Obama issues challenge to GOP over budget

obama

In his speech to an Associated Press luncheon in Washington today, President Obama harshly criticized the budget proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan.

In other words, he told the simple truth about it.

By 2014, he warned, “nearly 10 million college students would see their financial aid cut by an average of more than $1,000 each … over 200,000 children would lose their chance to get an early education in the Head Start program … two million mothers and young children would be cut from a program that gives them access to healthy food … Hundreds of national parks would be forced to close for part or all of the year … Cuts to the FAA would likely result in more flight cancellations, delays, and the complete elimination of air traffic control services in parts of the country.”

Etc. etc. etc. “This is not conjecture,” Obama noted. I am not exaggerating. These are facts. And these are just the cuts that would happen the year after next.” By the middle of the century, funding for those and other endeavors would have to be cut by 95 percent in order to remain in the spending limits ordained by the Ryan budget.

AP120320121532_paul_ryan

As the excerpts above suggest, the speech was a direct, detailed and sustained dissection of the Ryan budget. Here was Ryan’s response in its entirety:

“History will not be kind to a President who, when it came time to confront our generation’s defining challenge, chose to duck and run. The President refuses to take responsibility for the economy and refuses to offer a credible plan to address the most predictable economic crisis in our history. Instead, he has chosen tired and cynical political attacks as he focuses on his own re-election.

“The President has offered four budgets during his four years in the White House – each committed to funding ever-higher government spending by taking more from hardworking Americans and adding to a crushing burden of debt. His failed agenda is stifling opportunity and hope for the next generation.

“Like his reckless budgets, today’s speech by President Obama is as revealing as it is disappointing: While others lead by offering real solutions, he has chosen to distort the truth and divide Americans in order to distract from his failed record. His empty promises are quickly becoming broken promises – and the American people will hold him accountable for this violation of their trust.”

The lack of detail or facts is telling, as are the stock condemnations. For example, Ryan claims that Obama “has chosen to distort the truth,” yet he offers no evidence or specific example of such distortion. As you might expect, he also accuses Obama of “adding to a crushing burden of debt” that is “stifling opportunity and hope for the next generation.”

As it happens, Obama also addressed that particular charge head on, in terms that recent readers of this blog will find familiar (see HERE and HERE):

“Now, the proponents of this budget will tell us we have to make all these draconian cuts because our deficit is so large; this is an existential crisis, we have to think about future generations, so on and so on. And that argument might have a shred of credibility were it not for their proposal to also spend $4.6 trillion over the next decade on lower tax rates.

We’re told that these tax cuts will supposedly be paid for by closing loopholes and eliminating wasteful deductions. But the Republicans in Congress refuse to list a single tax loophole they are willing to close. Not one. And by the way, there is no way to get even close to $4.6 trillion in savings without dramatically reducing all kinds of tax breaks that go to middle-class families — tax breaks for health care, tax breaks for retirement, tax breaks for homeownership.”

The debate over the budget is a debate over our future as a nation and a people. Its outcome will reflect our values and to a large degree determine our future. As Obama noted, it “is not just another run-of-the-mill political debate. I’ve said it’s the defining issue of our time, and I believe it.”

So let’s have that debate. Let’s discuss it factually and honestly, in as much detail as the American people can stand. Let’s cut through the ideology and assess its impact on real people. Let’s take a close look at the consequences of the various choices for ourselves, but more importantly for our children and grandchildren.

That, in essence, was the challenge issued today by Obama. He seems eager to fight it out on those grounds, and I’ll be very interested to how the right responds to his challenge. So far, I am not impressed.

– Jay Bookman

392 comments Add your comment

Tommy Maddox

April 3rd, 2012
6:13 pm

Oh boy – the master of the Budget speaks…

Bernie

April 3rd, 2012
6:16 pm

The Republican Party’s Budget says to the OLD and POOR amongst us “Will You Please, Go Ahead And Die Already! ” we can no longer afford YOU!

Chris

April 3rd, 2012
6:21 pm

Has a budget been passed since Obama has been in office?

getalife

April 3rd, 2012
6:23 pm

Knock out in the first round.

willard called ryan’s radical budget marvelous.

Check mate.

Jay

April 3rd, 2012
6:25 pm

If your question is whether appropriations bills have been passed, Chris — you know, the legislation that actually dictates how much money gets spent on what — the answer is of course yes.

What they call a budget in Congress is not an actual budget. It is not binding and has no authority.

