The KING OF LIES Diverts Blame on Sequestration

[soonercruiser]

I'm gonna puke if I see one more photo op of Obummer speaking with a bunch of his lemming peeps behind him on the stage.
He is the person responsible for the Sequestration Bill.
In 2011, he even threatened that he would veto any attempt to stop the automatic spending cuts.

And now, he wants to blame Congress and the Republicans for the hardships that occur as a result of Sequestration???
Unbelievable LIES, from the KING OF LIES!
This amount of lying, and the drive-by media supporting him is simply EVIL!

Here is a CBS video of him speaking in November 2011, saying he will not allow the automatic spending cuts to be stopped!
......at about 3:35 of this video......

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/president-obama-threatens-veto-any-changes

[Sooner5030]

he's a politician......what did you expect?

The herd will not hold him accountable because we still have bread and circuses....at least for now.

[diverdog]

I'm gonna puke if I see one more photo op of Obummer speaking with a bunch of his lemming peeps behind him on the stage.
He is the person responsible for the Sequestration Bill.
In 2011, he even threatened that he would veto any attempt to stop the automatic spending cuts.

And now, he wants to blame Congress and the Republicans for the hardships that occur as a result of Sequestration???
Unbelievable LIES, from the KING OF LIES!
This amount of lying, and the drive-by media supporting him is simply EVIL!

Here is a CBS video of him speaking in November 2011, saying he will not allow the automatic spending cuts to be stopped!
......at about 3:35 of this video......

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/president-obama-threatens-veto-any-changes

Aren't these the kind of cuts you righties have been asking for on this board?

[cleller]

This stuff is getting so old. Every few months a new set of crises, and nothing ever really resolved. No sign of leadership anywhere. Yes, the Congress is awful, but don't we expect a president to take some responsibility? Can he ever get anything done?

[sappstuf]

It is rather amusing to hear from Obama all the bad stuff that will happen if sequestration goes through....

WHY DID YOU SIGN IT INTO LAW THEN DUMBA$$!

Yh-C0srPmZ0

[yermom]

Aren't these the kind of cuts you righties have been asking for on this board?

Well, except the military cuts. We wouldn't want those.

[diverdog]

It is rather amusing to hear from Obama all the bad stuff that will happen if sequestration goes through....

WHY DID YOU SIGN IT INTO LAW THEN DUMBA$$!

Yh-C0srPmZ0

They are all guilty. I think only two in the house voted against the bill. They are all dumbasses.

[sappstuf]

They are all guilty. I think only two in the house voted against the bill. They are all dumbasses.

Be only one is being completely disingenuous about it. The only question that should be asked by the press is why he signed it into law. It will never be asked.

[TUSooner]

As far as I can tell, the only items absolutely "off the table" (according to Boehner) are some tax reforms that the Republicans seemed to favor 2 months ago. On March 1, when I stand to lose probably 20% of my income so the Donald Trumps of the nation can keep a few special tax breaks, I'll know exactly who to blame. Yeah, sequestration was a bad idea, but mainly because it presumed the right-wing-nuts of the GOP would behave rationally instead of using it to screw the general population and the economy in the name of their bizarre ideological purity. It takes a lot of sophistry to blame the Prez for the intransigence of what is in effect a fanatical GOP minority. Fortunately, the population as a whole is smarter than the brainwashed cadre that posts the right wing cant on this board. Only those who are already indoctrinated and lobotomized in the right wing echo chamber will buy what the GOP is selling. But I waste my time here. Carry on.

[cleller]

^^

In the interest of equal time: for an alternate perspective you may change the text of the above post to read "left" in place of "right" and transpose "president" with "GOP".

[Midtowner]

As far as I can tell, the only items absolutely "off the table" (according to Boehner) are some tax reforms that the Republicans seemed to favor 2 months ago. On March 1, when I stand to lose probably 20% of my income so the Donald Trumps of the nation can keep a few special tax breaks, I'll know exactly who to blame. Yeah, sequestration was a bad idea, but mainly because it presumed the right-wing-nuts of the GOP would behave rationally instead of using it to screw the general population and the economy in the name of their bizarre ideological purity. It takes a lot of sophistry to blame the intransigence of what is in effect a fanatical GOP minority on the Prez. Fortunately, the population as a whole is smarter than the brainwashed cadre that posts the right wing cant on this board. Only those who are already indoctrinated and lobotomized in the right wing echo chamber will buy what the GOP is selling. But I waste my time here. Carry on.

