Chambliss: Government shutdown is up to Obama
If you think the 112th Congress was a weak, unproductive bunch, you’re not alone. Saxby Chambliss agrees with you.
“Unfortunately that’s the way it feels inside, not just outside,” Georgia’s senior senator told me over coffee at his Cobb County office Tuesday. “Harry Reid’s leadership [in the Senate] leaves a lot to be desired, and the in-your-face stuff that the president’s thrown at us has gotten a lot of backs up on our side, in both the House and the Senate. You throw the presidential election in there and it just kind of all came together, and nothing got done.”
Readers who are not GOP partisans would probably add House Republicans to Chambliss’ list of Washington’s bad actors. But after spending the past few years working with a handful of his fellow senators to fashion a big, bipartisan deal to reform the federal tax code and reduce spending, to no avail, Chambliss conveyed disdain for the way the Jan. 1 agreement to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff came about. And he blamed President Barack Obama.
“He was pretty open about the fact that, ‘Look, if we go off the cliff, if you guys don’t give me what I want, if we go off the cliff, I’m going to get what I want. And then I will spend the first three weeks of January beating the heck out of Republicans, and then I’ll present my plan of [tax cuts for those earning] $250,000 or less and dare you guys to vote against it.’ That’s just not the way that you get major things accomplished.”
What Obama did accomplish — higher taxes on some high earners — bought little time before the next showdown. By March, Congress and the president will face a trio of expirations: the debt ceiling, the delay in automatic budget cuts known as sequestration, and the temporary funding Congress has enacted in lieu of a budget for almost three years now.
“Some people might argue that the debt ceiling is the least pressure point [of the three] because you’ve got to pay your bills,” Chambliss said, “and that’s what [Obama] keeps saying, that ‘I … dare you to not allow us to pay the bills that you’ve incurred.’
“Well the fact is, the Democratic Congress incurred the bills. This administration incurred the bills. The Republicans have been in charge of the House for two years; this money was basically spent in the two years before that when you look at the stimulus package and the other spending that he put in place to create the massive deficits. So for him to come out and say, ‘You guys are obligated to pay your bills’ — I didn’t vote for any of that stuff.”
Because the debt ceiling isn’t really about whether to default on the national debt — the Treasury takes in far more revenue than it needs to make debt payments — the more likely short-term alternative to raising the debt ceiling is a federal government shutdown. (Which is not to suggest there would be no consequences, or only mild ones, for taking that route.)
Chambliss said he hopes it doesn’t come to that, but once again he put the onus on the president. In the past, he noted, Obama has embraced both the need to reform entitlements and a ratio of $3 of spending cuts for every $1 of tax increases.
“If [Obama's] serious about that, then … the likelihood of a shutdown would certainly be minimized. If he gets his back up and says, ‘We’ll only do this if we get more revenue,’ then I’d say the chances of a shutdown are pretty good. … If he wants to get serious, show the world marketplace that we are going to lead in this area, he’ll have that opportunity. If he doesn’t, then something dramatic has got to happen, and a shutdown could be it.”
Chambliss is up for re-election next year, and it’s no secret tea partyers and Democrats alike are eyeing his seat for a possible challenge. “I’ve never backed off from a fight,” he said. Fine, but does the bitterness in Washington ever make him think twice about running again?
“This is an eight-year decision for me. It’s two years [campaigning] plus six years” in office, he said. “And if I thought the next eight years were going to be filled with contentious debates and the wrong way to govern that we have just gone through in the last two months, it would have a significant impact on my decision. But yeah, right now my plans are to run.”
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
236 comments Add your comment
Attack Dog
January 10th, 2013
5:56 am
First Clarence says that the “112th Congress was a weak, unproductive bunch,” then says the “government shutdown is up to Obama? This is the same guy who gave Bush a blank check (never said no to any spending bill), won’t identify the cuts in spending that he appropriated that has built up our annual deficit to more than a trillion dollars, and has been an obstructionist for the past eight years
Attack Dog
January 10th, 2013
6:04 am
Question for Clarence. If you supported a President increased our debt to $10 trillion, and you approved every spending bill that took the country from a budget surplus to having an annual budget deficit of $1.5 trillion dollars, what would your accumulated debt be in four years? Government shutdown is up to Obama? No Clarence, it’s arithmetic and you have not told us of any spending cuts that would significantly reduce the annual deficit.
Buzz Aldrin
January 10th, 2013
6:11 am
Kind of like when the Democratic Congress incurred debt filled budgets because George W Bush dared them to vote against Freedom and Democracy? The money spent on the war sure would be nice to have now.
Aynie Sue
January 10th, 2013
6:24 am
What a lot of bull!
The Bush Republican administration and Congress reversed the Clinton legacy of burgeoning federal budget surpluses and ended the period of the greatest well-being and prosperity Americans will ever know. First, they reduced revenue by cutting the taxes of high-earners. Then, they started two wars: the most costly one was unnecessary and counter-strategic, the other one the longest running war in American history. Finally, they abetted the financial manipulators in New York and London in crashing our economy.
When the new administration took office in the midst of a financial crisis that threatened Americans with another economic depression, Chambliss and his Republican henchmen obstructed economic recovery, paralyzed the Congress, and held the economic system hostage to their demands for “spending cuts” that they lack the political courage to specify .
The American people have shown in elections and polls that they will not tolerate drastic cuts in Medicare and Social Security to give the ultra-rich more tax relief and to fund more spending on useless cold war weapons programs. The American people overwhelmingly favor increasing federal revenue by reinstating Clinton-era tax rates on high-earners. And many Americans are smart enough to know that significant federal spending cuts while we are struggling to recover from Republican economics would cause drastic job cuts that would plunge the economy back into recession.
Chambliss and his Republican henchmen in Congress are a bunch of hack politicians financed by Wall Street financial manipulators and voted into office by southern rednecks. They have no loyalty to the United States of America, nor any regard for the well-being of Americans.
A Simple Man
January 10th, 2013
6:31 am
Time for some new blood.
DeborahinAthens
January 10th, 2013
6:36 am
“The Democratic Congress incurred the debt…” Really, Saxby? Are you joking? You do realize that over 20% of the debt we MUST pay is attributable to the two wars, which you certainly did vote for. What an idiot. No wonder we are in such a mess when we have legislators that deny they are the problem. I had a flash of hope that Chambliss might be able to help lead us out of this mess by being reasonable. But once he compromises to try to get our country back on track, the threats by Tea Partiers to “primary” him make him turn yellow and lose his backbone. We raise the debt ceiling (which is a stupid, arbitrary thing that was raise 16 times by Dubya the Dumb) to be able to pay our past debts. When our “leaders” refuse to raise the ceiling, they are telling our debtors that we are low life scum, who choose not to pay our bills. These bills, contrary to Saxby’s attempt to spin it, were incurred by Rebublicans as well as Democrats.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 10th, 2013
7:11 am
“If [Obama's] serious about that, then … the likelihood of a shutdown would certainly be minimized. If he gets his back up and says, ‘We’ll only do this if we get more revenue,’ then I’d say the chances of a shutdown are pretty good. …
Well, get ready for the shutdown then. Not only will obozo want more taxes, he’ll probably want more spending too.
Numbers-R-US
January 10th, 2013
7:24 am
HAHAHA! Sounds like Saxby did a good job of selling himself to Kyle as the poor pitiful ultra conservative right winger from Georgia who just can’t make any headway because of that mean old uppity Obama. Guess what, Kyle. Obama did not win as a result of unskewed polls. The majority of the voters have caught on to the Republican party and it’s desire to continue to feed at the trough of the Koch boys and Sheldon Adelson, et al, at the expense of the 99.9 percent. HAHAHA! Perhaps two billion will be enough campaign financing to get one of your boys in the White House in four more years. Probably not.
Bob
January 10th, 2013
7:25 am
Obama got his tax increase but will not go for spending decreases, repubs will most likely fold instead of fighting.
Scrivener
January 10th, 2013
7:28 am
Obama, Reid and a bunch of democrats, plus the media, of course, want the uninformed public to believe it’s all the republicans’ fault. Although the republicans are guilty of spending too much, too, it’s the dems who are the party of big spending. The Tea Party gets nothing but bad press, but they are the ones who want to curb spending and reduce taxes. Go figure.
Bill
January 10th, 2013
7:34 am
No surprises here – not my fault – his fault!! Looks like we will have more of the same “fun” and the ones that will be the big losers will be the American public.
What a shame!!
sailfish
January 10th, 2013
7:45 am
““Well the fact is, the Democratic Congress incurred the bills. This administration incurred the bills. The Republicans have been in charge of the House for two years; this money was basically spent in the two years before that when you look at the stimulus package and the other spending that he put in place to create the massive deficits. So for him to come out and say, ‘You guys are obligated to pay your bills’ — I didn’t vote for any of that stuff.”
I’m calling out saxby for his utter bs…how’s about 2 undunded wars, medicare part d, and nonsensical, irresponsible tax cuts that squarely put us in this mess? Really sick of republican amnesia, that’s why we are in such dire straits – one sided responsiblities, it’s absurd!
Skip
January 10th, 2013
7:54 am
“I’ve never backed off from a fight” Remind me, what branch did you serve with during Viet Nam?
curious
January 10th, 2013
7:59 am
Sen Chambliss may believe that, but the majority of Americans won’t.
ByteMe - Got ilk?
January 10th, 2013
8:05 am
Well the fact is, the Democratic Congress incurred the bills
That’s Republican Math to make him feel better.
What a weak politician. Blame everyone but himself. Where was he during Bush’s big spending years? Did he vote for waging war in Iraq without paying for it? Did he vote for Medicare Part D without a way to pay for it?
Cherokee
January 10th, 2013
8:06 am
Cry me a river Senator.
The Congress voted to spend the money, not just the Democrats.
Man up and pay your bills like the rest of us have to.
Georgia , The "New Mississippi"
January 10th, 2013
8:11 am
Chambliss is completely useless……. The only thing he is good at is collecting paychecks and getting re-elected. He is the epitome of a Georgia politician.
