Will this Democratic congress be remembered as historic?
In the darkest days of George Bush’s presidency, he and his supporters liked to suggest that history might judge his administration’s many failings with a less jaundiced eye.
Count me among the skeptics.
There are few political observers across the ideological spectrum who view Mr. Bush’s departure from the national scene with anything other than relief.
But the “history will judge us” argument is a little more convincing for this Democratic congress and its partnership with President Barack Obama.
From the beginning, pundits have insisted that this would be a do-nothing sort of bunch, especially after Democrats lost their 60-seat supermajority in the Senate.
Without the ability to defeat Republican filibusters, surely a stalemate would ensue, right?
Wrong. I’m a political junky of the first order — capable of destroying a party with my blowhard opinions about the 1964 presidential race — and I can’t remember congress accomplishing more in any two-year period.
It’s fair for Republians and conservatives to insist that lawmakers made bad choices and passed bad laws.
But the argument (which I saw repeated just yesterday on the Huffington Post website) that the Democrats have squandered their moment just doesn’t wash anymore.
They passed a massive stimulus bill, pushed through a healthcare reform package that eluded lawmakers since the 1940s, and enacted the most sweeping reform of our dysfunctional financial regulatory system since FDR was in the White House.
Before the 2010 midterms, Democrats will also have installed two new Supreme Court justices.
And they may well have pushed through an energy bill and a repeal of the Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell policy banning gays and lesbians from open service in the military.
Not since Lyndon Johnson was in the White House have Democrats achieved that kind of track record, yet here’s how the Politico website assessed the situation:
Having moved swiftly toward achieving the very policy objectives he promised voters as a candidate, Obama is still widely perceived as flirting with a failed presidency.
Meanwhile, progressive Eric Alterman insisted in The Nation that “significant accomplishments notwithstanding, the Obama presidency has been a big disappointment.”
Alterman’s argument — echoing those of many on the left — is pretty simple: Mr. Obama and Democrats in congress haven’t fulfilled every campaign promise they ever made in 24 months.
Which is, obviously, a ludicrous complaint. But it’s one that is likely to have a deep impact on the November elections.
In recent weeks, Mr. Obama’s poll numbers have sagged and then sagged again, largely because he’s been losing the support of white Democratic voters who rallied to him in 2008.
Angered by the continuing weakness in the economy, and frustrated by the inevitable compromises in our political process, a lot of Democrats are likely to sit out next year’s election.
Ironically, it may well be those impatient and apathetic Democrats — not zealous tea-party Republicans — who put an end to one of the most ambitious, far-reaching and, yes, historic legislative efforts our country has seen.
.jpg)
Brian calls it “most ambitious, far-reaching and, yes, historic legislative efforts our country has seen.”
Not exactly the “most transparent”, “end to earmarks”, legislation that candidate Obama promised.
No. He just doubled-down on the dirtiest kind of politics, and those “those impatient and apathetic Democrats” are not wanting any part of it.
That’s a gross and unfair simplification of what Alterman wrote, Brian. His analysis is a smart take on why much of the country, and not merely the fuzzy-headed liberals you dismiss so frequently, are disappointed.
This president and Congress haven’t accomplished anywhere near what GW Bush did in the first two years of his presidency. I don’t agree with what Bush did, but he “accomplished” more with the Patriot Act and the tax cuts, in terms of legislation that will affect the mass of people in this country over a long period of time (for ill, unfortunately, IMO), than the whole rest of the Obama agenda that’s passed so far. And there were two wars, also.
Bush changed the course of this country. That’s historic. Obama’s treading water, fighting the tide that Bush created.
“…capable of destroying a party with my blowhard opinions about the 1964 presidential race…”
I’ll believe it, Brian. ;)
I think we talk about history as a judge since we don’t yet see the results till long after the actions were taken. What will the results of these “historic legislative efforts” be? One result will probably have to be the need to raise taxes in a massive way. Doing that in a faltering economy will be a disaster, ask anyone on either side of the aisle. The presidents “committee” is waiting till after the election to drop that bomb on us. Some big mistakes have been made. We need to wait and see what the results are. So far all we have are businesses sitting on the sidelines flush with cash that don’t dare invest any of it because all these actions have made the future all that more uncertain. It is certainly “historic”, no argument there.