Harris

April 3rd, 2012
6:26 pm

josef

April 3rd, 2012
6:26 pm

JAY

“Let’s discuss it factually and honestly, in as much detail as the American people can stand. Let’s cut through the ideology and assess its impact on real people. Let’s take a close look at the consequences of the various choices for ourselves, but more importantly for our children and grandchildren.”

Why? Where’s the fun in that? Besides, it won’t fit in a memo or a talking point…

You are certainly the idealist, aren’t you?

Beverly Fraud

April 3rd, 2012
6:29 pm

“So let’s have that debate. Let’s discuss it factually and honestly, in as much detail as the American people can stand.”

Like most Americans, I’m all for that. Just make sure you can fit it in between commercial breaks of American Idol. And for the really important stuff, halftime of NFL games-after a pizza and bathroom break of course-after all, you gotta be reasonable about these things.

F. Sinkwich

April 3rd, 2012
6:30 pm

Typical lib response to any suggestion to reduce spending on ANYTHING, save military:

“People are gonna die! The earth is gonna end! Women and minorities to suffer most! Grandma to ride her wheelchair off a cliff! Grandpa to hang himself by Grandma’s pantyhose!

Yawn.

You lib ilks need a new play book. People are figuring out WE HAVE NO MORE MONEY regardless of tax rates. Tax the sh*t out of the rich, the epilogue remains the same: WE HAVE NO MORE MONEY!

Play the class warfare game — go ahead. You may win some pinhead votes, but people in the real world understand: government spending is out of control.

Jay

April 3rd, 2012
6:30 pm

Guilty as charged, Josef.

It’s what gets me through the day.

ragnar danneskjold

April 3rd, 2012
6:31 pm

Total Federal Outlays
2008 2,982,554,000
2009 3,517,682,000
2010e 3,702,701,000
2011e 3,833,862,000

Ramped up spending, justified as “Keynesian theory” has failed for the third time, as in the 1930s and 1970s. Reining in the uncontrolled spending, especially if we eliminate layers of corrupting corporate subsidies and regulations, will strengthen the private economy.

There is need for only two Federal economic laws/regulations: (1) to punish actual fraud when it occurs, and (2) to punish actual collusion when it occurs. Abolish the rest.

Beverly Fraud

April 3rd, 2012
6:33 pm

I really think if the public schools just mandated that students sing Lee Greenwood’s ‘Proud to be an American’ I think these problems would largely dissipate.

Cynic

April 3rd, 2012
6:33 pm

Hate to say it, but he has no credibility on budgets. He might as well write them out on a napkin with a crayon so everybody can wipe their a$$ on it before flushing it.

getalife

April 3rd, 2012
6:33 pm

filky,

“Let’s discuss it factually and honestly.”

At least try.

William

April 3rd, 2012
6:34 pm

“So let’s have that debate. Let’s discuss it factually and honestly, in as much detail as the American people can stand. Let’s cut through the ideology and assess its impact on real people. Let’s take a close look at the consequences of the various choices for ourselves, but more importantly for our children and grandchildren.”

I agree with this statement, Jay. But if you think that Obama was or often has told the “simple truth” about the Ryan budget or other things, you are more gullible than I thought. The fact is, Ryan is a sharp cookie (whether you like him or not) and there simply have to be a number of good ideas in his proposed budget (unless you are an unthinking partisan who is unwilling to concede there is any good in the other side). So wholesale trashing of his proposal is very non-productive at this point and just adds to the partisan rancor. At least he has put forth a budgetary plan. How from the opposite side of the isle has produced something similar?

ragnar danneskjold

April 3rd, 2012
6:35 pm

Forgot to post the national defense spending numbers that leftists decry:

2008 616,073,000
2009 661,049,000
2010e 719,179,000
2011e 749,748,000

Chris

April 3rd, 2012
6:35 pm

Jay – so the answer is really ‘no’ since an appropriation bill is different from a budget. As such, and since the budget process starts with the President’s Budget Request, I wouldn’t exactly consider him an authority on how to write a budget or how to work with Congress on getting a budget passed (especially with the deficits he has proposed – it’s not budgeting to spend money you do not have). And before we get the obligatory ‘the Republicans wouldn’t let it pass’ go ahead and explain to me the missing in action budgets prior to 2010.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:37 pm

Throwing down the gauntlet.

Not that it will change cons’ minds but it seems liberals and independents are responding favorably.

ragnar danneskjold

April 3rd, 2012
6:37 pm

Since the president’s budget lost 414 – 0 in the House – not even democrats would support it – he might as well challenge – his standing cannot get worse.

