Barack Obama, our next President

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Full Story
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#831055 Dec 30, 2012
Some lawmakers, pundits, and others continue to say that President George W. Bush’s policies did not drive the projected federal deficits of the coming decade — that, instead, it was the policies of President Obama and Congress in 2009 and 2010. But, the fact remains: the economic downturn, President Bush’s tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficit over the next ten years — according to this update of our analysis, which is based on the Congressional Budget Office’s most recent ten-year budget projections (from August) and congressional action since we released the previous version of this analysis in May 2011.

The deficit for fiscal year 2009 — which began more than three months before President Obama’s inauguration — was $1.4 trillion and, at 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the largest deficit relative to the economy since the end of World War II. At $1.3 trillion and nearly 9 percent of GDP, the deficits in 2010 and 2011 were only slightly lower. If current policies remain in place, deficits will likely exceed $1 trillion in 2012 and 2013 before subsiding slightly, and never fall below $700 billion for the remainder of this decade.

The events and policies that pushed deficits to these high levels in the near term were, for the most part, not of President Obama’s making. If not for the Bush tax cuts, the deficit-financed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the effects of the worst recession since the Great Depression (including the cost of policymakers’ actions to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term. By themselves, in fact, the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will account for almost half of the $18 trillion in debt that, under current policies, the nation will owe by 2019.[1] The stimulus measures and financial rescues will account for less than 10 percent of the debt at that time.

President Obama, however, still has a responsibility to propose, and put the weight of his office behind, policies that will address our key long-term fiscal challenge — preventing the significant rise in debt as a percentage of GDP that will occur under current policies. Allowing the flagship Bush tax cuts — which initially were slated to end after 2010 and were extended for two years — to expire on schedule at the end of 2012 would halt the rise in the debt-to-GDP ratio. In fact, that step — or an equivalent, substitute package of deficit reductions — would reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio and stabilize it at about 70 percent in the second half of the decade. Of course, with the economy still fragile, it is prudent to continue the middle-class portion of the tax cuts for a while longer. But there is no justification for extending the entire set of expiring tax cuts indefinitely. To keep the debt stable over the longer run, when the fiscal impacts of an aging population and rising health care costs will continue to mount, policymakers will need to take large additional steps on both the expenditure and revenue sides of the budget.

Having said that, policymakers should not mistake the causes of the swollen deficits that we face in the decade ahead nor make policy based on mistaken impressions.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm...

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Conroe, TX

#831056 Dec 30, 2012
impeach Congress wrote:
The only reason that sorry lot called "the house of representatives," and "that dazed looking Mofo Boehner," will not work with President Obama is because they hate the fact that the brother is in charge. Anyone deny it is a delusional, lying S.O.B.itch. We ALL know it. That old racist propaganda about whites being somehow more important (as if God had nothing better to do)need to be buried so the worlds people can advance to levels of civilizations practiced long before you space cadets fell from hell, contaminating the purity of God's "chosen" people. You are so self absorbed in your physical being that you have grown even more pathetic than you were in days of old. The "mirror" is NOT your friend! If you are hearing one tell you that "you are the fairest of them all" You are in never never land! You break faster, wrinkle faster, die faster and have more deformities and crack faster than all other races of man on the planet and yet...It is always YOU who want to judge and defame others. The time is at hand, and soon we will revise the constitution written by YOUR forefathers. We will change the words and take power away from those who fail to perform (like todays' Congress and Republicans.) We will make it a crime punishable by death to insult the "elected" commander in chief as it is in other "civilized" countries. Many of you here today would have your heads on the chopping block. You are not worthy of "freedom of speech" because you have nothing to say except for useless bytching and moaning with nary a solution. I am looking forward to the day when this happens because it is YOU bytchers and Moaners who should be filling prisons and not black men. It is YOU who are terrorist, shooting up your fellow citizens because you are a bunch of egotistical, self absorbing, delusional, crazy azzes that need to be in solitary confinement or in straight jackets. I can see from your posts that you too are a threat to society. No wonder your people commit so many senseless mass murders. 90% of you are damn NUT CASES!
Get over yourself.
In case you haven't figured it out, dumbass, Boehner is a Democrat.

What needs to happen is government spending gets cut. The fiscal cliff does that. And, taxes need to increase. The fiscal cliff does that.
What fucking problem do you idiots have with that?