SBinF
January 10th, 2013
8:31 am
LOL. Chambliss is delusional.
Let’s see who shoulders the blame should such a thing happen. Who shouldered the blame the last time such a thing happened?
Exactly.
Reality
January 10th, 2013
8:33 am
If Chambliss really said this headline, then he is part of the problem.
The ‘government shutdown’ can only be caused by Congress not increasing the debt ceiling. This means that the Congress decided not in pay bills already incurred. President Obama has nothing to do with this.
If the idiot con repub or ANYONE wants to decrease spending…. you do this through the BUDGET. If this Congress voted ‘yes’ on the budget, how can they vote ‘no’ when it comes time to pay the bills?
The analogy would be you using your VISA card to purchase food, but when the bill comes in the mail, you say ‘nope’, not gonna pay it. The idiot con repub wants the public to think that by saying ‘no’ this will somehow make the food magically return to the store?
However, there is a large percentage of idiot public that will listen to the idiot con repub….
indigo
January 10th, 2013
8:35 am
“I’d say the the chances of a shutdown are pretty good”
It looks like the Republicans are going to do everything possible to force a shutdown.
Then, they will do everything possible to persuade the public it’s all Obama’s fault.
They are still so angry at American voters for not electing Romney that punishing the Country with a shutdown actually seems like a good idea.
Fenton Hardy
January 10th, 2013
8:53 am
Sorry Saxby – This is a bi-partisan mess and requires a bi-partisan solution. Was willing to give you credit for your work with the Gang of Six, but, this is just pandering and not helpful.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
January 10th, 2013
8:57 am
I hope you washed your hands after leaving his office.
ewwww
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
January 10th, 2013
9:02 am
the stimulus package and the other spending that he put in place to create the massive deficits.
sorry, but neither O nor the Democrats “created” the massive deficits. They extended them for sure but they didn’t create them.
Banderson
January 10th, 2013
9:02 am
Mint the coin.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
January 10th, 2013
9:04 am
Well the fact is, the Democratic Congress incurred the bills. This administration incurred the bills
Cons = Unable to take responsibility. The two wars were started under Republican rule so did the Dems decide to stop funding them and pull all the troops out immediately? No. They continued to work with what they were given.
td
January 10th, 2013
9:04 am
It is hard to balance the budget when the President does not think we have a spending problem.
Lynnie Gal
January 10th, 2013
9:09 am
Obama said he will not compromise on paying the nation’s debts. He said he will not capitulate to hostage takers in the House again and has vowed to break them of this habit. I think he’s going to mint the coin and stop the children from fighting. That’s what adults have to do sometimes with children who keep fighting. Take away their toy and nobody gets to play. As far as Saxby, he’s a target now of his own party, but I doubt the TP is powerful enough to take him down. The TP’s power is fading and people are starting to understand the danger they pose to our economic health. Saxby will ultimately win this fight.
BW
January 10th, 2013
9:10 am
LOL….he certainly sound like he’s running for re-election too. The Republican party apparently has no part in the fiscal mess facing this country…facepalm
Out by the Pond
January 10th, 2013
9:19 am
What, what…..in your face republicans get upset when someone gets back up in their face? This country has some major issues and all the American people get are sophomoric idiots.
Cutty
January 10th, 2013
9:24 am
Did Chambliss pay for the wars? Farm bills? What about those budget-busting tax cuts or the Prescription Drug bill? To lay blame for policies that he didn’t vote as the problem is asinine. And that’s the problem w Republicans. They ignore their big spending ways of years past, and act as if the nation’s debt was $0 the day Obama was inaugurated.
The first step to recovery, and regaining the trust of Americans on the fence about both parties is to admit your mistakes. Chambliss didn’t in this article, and Kyle had the opportunity to bring it up and didn’t. He should have mentioned that he did vote for all the deficit spending mentioned above, and I don’t believe the wars are entirely paid for.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
January 10th, 2013
9:27 am
Taxme and Johnny are so wishy washy it is difficult to put much faith in their words. What they say for the home folks, has little resemblance to their voting records. Hard to comment on what they say because it means absolutely nothing.
UIC
January 10th, 2013
9:31 am
‘You guys are obligated to pay your bills’ — I didn’t vote for any of that stuff.” I guess Saxby thinks that when a bill is passed, the cost for it there will never be an additional expense associated with that vote. I won’t look it up, but I’d guess Saxby voted for both the Bush tax cuts and the Iraq war when he was in the House. Earth to Saxby, those two votes will cost this country for the next couple of generations. Those votes, coupled withe the repeal of Glass Steagall has set this country on a path that will cost generations of people who were not eligible to vote in 2000 and 2004 a tremendous amount of money. Saxby, take Economics 101 before you make comments about the debt and deficit.
Just Saying..
January 10th, 2013
9:32 am
““Well the fact is, the Democratic Congress incurred the bills”
So now the Treasury issues “D” bonds and “R” bonds?
Just Saying..
January 10th, 2013
9:35 am
““I’ve never backed off from a fight,…”
Other than Vietnam, Sax?
MarkV
January 10th, 2013
9:35 am
The hypocrisy of Chambliss’ statements about the fiscal cliff deal is palpable, even if explainable by his reelection concerns. After the four years of Republicans’ paralyzing the Senate by filibuster he dares to accuse of the President of insisting on what he ran on in the election, won, and was supported by a majority of the people?
But even that pales in comparison with the complete idiocy of Chambliss’ claim that the bills requiring raising the debt ceiling are just the bills that the Democratic Congress and this administration incurred. The legal obligations include, among other things, Social Security and Medicare benefits, interest on the debt, military salaries etc. How does Chambliss distinguish the money to be paid for those items from whatever the Democratic Congress and administration “incurred,” and the items the Republicans voted for?
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
9:36 am
Republicans are ready to increase the debt limit and implement common-sense spending controls. Let us hope Obozo and the Democrats back down from their irresponsible threats to obstruct progress.
Darwin
January 10th, 2013
9:39 am
So Republicans pass the biggest increase in the history of Medicare in 2004 and now they want a Democratic president to offer cuts in social programs. What planet do you guys live on?
Tap Out
January 10th, 2013
10:08 am
Nonsense….which is actually a viable currency in Georgia.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
10:10 am
sailfish: All comments are in moderation these days between evening and morning. Your 8:07, however, is too long for a blog comment: Resubmit it with a short excerpt and a link to the rest of the piece, and it’ll be fine.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
10:16 am
Darwin, would you support repealing that Medicare Part D? You understand that Obozo INCREASED spending on it, making it even more generous to seniors, right?
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
10:18 am
I’m calling out saxby for his utter bs…
———
Chambliss is referring to Obozo increasing spending by around $700 billion above what he inherited.
Utter BS? Still you.
Your daily jolt: Gov. Nathan Deal wants to stay out of gun debate | Political Insider
January 10th, 2013
10:19 am
[...] Check out this curious quote from U.S. Saxby Chambliss that my AJC colleague Kyle Wingfield tacked onto the end of his column today: [D]oes the bitterness in Washington ever make him think twice about running [...]
sailfish
January 10th, 2013
10:22 am
kyle
OK – thanks
Senator bernie sanders nails it:
“My Republican colleagues say that the deficits are a spending problem, not a revenue problem. What these deficit-hawk hypocrites won’t talk about is their spending. They won’t discuss what they did to dig the country into this $1 trillion deep deficit hole. They waged wars in Afghanistan and Iraq without paying for them. They gave away huge tax breaks for the rich. They squandered taxpayer dollars on the pharmaceutical industry by making it illegal to let Medicare bargain for lower drug prices. They also rescinded financial regulations that enabled Wall Street to operate like a gambling casino, leading to a severe recession that eroded tax revenue and left more than 14 percent of American workers unemployed or underemployed”
JDW
January 10th, 2013
10:26 am
@Kyle…you sure that was coffee you guys were drinking?
“the Democratic Congress incurred the bills”…O’ Dear Saxby meet George. He was once President. Raised deficit spending from 0 to $1 trillion plus by giving away money in tax cuts, starting unfunded wars and running the economy in the ditch. Time to pay the bill.
As for this nugget…”“He was pretty open about the fact that, ‘Look, if we go off the cliff, if you guys don’t give me what I want, if we go off the cliff, I’m going to get what I want.”
Elections have consequences, win and you set the agenda, lose the other guys do. Rather than whining and holding your breath the responsiblity of the the losers is to work within the parameters set by the winners.
JDW
January 10th, 2013
10:29 am
@LBB…”Chambliss is referring to Obozo increasing spending by around $700 billion above what he inherited.”
Then like you he is wrong…as always. Obama has increased spending less than 2% a year since the Duhbya Debacle…less than any president in modern times.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
10:30 am
Bernie Sanders seems to have forgotten that the last deficit before Dems took the Congress in 2006 was $160 billion. Our President Bush never proposed or ran a trillion dollar deficit. That dishonor belongs solely to Obozo.
WAW
January 10th, 2013
10:35 am
When members of Congress have one secretary, are paid a flat salary with no perks each year of their tenure, and no government retirement benefits, then (and only then) talk about cutting Social Security and Medicare. We all have to give a little and some have to give up their aristocracy. Lord Clarence, Downton Abby is fiction so is the United States Congress (the only bi-partisan fact known to exist).
Dave
January 10th, 2013
10:44 am
I just love the good Senator blaming Obama. As I recall the GOP turned down a four to one spending to tax increase deal that Obama and Boehner cooked up last year. The dynamics have changed and the deal offered isn’t as good, in good part because of GOP intransigence and now it’s Obama to blame?
JDW
January 10th, 2013
10:46 am
@LBB…”Our President Bush never proposed or ran a trillion dollar deficit. ”
Factually incorrect…Duhbya both proposed and ran FY 2009. Deficit $1.4 trillion.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
10:52 am
No, JDW, $3.7 trillion (Obozo’s annual spending) is not a 2% decrease over $3 trillion (Our President Bush’s spending).
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
10:57 am
I’ve never backed off from a fight,…”
Other than Vietnam, Sax?