There’s “good” historic and “My God, what were these idiots thinking?!!!” historic. I’m pretty sure you can guess how I view them.
Sure it will be historic…..for two reasons. #1. For the first time in history, every vote in the Senate requires a super majority vote to get any legislation passed. #2. For the first time ( I think) the minority party in the Senate has a policy of insuring that the Obama administration fails, even if it takes the country down too.
While we’re on the subject of The Nation, this Congress will also be remembered for not doing enough about unemployment because people were bamboozled by deficit scolds, which is well-argued here: http://www.thenation.com/article/37534/deficits-mass-destruction
PNElba, I believe the super majority thing started just a few years back during Bush’s reign. I forget the issue they were arguing over, but the Dems demanded a super majority to block something the Repubs were doing. Now we’re stuck with it until common sense returns to Washington, and they’ll be making snowballs in Hades before that happens.
there’s a nice chart on the rise of cloture here. i think it’s wholely unreasonable to pin the origin of the problem on democrats.
Given the cards he’s been dealt, I think he’s done a fairly competent job thus far. That’s not to say I haven’t been somewhat disappointed on some issues. For instance, Health care (I wanted TRICARE for all), the “surge” in Afghanistan (we can’t win there and need to get out ASAP), the continued wiretap business (he’s dragged his feet on this), legislation passed ending federal intervention in states that have passed medical or legal marijuana reforms (statements from Eric Holder are not enough, we need legislation preventing the DEA from overstepping their jurisdiction) major cuts and not increases in the annual defense appropriation (the DOD budget is the biggest discretionary spending item in the federal budget and continues to grow…4.5% in the next year alone), stop paying for the wars with separate appropriations and include them in the budget (he stated in the campaign that he’d end this accounting gimmick), etc…..
Having said that, I voted for Obama based upon the choice between he and his opponent and who I felt was more competent and had ideas I could support. I didn’t vote for Obama out of some naive notion that he was going to change the culture of Washington. And given he’s had little to no cooperation from the Republican leadership, I’d say he’s done alright. As Bill Clinton pointed out recently in an interview, “if you exam what he’s accomplished in a mere 18 months legislatively, he’s done pretty well.”
Bret, you are being disingenuous again. I have no problem with the minority party, whether it be Democratic or Republican, using a filibuster when absolutely necessary. The members of this Republican Senate are using it routinely to prevent governing. They even admit that they want Obama (and I assume the country) to fail. That way they get re-elected.
The most filibusters used by a Democratic minority was 58 times in 1999-2002 Congress. I think in the current Congress we are well over 100 filibusters.
As for the “super majority thing” I believe its basis is Senate Rule 22 which was adopted in 1917 for a pretty good reason.
I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing. Looking at the chart I may be recalling something different, my rememberer being somewhat on the fritz of late. Wasn’t there a big to-do over something, maybe a SCOTUS nominee, where the traditional majority was written off and a super majority required by the Dems which established a new standard? Does that ring a bell? That’s what I’m thinking of. If it’s not the same super majority P is talking about then I’m in the wrong. Anyone recall what I’m talking about?
It is nice to have a reality check around. I’m pretty disappointed in the Democratic Party and their agenda. Yes they’ve passed a lot of legislation but it has been pretty watered-down. For instance on health-care Obama walked in to the negotiations announcing that he was pulling single-payer off the table. After many years of study historians may say that was the only way to get something done. I have my doubts.
Much of what has been accomplished simply had to be done. The last election was about the Supreme Court. Everyone knew that justices would be retiring and with the SC already far to the right–activist Right I would say–it was important to get a Democrat in the Whitehouse. So I discount the SC nominations as being simply timing. Of course timing is everything, but…
Many will not see it this way but I find the Obama cabinet to be centrist if not tilting right. His military record so far is fairly right wing, and the financial work isn’t very different than a Nixon might have done.