Now, all we need to do is increase the number of people paying taxes. 47 percent of the population mooching off the other half won't survive, no matter what kind of government or economy you have.
You moochers are going to have to get some patriotism going and get a job, and start paying your fair share of what the government costs.
... you really didn't prepare yourself to get a real job, did you?
Well, go get fitted for a leaf blower, or learn to wash dishes. There just isn't any money left to carry your lazy ass anymore. You're going to have to do like eveyone already paying for everything you have - get a fucking job and pay your fair share of taxes.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Conroe, TX

#831058 Dec 30, 2012
sonicfilter wrote:
Some lawmakers, pundits, and others continue to say that President George W. Bush’s policies did not drive the projected federal deficits of the coming decade — that, instead, it was the policies of President Obama and Congress in 2009 and 2010. But, the fact remains: the economic downturn, President Bush’s tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficit over the next ten years — according to this update of our analysis, which is based on the Congressional Budget Office’s most recent ten-year budget projections (from August) and congressional action since we released the previous version of this analysis in May 2011.
The deficit for fiscal year 2009 — which began more than three months before President Obama’s inauguration — was $1.4 trillion and, at 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the largest deficit relative to the economy since the end of World War II. At $1.3 trillion and nearly 9 percent of GDP, the deficits in 2010 and 2011 were only slightly lower. If current policies remain in place, deficits will likely exceed $1 trillion in 2012 and 2013 before subsiding slightly, and never fall below $700 billion for the remainder of this decade.
The events and policies that pushed deficits to these high levels in the near term were,
blah blah blah
— preventing the significant rise in debt as a percentage of GDP that will occur under current policies. Allowing the flagship Bush tax cuts — which initially were slated to end after 2010 and were extended for two years — to expire on schedule at the end of 2012 would halt the rise in the debt-to-GDP ratio. In fact, that step — or an equivalent, substitute package of deficit reductions — would reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio and stabilize it at about 70 percent in the second half of the decade. Of course, with the economy still fragile, it is prudent to continue the middle-class portion of the tax cuts for a while longer. But there is no justification for extending the entire set of expiring tax cuts indefinitely. To keep the debt stable over the longer run, when the fiscal impacts of an aging population and rising health care costs will continue to mount, policymakers will need to take large additional steps on both the expenditure and revenue sides of the budget.
Having said that, policymakers should not mistake the causes of the swollen deficits that we face in the decade ahead nor make policy based on mistaken impressions.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm...
You are an ignorant dupe.
I know you and Obama have never read the Constitution, so you really don't understand how government works here. I'll give you an education.
Congress is the sole authority on revenue and spending.
If you bother to look at the real-world data, you will find the insane spending beginning in January, 2007. Coincidentally, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of government in January, 2007.
If you need to see actual figures, here's the only reference you need:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
All you have to do now is learn something about American history and what happened when, for instance, in January, 2007, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of the government when the annual deficit was 0.16 (that's zero point one six) trillion dollars, and the total debt had increased from 5 to 8 trillion dollars between the years 2001 and 2007.
I've crammed the facts up your ass so many times, it's a wonder there was room for these facts.
carol

Orlando, FL

#831059 Dec 30, 2012
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Howls of protest filled the halls of the U.S. Senate today as dozens of Senators expressed their outrage at having to work through the weekend to save the United States from financial Armageddon.
“We’re hearing a lot about the country plunging back into recession and millions of people being thrown out of work,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky).“What we’re not hearing much about is how our Sunday is being completely and irrevocably ruined.”
Senator McConnell said that when President Obama called the Senate back to work on a budget deal this weekend,“At first I thought he was kidding. Not only have I never worked on a weekend, I’ve never met anyone who’s done such a damn fool thing.”
Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowit...
Maybe if the Democrats had passed a budget in 3 years, others on Capital Hill wouldn't be cranky they're not making it easier on anyone now either.
carol

Orlando, FL

#831060 Dec 30, 2012
cah9178 wrote:
<quoted text>
yes it is every black person should read the first part of this
http://stacyswimp.net/2011/09/17/walking-off-...
Pretty powerful. And true. If only this message could reach more black Americans.

As the author stated, "I was bamboozled for years!"