I am amazed that ANY US military veteran could ever vote for this POS.
And of all the draft dodging, swiftboating cowards in the GOP, there is NOBODY worse than this one.
The man is a total disgrace.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
10:57 am
“On Jan. 7, 2009, two weeks before Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported that the deficit for fiscal year 2009 was projected to be $1.2 trillion. ”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/29/barack-obama/obama-inherited-deficits-bush-administration/
Politico
January 10th, 2013
11:04 am
Saxby
He will win if he runs even if challenged by the “Tea Party”
What can you say about ole Saxby? A good percentage of his constituency thinks he doesn’t like trial attorneys, those who evade(avoid) service and government waste. Yet he was in law school during Vietnam, made his money being an attorney and never seen a farm subsidy that he didn’t like……. And let’s not forget that he doesn’t really like to talk about illegals too much. After all some of his major financial supporters in Agri- Business just love to utilize illegals as a good percentage of their labor force.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 10th, 2013
11:04 am
“I’ve never backed off from a fight,” he said
He sure did. Ask him where he was during Vietnam.
And then this piece of human garbage had the nerve to run against a man ( Max Cleland ) who left three limbs in Vietnam. Run ads against him calling him unpatriotic… and have the low education/information voter in Georgia otherwise known as a Republican buy it hook line and sinker.
Next time you see him Kyle and he says he has never run from a fight.
Ask him did he run from his responsibility in Vietnam.
Chambliss focused on the issue of national defense and homeland security during his campaign, and released an ad that included Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, highlighting Cleland’s record on the issues of war and terrorism.[12]
Chambliss received criticism from Democrats and Republicans for this ad, pointing out that he, who hadn’t served in the Vietnam War due to receiving military deferments, had attacked a Vietnam War veteran who lost three limbs during his service for not being tough enough on issues of war and homeland security. Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona said of one ad, “[I]t’s worse than disgraceful, it’s reprehensible;” Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said the ads were “beyond offensive to me.”[
The only time Mr Chambliss would be having coffee with me would be when I threw it in his face.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 10th, 2013
11:05 am
The man is a total disgrace.
Ditto times a thousand.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
11:14 am
Cheesy: If you’re quoting a source in your 11:04 — as the apparent footnotes would seem to indicate — you need to cite it.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 10th, 2013
11:19 am
Chambliss received criticism from Democrats and Republicans for this ad, pointing out that he, who hadn’t served in the Vietnam War due to receiving military deferments, had attacked a Vietnam War veteran who lost three limbs during his service for not being tough enough on issues of war and homeland security. Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona said of one ad, “[I]t’s worse than disgraceful, it’s reprehensible;” Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said the ads were “beyond offensive to me.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxby_Chambliss
sailfish
January 10th, 2013
11:20 am
lil
You are in complete denial when it comes to bush and deficits; he got that train rolling and kept the wars off the books. Obama did the right thing by including them in the debt, hence that trillion dollar number. Bush was using good old fashioned smoke and mirrors – sorry that the truth must sting in your world…
Politico
January 10th, 2013
11:38 am
“Bernie Sanders seems to have forgotten that the last deficit before Dems took the Congress in 2006 was $160 billion.”
Is that so?
How could that be when the lowest deficit during the Bush years was 158B in 2002?
Please site your source.
Thanks
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 10th, 2013
11:42 am
SHRINK: We are creating ‘generation of deluded narcissists’…
And I can name a couple of them right here on this blog.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
11:43 am
Barry
Maybe this website can be of assistance to you and what appears to be your lack of factual information.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/
Have an awesome day
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
11:46 am
Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said the ads were “beyond offensive to me.”
That RINO???
I wonder if, with this nomination, Fox News will help swiftboat him, too…
JDW
January 10th, 2013
11:47 am
@LBB…”No, JDW, $3.7 trillion (Obozo’s annual spending) is not a 2% decrease over $3 trillion (Our President Bush’s spending).”
Make up whatever fantasies you like..the facts are…
Dubya’s last year was FY2009 and spending was $3.517 trillion
FY 2010 spending was $3.456 trillion a DECREASE of -1.75%
FY 2011 spending was $3.603 trillion a increase of 4.25%
FY 2012 spending was $3.795 trillion a increase of 5.34%
FY 2013 estimated spending is $3.803 trillion a increase of 0.21%
Average annual increase 2.01%
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
11:52 am
JDW @ 11:47: As you know from our past debates, evaluating spending by fiscal years that overlap presidencies is very misleading. I’m not going to get into the dollar figures with you yet again, but your facts do not tell the truth.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
11:53 am
You’re also ignoring stimulus spending that, while passed during FY09, was spread over a few fiscal years. So the year-on-year change tells a rather incomplete story.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
12:02 pm
Bottom line, Our President Bush never proposed or ran a trillion dollar deficit. The first one occurred on Obozo’s watch, and not only did he do nothing to prevent it, he exacerbated it. He also has ratcheted up spending by about $700 billion per year.
When does Obozo plan to return spending to where it was pre-recession? He inherited a recovery four years ago, for gosh sakes!
Politico
January 10th, 2013
12:04 pm
Kyle
If the same standard is used for any given President, why is it not fair to use it for Bush?
I do see your point, but again if one uses the same standard what is the problem?
Of course if your method is utilized for any given President then it appears to be “fair” as well.
No offense, but regardless of what side the fence one sits on, the “standard” that makes their guy look better or the other look worse is usually the preferred method.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
12:06 pm
Bottom line
You had to say “bottom line” because you were incorrect.
Were your numbers just from being ill informed or being dishonest?
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
12:07 pm
Bottom line, Our President Bush was a consummate failure. Across the board. The most incompetent administration in nearly a hundred years. (Thanks to Herbert Hoover or it would be even longer!)
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
12:08 pm
The debt ceiling can be extended to cover only a short term until the sequestration and Continuing Resolution issues are settled – as Gingrich partially points out via the following link – there will be a partial government shutdown or sequestration forcing Obama to finally accept spending cuts:
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/01/09/gingrich-picking-fights-republicans-can-win/
JDW
January 10th, 2013
12:11 pm
@Kyle…”As you know from our past debates, evaluating spending by fiscal years that overlap presidencies is very misleading. I’m not going to get into the dollar figures with you yet again, but your facts do not tell the truth.”
We have had this debate before as have lots of others…fact is no more than $200 billion in FY2009 can be attributed to Obama’s actions. As noted by someone else in this blog the CBO projected the deficit at $1.2 trillion BEFORE Obama took office.
While I completely agree that spending is a part of our current problem the Republican mantra of out of control spending by the Administration is a false narrative.
If you want to complain that the President has been unable to drive a solution to this issue as quickly as you would like I am with you. However if you or anyone else want to maintain, in the face of the facts. that he is the cause of the problem I will continue to disagree.
JDW
January 10th, 2013
12:14 pm
@Kyle…”You’re also ignoring stimulus spending that, while passed during FY09, was spread over a few fiscal years. So the year-on-year change tells a rather incomplete story.”
That is relevant how…IN SPITE of all the stimulus spending the average annual growth has ONLY been 2%. That means we spent even more less in other areas than normal.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
12:21 pm
“You do realize that over 20% of the debt we MUST pay is attributable to the two wars, which you certainly did vote for. ”
Not intended to be a factual statement.
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
January 10th, 2013
12:22 pm
Congress controls spending, and the reupblicans control the house — we’ve had TWO spending cuts already………
So, the republicans blame Obama instead of taking “responsibility” for their own mess? Is there anyone out there surprised?
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
12:26 pm
Oh, and btw?
Shut down this government. Right now. Don’t care who President Incompetent blames.
Maybe when the people actually see that it isn’t the biggest disaster in their lives when the State no longer interferes, they’ll finally decide to stop funding it.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
12:30 pm
JDW, it doesn’t matter what the growth of spending is. When you bring in less revenue, you CUT spending.
The only reason this government should ever go into deficit spending is in times of war – and specifically for that war. Otherwise, it should scale up or down based on revenue coming in, and the need to spend on certain programs.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 10th, 2013
12:35 pm
Maybe when the people actually see that it isn’t the biggest disaster in their lives when the State no longer interferes
Yeah. I mean just the other day there was a fire at a neighbors house.
Well wouldn’t you know it but the government showed up and interfered.
They put out the fire but seemed like a total waste of money to me.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 10th, 2013
12:37 pm
The only reason this government should ever go into deficit spending is in times of war
And if your Dubya you can go to war with no idea what you are doing.
And cut taxes for the wealthy at the same time.
How did that work out ?
Latifah
January 10th, 2013
12:37 pm
Kyle I wish you’d asked Sen. Chambliss about his current stance on illegal immigration. It is no secret that he’s run interference with the feds on behalf of his south Georgia farmer constituents in the past. I believe that will be an issue in his reelection bid.
John Ellison
January 10th, 2013
12:37 pm
Throw all of the bums out of office. They’re a bunch of charlatans financed by special interests. We wouldn’t have a deficit if all the special interest loopholes were removed from the tax code. The loopholes cost taxpayers 1.2 trillion dollars annually.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
12:38 pm
Real Americans are embarrassed that their government has grown so large that anyone is asked to pay more than 10% in taxes.
Democrats are not.
John Ellison
January 10th, 2013
12:44 pm
What purpose is served by shutting down government? All of the government employees will still be paid for not working. The only people hurt by a shutdown will be the taxpayers who will be paying government employees to do nothing.
Hillbilly D
January 10th, 2013
12:47 pm
I think they’re all a bunch of clowns and that nothing much is going to get done. Just more brinksmanship and can-kicking, when it’s all said and done.
However, if I was the Republican team, I’d double down. I’d take what ever Obama proposed and give him more than what he asked for. Call his bluff and let him own. That was one of the smartest moves Clinton ever made, when he basically co-opted his opponents positions. If they worked he came out smelling like a rose and if he lost, they took the heat. Say what you want (and I think he had a bushel basket full of flaws), the ol’ boy knew how to play a poker hand.
JDW
January 10th, 2013
12:48 pm
@Tiberius…”When you bring in less revenue, you CUT spending.”