Nope, I agree.

Also, keep in mind, the Republican House voted for this. Boehner voted for it... heck, he helped negotiate it as a poison pill designed to force his own hand later. The first person to say the sequester was going to happen publicly was none other than Republican Rand Paul.

Spin, spin away right wing bubblers, this one falls squarely on your boys 'n girls.

It also proves what sane people have been saying for a long time--spending grows the economy, cuts will contract it. That's a rather common sense argument, but a lot of these morons think you can grow the economy through spending cuts... and I guess magic and fairy dust?

[FaninAma]

Aren't these the kind of cuts you righties have been asking for on this board?

yep, bring them on. I suspect, however, that you lefties will be whining a lot harder than the righties about the cuts once they actually take place.

[FaninAma]

Nope, I agree.

Also, keep in mind, the Republican House voted for this. Boehner voted for it... heck, he helped negotiate it as a poison pill designed to force his own hand later. The first person to say the sequester was going to happen publicly was none other than Republican Rand Paul.

Spin, spin away right wing bubblers, this one falls squarely on your boys 'n girls.

It also proves what sane people have been saying for a long time--spending grows the economy, cuts will contract it. That's a rather common sense argument, but a lot of these morons think you can grow the economy through spending cuts... and I guess magic and fairy dust?

Really? There are several minutes of video of Obama in November of 2011 that would disprove your assertion.

And if government spending grows the economy Greece and the rest of Europe should be the economic beacon to the world. Hell, the US is borrowing 46 cents of every dollar we spend. The GDP should be growing at a 5% clip. What.....the last quarter GDP was negative? Get out of here.....according to Mid that can't possibly be correct.

LOL.

[diverdog]

yep, bring them on. I suspect, however, that you lefties will be whining a lot harder than the righties about the cuts once they actually take place.

My one and only concern is that it will trigger a recession.

[FaninAma]

TU, it is so disingenous to claim taxing the Donald Trump's of the world more is going to bring the deficit under control.

There is a monster debt bubble created by irrespopnsible Fed policies and government spending. The government isn't going to get us out of the mess they created. Obama is just trying to stall the inevitable outcome until he is out of office.

[FaninAma]

My one and only concern is that it will trigger a recession.

So will higher taxes. We are already seeing the effects of the SS withholding rate going back up.

[cleller]

My one and only concern is that it will trigger a recession.

It may already be here. Wouldn't that be ironic?

[Midtowner]

Really? There are several minutes of video of Obama in November of 2011 that would disprove your assertion.

And if government spending grows the economy Greece and the rest of Europe should be the economic beacon to the world. Hell, the US is borrowing 46 cents of every dollar we spend. The GDP should be growing at a 5% clip. What.....the last quarter GDP was negative? Gett out of here.....according to Mid that can't possibly be correct.

LOL.

Looks like we'll get to test your theory that cuts will grow the economy soon. Of course the Army has already stated that if the sequester goes into effect, they will cut 300,000 jobs. That's just one employment source.

I'm sure those jobs will be replaced by fairy dust and rainbows and everything will be fine.

[XingTheRubicon]

The fairy dust and rainbows are what we're experiencing now. More than a trillion dollars in deficit spending for 4 straight years resulting in less than 2% GDP growth and calling it a "recovery."

Oh, oh...don't stop spending, it'll cause a recession!! So ****ing stupid it actually boggles the mind.

As one poster said a few months ago...if it's 5AM, you're drunk as hell and don't want to experience a hangover, you can just keep drinking...

[Midtowner]

True or false.. we stop spending and a recession happens. I just want to get you bubblers on the record so that if the sequestration does happen, I can come back and point out what a bunch of ignorant efftards you are about the economy.

[hawaii 5-0]

Just another lame attempt to re-write history.

It was a poison pill agreed to by both Parties to get off their asses and do something productive.