On the other hand, if Bret is agin him I guess he can’t be all bad.
Sorry for making this about Obama, but I’m using him to represent the Dems.
Also, I’m not trying to denigrate Nixon. I’d have taken Nixon over Reagan or Bush 2 any day.
Well, if we want to move over into talking about the King, yup, he’s right up there with FDR. Break whatever laws you want, seize whatever powers you want, lie like a rug and no one questions it. I sure do look forward to having an additional $1K taken out of my pocket when the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire this fall. No more $!K child tax credit. Boy, that’ll show those evil rich guys!
The King is an empty suit more concerned with taking the Queen on vacation after vacation than doing any work. In a word, the man is LAZY. He’s in way over his head, has no clue what he’s doing or does know and doesn’t care that he’s dragging us down. More taxes in a depression don’t help things.
Hey Knuck, I didn’t have much good to say about Bush either.
“The King…”, “seize whatever powers you want”, “lie like a rug”, “taking the Queen on vacation”, “LAZY”, “More taxes in a depression”, “doesn’t care that he is dragging us down”.
Where is the evidence that and of the above is true or has actually happened and is not just partisan opinion?
Bret, I’m disappointed. I’ve been coming around to thinking you are a better person than those comments indicate. Those are just stupid, unthinking, TEA Party crap-comments. Those are the types of comments that are “dragging us down.”
BTW, he is not the “King”, he is the “Chosen One”. At least keep up to date with your infantile name calling.
No, actually he used to be The Messiah. You listen to too much Hannity. I’ve decided to call him the King since he sees to think he’s royalty. And for proof all you have to do is look around. He did seize the power to unlawfully fire the CEO of GMC, did he not? He did seize the power to force people to buy a product or be fined/jailed, did he not? He did say there would be no new taxes on those making under $250K did he not? And yet he wants to let the Bush Tax cuts expire, has lined up all sorts of new costs in the health care debacle, has lined us up for an approximate $19 TRILLION in debt over the next few years, all which will result in more taxes for the common man. That used to be called LYING when the other guy was in office. And what does the guy do besides vacation, attend parties, golf, play basketball and have parties several nights a week at the White House?
Yeah, we’re in a depression as far as I can see. It’s maybe just starting, but there’s no recovery. Spin numbers all you want but things are getting worse, not better. So instead of working on answers the King is taking the lazy way out and going with good old Plan B- BLAME BUSH. Well, that’s all well and good, W. bears responsibility, but last I knew he wasn’t in the big seat at the WH.
Hey, it’s not just me. His poll numbers have reversed themselves. People notice when the all knowing King doesn’t help protect our shores from oil spills, all it would have taken is a word and the skimmers would have been on their way, the permits for berms and sea walls fast lined, help from foreign nations specialized craft would have been on it’s way. But noooooooo, the King and Queen can’t lower themselves to such mundane matters. Instead it’s golf and the Queen lecturing the little people and what fat slobs they are.
It could be worse, that blithering idiot Pelosi could be in charge, or even old “Both Feet in my Mouth” Biden, or “I love Illegals” McCain. I see no hope in the current crop of politicians unless someone drafts Chris Christy from Joisey. At least then we’d have a chance, but I keep forgetting those 435 morons in Congress that would block every common sense move he’d make.
Depressing, ain’t it?
Bret, you have an “out” for everything. You hate everyone, you blame everyone and you believe in no one (not even your country). If the country goes down the tubes it’s going to be because of people like you. You sir, are pitiful and depressing.
Sorry, but The King is on his 3rd or 4th vacation since the oil well popped. How many vacations have you taken in that time? He’s played more rounds of golf in a year and half the Bush did in 8 years! Tell me he’s “not resting till till the oil is stopped”!