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#831061 Dec 30, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Carol, the fiscal cliff seems to be the only act of Congress that cut government spending. The Democrats have only one plan, to increase the size of government until the government dominates everything. If they create a catastrophe in doing so, that will give them justification for using the government to take control of everything.
Boehner won't do anything but give the Democrats everything they want. That's why Nancy Pelosi asked Boehner to arrance the selection of Speaker in November, and not as it should be done on the first day of the next Congressional session. Boehner ordered the 112th Congress to select the Speaker for the 113th Congress.
We have to let the fiscal cliff happen. If we don't, then there's absolutely no reason to believe the insanity we saw the past 4 years, to include 2 years with a Republican House, will end.
There's no way to pay for the government the Democrats are creating. It's an impossibility. There's just not enough earnings to be taxed.
The fiscal cliff cuts government spending. The fiscal cliff raises taxes. We need both to happen.
And, we also need to increase the number of people paying taxes. 47 percent getting a free ride just don't sound right.
Now, don't allow any more debt. We can't afford any more debt. Every dollar we borrow brings us closer to the inevitable collapse perpetual borrowing causes.
Well, if the Democrats only plan is to increase the size of government and the Republicans only track record is increasing the size of government don't you feel pretty stupid voting for either one if what you want is smaller government?

lp.org
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#831062 Dec 30, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You are an ignorant dupe.
I know you and Obama have never read the Constitution, so you really don't understand how government works here. I'll give you an education.
Congress is the sole authority on revenue and spending.
If you bother to look at the real-world data, you will find the insane spending beginning in January, 2007. Coincidentally, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of government in January, 2007.
If you need to see actual figures, here's the only reference you need:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
All you have to do now is learn something about American history and what happened when, for instance, in January, 2007, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of the government when the annual deficit was 0.16 (that's zero point one six) trillion dollars, and the total debt had increased from 5 to 8 trillion dollars between the years 2001 and 2007.
I've crammed the facts up your ass so many times, it's a wonder there was room for these facts.
The GOP's Lost Year In The Fox News Bubble

.....the right-wing bubble was a comfortable place to inhabit if you thought of Obama as an historic monster, or if you required to be reminded of that fact many time a day, every day of the year. The bubble is the place where followers for four years were fed the feel-good GOP narrative about how Obama's presidency was a fiasco, that the Americans suffered a severe case of 2008 buyer's remorse, and that the president's re-election defeat was all but pre-ordained.

The one-part-panic, one-part-denial message may have cheered obsessive Obama-haters, but it didn't prepare conservatives for the reality of the campaign season.

And it cost the GOP a lost year in the Fox News bubble.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/12/30/the-g...

cram all you want. your 'message' is for losers. the 'winners' are just laughing at you while you pretend that the right wing BS we've all put up with for 4 years really matters.

only an idiot/conservative revisionist would think that the 6 years before the Dems took Congress matters naught. we were in the shit the minute Bush took the WH. one year in and we're borrowing money from China because of the tax cuts when a smart man should have looked at Reagan and figured out the correct way to fix the mistake......

RAISE TAXES!!

and when was the last time that raising taxes hurt the economy? eh mister info?
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#831063 Dec 30, 2012
Tax Cuts Don't Lead to Economic Growth, a New 65-Year Study Finds

Analysis of six decades of data found that top tax rates "have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth." However, the study found that reductions of capital gains taxes and top marginal rate taxes have led to greater income inequality. Past studies cited in the report have suggested that a broad-based tax rate reduction can have "a small to modest, positive effect on economic growth" or "no effect on economic growth."

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2...

sorry. no leap of faith.
impeach Congress

Morrow, GA

#831064 Dec 30, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Get over yourself.
In case you haven't figured it out, dumbass, Boehner is a Democrat.
What needs to happen is government spending gets cut. The fiscal cliff does that. And, taxes need to increase. The fiscal cliff does that.
What fucking problem do you idiots have with that?
Now, all we need to do is increase the number of people paying taxes. 47 percent of the population mooching off the other half won't survive, no matter what kind of government or economy you have.
You moochers are going to have to get some patriotism going and get a job, and start paying your fair share of what the government costs.
... you really didn't prepare yourself to get a real job, did you?
Well, go get fitted for a leaf blower, or learn to wash dishes. There just isn't any money left to carry your lazy ass anymore. You're going to have to do like eveyone already paying for everything you have - get a fucking job and pay your fair share of taxes.
Oh My God! Can you ALL see what I mean about the ignorance ass level of these dip sticks? LOL Here bubba... FACT CHECK!