In this case we didn’t “bring” in less revenue…we gave it away. I say we stop. Bring revenue back to the late 90’s as a % of GDP, cut defense spending to the levels of the late 90’s as a % of GDP and you are 75% of the way home already.
Jefferson
January 10th, 2013
12:48 pm
Only a fool would agree with the senator from GA.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
12:48 pm
JDW @ 12:11: In the first place, you are weaving back and forth between spending and deficits, the latter of which also includes revenues. Let’s stick to spending.
Second, even your concession of $200B — and I don’t think that goes far enough — means the change from FY09 to FY10 was not a decrease of 1.75%, as you stated earlier, but an increase of 4.19%. That raises your four-year average to 3.5% from 2%, even before we debate whether your $200B figure is correct.
Third, almost all of that increase came in the first three years. One might argue that means almost all the increase came when Democrats in Congress were setting spending levels. But my point is this: When you’ve increased spending by an average of 4.6%
(after inflation, remember)in the first three years, then merely keeping it at that level in the fourth year does not signal some kind of fiscal discipline — particularly when much of the spending in the first three years (for stimulus and various bailouts) was supposed to be temporary. There should have been a significant decrease beginning in the fourth year. Instead, higher spending has been baked into the cake, as many of us warned at the time.Fourth, and in any case, the year-on-year change statistic is superficial at best, willfully misleading at worst. There may not be much elevation change across the top of a plateau, but that tells us nothing about the plateau’s elevation. The questions of whether spending is high relative to a) historical norms or b) the size of the economy are not in dispute. It is high relative to both.
Hillbilly D
January 10th, 2013
12:49 pm
if he lost
That should say “if they didn’t work”. (I wish we had an edit function here like on the baseball blogs).
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
12:54 pm
One correction to my 12:48: While I normally use inflation-adjusted figures, it appears JDW did not, and I didn’t realize it until now.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
12:56 pm
Time for the second part of that “balanced approach”, Obozo receptacles.
Cut the spending or the sequester will do it for you.
Taxpayer win!
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
12:58 pm
JDW has his little Obozo hymnal out, Kyle. You’re wasting pixels explaining basic math to him.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
12:59 pm
“Yeah. I mean just the other day there was a fire at a neighbors house.”
Nice deflection, Cheesy. Of course, what you specify is both a LOCAL taxation issue and an arguably Constitutionally-correct use of tax dollars through public safety.
If you had anything to defend, you would have.
But you can’t.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
1:00 pm
“In this case we didn’t “bring” in less revenue…we gave it away.”
Another incorrect statement from JDW. Revenue declined starting in FY09 (FY08, really) because of the recession — and remains lower than usual because unemployment remains higher than usual. We didn’t “give it away.”
In fact, and as I pointed out the other day, revenue as a percentage of GDP from FY02-FY08 — that is, during the period when the Bush tax cuts were in place, but before the bottom fell out of the economy due to the recession — was within tenths of a percentage point of its post-WW2 average.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
1:01 pm
“And if your Dubya you can go to war with no idea what you are doing.”
More deflection, Cheesy. As I have stated many times before, I not only never votd for W, I constantly raled against his spending policies and war policies.
But again, you can’t defend President Incompetent and his lack of leadership on this issue, so you deflect.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
1:06 pm
“In this case we didn’t “bring” in less revenue…we gave it away.”
As Kyle explained, JDW, we did not. But nide try.
“I say we stop. Bring revenue back to the late 90’s as a % of GDP, cut defense spending to the levels of the late 90’s as a % of GDP and you are 75% of the way home already.”
How about this: Why stop at defense? In fact, defense is the ONLY Constitutionally-mandated role of government there is, but even I think it is way, way too large. However, why do you just focus on defense, JDW? Cut it ALL back to the ’90’s levels !!!!!!
Wonder why you just can’t seem to acknowledge nor follow the Constitution when deciding what spending you want to cut? Maybe because you never bothered to read that document?
Or maybe all those big words are too difficult for you?
JDW
January 10th, 2013
1:08 pm
@Kyle…”When you’ve increased spending by an average of 4.6% (after inflation, remember) in the first three years, then merely keeping it at that level in the fourth year does not signal some kind of fiscal discipline”
First off no those number are not after inflation I used the raw ones. After inflation without adjusting budget growth is -.01%. If you adjust then it is 2.2%.
Either way it is a damn sight better than Duhbya and Reagan who averaged more than 6.5% AFER inflation which is the point. You and the rest of the Republicans want to say The Adminstration has CAUSED the problem or has underpreformed. In fact they inherited the problem, have not made it worse and have actually slowed the rate of decline.
As for this…”There should have been a significant decrease beginning in the fourth year. Instead, higher spending has been baked into the cake, as many of us warned at the time.”
What you get is exactly that…2012 spending is around $3.795 trillion if you had increased it by a less than normal 4.5% it would be around $4 trillion in 2013. Instead it will be around $3.803…a significant decrease of $200 billion from the norm.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
1:08 pm
“What purpose is served by shutting down government? All of the government employees will still be paid for not working.”
Says who?
They’re not on salary. Who says they get paid?
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 10th, 2013
1:08 pm
Real Americans are embarrassed that their government has grown so large that anyone is asked to pay more than 10% in taxes.
Go back and look at tax rates were when Eisenhower was in office. We have been cutting taxes for the rich steadily since then and going further further into debt.
The whole time being told just wait…. you’ll feel the trickle anytime now.
Dumb and Dumber
January 10th, 2013
1:09 pm
I wonder if Saxby’s knee ever got better?
Of course he would blame Obama; Saxby is hands-down the most spineless pol to come out of Georgia in a generation.
MANGLER
January 10th, 2013
1:10 pm
Most economists, and recently the the IMF. states that austerity is what is causing Europe’s double dip recession and that the opposite would have helped. You keep whining about the slow recovery and wanting to cut more and more spending. Yes, that formula will drag us back into recession.
Do I think that the stimulus was perfect? Of course not. Things happened that make blood boil on both sides of the isle. But had no stimulus been achieved (by both Presidents), I’m confident that we’d have hit rock bottom so fast and so hard that we would have a larger debt than we currently have.
JDW
January 10th, 2013
1:13 pm
@Kyle…”Revenue declined starting in FY09 ”
BS…revenue started declining in 2001…thanks Duhbya.
Revenue numbers in trillions of 2005 dollars 2000 to now….
2000…$2,309
2001…$2,214
2002… $2,028
2003…$1,901
2004…$1,949
2005…$2,154
2006…$2,325
2007… $2,413
2008… $2,288
2009… $1,899
2010… $1,928
2011… $1,999
2012… $2,089
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
1:15 pm
JDW @ 1:08: I noted the point about inflation in my 12:54. I have no idea what you mean by “After inflation without adjusting budget growth…”
Your final point either ignores or fails to understand the point I was making. Keeping spending at a level that was supposed to be only temporary is not being disciplined. You are using typical D.C. math — hey, we increased spending by less than we could have!
Ronnie Raygun
January 10th, 2013
1:19 pm
What a tall tale teller Chambliss is.
So the whole deficit is all the fault of the FOUR MONTHS that the Democrats controlled the House and Presidency and had a supermajority (60 votes) in the Senate?
Have you no shame, Sir?
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
1:26 pm
JDW @ 1:13: Were you not talking about revenues since FY09? I thought you were, since you were talking about deficits since then. Therefore, I was talking about revenues since FY09.
In any case, you’ve once again reported numbers without any context. How much of the decline in 2001 was due to the bursting of the tech bubble and resulting recession — prolonged by 9/11 — rather than the change in tax rates? Given that most of the tax-rate changes didn’t hit until 2003, probably quite a bit — and that goes for 2002, too. You also may have noticed that revenues increased every year from 2004 to 2007.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
1:29 pm
Ronnie Raygun @ 1:19: Budget bills are not subject to cloture and thus do not require 60 votes at any point in the process. See here if you don’t believe me.
Therefore, for the purposes of this discussion, whether the Dems had 59 or 60 votes in the Senate at any given point between 2007 and 2010 doesn’t matter.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
1:30 pm
“You also may have noticed that revenues increased every year from 2004 to 2007.”
Speaking of bubbles, wasn’t 2004 to 2007 during the peak times of something we know as the housing and construction bubble?
Interesting that you would mention the tech bubble but not the housing bubble.
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
1:32 pm
Kyle,
While your responses to JDW are spot on and expand the discussion, I wonder why you bother responding to such a partisan who selectively uses mostly bogus figures.
Georgia, The " New Mississippi "
January 10th, 2013
1:34 pm
The biggest problems Georgia has to overcome are Saxby Chambliss, Johnny Isakon and Nathan Deal. Until these men are flushed out of the political system, we will continue to be the laughingstock of educated humanity.
Get Real
January 10th, 2013
1:36 pm
Liberals are idiots….All hail the Food Stamp President. We are moving towards the vaunted European model of government dependency…..another 4 years of spend and tax and there may be no recovery. Congratulations libbies, your children and grandchildren are screwed….
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
1:37 pm
“Speaking of bubbles, wasn’t 2004 to 2007 during the peak times of something we know as the housing and construction bubble? ”
You mean the government policy created housing and construction bubble, don’t you Politico?
That which an ignorant government creates cannot be sustained.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
1:39 pm
Looks like revenue went up after Our President Bush’s tax cuts were implemented in 2003. Thanks for the info, JDW!
Politico
January 10th, 2013
1:41 pm
Tiberius
Who and how is irrelevant to the point I was making to Kyle, but you are welcome to yap as always do.
The point is that he made sure he spoke of the tech bubble and it ensuing recession, but seemed to conveniently forgot to mention that the housing bubble and the direct and indirect impact on the economy and the tax revenues during the very years he sited.
But by all means, do blather on
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
1:43 pm
My, my, Politico.
There doesn’t appear to be much difference between yours and JDW’s responses to me.
Could it be you also have nothing original to post when your back is against the wall?
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
1:46 pm
Get Real is a liberal plant.