They didn't, and now they want to lay blame where it doesn't belong.

So where are they now instead of hammering out a solution?

Taking yet another vacation from their elected jobs.

5-0

[FaninAma]

Looks like we'll get to test your theory that cuts will grow the economy soon. Of course the Army has already stated that if the sequester goes into effect, they will cut 300,000 jobs. That's just one employment source.

I'm sure those jobs will be replaced by fairy dust and rainbows and everything will be fine.

So you do support a huge military. Nice to know. I will file that little factoid away for future reference.

[XingTheRubicon]

True or false.. we stop spending and a recession happens. I just want to get you bubblers on the record so that if the sequestration does happen, I can come back and point out what a bunch of ignorant efftards you are about the economy.

Dude, you're a 20 hour a week starving atty. You're a little in over your head...kinda like the abortion thread when the entire board had a laugh at your expense...and I mean the entire board. Everyone.

To answer your sophomoric question, yes, cuts will be devastating. Everyone here knows that. It's the lesser of two evils going forward. You're just, once again, too woefully ignorant to fully understand what that means.

[FaninAma]

True or false.. we stop spending and a recession happens. I just want to get you bubblers on the record so that if the sequestration does happen, I can come back and point out what a bunch of ignorant efftards you are about the economy.

The recession is going to happen. It's just a matter of when. I am sure Obama wants to continue to spend like a drunken sailor(apologies to drunken sailors) so the economy can limp along until he gets out of office.

He also wants to demagogue the tax issue. He knows that if he raises taxes enough to hep reduce the deficit that it will trigger a recession. So instead he continues to demonize the "rich" by proposing new taxes on them that will not do anything to seriously decrease the deficit. BTW, what is Obama's current definition of the rich? It used to be families making over $250K and then it was changed to $400K. Now he contunually squawks about people like Donald Trump. So are the rich mega-millionaires or are they upper middle class families that make $250K?

Obama is a clown in over his head. He has no idea how to get out of this mess. He simply doesn't want it to come crashing down around his head while he is in office. His best plan is to :A. keep spending and let us limp along until he is out of office or B. pin the resulting recession on the GOP. He isn't looking for a real soultion.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

True or false.. we stop spending and a recession happens. I just want to get you bubblers on the record so that if the sequestration does happen, I can come back and point out what a bunch of ignorant efftards you are about the economy.

It will absolutely cause a recession in the way that GDP is measured and it's the right thing to do. All of this gov't spending has done nothing to stimulate the private sector and you won't grow revenues until private sector activity picks up. The private sector is waiting for the debt bubble to burst and is scared to invest in this environment.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

True or false.. we stop spending and a recession happens. I just want to get you bubblers on the record so that if the sequestration does happen, I can come back and point out what a bunch of ignorant efftards you are about the economy.

BTW, ignorant efftards read Paul Krugman articles and think they have an education in economics rather than getting an actual education in economics.

[pphilfran]

My one and only concern is that it will trigger a recession.

We are on the brink of one anyway...

No growth (even with massive government spending) since August...numbers can be revised

http://www.e-forecasting.com/US_Monthly_GDP.html

August GDP 13.684 trillion
Jan GDP 13.675

[pphilfran]

yep...the smart thing to do now is cut spending...revenue drops and spending on unemployment and Medicaid climbs...and we are still a trillion a year in the hole...but instead of 7% unemployment we have 10%+....

Yep...cut that ****ing spending to the bone....

[cleller]

We are on the brink of one anyway...

No growth (even with massive government spending) since August...numbers can be revised

http://www.e-forecasting.com/US_Monthly_GDP.html



August GDP 13.684 trillion
Jan GDP 13.675

Just remember, "it could be worse..."

We could be facing the economic collapse coming in 2014, or 2015 right now, instead of having this opportunity to spend more money we don't have on non-Keynesian type projects.

Might as well take the boat out a few times before its repossessed.

[Midtowner]

So you do support a huge military. Nice to know. I will file that little factoid away for future reference.

Right now? You bet I do. I would also favor bringing the troops home and spending as much money as we can with the purpose of growing the economy. That's our only possible salvation right now.