Generation$crewed

April 3rd, 2012
6:37 pm

So Obama is framing the debate as he wants to give more free stuff to voters and the GOP want to take stuff away?

Wow one would assume that after 3 years as leader of the free world one would have waaay more to run on???

William

April 3rd, 2012
6:37 pm

“As such, and since the budget process starts with the President’s Budget Request, I wouldn’t exactly consider him an authority on how to write a budget or how to work with Congress on getting a budget passed (especially with the deficits he has proposed – it’s not budgeting to spend money you do not have). And before we get the obligatory ‘the Republicans wouldn’t let it pass’ go ahead and explain to me the missing in action budgets prior to 2010.”

But you are overlooking Obama’s non-executive community organizer experience. Surely that has to count for something.

getalife

April 3rd, 2012
6:37 pm

Yes, lets look at ryan’s radical budget.

What did they cut?

Moderate Line

April 3rd, 2012
6:38 pm

It is great that the Dems point to Rep and the Rep point to Dems but the Budget deficit increase under Obama has been 43% due to decrease in revenues and 57% due increase expenditures which would seem mean that both sides are wrong.

Before the Bush tax cuts the highest revenue we had for one year was 20.6% of GDP. Our spending for that last three years has been 25.2%, 24.1% and 24.1%.

Both sides will fight for their side. Rep will fight for lower taxes while Dems will fight for higher spending. The compromise will be lower taxes+higher spending = more debt.

William

April 3rd, 2012
6:38 pm

“Since the president’s budget lost 414 – 0 in the House – not even democrats would support it – he might as well challenge – his standing cannot get worse.”

All the more reason we should take him seriously on matters financial.

Jay

April 3rd, 2012
6:39 pm

William, if it is not the simple truth, demonstrate where it’s wrong.

Ryan failed to do so. We’ll see if he does so in the future, but I very much doubt it.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:39 pm

So ragnar, anything to say about my addressing Ann Coulter’s arguments directly?

getalife

April 3rd, 2012
6:42 pm

“In the end, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that 62 percent of the cuts come from programs for low-income Americans and 37 percent of the tax benefits go to the few Americans earning more than $1 million..”

It is the willard ryan budget now.

Yes, it is more welfare for the wealthy.

Class warfare, if you will.

That class does not need anymore welfare cons.

Jay

April 3rd, 2012
6:42 pm

“So Obama is framing the debate as he wants to give more free stuff to voters and the GOP want to take stuff away?

Actually, you have it backward, Generation. The Republicans want to give more free stuff to voters through tax cuts. Every one of the GOP presidential candidates squawked endlessly about the dangers of the deficit and then promised voters even lower taxes.

Cutting taxes in the face of mounting debt is a giveaway, a freebie, to voters. It is pandering, a something-for-nothing free lunch.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:43 pm

and I’ll be very interested to how the right responds to his challenge. So far, I am not impressed.

Prediction: They will respond by saying “but but but Obama raised the deficit! This decreases the deficit!” They will also ignore any negative impact this has on the poor and elderly in their response.

And the mainstream (excuse me) the CONSERVATIVE media will not bother to ask any Republican about the cuts to poor programs and medicare, instead focusing on how brave Paul Ryan was to stand up to the President.

ragnar danneskjold

April 3rd, 2012
6:43 pm

Dear Adam, did not notice anything. Did you find a single factual error?

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:44 pm

It is great that the Dems point to Rep and the Rep point to Dems but the Budget deficit increase under Obama has been 43% due to decrease in revenues and 57% due increase expenditures which would seem mean that both sides are wrong.

BINGO.

Now watch the partisans spin that.

I have long said we have BOTH a spending AND a revenue problem. Obama’s FY2013 addressed both, as did his debt deals. But the Ryan plan only deals with the spending side and actually CUTS revenue.

Chris

April 3rd, 2012
6:44 pm

I will give Obama credit for this though: his budget did get bipartisan support, in that it was defeated 414-0.

ragnar danneskjold

April 3rd, 2012
6:46 pm

Democrats decrease tax revenues by passing regulations, such as Dodd-Frank and ObamaCare, and increase spending by hiring bureaucrats to micromanage the private economy. Reversing those practices is all that will be necessary to right the ship.

Cynic

April 3rd, 2012
6:47 pm

And the mainstream (excuse me) the CONSERVATIVE media will not bother to ask any Republican about the cuts to poor programs and medicare, instead focusing on how brave Paul Ryan was to stand up to the President.