Yes, you are right in one respect. I have zero faith in our present day politicians. Blind obedience to a politician or political party is what got us here today. Do you have any faith that all will be well if we follow the current path? Please, in all seriousness, explain to me how you think that can possibly happen. We have borrowed more money than we can possibly hope to pay back without pretty much emptying the pockets of our entire population. We have leaders who either can’t understand that you can’t borrow your way out debt or who are making their fortunes off the system and won’t cut off their revenue stream. So just what do you think is going to happen? Tax the rich all you want, all you’ll do is turn them into poor people or drive them out of the country. Borrow more and keep spending on social programs and pork, our debt is simply unsustainable now so how will more debt fix it?
I’ll take a different tack- Instead of you taking the “out” that all we have to do is trust our politicians, let’s use common sense. We spend too much. Can we agree on that? How about we stop spending so much? Cut the pork, the redundant social programs, the arts, close Gitmo and leave the middle east ASAP so we can cut some defense spending. Leave taxes at their current level and start paying off some debt. Get our bond ratings back up where they should be. Cut government spending by 10% a year to start. Cut all Congressional perks and start using teleconferencing for the House and Senate to discuss matters. IOW, close Congress except for maybe 60 days a year. Get them out of Washington and back home where they belong and can’t do as much damage.
Those are just a couple ideas, I’m sure there are lots of others out there with better ideas on how to cut the spending and the taxation that follows and loss of business and faith in America that is ruining us. Surely you have some ideas along this line?
I agree with everyone of your cost cutting ideas and more. So explain to me how all the ranting and name calling helps. That’s what confuses me and that is what is preventing things from getting done in this country. It’s all about fear and blame and I’m sick of it.
Go to factcheck.org and compare vacation times of past Presidents. Bush spent more time on vacation than JFK spent in office. Bush spent 69 days of his first year in office on vacation. President Obama spent 26 days.
But is vacation time really that big of a deal. Must experts agree that Obama has accomplished more in less than two years in office than any recent President. Now you may not like what he accomplished but that doesn’t mean major accomplishments have not been made.
I’m not taking any “out”. I believe in our system of government. We have elections every two years to put people in office to represent us. If they don’t represent us, then we can replace them. At least that is how the system is supposed to work. One problem is the system of drawing Congressional districts to protect politicians. The other bigger problem is the source of money used to put those people in office. But then, you have already told us you have no problem with corporate funding of elections in the USA.
Is the government broken – yes. The Senate may be broken permanently now that majority rule is not a rule.
And, common sense, absolutely no. I do not believe in “common sense”. Common sense is what most people believe. Most people in the USA do not accept the theory of evolution or the evidence that our climate is changing. Sorry, I will stick to accepting evidence and facts to make sense of things.
Borrowing money has been a serious problem in this country. Again, what confuses me is that borrowing money was NEVER a problem until President Obama was elected. All evidence I’ve seen shows that the Bush tax cuts have been instrumental in our current economic condition. Too bad we can’t post the graphs that show this.
I just don’t see the “common sense” in cutting spending in the current economic climate. I’m not an economist, but I can understand that when no one is spending, we are going to lose jobs, businesses are going to fold, tax revenues are going to go down. And when that happens, we are going to lose more jobs, more businesses are going to go under and we lose more tax revenues. In biology that is called positive feedback and we have evolved very, very few positive feedback mechanisms.
Numbers? Bush spent 216 days on “vacation” in 8 years, so 54 days in 2 years vs. Obamas current 85 in a year and half. And lets remember many of Bushs “vacations” at Crawford were working vacations spent with foreign dignitaries etc. Not Obamas style. And if you can find any record that Bush took 3 or 4 vacations in the 100 days following 9/11 or Katrina please provide a link. The oil spill is Obamas 9/11 and Katrina and he’s blowing it. Bush was a disaster but this clown is no better, why defend him?
Still have that issue with people joining together and having freedom of speech eh? Look, I understand where you are coming from. I don’t think outfits like Moveon.org, Media Matters and Progressive Insurance and all those George Soros funded progressive outfits should be able to wield the influence they do. But multi billionaires like Soros have that right and power. I don’t think it’s really “right” that Hollywood should be able to send false and misleading messages in alleged documentaries, but I don’t think anyone has the “right” to outlaw that either. You want freedom of speech or not?