John Andrew Boehner is the 61st and current Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. A member of the Republican Party, he is the U.S. Representative from Ohio's 8th congressional district, serving since 1991. The district includes several rural and suburban areas near Cincinnati and Dayton, and a small portion of Dayton itself.

Makes the rest of what you had to say sorta "Not Worth Reading" You related to Mitt Romney's lying ass?

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#831065 Dec 30, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You are an ignorant dupe.
I know you and Obama have never read the Constitution, so you really don't understand how government works here. I'll give you an education.
Congress is the sole authority on revenue and spending.
If you bother to look at the real-world data, you will find the insane spending beginning in January, 2007. Coincidentally, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of government in January, 2007.
If you need to see actual figures, here's the only reference you need:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
All you have to do now is learn something about American history and what happened when, for instance, in January, 2007, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of the government when the annual deficit was 0.16 (that's zero point one six) trillion dollars, and the total debt had increased from 5 to 8 trillion dollars between the years 2001 and 2007.
I've crammed the facts up your ass so many times, it's a wonder there was room for these facts.
How many times does it have to be proven to you? Are you really that thick?

Below is a list of the amount spending increased over the previous year (in millions of dollars) from 2002-2007. See that? The last year with a Republican President and Republican Congress netted a spending increase of $183 billion. Dems take Congress in 2007 and the increase drops to $73 billion, less than half of the average increases every year the GOP held the trifecta. You've been shown this before, how can you continue to come on here and lie through your teeth like that? When your lies are exposed do you suppose that's helping your cause any? Don't bother with your Treasury BS, we're talking about spending. That may fool the stupid but it won't fool me.

148,048
149,005
132,942
179,116
183,093
73,636

Table 1.1
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historic...
impeach Congress

Morrow, GA

#831066 Dec 30, 2012
DBwriter...put down your pen...unless you want to continue writing FAIRY TALES.

What world are you living in where the speaker of the house is now a Democrat. Never mind...go stick your dumb ass head back in the sand and try not to respond to my posts. Clearly you are not qualified. LOL

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#831067 Dec 30, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You are an ignorant dupe.
I know you and Obama have never read the Constitution, so you really don't understand how government works here. I'll give you an education.
Congress is the sole authority on revenue and spending.
If you bother to look at the real-world data, you will find the insane spending beginning in January, 2007. Coincidentally, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of government in January, 2007.
If you need to see actual figures, here's the only reference you need:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
All you have to do now is learn something about American history and what happened when, for instance, in January, 2007, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of the government when the annual deficit was 0.16 (that's zero point one six) trillion dollars, and the total debt had increased from 5 to 8 trillion dollars between the years 2001 and 2007.
I've crammed the facts up your ass so many times, it's a wonder there was room for these facts.
Oh, I see. The old "percent GDP trick". That's true, in late 2007 spending as percent GDP started skyrocketing in the 4th quarter but as I showed you in the previous post, spending went up considerably less than it did the five prior years.

Did you hear about the Great Recession? The one that started in 4Q07? Spending didn't go up, GDP dropped as it does in a recession which raises the spending/GDP ratio.

Or was that too much math thinking for you?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Conroe, TX

#831072 Dec 30, 2012
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, if the Democrats only plan is to increase the size of government and the Republicans only track record is increasing the size of government don't you feel pretty stupid voting for either one if what you want is smaller government?
lp.org
Where the f**k do you get your information from?

Perhaps you equate the necessary cost of fighting a global war the Arab jihad declared with increasing the size of government. Perhaps you are just as ignorant of how government works as Obama. My guess is, neither of you have ever read the Constitution and know just how government works. It works like this:
All government programs begin in Congress.
Let's take a look at what happened after January, 2007, when the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of government:

From 2001 to 2007 government spending went from 1.86 to 2.73 trillion dollars. During a war.

Democrats take control of government spending.

From 2007 to 2012 government spending went from 2.73 to 3.80 trillion. After the war.

What the hell have you clowns been spending the money on? One thing's for sure, we haven't gotten anything from it.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/fed_spend...

