficit problems.
He would have obeyed the law, and used his tools to keep the budget balanced as the law of his time required. He definitely wouldn't have TRIPLED the deficit in only five months, spending more than every other President combined has, in the entire history of the country!Clinton didn't face the massive economic problems we have today, so it surely isn't clear how he would have handled the current situation.
One of Bill Clinton's gifts truly was, like him or not, he knew that good ideas knew no party lines. He knew that a good idea is just that, a good idea, no matter where it came from. It was one of his true, honest virtues.Clinton definitely would have gotten more cooperation from Republicans, that's for sure.
That its not his priorities which are overwhelming the budget. They are but a small fraction of the overall amount.
WTF? he's the one that submitted the budget ... are you saying he's only responsible for all the wasteful bullshit he put in that constitutes "his priorities"? what about the rest of the wasteful bullshit in it, was that an act of god or something?
Now we're getting somewhere and I'll buy into that comprimise, so what would you cut first ?Sealybobo said:I suspect that if we sat down and were forced, half the shit you want to cut out could be cut and half the shit I think is wasteful probably is too.
And that would probably fix our deficit problems.
Now you're talking.That its not his priorities which are overwhelming the budget. They are but a small fraction of the overall amount.
WTF? he's the one that submitted the budget ... are you saying he's only responsible for all the wasteful bullshit he put in that constitutes "his priorities"? what about the rest of the wasteful bullshit in it, was that an act of god or something?
Now we're getting somewhere and I'll buy into that comprimise, so what would you cut first ?Sealybobo said:I suspect that if we sat down and were forced, half the shit you want to cut out could be cut and half the shit I think is wasteful probably is too.
And that would probably fix our deficit problems.
Well me, I would cut all the wastful military spending. And I'd cut Haloburton/Blackwater/KBR off at the knees. No bid contracts my ass.
As for on the liberal spending, anything that isn't vital. Like that Airport to knowhere
Slublog: Airport to Nowhere, Part II?
Or some of this:
$2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.
A $246 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film.
$650 million for the digital television converter box coupon program.
$88 million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship).
$448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters.
$248 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters
$400 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's.
$1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs.
$125 million for the Washington sewer system.
$150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities.
$1 billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of $3 billion.
$75 million for "smoking cessation activities."
$25 million for tribal alcohol and substance abuse reduction.
$10 million to inspect canals in urban areas.
$500 million for state and local fire stations.
$650 million for wildland fire management on forest service lands.
$1.2 billion for "youth activities," including youth summer job programs.
$88 million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service.
$412 million for CDC buildings and property.
$500 million for building and repairing National Institutes of Health facilities in Bethesda, Maryland.
$160 million for "paid volunteers" at the Corporation for National and Community Service.
$850 million for Amtrak.
$100 million for reducing the hazard of lead-based paint.
$75 million to construct a "security training" facility for State Department Security officers when they can be trained at existing facilities of other agencies.
$110 million to the Farm Service Agency to upgrade computer systems.
Some of this sounds like crap.
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.Line item veto was struck down by the Supreme Court.
That those laws were later struck down by DEMS in the SCOTUS, isn't relevant to what Clinton actually had when he had it.
Clinton didn't face the massive economic problems we have today, so it surely isn't clear how he would have handled the current situation. Clinton definitely would have gotten more cooperation from Republicans, that's for sure. As for PAYGO, Bush allowed that to expire in 2002, I believe, knowing full well that as we went to war, there was no way the rules could be met.
Now you're talking.
Riddle me this: Which number is bigger:
999,821 million
-or-
1.2 trillion
That its not his priorities which are overwhelming the budget. They are but a small fraction of the overall amount.
WTF? he's the one that submitted the budget ... are you saying he's only responsible for all the wasteful bullshit he put in that constitutes "his priorities"? what about the rest of the wasteful bullshit in it, was that an act of god or something?
Now we're getting somewhere and I'll buy into that comprimise, so what would you cut first ?Sealybobo said:I suspect that if we sat down and were forced, half the shit you want to cut out could be cut and half the shit I think is wasteful probably is too.