Tell me, do you see either party as worthy of your trust? Do you really think anyone in either party gives any thought to anything other than staying in power? I don’t see more than a very few current Federal level politicians that I would trust with my beat up old truck, much less my childrens future or the nations future. At the State level? Oh my, just look at what we have here.
And what’s with the common sense remark? Most people I know accept evolution AND the idea of a higher power or intelligent design to use the current phrase. They accept climate change, they question the causes and so called remedies, especially the ones that somehow require obscene amounts of money and power being taken from us, the evil western nations.
And the ranting comes from both sides P. You refuse to accept there were people on the right (the TEA Party) that were not thrilled with Bush, that were complaining about his decisions, especially over the last 2-3 years. Haven’t you ranted about anyone in the TP being nothing but a racist, homophobe, bigot that’s out to protect themselves since they’re all rich white corporate executives that just happen to be Grand Klugel in the Craven or whatever the chief boogeyman at the KKK is called?
We can cut spending. We can do it slowly and carefully but it requires long term solid plans not subject to political whims. We need to have spending from the private sector, funding not dependent on taxpayer dollars. Your positive feed back model works in the current situation too. Increased public spending requires either more tax revenue or borrowing, more borrowing means a lower value to the dollar or bond rating. More taxes result in higher costs, less liquidity for the public, lost jobs, tax revenue and all the stuff you laid out. So in my mind at least it’s better to slowly cut spending which results in an effective revenue increase to pay off debt and eventually be able to get us back on solid ground. The problem is there aren’t 5% of the politicians even thinking about this, much less working on it. So just why would anyone capable of reasoning this out have any faith or desire to vote for any of the current crop of power hungry candidates? When you look at it from my point of view you’d be disgusted with the whole group too and occasionally vent a bit too.
I’m really not sure anymore why I’m responding but Bush spent 977 days on vacation over his 8 years in office. Of course many of those days were spent on his “ranch” or at Camp David or at his rich family resort in Maine, so by your definition they don’t count as vacation. Ok, I get it, Obama is shiftless.
Bush was on vacation when Katrina hit and he stayed on vacation (as did Dick Cheney) (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php title=George_W._Bush:_Hurricane_Katrina) but I’m sure you will find a way to explain that away as well.
Gallop shows only 39% of Americans “believe in evolution” (http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/darwin-birthday-believe-evolution.aspx)
As for climate change beliefs of Americans again, facts are easily available (http://www.gallup.com/poll/126560/americans-global-warming-concerns-continue-drop.aspx)
Make up of TEA Party members, facts available (http://www.gallup.com/poll/141098/tea-party-supporters-overlap-republican-base.aspx)
It’s hard to have a reasonable discussion when facts don’t seem to be facts anymore.
I stand corrected on the total days. I would point out however that a working vacation at your home is quite a bit different than what Obama is doing. And Obama is at one of those “rich family resorts in Maine” right now, so who’s name calling?
Bush WAS on vacation at the start of Katrina but cut it short- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/30/AR2005083000945.html He was crucified for “not doing anything” while Obama gets a pass. Why defend a guy whose doing even less than his predecessor? Obama has taken 3 or 4 vacations since the spill started. Would you be excusing Bush or McCain or Palin?
You said “MOST people in the USA do not accept the theory of evolution” MOST is not 39%. MOST is at least 51% and thats not in the numbers. What the poll doesn’t ask is how many accept both evolution and the idea of intelligent design.
And on climate change, considering all the lies and distortions and massaged numbers I would expect people to be skeptical. The poll shows over half believe it’s man made and the number growing closer to 50/50.
Your Tea Party numbers show about 1/5 are other than conservative Republican. It says nothing about income, race, bigotry, penchant for evil, etc. The TP is about TAXES first and foremost, I think it would be expected that they would be predominantly conservative. In fact, that 20% are politically to the left surprises me. Your poll certainly isn’t any defense of the hysterical, frothing at the mouth, hate filled rhetoric I’ve seen regarding the TP.