No point in trying to cut spending. We’ll just keep deficit spending and increase entitlements to garner votes and mimic Greece. Nice thinking.

JohnnyReb

April 3rd, 2012
6:47 pm

It’s amazing that Obama takes the Republican’s proposed tax rates, does simple math, ignoring the elimination of write offs Republicans would put in place that would drastically change the numbers, throws it out and the Left eats it up. Even challenging the Right to dispell it. No wonder we can’t agree on anything. Did your spaceship have a name?

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:48 pm

Ragnar: I answered you here: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/04/03/someday-us-may-catch-up-to-mexico-on-health-care/?cp=all#comment-914438

I asked if you wanted me to go on. Please let me know. Or tell me I’m just plain wrong, as I predict you will. Like Ryan, I don’t expect you to back it up.

josef

April 3rd, 2012
6:48 pm

Maybe it’s just the elementary school teacher used to cutting apples into 20 equal pieces to make sure to be “proactive” in foregoing the s/he got more fracas, but maybe if we just said, “same budget as last year with a 10% across the board cut for everybody. Deal with it or no recess…”

Wonder...

April 3rd, 2012
6:48 pm

Where is the balanced budget that Obama promised?

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:48 pm

Cynic: You fail to notice that Obama’s FY2013 budget, as well as the House Democrat budget, both cut spending.

getalife

April 3rd, 2012
6:49 pm

Google ryan’s budget cuts and lets debate cons.

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

April 3rd, 2012
6:50 pm

I don’t support Ryan’s budget but I support his effort. At least Ryan is in the game. Maybe he struck out but I wish we would have multiple budget plans brought forward and instead of blanket “no’s” they are examined and perhaps refined to create a final product that is workable.

To many in this political arena are sitting on the bench.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:50 pm

ignoring the elimination of write offs

He didn’t ignore them. He said straight up they said they would cut tax loopholes and that to make the math work, even if they cut all the loopholes for the wealthy they’d still have to cut a good chunk of the middle class credits as well. Or did you not watch the speech?

Ah, caught you didn’t I? You didn’t watch the speech!

josef

April 3rd, 2012
6:51 pm

FRAUD

We sing “The Star Spangled Banner” and “My Country Tis of Thee…”

getalife

April 3rd, 2012
6:51 pm

Wonder,

You can’t balance the budget when the gop cuts revenue.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:51 pm

Steve – USA: At least Ryan is in the game. Maybe he struck out but I wish we would have multiple budget plans brought forward and instead of blanket “no’s” they are examined and perhaps refined to create a final product that is workable.

Both Obama and the House Democrats have put budgets out there.

JamVet

April 3rd, 2012
6:53 pm

Chris, if you don’t bring up that goofy “budget’ canard for a week, you’ll win an all expenses paid vacation for one to the fashionable Days Inn on Delk Road! (Taxes apply!)

Ryan, a sharp cookie?

He’s a pandering oaf and a deadbeat dad that speaks in perfect Republican pyschobabble.

Fortunately a real American hero – one he insulted – is gonna make him a one and done…

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:55 pm

For the record, the Republicans haven’t passed a budget either. It takes both houses.

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

April 3rd, 2012
6:56 pm

“Both Obama and the House Democrats have put budgets out there.”

Yeah and they were DOA. That’s why I am saying they need to see if they can’t work on them and get somewhere instead of just throwing them in the trash can. Maybe I am not remembering things clearly but didn’t we used to work through obstacles to get something done in this country.

getalife

April 3rd, 2012
6:57 pm

“Last week, the House passed the Wisconsin Republican’s $3.5 trillion budget plan, complete with measures to switch Medicare to a private system, slash more than $700 billion from Medicaid, and cut programs such as food stamps.

On Monday, the Democratic-aligned Americans United for Change and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees are firing off a round of ads aimed at Ryan and three other Republicans in tough races, focusing especially on the electorally potent topic of Medicare.

Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman, and his colleagues took a beating over his plan last year, and the ads predict it will happen again.

“Last year, Congressman Ryan voted to end Medicare,” the ad says, arguing that the push to switch Medicare to a significantly less generous private system will essentially end the program that seniors now rely on.

“Back home, we gave that young man an earful,” the ad continues in the scolding voice of an apparently retired woman. “You’d think he’d have learned his lesson. Think again,” the woman says.

“Does he think we were born yesterday?” she asks” Aol.

