Obama excepts his Nobel prize

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

We do, but read the article again. Bush "did" do stuff and there it sits.

Obama "may" do stuff (in the opinion of this op-ed piece and Cannon Shell)

You can't crucify Obama for doing stuff, until he actually does it

Then you can say, "I told you so!"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...ostpop_emailed

When it comes to spending, the Democrats who run Washington can't decide on their message. On the one hand, as President Obama said this week, they claim we have to "spend our way out of this recession." On the other, they keep telling us the deficit is too large and isn't "sustainable." In this tug of political spin, watch what they spend, not what they say.

[Riot]

In this tug of political spin, watch what they spend, not what they say.

Exactly. Let's not listen to the spin, let's see what's real:

So far Obama hasn't spent $200 billion he was entitled to (budgeted) to spend. He gave us a tax cut. He kept us out of a depression.

He says won't sign a health reform bill unless it's self-funded. He keeps railing against increased costs across the federal government.

We'll see what Congress does with the budget, and what Obama redlines or not out of it.

Obama campaigned on zero-based budgeting, let's hope he holds to it. So far he's doing fine.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Exactly. Let's not listen to the spin, let's see what's real:

So far Obama hasn't spent $200 billion he was entitled to (budgeted) to spend. He gave us a tax cut. He kept us out of a depression.

He says won't sign a health reform bill unless it's self-funded. He keeps railing against increased costs across the federal government.

We'll see what Congress does with the budget, and what Obama redlines or not out of it.

Obama campaigned on zero-based budgeting, let's hope he holds to it. So far he's doing fine.

Yeah great...the govt's only grown 10% since he started his grand plans!

[Danzig]

just a few snippets:


CBO projects a $9.1 trillion deficit under Obama’s budget, and a $4.4 trillion deficit under current law. In other words, CBO figures Obama’s budget would make the deficit $4.5 trillion worse, not $2.2 trillion better


The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office doesn’t agree that Obama’s budget has “reduced federal spending” at all. Quite the opposite. His budget calls for vastly increased spending, according to CBO

CBO specifically estimated the "total effect on outlays" of Obama’s budget as an increase of $2.7 trillion compared with what’s called for in current law. So by CBO’s figuring, spending would go up $2.7 trillion, not down $2.2 trillion.

[Riot]

I challenge all the Obama Haters here to watch 60 Minutes tonight, then discuss what is said here.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by Riot

I challenge all the Obama Haters here to watch 60 Minutes tonight, then discuss what is said here.

he loves himself more than andy stering..though i will get the bs meter out of the basement..

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

he said nothing...im all over it..blah blah blah.. oh and he likes to tell everyone hes the prez..and has the final say..

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

just a few snippets:

Thanks, but I'll wait until Congress gets through with tearing apart the budget, as they have 1000 times more input into the final product than the President does

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Thanks, but I'll wait until Congress gets through with tearing apart the budget, as they have 1000 times more input into the final product than the President does

it's his budget that he submitted they were talking about, not what congress will eventually approve. but way to deflect at any rate. obama wants increased spending, while at the same time cautioning about a bigger deficit. it's called talking out of both sides of your mouth.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

it's his budget that he submitted they were talking about, not what congress will eventually approve. but way to deflect at any rate. obama wants increased spending, while at the same time cautioning about a bigger deficit. it's called talking out of both sides of your mouth.

??? The President doesn't make up the vast majority of what we spend every year - it is largely predetermined, Medicare, federal employees, defense, etc. For example Fed employees are getting a 2% raise this year.

Are you talking about what is in the House and Senate now, the omnibus bill for 2010 spending, right?

So tell me, out of all the 2010 spending ("Obama's budget" is not what it is), what is specifically Obama's programs, added, that you don't like?

And yes, that bill (those bills, House and Senate are different) are huge and filled with pork, and much will be cut out, and the vast majority of crap in it is put there by our Congressmen and Senators for their districts and states.

Blaming everything in there for 2010 all on Obama is ridiculous. And yes, you have to wait and see what is passed and what is not.

News (not op-ed) article discussing it: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=alggRZ3von6w

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Thanks, but I'll wait until Congress gets through with tearing apart the budget, as they have 1000 times more input into the final product than the President does

That's bs. The Dems control both houses and he is the freakin President and of the same party. He can get whatever he wants in or out of that thing. If he can't?

If he doesnt have enough influence within his own party to get his own budget passed we should seriously be worried.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

That's bs. The Dems control both houses and he is the freakin President and of the same party. He can get whatever he wants in or out of that thing. If he can't?

If he doesnt have enough influence within his own party to get his own budget passed we should seriously be worried.

Do you even keep current on the news?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Thanks, but I'll wait until Congress gets through with tearing apart the budget, as they have 1000 times more input into the final product than the President does

Here let me repeat in response to your inference that the budget is NOT Obama's but actually is 1000 times more Congresses.....


That's bs. The Dems control both houses and he is the freakin President and of the same party. He can get whatever he wants in or out of that thing. If he can't?

If he doesnt have enough influence within his own party to get his own budget passed we should seriously be worried.