[pphilfran]

Just remember, "it could be worse..."

We could be facing the economic collapse coming in 2014, or 2015 right now, instead of having this opportunity to spend more money we don't have on non-Keynesian type projects.

Might as well take the boat out a few times before its repossessed.

We are not nearly to the point of no return...contrary to what you or Fanin believe...

The priority must be the economy...with 4% growth we still have a good chance of climbing out of this mess...with our current economy we are screwed...

[cleller]

We are not nearly to the point of no return...contrary to what you or Fanin believe...

The priority must be the economy...with 4% growth we still have a good chance of climbing out of this mess...with our current economy we are screwed...

If Obama would direct his spending in a way consistent with his claimed ideology, maybe I'd have a softer outlook. He chooses to instead spend too much on social/welfare programs, that are not only saddling us with higher debt, but a poor and dependent work ethic.

[FaninAma]

yep...the smart thing to do now is cut spending...revenue drops and spending on unemployment and Medicaid climbs...and we are still a trillion a year in the hole...but instead of 7% unemployment we have 10%+....

Yep...cut that ****ing spending to the bone....

You just proved my point. The government and politicians can't quit spending. Just like a junkie can't kick his/her addiction without consequences. The bastards have made the country dependent on government spending. But we are at the Keynesian end point. The consequences will be felt. Am I a doom and gloom type? No, just a realist.

[FaninAma]

We are not nearly to the point of no return...contrary to what you or Fanin believe...

The priority must be the economy...with 4% growth we still have a good chance of climbing out of this mess...with our current economy we are screwed...

There is no chance. None. Zero. You even said as much in your previous post. There is no way to cut spending in a meaningful way that will reduce the rate of deficit accumulation that willnot trigger a severe recession.

Even with Treasury bond rates at historic lows the service on the GDP accounts for 3% of the GDP. If interest rates and bond rates even double that cost will chew up 6 to 8% of the GDP(or 16 to 20% of the government's budget.)

The country's economy is too dependent on government spending. It accounts for close to 40% of the GDP now. That dependency has prevented true growth in private companies and businesses. There is nothing that can step up and replace government spending as the engine for GDP growth......nothing.

[pphilfran]

Not all spending needs to be cut....

Raise the age for SS and Medicare...saves money and does not harm the economy

Bring troops home from overseas...spend the money here and it is stimulus...we could cut military spending and still be able to increase spending in the states...

Freeze all other spending at current levels and let inflation deal with the deficit...

Do I think our current leadership have the nutz to work on a long term plan? Not a chance...

[pphilfran]

There is no chance. None. Zero. You even said as much in your previous post. There is no way to cut spending in a meaningful way that will reduce the rate of deficit accumulation that willnot trigger a severe recession.

Even with Treasury bond rates at historic lows the service on the GDP accounts for 3% of the GDP. If interest rates and bond rates even double that cost will chew up 6 to 8% of the GDP(or 16 to 20% of the government's budget.)

The country's economy is too dependent on government spending. It accounts for close to 40% of the GDP now. That dependency has prevented true growth in private companies and businesses. There is nothing that can step up and replace government spending as the engine for GDP growth......nothing.

I have said all along that long term debt servicing is going to be the final straw...

I agree with you on all points other then I think we can still manage our way out of the mess...where you think there is no chance..

[olevetonahill]

Just another lame attempt to re-write history.

It was a poison pill agreed to by both Parties to get off their asses and do something productive.

They didn't, and now they want to lay blame where it doesn't belong.

So where are they now instead of hammering out a solution?

Taking yet another vacation from their elected jobs.

5-0

No, Obammy's back from Playing with Tigers wood.

[FaninAma]

Not all spending needs to be cut....

Raise the age for SS and Medicare...saves money and does not harm the economy

Bring troops home from overseas...spend the money here and it is stimulus...we could cut military spending and still be able to increase spending in the states...

Freeze all other spending at current levels and let inflation deal with the deficit...

Do I think our current leadership have the nutz to work on a long term plan? Not a chance...

I agree with everything you said but even those sensible measures will trigger a recession tht would probably last for at least 4 to 5 quarters. But at least we would get the worst behind us and hopefully put some safeguards in place that don't allow the idiots in DC to get us right back to the same place in a few years.