No real Republican would constantly help the liberal cause out like he does here…
Politico
January 10th, 2013
1:47 pm
Tiberius
“color me shocked”………… your typical “poutrage” is your usual sign of “surrender”, which I will not accept because it would be too easy
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
1:49 pm
AHhhh, more repetitive posts from Politico.
It’s all she’s got when she can’t back up her nonsense.
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
1:54 pm
politico, you know you’ve arrived at Kyle’s when a certain somebody childishly uses the wrong gender to address you!
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
1:58 pm
You know you’ve become irrelevant when all you do is repeat the same posts over and over again when complaining about other posters, rather than the topic at hand.
TRUTH
January 10th, 2013
2:00 pm
WOW, good work, Kyle. A neo-con writes a blog and the comments are about 98% anti-R. What does that tell you? Chambliss and the rest of the R-party clearly don’t get it. Allow me to be clear…
1. Who doesn’t know that Dubya and the R-party racked up an unknown number in spending the nation’s surplus. Then when President O won the ‘08 election, R’s ran away from Dubya, ran away from just admitting they were complicit in the out of control spending and were NOT defending or protecting our nations coffers.
2. Instead of the admission, the nation got the Tea Party. Eh, ever wonder how THAT looniness got started? See Koch Brothers, Dick Armey, Karl Rove and the Faux News crowd. (Translated: You got played by the R power brokers.) They, in concert, led the R party into irrelevance and took a lot of your money with it. President O’s election in ‘08 opened and exposed the R party and its “henchmen” and its primary players.
3. It also showed that the R’s playbook was fraught with redistricting to favor R’s, to keep power, and to disregard the American public who did not fit into their demographic. Jokes on you, the American people give a dayum about this nation. The R’s also have NOT engaged in what the American people want, regardless of the flogging they recently took. It was understandable after the first win by the President, now its just stupid and harming our movement forward and to the return of prosperity.
I can go on and on, but most of the responses I’ve read touch on those subjects I have not, and unfortunately dare I say, there are bucketloads MORE to lay at the feet of R’s. Sum result is the obvious grab for power when you have nothing else to stand on. Compromise from a R is a ridiculous thought. Yet, the R’s have the kahones to EXPECT D’s to cave in, even when they are in the minority and shrinking daily. KAHONES!
Last thing, I appreciate a 2 party (or more) system of government as most Americans, but what exactly does a elected R politician do? Get elected by his constituents and party affiliates, to then be handled by Norquist, Limbaugh, Adleson, Koch and others? If I were an R member, I would be livid. (Guess why you R’s are fading into the black – oh, that’s right, you don’t like Black (Presidents, Deputy Secretary of States, AG’s, people, or Brown – Supreme Court Justices, Mayors, immigrants, or Women (everything women), or LBGTs, or ____________). The rich, you likey the rich.
Nice try, Kyle. Come again.
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
2:01 pm
Isn’t the topic at hand, tibby’s childishness?
But of Ms. Tibby insists…
If you think the 112th Congress was a weak, unproductive bunch, you’re not alone. Saxby Chambliss agrees with you.
Would someone ask Mr. Chambliss why the GOP drags that abysmal rating even lower?
To the same level as used car salesmen and CEOs?
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 10th, 2013
2:03 pm
You mean the government policy created housing and construction bubble, don’t you Politico?
Not in any way accurate
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
2:06 pm
Politico @ 1:30: Do you pay taxes on the increase in the paper value of your house? Do you pay taxes on the capital gain from selling your house if it’s your primary residence?
OTOH, do you pay taxes on the capital gain from selling tech stocks or other equity investments?
Which raises an important point. In the mid- to late-1990s, about one-third of the increase in federal revenues as a percentage of GDP came from the capital gains tax. What did we do then? Cut that tax rate. What are we doing now? Raising it (for those upper-income taxpayers most likely to pay it).
Brilliant.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 10th, 2013
2:07 pm
1. Who doesn’t know that Dubya and the R-party racked up an unknown number in spending the nation’s surplus.
Me.
W didn’t start the tech recession, didn’t fly the airplanes into the World Trade Center and was only one of many on both sides calling for a war in Afghanistan.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
2:07 pm
Centrist @ 1:32: Mostly for sport.
john hayes
January 10th, 2013
2:09 pm
I would vote for ANYBODY other than Saxby. He is a man of no courage, no substance, and no integrity.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:12 pm
Kyle
You know you mentioned the tech bubble bursting to speak of the negative impact it had at that time, but purposely failed to mention the “positive impact” the housing bubble was having on tax revenue from 04 to 07 because it didn’t fit your narrative.
That’s fine and dandy. This is your blog, but one was mentioned and the other left out by coincidence.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 10th, 2013
2:12 pm
Ill tell you what W did
He blew through a surplus he was handed by Clinton in about 17 days.
He totally ignored the Islamic threat and bin laden, preferring instead to push for national missile defense system with rummy, until it bit him in the backside.
He then ginned up intelligence about Iraq and 9/11 so he could get Saddam back for his father.
Then while not paying for that war he cut taxes on his rich buddies and deregulated wall st which was a total disaster.
Add to that he was almost a daily embarrassment worldwide
Other than that he was great.
Worst President Ever
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:16 pm
Mrs Tiberius
Again, the housing bubble, who and why, was and is irrelevant to the point I was making to Kyle.
If you wish to have a conversation with yourself about the ins and outs of the housing bubble over and above the positive impact it was having on the economy and tax revenues from 04 to 07, knock yourself out madam.
So you have proven exactly nothing I said to be incorrect, but keep flailing and yapping. Just don’t fall off your step stool
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
2:17 pm
“Not in any way accurate”
Back your assertion up, Cheesy.
Be sure to NOT leave out all the policies and bills passed during past GOP and Dem administrations which made it easier for people to buy houses they couldn’t afford.
td
January 10th, 2013
2:17 pm
3 million people in this nation was receiving Food Stamps in 1969.
44 million people in this nation receiving Food Stamps in 2012. (1 in 4 children)
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:17 pm
*was not left out by coincidence
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
2:17 pm
Politico @ 2:12: I’m not sure how you divined my purpose for writing anything. What I did was write about the negative effect each bubble’s bursting had on revenues. You were the one who brought up the positive effects of one bubble — but, I notice, not the other one. I won’t speculate as to your own motivation, but I will direct you to my 2:06 comment about the different tax treatment of the elements of the respective bubbles.
Oh, and before you complain: Taxes on capital gains represented 15% of the growth in all federal revenues from the trough year (2004) to peak (2007).
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
2:20 pm
He is a man of no courage, no substance, and no integrity.
Obviously.
But the coward who spits on combat veterans could get reelected in Georgia for the next fifty years if he lived that long and chose to run.
And I pity the people who vote for him even more than him…
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:21 pm
Kyle
And no I can’t read your mind, but awhile back when this same issue was brought up, you at that time also failed to mention the housing bubble before it burst and it’s impact on the economy during the years you so fondly mention regarding the Bush tax cuts
Heck, even when you use the years you like to cut out and not all the years the cuts were in place, the revenue to GDP ratio still doesn’t match the historical average…………… even with the “let’s don’t mention” the housing bubble impact………. Even if we all know that was a huge direct and indirect factor during those years
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:23 pm
Kyle
I wasn’t the one who forgot a bubble. I didn’t refute the tech bubble bursting and the ensuing recession, did I?
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
2:24 pm
@ TRUTH – The high percentage of liberal posts here is due to the mostly liberal readership of the liberal AJC. Few conservatives read it anymore.
@ Politico – The housing bubble did not contribute to federal tax revenue since most of those capital gains are exempt from taxation. It did help local coffers via higher taxable assessments without corresponding millage rate reductions – but that ended when the bubble burst.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
2:24 pm
“He blew through a surplus he was handed by Clinton in about 17 days.”
There was no surplus.
“He totally ignored the Islamic threat and bin laden,”
Partially correct, however, since you were never in the Oval Office during the PDB, I suspect that’s just uninformed opinion by you.
“He then ginned up intelligence about Iraq and 9/11 so he could get Saddam back for his father.”
Partially correct, however, see my above comment on your opinion.
“Then while not paying for that war”
Funny, I don’t recall anything not being paid for. Maybe you need to revise and extend your explanation here.
“he cut taxes on his rich buddies”
Or in other word, everybody.
“and deregulated wall st which was a total disaster.”
Name the bill(s) signed into law that deregulated Wall St.
“Worst President Ever”
Jimmy Carter still retains that title, and President Incompetent will eclipse that beginning in 2017.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:25 pm
Kyle
As always thanks for the exchange.
JDW
January 10th, 2013
2:27 pm
@Kyle…”You are using typical D.C. math — hey, we increased spending by less than we could have!”
You on the other hand are demonstrating typical Republican slight of hand.
For example….there is no outrage when Reagan and Duhbya increase spending, in constant dollars by an average of 6.5% a year over 8 years each…however when a Democrat increases spending by less than half that amount over a 3 year period why OMG WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM or you are using “D.C. math”…welcome to the real world our population grows every year and when Duhbya is not around so does our GDP…newsflash government spending grows right along with it.
More misdirection…why it couldn’t have been the fact that we CUT TAX RATES that caused the revenues to decline…must be the downturn…BULL HOCKEY…during the years 2000-2007 GDP increased an average of 2.2% per year not robust but not a complete disaster…one would have reasonably expected government revenues to grow by a similar number instead they grew at LESS than 1%. Spending on the other hand GREW at 6.2%..guess what we got deficits. Growing economy, tax cuts, Republican control = Deficits how could that be?
Must have been those damn Dems…
TRUTH
January 10th, 2013
2:27 pm
@ Aesop 2:07
Soooooo, the tech bubble caused the economic recession in our country??!! Guess I missed my edition of “Wired.” And then you have the stones to mention the two UNFUNDED wars. Sheer genius. I look forward to your next rant…. might we expect you next to say that the President will allow the government to shut down?
Basic civics class, the President cannot shut down the government, the House can (Remember Newt?)
Reading and comprehension are quite essential….
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
2:30 pm
Jimmy Carter still retains that title…
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Bushbots do crack me up.