The interesting thing is that "current news" actually has little to do with your inferring that the budget is almost exclusively the province of Congress with the President having very little to do with it .........unless 1000 times less isnt a big deal in the alternate reality world in which you live in.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Exactly. Let's not listen to the spin, let's see what's real:

So far Obama hasn't spent $200 billion he was entitled to (budgeted) to spend. He gave us a tax cut. He kept us out of a depression.He says won't sign a health reform bill unless it's self-funded. He keeps railing against increased costs across the federal government.

We'll see what Congress does with the budget, and what Obama redlines or not out of it.

Obama campaigned on zero-based budgeting, let's hope he holds to it. So far he's doing fine.

You keep saying this and yet harp on others for things perceived. I can tell you one with with complete certainty, if someone with any creditability had shown this to be true we would have been bombarded with it. Obama with falling approval rates, a seemingly dead Cap and tax bill, a weak Democratic showing at the polls in the Nov elections, a struggling health care bill, an increasing deficit and seemingly getting blasted by the far left as a traitor and the right for exposing him hasn't used the "I kept us out of a depression" card. Why exactly would that be? A new president assuming huge global financial troubles saves the day but doesnt tell anyone?

As for the rest you simply refuse to see the truth. As always you simply listen to what they say, not understand what they do.

Let me ask you one question about the healthcare deal. If it will take 4 years of revenue and "cuts" before there is enough money to even begin the program, how will it possibly sustain itself without a massive tax increase?

[docicu3]

Let me ask you one question about the healthcare deal. If it will take 4 years of revenue and "cuts" before there is enough money to even begin the program, how will it possibly sustain itself without a massive tax increase?[/quote]

It can't........thank God. Thus it will be much ado about nothing as expected by anyone with a calculator and a calendar.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You keep saying this and yet harp on others for things perceived. I can tell you one with with complete certainty, if someone with any creditability had shown this to be true ...

How about virtually every financial expert, including your Wall Street Journal? Every one of them has said it kept us out of a depression.

YOU are the one saying he's been a financial failure, yet you still have nothing concrete to show except what you fear will maybe happen in the future, sorta maybe.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

How about virtually every financial expert, including your Wall Street Journal? Every one of them has said it kept us out of a depression.

.

Uh where and when?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You keep saying this and yet harp on others for things perceived. I can tell you one with with complete certainty, if someone with any creditability had shown this to be true we would have been bombarded with it. Obama with falling approval rates, a seemingly dead Cap and tax bill, a weak Democratic showing at the polls in the Nov elections, a struggling health care bill, an increasing deficit and seemingly getting blasted by the far left as a traitor and the right for exposing him hasn't used the "I kept us out of a depression" card. Why exactly would that be? A new president assuming huge global financial troubles saves the day but doesnt tell anyone?

As for the rest you simply refuse to see the truth. As always you simply listen to what they say, not understand what they do.

Let me ask you one question about the healthcare deal. If it will take 4 years of revenue and "cuts" before there is enough money to even begin the program, how will it possibly sustain itself without a massive tax increase?

it won't. i'd imagine obama will make it look nice, will get it passed, and then leave the real bill for after he's long gone out of office. he'll be able to crow about how he got it done (interesting isn't it, when there's a success it's the president who did it, but if there's a problem-it's congresses fault!) but later we'll have bigger and bigger issues to deal with to keep it going.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Danzig

it won't. i'd imagine obama will make it look nice, will get it passed, and then leave the real bill for after he's long gone out of office. he'll be able to crow about how he got it done (interesting isn't it, when there's a success it's the president who did it, but if there's a problem-it's congresses fault!) but later we'll have bigger and bigger issues to deal with to keep it going.

and look what i just found that explains in detail what i predicted:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...508080098.html

Under the House bill, CBO projects that the entitlement would bring in $123 billion in premiums from 2010-2019 and pay out only $20 billion in benefits. CBO also projects that the Senate's version would generate $88 billion in premiums and $14 billion in benefits.

But in a letter late last month to Sen. Tom Harkin, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf explained that while the Class Act would likely reduce federal budget deficits during 2020-2029, it would do so "by smaller amounts than in the initial decade."

By the third decade, CBO says the program would pay more in benefits than it received in premiums and what it saved Medicaid (which currently pays for long-term care for millions of elderly). Mr. Elmendorf concludes that "the programs would add to budget deficits in the third decade—and in succeeding decades—by amounts on the order of tens of billions of dollars for each 10-year period." These long-term demands on the Treasury would coincide with shortfalls in Medicare and Social Security projected to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
Sen. Kennedy notwithstanding, it is hard not to conclude that a major motivation for the Class Act is to make ObamaCare look fiscally better over CBO's official 10-year budget horizon. Without the new long-term care program, CBO's projected deficit reductions for the House and Senate bills would be $36 billion and $58 billion, respectively, rather than $138 billion and $130 billion. This makes the overall Democratic reform look fiscally more responsible than it really is. The real danger comes after 10 years, when the long-term care program will increase deficits and create even greater pressure for government rationing of medical care

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

and look what i just found that explains in detail what i predicted:

In 30 years, we can look at that small, partial portion of the health-care reform act, and adjust it, if necessary. The first 20-25 years are clearly markedly profitable, according to that article.