[diverdog]

If Obama would direct his spending in a way consistent with his claimed ideology, maybe I'd have a softer outlook. He chooses to instead spend too much on social/welfare programs, that are not only saddling us with higher debt, but a poor and dependent work ethic.

The way out of this situation is to grow jobs and get people working.

[diverdog]

I have said all along that long term debt servicing is going to be the final straw...

I agree with you on all points other then I think we can still manage our way out of the mess...where you think there is no chance..

I read on MarketWatch that 72% of the deficit is due to lower than expected revenues.

[olevetonahill]

I read on MarketWatch that 72% of the deficit is due to lower than expected revenues.

So, Counting yer chickens before they hatch.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

I read on MarketWatch that 72% of the deficit is due to lower than expected revenues.

And 4 years of massive deficit spending has yielded little to no economic growth. At what point do you admit that the current course is not working.

The goal of fiscal policy is not to prevent recessions. There have been times in the past where policy makers have purposefully taken the country into recession. The latest was in the early 80s when we were dealing with stagflation. They decided to take out the easiest piece to deal with, which was the inflation. It caused a recession and we came out of it with no inflation and a much stronger economy.

Today we have a stagnant economy with an unsustainable debt bubble. The easiest part of that to deal with is the debt bubble. If the gov't shows it serious about dealing with the unsustainable budget deficits it will increase business confidence in the long run.

[XingTheRubicon]

you might as well have written that in Latin ^^^^^^^^

[FaninAma]

Right now? You bet I do. I would also favor bringing the troops home and spending as much money as we can with the purpose of growing the economy. That's our only possible salvation right now.

You are going to be disappointed.

[FaninAma]

The way out of this situation is to grow jobs and get people working.

I think we all agree. The thing we disagree on is that it can be done with massive government spending.

[diverdog]

And 4 years of massive deficit spending has yielded little to no economic growth. At what point do you admit that the current course is not working.

The goal of fiscal policy is not to prevent recessions. There have been times in the past where policy makers have purposefully taken the country into recession. The latest was in the early 80s when we were dealing with stagflation. They decided to take out the easiest piece to deal with, which was the inflation. It caused a recession and we came out of it with no inflation and a much stronger economy.

Today we have a stagnant economy with an unsustainable debt bubble. The easiest part of that to deal with is the debt bubble. If the gov't shows it serious about dealing with the unsustainable budget deficits it will increase business confidence in the long run.

The problem is cutting spending is not a zero sum game. It will affect far more than government programs.

Correct me if I am wrong Reagan was saved by a decrease in oil prices and a massive increase in deficit spending.

[okie52]

The problem is cutting spending is not a zero sum game. It will affect far more than government programs.

Correct me if I am wrong Reagan was saved by a decrease in oil prices and a massive increase in deficit spending.

Saved for what...1986? Because that is when oil prices took a nosedive.

[diverdog]

Saved for what...1986? Because that is when oil prices took a nosedive.

Even larger deficits.

I forgot to add he also devaluated the dollar.

[FaninAma]

Even larger deficits.

Thanks to the Democratic controlled Congress not following through on the spending cuts they promised. Reagan was a good President but Tip O'Neil played him like a fiddle on this issue.

[diverdog]

Thanks to the Democratic controlled Congress not following through on the spending cuts they promised. Reagan was a good President but Tip O'Neil played him like a fiddle on this issue.

Reagan spent plenty on his own.

[FaninAma]

Reagan spent plenty on his own.
I never said he didn't. I just wanted to point out that the budget cuts promised by the Democrats in their negotiations with Reagan never materialized.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

If Obama would direct his spending in a way consistent with his claimed ideology, maybe I'd have a softer outlook. He chooses to instead spend too much on social/welfare programs, that are not only saddling us with higher debt, but a poor and dependent work ethic.

He is building in defacto reparations to the former slave population... Regardless if they can prove lineage or not...

[Bourbon St Sooner]

The problem is cutting spending is not a zero sum game. It will affect far more than government programs.

Correct me if I am wrong Reagan was saved by a decrease in oil prices and a massive increase in deficit spending.