Outside of the GOP’s lunatic fringe, NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY is stupid or intellectually dishonest enough to write insanity like that!
W was so friggin’ awful he is in the bottom five/ten all time in virtually every ranking ever made.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:30 pm
Centrists
There as plenty of direct and indirect impact on revenue from the housing bubble. What planet were you on?
So lawyers, banks, mortgage companies do not pay taxes on the additional earnings that were made via sells, refies, closings, etc?
Contractors and subs do not pay taxes on the earning they make from building homes?
Agents and brokers didn’t realize higher tax bills from the higher earnings during the boom?
Really?
If that were not so, why the “NEGATIVE IMPACT” to revenues when they bubble burst?
Thanks for playing.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
2:31 pm
Soooooo, the tech bubble caused the economic recession in our country?
——–
No, it’s collapse did.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
2:31 pm
“For example….there is no outrage when Reagan and Duhbya increase spending”
Of course, there were few blogs then, but don’t let that little fact stop you from your poutrage.
btw, probably the most useless statement of the day there, JDW.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
2:33 pm
By most any measure (deficits, debt, spending, unemployment, credit rating, poverty) Our President Bush was superior to Obozo.
Don’t fear facts.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
2:35 pm
“Basic civics class, the President cannot shut down the government, the House can”
Nice try there, UNTRUTH, but it takes two to tango in a Constitutional government. If President Incompetent refuses to negotiate in good faith (now there’s an understatement, by God), the House might just have no other choice but to shutdown the government.
Either way, your attempt to absolve the Executive Branch from any responsibility for a government shutdown shows YOUR ignorance of Civics.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
2:35 pm
Politico @ 2:21: If you think there are better years to use in any of these examples, by all means, point them out. But make sure to explain your reason for choosing them, as I have when I’ve chosen my time frames.
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
2:36 pm
By most any measure (dead civilians, dead members of the US military, the greatest economic collapse since the 1920s) Our President Bush was superior to Obozo.
JDW
January 10th, 2013
2:36 pm
@Centrist…”While your responses to JDW are spot on and expand the discussion, I wonder why you bother responding to such a partisan who selectively uses mostly bogus figures.”
Every number I have used comes straight from the official budget numbers for the United States of American…you can find them all here.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals
Funny what happens when you strip the Right wing rhetoric out of them. The sky has not fallen in the last 4 years…in fact things have gotten a lot better.
As for a Partisan…
I was once one of those now nearly extinct rarities a moderate Republican…Newt cured me and most like me. My ideas haven’t changed…Barry Goldwater has become a RINO.
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
2:37 pm
And of course outrage cannot be expressed unless on a blog.
Are there a lot of sunpsots lately?
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
2:37 pm
Don’t get me wrong, AmVet, Bush is a close 2nd or 3rd worst President (I’m always torn between Bush and Lincoln as to who was worse), but Carter takes the all-time prize.
Until 2017.
JamVet
January 10th, 2013
2:39 pm
Lincoln?????????????????
You ARE seriously messed up in the head.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
2:39 pm
JDW @ 2:27: I’ve explained why I think your metric is superficial. You’ve only railed against the metrics I prefer. As for your BULL HOCKEY rant, once again you start mixing metrics — now you’re on GDP growth, when we were talking about spending, and now taxes — in an effort to make it appear you have an argument. My point is clear: The tax rates that prevailed from 2001 to 2012 do not explain the very low revenues of 2009-12, because the results were quite different from 2001-08. You have never reconciled this inconsistency in your argument.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
2:40 pm
“The sky has not fallen in the last 4 years…in fact things have gotten a lot better.”
A LOT better?
Try marginally. Barely. Anemically.
And in doing so, the long-term health of this Republic has been placed in bigger jeopardy than it ever has before.
By BOTH sides of the aisle.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
2:42 pm
Yes, AmVet, Lincoln.
The absolute worst Federalist of the bunch. Was responsible for the greatest increase of Federal power in the history of this nation.
And that ain’t a good thing.
MarkV
January 10th, 2013
2:46 pm
Chambliss (with reference to the debt limit and Obama’s statement that the country must pay her bills): “Well the fact is, the Democratic Congress incurred the bills. This administration incurred the bills. The Republicans have been in charge of the House for two years; this money was basically spent in the two years before that when you look at the stimulus package and the other spending that he put in place to create the massive deficits. So for him to come out and say, ‘You guys are obligated to pay your bills’ — I didn’t vote for any of that stuff.”
That is as if a family had a joint credit card, and when the balance was reaching the maximum, one of those using it refused to contribute, arguing that his/her charges were not the latest ones. Never mind all the charges he/she made before that and which represented a substantial part of the balance.
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
2:48 pm
To take Kyle’s 2:39 explanation a step further, pointing out Bush’s gross increased spending while ignoring Obama’s much grosser increased spending is partisan garbage.
We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Liberal NYT David Brooks spells it out here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/opinion/brooks-why-hagel-was-picked.html?ref=davidbrooks&_r=0
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:56 pm
Kyle
My point is that you know you didn’t include a major variable within the years you picked. Your choice, but it is what it is.
Any years anyone picks should be include the “major variables” that had positive or negative impact on the economy and tax revenues.
Clinton years shouldn’t be talked about without the tech bubble. He was the recipient of the good side, however Bush was hit with the ensuing recession you mentioned.
In my opinion, the POTUS gets too much credit and blame for the economy and the majority of them have accepted the credit and deflect the blame, as have their followers.
Thursday Afternoon Speculation – Saxby Chambliss Edition — Peach Pundit
January 10th, 2013
2:59 pm
[...] Mike Hassinger · 0 comments TweetSo Kyle Wingfield wrote a column about his interview with Sen. Saxby Chambliss, mostly about the possibility of shutting down the [...]
JDW
January 10th, 2013
2:59 pm
@Kyle…Mixing metrics? You just aren’t following along…You clearly state…”How much of the decline in 2001 was due to the bursting of the tech bubble and resulting recession — prolonged by 9/11 — rather than the change in tax rates?”
I say BULL HOCKEY…that downturn was not a primary cause evidenced by the fact that GDP grew at 2.2%…some effect maybe…prime reason no.
Now for this…”My point is clear: The tax rates that prevailed from 2001 to 2012 do not explain the very low revenues of 2009-12, because the results were quite different from 2001-08. You have never reconciled this inconsistency in your argument.”"
The change in tax rates is a prime reason and the other is the downturn. Results are going to be different in every year but a constant is that if you lower rates you will collect less revenue per dollar. Combine that with fewer dollars and you have the mess we are in now.
Now to preempt the argument that tax cuts increase revenue…no they do not. Like everything else they are subject to diminishing returns. If you cut the top rates from 70% to 40% yeah you can get a bump…but it is less with each point you decrease and at some point the gain turns to a loss. Based on history it seems that happens in the 40% to 45% top marginal rate range.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
2:59 pm
Kyle @ 2:39
The housing bubble bursting might have a little to do with the revenues from 09 to 12.
JDW might have a different take. And it could just be a minor coincidence.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
2:59 pm
“In my opinion, the POTUS gets too much credit and blame for the economy and the majority of them have accepted the credit and deflect the blame, as have their followers.”
Likely the first accurate thing you’ve posted on this blog, Politico.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
3:05 pm
And Ms. Tiberius yaps along
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
3:09 pm
Boy, you complement a gal and they go all postal on you.
Typical lib.
1961_Xer
January 10th, 2013
3:13 pm
If this Congress voted ‘yes’ on the budget, how can they vote ‘no’ when it comes time to pay the bills?
No Congress has voted on a budget since 2009. Thank you, Harry Reid and the Democrats.
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
3:16 pm
We are never going to agree on what tax policies will maximize revenue mostly because there are too many other variables that affect it. But many of us should be able to agree that as tax revenues go up and down with small variations, spending only goes up with some wild jumps.
The spending has blown up our deficits and debt – not tax policies. The bills will come due, and we can only ameliorate the consequences by cutting spending sooner rather than later. March is our next best chance, and sequestration and/or a partial government shutdown is probably necessary to force the issue.
yuzeyurbrane
January 10th, 2013
3:25 pm
First, Chambliss misspeaks when he asserts all the debts owed by the US were incurred in the first 2 years of Obama’s Presidency. Just not true. It took a long time and many Presidents of both parties to reach where we are now. But I don’t expect Saxby to shoulder any part of responsibility when he is thinking of a difficult primary challenge from the right. His pride will not allow him to run if he has strong opponent. That is most important nugget of interview. As to Democrats, if they were crafty, facile and lucky enough they could end up in Mourdock type situation where Republicans blew Senate seat in Indiana—but highly unlikely considering their short bench.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
3:30 pm
“First, Chambliss misspeaks when he asserts all the debts owed by the US were incurred in the first 2 years of Obama’s Presidency.”
Of course, yuz, if you actually read the statement, he never said all the debt. he’s complaining about stimulus onward, which WAS the responsibility of the Dems.
JDW
January 10th, 2013
3:32 pm
@Politico…”JDW might have a different take. And it could just be a minor coincidence.”
Strangely enough I have exactly the same take…from 2008 to 2012 average GDP growth was less than .25 of a percent so revenues should be flat unless there was a tax decrease.
FY2008 revenue in constant 2005 dollars $2.288 trillion
FY2012 revenue in constant 2005 dollars $2.089 trillion
Remember the 2% SSI withholding decrease.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
3:39 pm
If this Congress voted ‘yes’ on the budget, how can they vote ‘no’ when it comes time to pay the bills?
————-
It’s quite simple. The current “budget” (actually a continuing resolution) ends in a month or two. There isn’t any discretionary spending approved beyond that. This is exactly the right time to debate the debt limit.