And that would probably fix our deficit problems.
Well me, I would cut all the wastful military spending.
Wow....Bookend BOOOOOOOOSH!!!Clinton was given Daddy Bush's recession and handed Bush 2 a surplus.
Now you're talking.WTF? he's the one that submitted the budget ... are you saying he's only responsible for all the wasteful bullshit he put in that constitutes "his priorities"? what about the rest of the wasteful bullshit in it, was that an act of god or something?
Now we're getting somewhere and I'll buy into that comprimise, so what would you cut first ?
Well me, I would cut all the wastful military spending. And I'd cut Haloburton/Blackwater/KBR off at the knees. No bid contracts my ass.
As for on the liberal spending, anything that isn't vital. Like that Airport to knowhere
Slublog: Airport to Nowhere, Part II?
Or some of this:
$2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.
A $246 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film.
$650 million for the digital television converter box coupon program.
$88 million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship).
$448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters.
$248 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters
$400 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's.
$1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs.
$125 million for the Washington sewer system.
$150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities.
$1 billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of $3 billion.
$75 million for "smoking cessation activities."
$25 million for tribal alcohol and substance abuse reduction.
$10 million to inspect canals in urban areas.
$500 million for state and local fire stations.
$650 million for wildland fire management on forest service lands.
$1.2 billion for "youth activities," including youth summer job programs.
$88 million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service.
$412 million for CDC buildings and property.
$500 million for building and repairing National Institutes of Health facilities in Bethesda, Maryland.
$160 million for "paid volunteers" at the Corporation for National and Community Service.
$850 million for Amtrak.
$100 million for reducing the hazard of lead-based paint.
$75 million to construct a "security training" facility for State Department Security officers when they can be trained at existing facilities of other agencies.
$110 million to the Farm Service Agency to upgrade computer systems.
Some of this sounds like crap.
Riddle me this: Which number is bigger:
999,821 million
-or-
1.2 trillion
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.
That those laws were later struck down by DEMS in the SCOTUS, isn't relevant to what Clinton actually had when he had it.
Clinton didn't face the massive economic problems we have today, so it surely isn't clear how he would have handled the current situation. Clinton definitely would have gotten more cooperation from Republicans, that's for sure. As for PAYGO, Bush allowed that to expire in 2002, I believe, knowing full well that as we went to war, there was no way the rules could be met.
Clinton was given Daddy Bush's recession and handed Bush 2 a surplus.
Midnight said:Riddle me this: Which number is bigger:
999,821 million
-or-
1.2 trillion
It's a simple math question, just answer it.Is that with or without inflation?
Did I call the shot, or what?!?!?!!????Midnight said:Riddle me this: Which number is bigger:
999,821 million
-or-
1.2 trillionIt's a simple math question, just answer it.Is that with or without inflation?
WTF? he's the one that submitted the budget ... are you saying he's only responsible for all the wasteful bullshit he put in that constitutes "his priorities"? what about the rest of the wasteful bullshit in it, was that an act of god or something?
Now we're getting somewhere and I'll buy into that comprimise, so what would you cut first ?
Well me, I would cut all the wastful military spending.
We're in agreement then, first thing I'd cut is the military as well, specifically abdicate our role of global cop, roll back the empire, extricate ourselves from entangling alliances (like NATO) and restructure our military as a defensive only force. I haven't worked out the numbers but I'm confident I could knock it down to 40% of what it is today without compromising our ability to defend ourselves and fulfill our obligations to our veterans in a way that they deserve too boot.
The next items to get the axe would be the department of education, DHS, the IRS and the federal reserve, but that's a whole 'nother topic.
He thinks I am trying to make some point against his Messiah. I am not. I am attempting to see if he understands numbers on the most basic of levels.Did I call the shot, or what?!?!?!!????Midnight said:Riddle me this: Which number is bigger:
999,821 million
-or-
1.2 trillionIt's a simple math question, just answer it.Is that with or without inflation?
Midnight said:Riddle me this: Which number is bigger:
999,821 million
-or-
1.2 trillionIt's a simple math question, just answer it.Is that with or without inflation?