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Conroe, TX

#831073 Dec 30, 2012
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, I see. The old "percent GDP trick". That's true, in late 2007 spending as percent GDP started skyrocketing in the 4th quarter but as I showed you in the previous post, spending went up considerably less than it did the five prior years.
Did you hear about the Great Recession? The one that started in 4Q07? Spending didn't go up, GDP dropped as it does in a recession which raises the spending/GDP ratio.
Or was that too much math thinking for you?
Percent of GDP....
I'm thinking you don't know the difference between GDP and GNP, and the Democrats changed the method of calculating the economy in the 60s to make the economy look better than what it was (is).
It's the government that raises the spending to GDP ratio. There isn't any low of economics that makes that happen. Some argue that, because government is actually an expense on the economy, constantly increasing the percentage of GDP the expense of government, there are inevitable corrections, the so-called "great recession" being just a naturally occurring event when government spending (consumption of capital, thus starving the economy of capital) continually increases.
The most logical thing to do when revenue decreases is decrease spending. Our government did the exact opposite. As a result, today the clowns in the White House are promoting expanding a government that is already beyond the ability of the economy to pay for.
You can't get more ignorant than that.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Conroe, TX

#831074 Dec 30, 2012
The Democrats want to raise taxes. The fiscal cliff raises taxes.
So, just what the hell don't the Democrats like about the fiscal cliff?

... it also cuts spending. That's poison to the Democrats.
GhostofRaygun

Russellville, KY

#831075 Dec 30, 2012
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe if the Democrats had passed a budget in 3 years, others on Capital Hill wouldn't be cranky they're not making it easier on anyone now either.
What was the name of the other President that failed to have 3 budgets passed?????????? Reagan.
GhostofRaygun

Russellville, KY

#831077 Dec 30, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
The Democrats want to raise taxes. The fiscal cliff raises taxes.
So, just what the hell don't the Democrats like about the fiscal cliff?
... it also cuts spending. That's poison to the Democrats.
It raises taxes on 100%. They only want the 2%top Rich to go back to the 1996 rates when America was growing 22 million new jobs.
Raising SOME of the rich taxes is "poison" to Repubs. But don't be too upset. Mitt and thousands more like him will still have their 15% tax rate.
.
JEB

Pompano Beach, FL

#831078 Dec 30, 2012
GhostofRaygun wrote:
<quoted text>It raises taxes on 100%. They only want the 2%top Rich to go back to the 1996 rates when America was growing 22 million new jobs.
Raising SOME of the rich taxes is "poison" to Repubs. But don't be too upset. Mitt and thousands more like him will still have their 15% tax rate.
.
Good; then maybe leeches like you will be inspired to actually work for a living and pay some taxes yourself. LOL
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#831079 Dec 30, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You are an ignorant dupe.
I know you and Obama have never read the Constitution, so you really don't understand how government works here. I'll give you an education.
Congress is the sole authority on revenue and spending.
If you bother to look at the real-world data, you will find the insane spending beginning in January, 2007. Coincidentally, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of government in January, 2007.
If you need to see actual figures, here's the only reference you need:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
All you have to do now is learn something about American history and what happened when, for instance, in January, 2007, the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of the government when the annual deficit was 0.16 (that's zero point one six) trillion dollars, and the total debt had increased from 5 to 8 trillion dollars between the years 2001 and 2007.
I've crammed the facts up your ass so many times, it's a wonder there was room for these facts.
lol! You mean like how cons took control in 2010 and we're still headed down that same path?

amazing!
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#831082 Dec 30, 2012
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
only time will tell
Greece is the alternative to budget control.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Deat Abby 12-16 22 min Sublime1 47
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 37 min Rogue Scholar 05 181,688
sexting on whatsapp 38 min cute_bwoy 1
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr Yumpin Yimminy 68,874
14-Year-Old Boy Shot In Head On Far South Side 1 hr Taint Shield 4
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr kal 49,174
best joke (Oct '09) 2 hr Always Smile 526
Chicago Dating
Find my Match

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 11:41 am PST

NFL11:41AM
Trestman: There's accountability in Bears' building
NBC Sports12:41 PM
Bears' Trestman aware of speculation about future - NBC Sports
Yahoo! Sports 1:20 PM
Chicago sportscaster apologizes for tasteless joke in Cutler pun
NFL 1:47 PM
One Preview: Passing and rushing yardage leaders meet in Big D
NBC Sports 1:57 PM
Marc Trestman: It's evident I haven't gotten best from Jay Cutler