Lets stick to this issue and debate

Paul

April 3rd, 2012
6:57 pm

“Let’s discuss it factually and honestly, in as much detail as the American people can stand. Let’s cut through the ideology”

Seems to be a popular extract. I’ll add mine.

Jay, Rep Ryan has already shown he’s not willing to have that debate. He can’t. He gets support on generalities. The Hannities and Rushes do, also. It’s when the specifics start that they have great difficulty. Oh, they’ll turn to mocking like Sinkwich just did, but engage in a real debate?

They’re smart enough to know a losing hand when they look at it.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:57 pm

Steve – USA: Both Democrats AND Republicans are throwing them in the trash can. Just because the Republicans have a majority in the House doesn’t mean they “passed” a damn thing.

LUCIFER

April 3rd, 2012
6:58 pm

Every move that Republicans make – whether it’s to gut consumer protections, roll back environmental regulations, subsidize giant agribusinesses, abolish health care reform or just drill, baby, drill – is consistent with a single overarching agenda: to enrich the nation’s wealthiest individuals and corporations, even if it requires borrowing from China, weakening national security, dismantling Medicare and taxing the middle class. The best article I’ve read on the GOP being the Party of the Rich was written by Tim Dickenson in Rolling Stone back in November. If you haven’t had a chance to read it, visit this link: http://bit.ly/HepXla Caution: It is guanteed to piss you off.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
6:59 pm

but engage in a real debate?

They’re smart enough to know a losing hand when they look at it.

Precisely. My money is on NO conservative here engaging in a real debate on the issues with facts. And no, saying “but but but no budget was passed!” doesn’t count. I’ll wager $50. Who’s in?

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
7:00 pm

BTW, my wager is specifically on the Ryan budget and what Obama said about it. Nothing else. Thanks.

getalife

April 3rd, 2012
7:00 pm

Adam,

cons welch but it is a safe bet.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

April 3rd, 2012
7:01 pm

Well, the plain fact is, we can’t afford nothing, so we got to cut alot of things. We can’t raise taxes on the Job Creators or they’ll stop creating jobs we’ll see in a few years I’m sure. Everybody wants those jobs now, but it takes alot of time and alot of tax cuts to create jobs.

This can mean only one thing: Bend over, blacks, women, poor people, the jobless, old people, and kids. You got to take it in the shorts again. That’s just the way America works. Better you than me.

Have a good night everybody, and God Bless America!

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
7:01 pm

Oh, and an admission that we are right won’t net you $50, especially if you’re not a conservative. Simply admitting defeat is not engaging in an actual debate.

Pizzaman

April 3rd, 2012
7:03 pm

Oh boy! Just can’t wait till the repubs have complete controll again. The Bush Depression of 2008 will look like a small blip when they put the Ryan plan in play.

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

April 3rd, 2012
7:05 pm

Adam@6:57

Once again, I agree. My point was…..never mind. I see what the problem is. To much hatred from the Left and Right.

Goodnight Gracie

Whatever

April 3rd, 2012
7:06 pm

A balanced budget and revenues to pay off the debt. Anything else is politics.

F. Sinkwich

April 3rd, 2012
7:07 pm

Many of you whiners here I’m sure predicted catastrophe when Clinton signed the welfare reform act back in the mid-nineties, after vetoing it twice before.

That action turned out to be the best government reform measure inacted for who knows how long.

Lib ilks have no confidence in the human spirit. They believe that unless some government program exists to “help” people, the people will suffer, die, get sores, go hungry, kill their neighbors, etc.

Grow up, libs.

Only the most O’bozo ardent sycophants believe that anymore.

Generation$crewed

April 3rd, 2012
7:07 pm

Jay
April 3rd, 2012
6:42 pm

1st how very telling that u think the government taking less of some people’s earned money is giving them money? Wow didn’t knowit was the gov to give to us? Does that mean u support raising taxes across the board low, middle high income earners?

2nd you are the one who wants to talk facts. More as a percentage has been added to debt in the form of expenses, than has been lost due to tax decreases as an earlier poster pointed out (tax cuts which Obama signed,FACT)

3rd seems in Obama’s speech he speaks waaaay more of the things the Ryan budget would TAKE away, not mentioning too many giveaways. So seems if fact is what u are wanting to center the debate around maybe u should reconsider that post to me

JamVet

April 3rd, 2012
7:07 pm

Yep, it looks really likely that the crappy governor in Wisconsin will be the fourth governor ever to get sent packing by the people of his state.

And their crappy Lt. Governor will be the first ever in that role to get canned by the people.