Why do you defend the current President? He’s no better than Bush, worse in many ways. And his main benefactor is truly evil. I suppose you have polls that show George Soros is really Mr. Nice Guy? The point is that we keep electing POLITICIANS and expecting them to act as public servants with our best interests at heart instead of “what’s in it for me?” We’re going to get less and less from our politicians at the Federal and State levels until we start holding them accountable and tossing the bums out.
Ok Bret, you done me in. As my 15 year old neice would say…..”whatever”.
“Whatever”. Yeah, well here’s some “whatever” that was on the front page of the Watertown Times yesterday. It reminds me of a certain Geo. H.W. Bush saying “read my lips…” only this time it was The King of Hope and Change promising no new taxes. There appears to be a little confusion between The King and his lackeys who are doing their best to convince the court that mandated healthcare IS a tax. But there won’t be any new taxes on those making under $250K, well, except for those were illegally forcing to purchase a product who will pay a tax or else pay fines till the IRS throws them in prison.
And people can support this garbage? Yup, the same people who tore Bush a new one every stinkin’ day for breaking laws and abusing power call The King a genius. Riiiight…
Stupid cut and paste….here, my bad….
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/health/policy/18health.html
Bret, please stop beating on me. I’ve admitted you’ve done me in. I’m even considering not voting for that shiftless, lazy, fascist, commie running our government. You’ve won!!!
P, I’m not stomping on you man, I’m just trying to show some of why I can’t understand why otherwise good, well intentioned and intelligent people can vote for same stuff decade after decade. I did it! I’m disgusted with myself for it. This is a big part of what things like the TP are all about- the same old, same old. Republicrat or Democan, almost no difference in the end result.
Think about this the next time you tell yourself to trust Washington- US National debt is currently between $58 and 62+ TRILLION DOLLARS. The GDP of the entire world is about $61 TRILLION dollars. The US currently has about $15 Trillion in cash circulating. Think about that…..how do we pay our debt? What we’ll do is as Bernanke said- we print more money. What happens when you print more money? Inflation, the value of the currency drops like a rock. Think Zimbabwe in Hometown USA.
Folks, I strongly urge you all to at least consider preparing for unpleasant times. Cut up the credit cards, start saving a little and put a few extra cans of food in the pantry. The money for that vacation to Aruba might better be spent paying down your mortgage or paying off the car or card. Just give it some thought. Higher prices and taxes are coming. You’ll be taxed on the value of your healthcare, you’ll be losing half your child tax credit, you’ll be paying more and more taxes to support the politicians efforts to stay in office.
Just consider it.
Bret4207 says:
“US National debt is currently between $58 and 62+ TRILLION DOLLARS.”
The amount commonly used for the US National Debt is $13.2 trillion, That’s the amount that the federal government is currently paying $400 billion interest on this year. You can get other numbers by including different kinds of debt and projected obligations, but the $13.2 trillion number is the one that corresponds with the one that budget watchers have been comparing for more than fifty years.
The Congressional budget office that produces the federal debt number also gives a total of $54 trillion for all US debt–but that includes individual mortgage and credit card debt, state and municipal debt and bond obligations, private commercial debt, and debt obligations of the major financial institutions.
Dale Hobson
NCPR web manager
Dale, with respect, I disagree.
http://www.pgpf.org/about/nationaldebt/
Have a little time now. Look at the link I gave. That’s not a conservative political organization. Fiscally conservative, yes. But the figure they give is the money the gov’t has promised to pay, obligated money- debt. This is what they have agreed to pay. So at this point it’s not just the $16.5 trillion they owe and are paying interest on that’s the problem. It’s that the gov’t has promised to pay out another $43 trillion! If I promise to pay your mortgage and signs paper work saying that, that’s my debt. Same thing here. The US Gov’t is obligated, CURRENTLY, to pay out that much over the next decades. Inflation is a very real concern and costs will not fall, at least I cant see anyway the day of the $20.00 doctors call will return. Nothing ever comes in under budget and IIRC that chart was dated before Health Care passed, so who knows how much additional debt there is.