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
3:40 pm
The liberals here continue to ignore the blog issue of spending. They keep going back to tax revenue, even though the vast majority of the tax side of the equation was settled earlier this month. Sure, there will be more limits to deductions, exemptions, and tax credits – but the game stopper is about cuts to spending which has not been done since Reagan won the cold war.
josef
January 10th, 2013
3:47 pm
TIBERIUS
You ought to know by now that Lincoln was G-d Inc-rnate, did no wrong, had no flaws and ascended into heaven where he now instructs his followers in how to issue fatwahs on unbelievers…
Michael H. Smith
January 10th, 2013
3:48 pm
Please republish Senator obama’s debt ceiling speech and compare what he said then to what he says now about raising the debt, Kyle.
Let’s see your resident socialist liberal obama sock puppets lie, spin and dance verbally all over the place to defend the indefensible hypocrisy of their “dear leader”.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
3:51 pm
Silly me, josef. I had forgotten about Lincoln’s deification all those years ago.
josef
January 10th, 2013
3:59 pm
TIBERIUS
Well, as you know, I don’t consider him even the worst. That title goes easily to Old Hickory, followed by Lincoln and Davis in a tie for number two…No fan of Bush II by a long shot, but he ain’t even in the top ten worst, imeoiauo…
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
4:02 pm
Pardon the interruption by going back to subject blog issue of spending.
Military spending was rapidly reducing between 1985 and 1993 (Reagan 81-88, H.W. bush 89-92) and remained flat between 1993 and 1999 (Clinton years). Economies undergo a recession after the end of a major conflict as the economy is forced to adjust and retool, a “peace dividend” refers to a potential long-term benefit as budgets for defense spending are assumed to be at least partially redirected to social programs and/or a decrease in taxation rates. We did all of that. We got the recession during H.W. Bush, long term dividend under Clinton, Bush tax cuts (partially undone by Obama), but lost the dividend after September 11, 2001 to fund conflicts like the War on Terror, War in Afghanistan and the War in Iraq. We have been “guns and butter” ever since with huge leaps in domestic spending too.
Sequestration might be the answer.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
4:03 pm
I knew who you were going to name, josef, and I didn’t want to increase your blood pressure exponentially by doing so myself.
Of course, MAJOR historians might disagree with us . . .
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
January 10th, 2013
4:12 pm
Obama just picked a Muslim cleric to deliver the benediction!
OMG!
psyche
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
4:15 pm
JOSEF,
If you were not here I would say that “our” Democrats had gone totally berserk. Since you are here, I will say “only partially beserk”.. Lincoln, my friend, was not a bad guy. Think about it. Hard life, not handsome, wacky wife, dead chidren bad war,eager enemies and then a shot in the head. But he wrote that great gem of a speech, the Gettysberg Address. HIs credits far outweigh his shortcomings.
But your “buds” here are determined to rot this blog away. No fun. They remind me of a dog in the Herriott book I am reading. The dog would hide and wait for a stranger to come along and then he’d pounce out growling and snarling (just for fun in his case).. Today Dems found Chambliss available so snarl, bite and babble.
Anyway, I’m glad you are here even if you are looking for Hillbilly. I always like to present a warm welcome..
josef
January 10th, 2013
4:16 pm
Tiberius
The MAJOR historians might also issue one of those fatwahs…you know folks like us are heretics and infidels.
josef
January 10th, 2013
4:20 pm
DUSTY
Well, each to his own taste said the man when he saw the monkey eating glue! -)
Not really here looking for Hillbilly, though I am always glad to hear from him. I’m happy to hear from you and several others as well, as always.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
4:21 pm
“But your “buds” here are determined to rot this blog away”
And since you are one of your buds, it is about time you included yourself.
Congratulations
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right
January 10th, 2013
4:25 pm
Dusty, I have no doubt Lincoln’s heart was in the right place when making his decision’s, but like all decisions made where government is concerned, he would have been better served by listening to his head.
Only bad government comes from following your heart.
retiredds
January 10th, 2013
4:28 pm
Typical politician, it’s the other guy’s fault. Blame = failure
josef
January 10th, 2013
4:30 pm
TIBERIUS
My jury is still out on whether or not he even had a heart in the biological sense, much less the metaphorical. But, then, as you know I do have issues with Granny’s Diocletian of the Potomac!
kevin
January 10th, 2013
4:31 pm
We are citizens of these United States of America. We elect those into office to work for us…and if it was anyone of us who were not doing our jobs…we would be “fired.” Those who are serving in office in Washington, year after years, continuing to give us; the American people bull, point fingers here and there, disagree about things that could help us and turn things down, give themself raises; use all of the loop holes in their taxes, stay in office a long time, eat, ride, get perks, etc., now you tell me that they can’t get their act together and help the america tax payers, yet, help themselves over and over again. Nothing is making sense, nothing is adding up and we are witnessing the same of stupid things again and again. We must called for all of them to resign; do not vote again to have them return to office. And, from what we are now seeing and will face, 113th Congress will turn out to be even worse. We all see, that they are not up in Washington on our behalf, but their own. Its is time we put a stop to this election into office again and again, we need those who will work for the people of these United States and leave their personal agenda behind. they ae not and have not done so. Its been kicking down the President at every turn and level. If we don’t do anything as citizens, we stand to pay for things again and again while congress give themselves another raise on our dime while we suffer, kick and try to keep our homes and lives. We have done the math, and Congress just is not adding up!
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
4:35 pm
retiredds: Typical politician, it’s the other guy’s fault. Blame = failure
———–
Yep, Obozo blames Republicans and ATMs for all his failures.
Good catch.
MarkV
January 10th, 2013
4:44 pm
Dusty has arrived with her usual complaints about Democrats destroying this blog with unspecified crimes against her views. Avoiding, naturally, pointing out any specific statement she could dispute by facts, logic and reason.
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
4:45 pm
Don’t be dense,
alitico. I was speaking to JOSEF.
Josef’s ‘buds” are usually Democrats although he can think clearer than the rest of ‘em. So stop your barking and biting.
josef
January 10th, 2013
4:49 pm
DUSTY
“…although he can think clearer than the rest of ‘em…”
Even after a few snorts of the MD?
MarkV
January 10th, 2013
4:56 pm
If Chambliss (or Kyle) thinks that Obama would be blamed for a government shutdown, it should be used as an illustration of wishful thinking.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
5:01 pm
“So stop your barking and biting.”
With all of your feigned outrage and one sided view points about the those who on this blog, you must have been laughing about yourself when you typed that last post.
All you do is bark via your daily feigning about others with different political view than yours.
Get over it.
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
5:01 pm
Dear MarkV
I don’t have time to post the number of “put down” posts by liberals here. Since you are somewhat endowed with reason and thought, please read the first six posts of this blog and tell me those are kindly words for discussion. They are the usual Dem start for “discussions” here.
Have you ever read James Herriott’s books? His “Dog Stories” are entertaining. .
Politico
January 10th, 2013
5:02 pm
*those on this blog
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
5:10 pm
Oh no POLITICO
I came here quite happily after a lovely luncheon meeting. Great conversations like “my casserole was better than your coconut cake” besides some vey deep subjects. We solved half the world’s problems!! Indeed.
Then I came here and there you were!! Uh oh!!
OH well, to each his own. I happen to be conservative.and don’t care for the big spenders of government. They happen to be Democrats.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
5:13 pm
And you have your right to that opinion, but the bs on this blog is not one sided as you consistently assert and are very well aware of
You are not welcome to your own facts, no matter how hard you try.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
5:15 pm
You have a great evening
Look forward to the next segment of “Dusty’s feigned outrage”
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 10th, 2013
5:17 pm
Off for the night. Nice chatting with you, josef.
You’re proof positive that there are some liberals who can carry on a civil conversation.
Just not the ones that usually pollute this blog.
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
5:17 pm
JOSEF,
You know that I am a “teetotler” except at Christmas. I am just my usual cheeerful self’
“The day was cold and dark and dreary.
The wind did blow and was never weary.
Tthe vine still clung to the molderling wall.
At each gust of wind, the dead leaves fall.”.
Poe knew how to describe a day without sunshine. It’s two shades of gray outside.
.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
5:19 pm
Dusty
Before I go, was Bush and almost 6 yrs of Republican Congress considered “small spending” in your book?
Sure that was a Democrat conspiracy as well, huh?
Politico
January 10th, 2013
5:20 pm
“Just not the ones that usually pollute this blog”
You are a liberal now? WOW
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
5:20 pm
@ MarkV – At least you are posting about the subject matter.
Sequestration was passed by the Senate, House, and signed by the President. It will be up to all three of those parties to change or postpone it – otherwise there will finally be large spending cuts.
If there is a partial government shutdown over the debt ceiling increase or lack of a budget and yet another Continuing Resolution may be part of the March deadlines, it won’t matter who the public “blames” – most politicians are safe in their states and districts. Congress may have a low poll rating, but the individuals are popular by their constituents who elect them.
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
5:30 pm
Good night POLITICO
Democrat conspiracy? NO.. No.That takes planning. The Democratic speaking from the White House, is doing the push on mindless spending. They are so far ahead of Bush on raising debt without cuts that it is almost ludicrous except no one is laughing. It is too mindlessly sad.
But you do not notice little things like that. Yeah, we know.
MarkV
January 10th, 2013
5:33 pm
Centrist @ 5:20 pm
It seems to be accepted as a fact that the politicians are safe in their districts and states. I think that is true only as most generalization are, that is, in a limited way. I suspect there would be a sufficient number of those, whose political fortunes would change, or, who would believe that it might happen. I am unwilling to give up on the power of the people.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
5:42 pm
MarkV: If Chambliss (or Kyle) thinks that Obama would be blamed for a government shutdown, it should be used as an illustration of wishful thinking.
———————-
Chambliss was speaking of people who think, not the Democrats or the media.
josef
January 10th, 2013
5:43 pm
DUSTY
Loves me some Poe-etry!
“Avaunt! tonight my heart is light. No dirge will I upraise,
But waft the angel on her flight with a paean of old days!”
I think, from “Lenore.” Pardon any errors, coming from the recesses of memory…
MarkV
January 10th, 2013
5:43 pm
Dusty @ 5:01 pm
Dear Dusty,
I was not asking you to post the number of “put down” posts by liberals here.” Just to take, once, some substantive statement by a liberal (preferably mine), and show WHY it was wrong. Is that not simple enough?