Between them and the lout Ryan getting tossed to the curb, the cons are going to have a VERY bad upcoming few months in Wisconsin.

Right on, cheeseheads.

cons welch

True dat.

I’m still amazed that they are not lining up to get those really good odds on Willard, getalife. (Slightly better than 2 to 1) LOL.

Whatever

April 3rd, 2012
7:08 pm

Adam,

I’m pretty much a conservative. I’ll give you taxes on the wealthy if you’ll give me a balanced budget.

In reality I’m not sure either side really wants solve this. They never have.

William

April 3rd, 2012
7:08 pm

“William, if it is not the simple truth, demonstrate where it’s wrong.”

Re-read Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Jay All Obama did was highlight certain cuts (for political reasons) that might scare people. I will tell you what scares me: a 16 trillion dollar and growing deficit. UNBELIEVABLE. There is not any intelligent person (on the left or right) I know who does not acknowledge that painful cuts are going to have to be made to remedy this dire situation. Indeed, you have acknowledged as much yourself. And most acknowledge that more cuts than tax increases will be needed to fix things. Just what do you imagine should be cut then? Is there any governmental “program” some will not see as essential?

I don’t know where we got to a place that everyone needs a college education. I think 8% of the population went to college in my father’s generation. I say fix the problems with secondary education and introduce technical training on a wide scale there and the demand for a college education would drop considerably.

F. Sinkwich

April 3rd, 2012
7:09 pm

Oh, good, lucifer, another commie on this blog. We sure needed another one.

William

April 3rd, 2012
7:11 pm

“I don’t support Ryan’s budget but I support his effort. At least Ryan is in the game. Maybe he struck out but I wish we would have multiple budget plans brought forward and instead of blanket “no’s” they are examined and perhaps refined to create a final product that is workable.”

Agreed. Same with Health Care Reform.

Whatever

April 3rd, 2012
7:11 pm

William,

Pretty much the facts. Massive cuts have to come. Also, why is college such a big deal? Tons of opportunities for people with skills. Not a lot of real work for Dance and women’s studies degrees.

We should only fund degrees that our economy actually needs. Anything else should be out of pocket.

marty

April 3rd, 2012
7:12 pm

And Jay, the key is just relax and maintain eye contact with the lens. You know the subject matter and that’ll take care of itself.

William

April 3rd, 2012
7:12 pm

“Oh, good, lucifer, another commie on this blog. We sure needed another one.”

Get behind me, Satan. LOL. Anyone who would use that moniker is broadcasting…well, I will let you fill in the blank.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
7:13 pm

Whatever: Clinton did manage to have a balanced budget without a huge increase in taxes. I don’t think it would take much to bring that sanity back. Well, as long as people are willing to put down their pitchforks on the right.

JamVet

April 3rd, 2012
7:17 pm

Cons have always been anti-edumacation.

(It’s liberal brainwashing with the maths and junk sciences, doncha know?!)

William

April 3rd, 2012
7:18 pm

“Clinton did manage to have a balanced budget without a huge increase in taxes. I don’t think it would take much to bring that sanity back.”

That would be nice. The situation he (and the Congress – let’’s give grudging credit to the House especially) was faced with is not anything like we have now.

Recon 0311 2533

April 3rd, 2012
7:18 pm

Bret Baier had Obama’s press secretary the Carni man squirming all over trying to justify why the Senate democrats haven’t passed a budget in 1070 days. His frustration was comical. What isn’t comical is this president not pressing Harry Reid and Senate democrats to pass a budget that can go into conference with the House budget for debate. The presidents attacks on Republicans make him look even all the more incompetent when he should be able to apply leadership on the democrat chamber of Congress that only needs 51 votes, which Reid has to get his version of a budget passed. Pathetic but not surprising from Obama and his party of irresponsibility.

Jay

April 3rd, 2012
7:19 pm

“Does that mean u support raising taxes across the board low, middle high income earners?”

Yes, it does.

“More as a percentage has been added to debt in the form of expenses, than has been lost due to tax decreases.”

Not because of programs enacted under Obama. It is solely because of increased spending required by the deepest recession in 80 years, such as extended unemployment benefits, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. For example, Gingrich likes to call him the “food stamp president,” ignoring the fact that all of the caseload growth has occurred under pre-existing rules about eligibility.

“… in Obama’s speech he speaks waaaay more of the things the Ryan budget would TAKE away, not mentioning too many giveaways.”