Where do you think the funds to pay out those promises will come from? Taxpayers? Not unless you plan to take 60-75% of their pay. The rich? Take it all and it still won’t cover it. No, they’ll do the only thing they can- print more money. The gov’t has been doing that for decades. No sense stopping now. So lets put 4x the amount of money in circulation, what happens? What you buy today for a dollar will cost $4 or more dollars (the middle man has to get his cut, plus taxes will be at least 4x as high!) . The minimum wage is what, $7.25? So it’ll have to be $29.00 an hour or more to keep up with the inflation caused by this debt. That’s not figuring in the unknowns like peak oil. Gas now is close to $3.00 a gallon. It might be $12.00 due to inflation, but I’m guessing it’ll be far, far higher than that, if you can even get it.
You see where this is headed? So the gov’t can do one of two things- either break their promises or devalue our currency. They won’t want to break the promises. Too many special interest groups screaming and voting them out of office. So they’ll print, print, print.
What’s in your wallet? Too bad it’s not gold.
But we have to be consistent in how we measure debt. The 13.2 Trillion dollar debt is what we actually owe and have borrowed and this historically is how we have measured our debt. So it makes no sense to bring in other methods. I do think it is a legitimate idea to look at all of these promises the Gov has made and recognize this is a huge problem, but it is not debt.
I wish we had some inflation pressure right now, what we have is deflationary pressure which is more indicative of a depression which I think we are going to be in for at least a decade.
President Obama is the wrong person to be in office during a depression from that perspective he and his staff with the exception of Hillary Clinton who he has effectively sidelined and isolated; are simply not up to the job, they don’t have a clue.
Mervel, how else can we get the message across that Gov’t has borrowed and promised and spent beyond anyone’s wildest realization? Currently it’s $16.5 trillion we have to pay on, but the gov’t has promised to pay out 4x that much. People don’t seem to be able to wrap their heads around that. This is that “balloon payment” on the sub-prime loan so to speak. It’s coming, we can;t pay for what we have now and the Federal Government just keeps spending and promising.
Okay, don’t use that figure, use the $16.5 trillion. We still can’t afford to make the payments!!! It’s that simple. So either we cut spending (HAH!) raise taxes and kill spending and investment and business/jobs (moan……) or we print more more to pay off loans at maybe $.50 on the dollar or even less. The end result is that we’ll destroy ourselves with the last two choices and no one in gov’t wants to address item 1.
Look where we are today, we have a President telling us to tighten our belts, but he’s flying the Royal Pooch around on private jets at taxpayer cost, playing golf, having Broadway Revues at the White House, living like a King and telling us to eat cake. And there’s no one on the other side that wants to do anything different.
PNelba – I think you were writing satire, but I’m deleting your comment on the general principle that there’s a way to get your message across that’s less crass than this.
Brian, NCPR
Yes, by all means delete my satire. Just make sure that Bret continues to get his crass messages across. Just look at his latest comment on your most recent post. Makes me want to puke!!!!
Sorry, the latest Somerstein post.
Crass??? Being concerned that Joe Average is blissfully unaware that this house of cards is built on a foundation involving a $2.00 yard sale card table and cheese whiz is crass?
my God, i assumed you were going to chip in with some decisive insght on the finish there, not depart it with ‘we depart it to you to determine’.
Bret, well I think those are the choices you have that correct in my opinion. I do think we could get major debt relief when we pull totally out of Afghanistan and Iraq. However if we have to fight wars against North Korea and or Iran that savings will be totally blown.
We can make the payments on 13 or 16 trillion whatever that amount, regardless it is huge. But we can make those payments it will simply crowd out other government spending. The other options of course are simply shaving social security and medicare. There are options they are just not good options.
This is interesting, given the tenor of this thread:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/we-cheat-other-guy-and-pass-savings-to.html