I don't know if "massive" deficit spending drove the economy of the 80s. Productivity increases led by advances in technology probably had a lot more to do with it. Anyways we know that massive deficit spending isn't pumping up this economy.

My point was that they had two problems they had to deal with. They chose to tackle the easiest thing to quelch - inflation - at the same time driving the economy into recession. That allowed business confidence to return and growth to pick up.

[diverdog]

I don't know if "massive" deficit spending drove the economy of the 80s. Productivity increases led by advances in technology probably had a lot more to do with it. Anyways we know that massive deficit spending isn't pumping up this economy.

My point was that they had two problems they had to deal with. They chose to tackle the easiest thing to quelch - inflation - at the same time driving the economy into recession. That allowed business confidence to return and growth to pick up.

And it was Carter's boy Volker who did the dirty work.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Volker did the dirty work after Reagan brought in Friedman on his council of economic advisors. Before that he sat there with his thumb up his ***.

[8timechamps]

And 4 years of massive deficit spending has yielded little to no economic growth. At what point do you admit that the current course is not working.

The goal of fiscal policy is not to prevent recessions. There have been times in the past where policy makers have purposefully taken the country into recession. The latest was in the early 80s when we were dealing with stagflation. They decided to take out the easiest piece to deal with, which was the inflation. It caused a recession and we came out of it with no inflation and a much stronger economy.

Today we have a stagnant economy with an unsustainable debt bubble. The easiest part of that to deal with is the debt bubble. If the gov't shows it serious about dealing with the unsustainable budget deficits it will increase business confidence in the long run.

Apparently never.

As was pointed out earlier, we are not past the point of no return, but we're damn near close.

It's hard for me to see us getting through this without a recession though, the trick is to get it over quickly, then get the economy moving the right direction. Doing the same old thing isn't going to get us there.

[Sooner5030]

8% growth in government debt in order to get 2% growth in GDP when total government debt already exceeds 100% of GDP is insane.

Borrowing does not "create" growth.....it just reschedules it from the future.

[SoonerorLater]

The only question at this point is when we will be checkmated. Maybe this can be kicked down the road for a little longer but the end is near. There is absolutely no chance this doesn't end in financial collapse. None whatsoever.

[diverdog]

Volker did the dirty work after Reagan brought in Friedman on his council of economic advisors. Before that he sat there with his thumb up his ***.Are you talking about supply side economics?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Apparently never.

As was pointed out earlier, we are not past the point of no return, but we're damn near close.

It's hard for me to see us getting through this without a recession though, the trick is to get it over quickly, then get the economy moving the right direction. Doing the same old thing isn't going to get us there.

If you just look at the current national debt it's manageable. But if you take into account the current deficit spending and lack of economic growth, we are clearly on a path to financial disaster.

[soonercruiser]

"Bring all the troops home", and they WILL BE BUSY defending our national borders from our real enemies.
Been there! Done that!
History will repeat itself.

What's the #1 gobment responsibility named in the Constitution???
Oh! I forgot! It's outdated!
:uncomfortableness:

[SoonerorLater]

If you just look at the current national debt it's manageable. But if you take into account the current deficit spending and lack of economic growth, we are clearly on a path to financial disaster.

I guess it depends on how you view what's managable. Debt is taking up a larger and larger part of the pie despite historically low rates. The only way we can service the current debt is to borrow even more. This is an obviously untenable situation. Most conversations don't even take into account state and local borrowing. We are sinking into the debt cesspool and at some point when things become bad enough the dollar will lose it's status as the worlds reserve currency. We haven't seen anything yet until oil is no longer priced in dollars. Then it really is checkmate for the US economy. It's just a slow unraveling process until one day it explodes.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Are you talking about supply side economics?

No, not at all. I was simply making the point that they had two problems at that point - inflation and no growth - so they tackled the problem that was easiest for the gov't to deal with.

Supply side economics has a whole lot more to it than that. Supply side economics basically states that if you lower the burden on producers (the supply side), you'll encourage investment which will in turn cause more demand. There's a lot more policy initiatives that go along with that - lower taxes, regulation, etc.