——————-
I have not read James Herriott’s books yet, but as a big dog lover I plan to do that.
How did you like the Downton Abbey episode on Sunday? I enjoyed it very much.
mbtc
January 10th, 2013
5:44 pm
We could grow ourselves out of much of this deficit if the Republicans quit trying to sabotage the economy for political gain.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
January 10th, 2013
5:50 pm
Good job, marxists, sending holder over to meet with the good and decent folk of the NRA. I’ll bet that didn’t rub any nerves raw.
And yes, you’ve been reduced to begging us for something, anything, a ban on 30 round clips, just give us a little bone so we don’t look like the fools that we are.
Go pound sand.
Stepped in it bigtime, didn’t ya?
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
5:52 pm
Centrist & MarkV
Sadly, both of you failed to notice that Chambliss, with a joint committee, worked several years on the fiscal problems that are overtaking us. His group presented a worthy plan of cuts and changes (somewhat sponsored by Obama). It was rejected on all sides including the president..
Therefore we have no plans other than wait until March. Chambliss is the subject by the way, a fair senator who has worked very hard to solve problems. He has few counterparts in the Democratic Party.
Hillbilly D
January 10th, 2013
5:53 pm
josef
Have to point up a technicality here, the Magnolia State seceded from the Union, January 9, 1861 (inauguration was March 4 in those days). So Granny’s Diocletian isn’t technically eligible to make your list.
Politico
January 10th, 2013
5:54 pm
Aesop
Stepped into (if that’s how you want to phrase it) a reelection victory in November. 3 more Senate seats and 7 more House seats……..
Yep, “stepped in it big time”
Thanks for finally acknowledging the obvious.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 10th, 2013
5:55 pm
mbtc: …if the Republicans quit trying to sabotage the economy for political gain.
————————
Not intended as a credible statement.
Hillbilly D
January 10th, 2013
5:59 pm
a ban on 30 round clips,
They ought to read up on what Alvin York did with a bolt action Enfield rifle and a standard issue .45.
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
6:00 pm
MarkV
Take about ANGRY!! I anxiously awaited the new issue of Downton Abbey. Settled in my easy chair and POOF! My TV went whacko and I missed the whole show. My TV is almost new!!
There’s a conspiracy out there, I tell you. A conspiracy! (What happened?)
MarkV
January 10th, 2013
6:03 pm
Dusty @ 5:52 pm
Dusty,
You are assuming! My critique regarding senator Chambliss was strictly with respect to the statements quoted by Kyle. I believe he and his history in the Senate are much better than what those statements, possibly made with an eye on the possible challenge, would indicate.
josef
January 10th, 2013
6:04 pm
HILLBILLY
Heh, heh! You’re channeling her gray ghost, all right! When we were being taught the Yankee Sharia version of history in school and were to recite that Abraham Lincoln was “our” 16th President, Granny took on the teacher, citing what you said and then noting that Mississippi was not reconstructed until after Lincoln’s death, therefore he was not “our” 16th President.
However, you will note that I put Abie and Jeff Davis in a tie for second place on the worst list…two egomaniacs perfectly willing to sacrifice those hundreds of thousands of lives to further their own arrogance and conceit…
MarkV
January 10th, 2013
6:06 pm
Dusty @ 6:00 pm
That was as unkind piece of fate as one can imagine. I am really sorry.
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
6:06 pm
Hillbilly
How many Germans did York kill in WWI? If I have it right,he grew up squirrel hunting. With that experience, he never missed his target.
josef
January 10th, 2013
6:11 pm
Hillbilly
I thought about you when I was reading this from a MAJOR historian on the French and Indian Wars who was, refreshingly, open minded on the Noble Savage. In discussing one of the battles he said that “the Indians, smelling defeat in the air, had, logically, withdrawn!”
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
6:11 pm
Thank you, MarkV. May Downton Abbey repeat itself!!
indigo
January 10th, 2013
6:12 pm
Aesop
Who are these “marxists” you speak of?
Hillbilly D
January 10th, 2013
6:13 pm
Dusty
And those machine guns were spitting fire and cutting down the undergrowth all around me something awful. And the Germans were yelling orders. You never heard such a racket in all of your life. I didn’t have time to dodge behind a tree or dive into the brush… As soon as the machine guns opened fire on me, I began to exchange shots with them. There were over thirty of them in continuous action, and all I could do was touch the Germans off just as fast as I could. I was sharp shooting… All the time I kept yelling at them to come down. I didn’t want to kill any more than I had to. But it was they or I. And I was giving them the best I had.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_C._York
josef
As to our conversation the other day, if there’d been no Louisiana Purchase, there’d probably have been no territories for the ego-maniacs (and there were more than those two) to fight over.
Centrist
January 10th, 2013
6:13 pm
Any bloggers here think the Republican House will agree to increase the debt, continue spending as is with a Continuing Resolution, postpone or remove sequestration in March?
There will be blood (spending cuts) one way or the other. Targeted cuts will eventually replace meat cleaver sequestration cuts. Probably not until after the deadlines – government is now only in the business of posturing and crisis management with little or no advance planning, bargaining, or compromise until absolutely necessary.
Kyle Wingfield
January 10th, 2013
6:13 pm
And with that, immediate commenting is off again until tomorrow morning.
Hillbilly D
January 10th, 2013
6:13 pm
Dusty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_C._York
josef
As to our conversation the other day, if there’d been no Louisiana Purchase, there’d probably have been no territories for the ego-maniacs (and there were more than those two) to fight over.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
January 10th, 2013
6:14 pm
I thought the GOP was the party of old white men, so why is it old white men the only ones selected for Barry’s Bungling Bozo Brigade (cabinet)? Seems Charlie Rangel, just off disenfranchising Hispanic voters in his district, is upset with Barry’s lack of diversity.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/charlie-rangel-hits-obama-on-diversity-86005.html
Dusty
January 10th, 2013
6:16 pm
JOSEF
So glad you joined us. I look forward to seeing you here more often (As long as you don’t turn on Robert E. Lee and say he threw his grandma out in the snow or something! But Davis…OK..).
Good night
Ol' Timer
January 10th, 2013
10:06 pm
Ol’ Saxby is a freakin’ weather vane — responding to the way the wind is blowing. His pandering is so outrageious — he bends over backwards to pander to the point where if he’s not careful he’s going to end up kissing his own arse.
ODD OWL
January 11th, 2013
1:37 am
The time has come for the President and the Democrats to draw a line in the sand and put an end to this Republican obstructionism…
d
January 11th, 2013
8:19 am
Since the Republicans are such lovers of the Constitution, they should read it: “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law…” Article I, Section IX. “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” – Amendment 14, Section 4.
President Obama cannot write legislation. Only Congress can. One thing that has to be understood in any governing body is that when a vote is taken, whether or not you were on the winning side, you have to go with the decision and will of the majority. Congress wrote the trillion dollar deficit. Defaulting on the national debt IS not a government shut down – it is a ticket right back to the recession we are so slowly climbing our way out of – and probably digging the hole even deeper than last time.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
January 11th, 2013
9:58 am
There will be blood (spending cuts) one way or the other.
————-
Your metaphor is slightly off. There already IS blood…Obozo is bleeding red ink at unprecedented levels.
You might have said “there will be healing”.
Obozo will continue to try to bleed the productive for the benefit of his moocher base, though.
Kyle Wingfield
January 11th, 2013
10:06 am
Immediate commenting is back on, and there’s a new post upstairs.
MarkV
January 11th, 2013
10:19 am
Dusty @ 6:00 pm
Dusty,
When you wrote “(What happened)” in your mail about your TV disaster, I did not know if you meant the breakdown or the Abbey episode. If the latter, and you wanted, I would be glad to summarize the main events.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
January 11th, 2013
11:54 am
Given the impressive list of things Politico doesn’t know about me (or anything else), I’m not surprised she doesn’t know whether I’m a liberal or not.
MarkV
January 11th, 2013
4:37 pm
To Dusty:
1. Robert, Earl of Grantham has lost practically all his (= Cora’s family) money in an unwise investment in a railroad.
2. It looks like Mathew is going to inherit a lot of money, but has scruples accepting it. Mary is upset because of that.
3. Branson and Sibyl arrive (the trip secretly financed by the Dowager). Branson brings Mary and Matthew back together.
4. Cora’s mother, Martha (Shirley MacLaine) arrives. Some wonderful exchanges with her and about her from the mouth of the Dowager.
5. Mary and Matthew get married.
6. Edith shows her affection for and to Sir Anthony. Robert tells him to leave Edith alone because he is too old for her. Edith is heartbroken, Martha makes Robert relent, and they are back together.
7. Mrs. Hughes may have breast cancer, the biopsy results will take 2 months.
8. Anna keeps visiting Bates and is looking for clues to exonerate him.
9. O’Brien’s nephew Alfred gets hired as a new footman. Thomas refuses to help Alfred, and a prank is played on Thomas to discredit him.
10. Daisy has eyes for Alfred, but he has them for Martha’s American maid.
Please let me know if you want more details.
the red herring
January 11th, 2013
8:29 pm
Gingrich/rep congress forced clinton to run a balanced budget. he did not want to do it. bush’s last two years were with pelosi/reid in control of spending and he failed to be a strong leader—then comes obama to overspend with pelosi/reid still in charge and he does just that to an extreme—all the while crying “it’s bush’s fault, it’s bush’s fault”. the democrat overspending is what has lead to this mess and the spending must be cut. same with clinton followed by dodd/frank to force banks to lend to people who couldn’t afford their loans—then they want to cry “wolf” again by saying “it’s the banks and their predatory lending”—no it was the democrats in congress forcing the banks to make loans to people who simply couldn’t pay them. when you have quality folks like paul ryan and mitt romney lose to chicago politics and “vote for me and i’ll give you more free stuff” then the country will get what it deserves. believe me the u.s.a. has hard times ahead and it’s because of obama and his policies not being held in check. i am praying for the house of rep. and the tea party folks to stand tall. it will be difficult but it is our only hope in the next 4 years.