Untrue. As I cited above, Obama documented the $4.6 trillion effect on the deficit of all the tax giveaways proposed under Ryan. And that’s a giveaway.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
7:21 pm

William: True. There is a bad recession to climb out of. But it’s a great starting point, no?

William

April 3rd, 2012
7:21 pm

“Cons have always been anti-edumacation. ”

Are you and getalife twins? Just wondering because you both seem to make the same childish and inane pronouncements. The general tone and substance of your posts suggests that you, in fact, may be “anti-edumacation”.

Paul

April 3rd, 2012
7:21 pm

Into two pages and not one blogger has supported the effects of the Ryan cuts or defended his assertions that they won’t really happen because it’s all about closing loopholes and cutting deductions.

Not one.

As Gomer Pyle would say, “Surprise, surprise, surprise.”

Mark in midtown

April 3rd, 2012
7:22 pm

Adam at 7:13 PM — Clinton also had a Republican Congress greatly restraining his ability to get new spending programs passed. As well, the Clinton Administration neither called for nor anticipated balanced budgets. In fact, the Clinton Administration’s projections were fore deficits of 200 billion dollars per year as far as the eye could see. It was the Republicans in Congress who were promising balanced budgets. Balance budgets were part of the Republicans’ “Contract With America”, the same “Contract With America” that Democrats with the help of their msm subsidiaries re-labeled as the “Republican Party’s Contract On America”.

josef

April 3rd, 2012
7:22 pm

William

He uses the moniker for offense. I’m offended. So I just scroll right on by, sorta like with the Duk-sha-nee.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
7:23 pm

Mark: So does that make the whole concept of going back to that a bad idea?

Jay

April 3rd, 2012
7:24 pm

“Clinton did manage to have a balanced budget without a huge increase in taxes. I don’t think it would take much to bring that sanity back.”

No, he did not. He passed a major tax increase in 1993, explaining that it was necessary to reassure Wall Street that the deficit was being addressed. Passing it cost the Democrats control of the House, and Gingrich and others predicted the tax hike would send the economy into a deep recession and exacerbate the debt.

It did the opposite. The economy soared, and by the end of the decade they were predicting surpluses well into the future.

Enter two Bush tax cuts, two major wars and Medicare Part D.

William

April 3rd, 2012
7:25 pm

“He uses the moniker for offense. I’m offended. So I just scroll right on by, sorta like with the Duk-sha-nee.”

Yeah, and I don’t mind that so much – it just not very clever in my opinion and (if there truly is a God) perhaps a bit foolish.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

April 3rd, 2012
7:26 pm

JAY:

May I ask how the President plans to discuss the budget if he doesn’t even know how the Supreme Court is supposed to function? That “group of people” as he called them?

Heard this today:

“He stated yesterday if the Supreme Court ruled against a law passed by Congress it would be “unprededented”. I guess he didn’t know the Supreme Court has overturned Congress about 190 times and if you add in the states and lesser government entities it’s 1,539 as of 2002 !!!

What arrogance !

CAESAR OBAMUS !”

MaJo

April 3rd, 2012
7:27 pm

The two loser political parties that we are stuck with can’t (or likely don’t want to) agree on what the facts are, so this whole debate is a pointless waste of time.

We get the government we deserve.

Rick

April 3rd, 2012
7:27 pm

After many years of George W., it appears the nation is making a comeback. This is good news for Obama, and for all of us Democrats.

F. Sinkwich

April 3rd, 2012
7:28 pm

“We should only fund degrees that our economy actually needs. Anything else should be out of pocket.”

I posited that proposal a few weeks ago about the HOPE schorlarship with limited support, Whatever.

I wanted to establish a distinction between “desired” and “not so desired (NSD)” which would determine funding levels.

“Desired” degrees would be funded in full. Those degrees would be in engineering, hard sciences, business, etc.

NSD degrees would be any degree with “studies” in it (like women’s, ethnic, etc.), journalism, English Lit, and so forth.

It’s genius.

Gator Joe

April 3rd, 2012
7:29 pm

Jay:
Ryan’s budget isn’t going anywhere, and once Romney wraps up the nomination he will run from Ryan’s budget as fast, and maybe faster, than he has from his prior positions.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
7:29 pm

Oof blog god smackdown. So he did a huge increase in taxes :o

Harris

April 3rd, 2012
7:29 pm

Ryan is leaving the specifics up to the Ways and Means Committee.

“Take away the tax shelter, subject all of their income to taxation, and get more revenue — and we can lower everybody’s tax rate in return,” Ryan, R-Wis., said.

The influential lawmaker would not get too deep into specifics about which deductions might be eliminated and which might be spared. He said he wants the tax-focused House Ways and Means Committee to work that out in public.

But Ryan argued that popular deductions might not have to be eliminated for everybody — just the high-income earners who “disproportionately” use them. He indicated a willingness to end the home mortgage interest deduction and other breaks for top earners.

William

April 3rd, 2012
7:30 pm

“It is solely because of increased spending required by the deepest recession in 80 years, such as extended unemployment benefits, food stamps, Medicaid, etc.”

Really? Solely? You realize that all it takes is one contradictory instance to falsify a universal claim, don’t you?

Recon 0311 2533

April 3rd, 2012
7:30 pm

This horrible failure of a president should at very least follow the decency of another failed democrat President, LBJ and declare that he will not run for a second term.

Jay

April 3rd, 2012
7:32 pm

True, William.

Then let’s go with “overwhelmingly”.

JamVet

April 3rd, 2012
7:33 pm

Wow, I sure got told off. And poor old getalife. Being compared with unedumacated me.

My obsessed one sure knows how to set us wayward children straight.

Obsessed one, did you go to Auburn? LOL. (It’s an inside joke and trust me, I am as disinterested in your curriculum vitae as I am in your opinions and posts!)

Interesting article about how the Moozlims could tip the scales in several key swing states. Alhamdulillah…

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/03/muslim-voters-could-swing-election-report-finds/?hpt=hp_t1

rcs

April 3rd, 2012
7:34 pm

jay, there was also the burst of the dot com bubble

Generation$crewed

April 3rd, 2012
7:36 pm

Jay
April 3rd, 2012

I am glad to see u support raising everyones taxes. This is not a position I have seen a democrat specifically say publically or in any proposed bill.

Has Obama offered one single piece of legislation that would reduce any benefits significantly? Has he mentioned which programs specifically he would want to cut?

You are correct he did go into the amount of money not to be collected from tax cuts. But what did his speech emphasise most? Which was used more? Did u really get the tone that Obama was saying the GOP is trying to give u stuff for free?? Seriously?

A side note, u requested facts, bringing up the unemployment extension is not a fact, you do not have any factual evidence to show extending benfits did anything but extend the amount of time it takes to find another job. As study after study shows that a much higher percentage find work at the end of unemployment benfits or soon after it expires.

By you giving Obama the blanket cover argument of “worse recessionsince depression…” How are u doing any better in regards to the fact hunt? At best u need to engage in what-if scenarios to prove ur position.

Can’t wait to see ur list of democrats who have publically called for taxes to be raised on everyone, not just the rich. That’s what it will take with spending cuts, but haven’t seen any of your chosen party offer that up. Do you discuss this with elected democrats when u speak with them? Is there opinion different in private than in public?

They BOTH suck

April 3rd, 2012
7:36 pm

Recon

You should be glad that he is going to run again…… If he is as bad as you believe then it shouldn’t be any problem for Romney to defeat him.

TaxPayer

April 3rd, 2012
7:37 pm

I’ve been thinking and thinking and I just cannot come up with anything nice to say about the Republican Party and Paul Ryan’s yellowbrick roadmap. He knows it is a fantasy work because he took it from the Heritage club for boy toys and tried to claim that it would magically pay for tax cuts only to find out after the fact that the other club members had failed to inform him that the magic would only work once the unemployment rate dropped to 2.8 percent and stayed there. So poor pitiful Paul Ryan continues to try and push that failed wet dream on we the people because he’s a one-trick philly. It’s all he’s got. A pair of ruby red slippers and a worn out routine, “there’s no place like home… there’s no place like home.” Paul Ryan has no choice but to deflect and distract and point fingers at others because no matter how many times he clicks his heels together, he’s still left there clutching that same old yellowbrick roadmap in the same old place. If he truly wants to get to Kansas, I would suggest a plane or train or car or else he could put some miles on those ruby red slippers and at least get some benefit out of them.

Recon 0311 2533

April 3rd, 2012
7:38 pm

http://www.thelandofthefree.net/conservativeopinion/2012/03/26/views-on-the-news-3242012/

25% of GDP with nothing to show for it. What a snow job on the American people.

Adam

April 3rd, 2012
7:38 pm

Has Obama offered one single piece of legislation that would reduce any benefits significantly? Has he mentioned which programs specifically he would want to cut?

Why should anyone? That’s completely unnecessary.