Obama says has reached his limit in debt talks

Me too!

Cut, Cap and Balance. Gray, blue or otherwise.

BigWhiteGuy wrote:

Cut, Cap and Balance. Gray, blue or otherwise.

IMO, anyone who wants to tie the hands off government by requiring them to always have a balanced budget is a simpleton. The federal government has been in debt since 1790 and we are the most prosperous nation in the world. The government needs to have the ability to borrow money for long term projects just like businesses and individuals. I wonder how many projects that BWG has designed that weren't built on credit?

sparks wrote:

BigWhiteGuy wrote:

Cut, Cap and Balance. Gray, blue or otherwise.

IMO, anyone who wants to tie the hands off government by requiring them to always have a balanced budget is a simpleton.

They are known as the freshman tea party whose complete lack of understanding of economics is going to create a huge crisis for this country and the world.

BigWhiteGuy wrote:

Cut, Cap and Balance. Gray, blue or otherwise.

Yeah. Well first, that bill has already been defeated in the Senate.

The biggest problem with it is that it effectively prohibits tax increases of any kind, ever, as a part of any efforts to balance the budget, and that's simply unacceptable.

Slogans and catchy names don't fix anything.

Scorpion wrote:

Slogans and catchy names don't fix anything.

But it gets them elected; Palin's entire campaign was an endless stream of bumper sticker quotes. Elections are the only thing I think they really care about at this point, as they've repeatedly demonstrated facts don't matter.

Yeah, I'm really, really sorry I didn't vote for your creationist, but seriously... get over it.

happy jack wrote:

And in case you haven't noticed, I am not the one who continues to inject her into the debate three years after the election.

You're totally right. I should just leave her to her quiet life at home in Alaska after retiring as a public figure and commentator.

Heretic wrote:

Scorpion wrote:

Slogans and catchy names don't fix anything.

But it gets them elected; Palin's entire campaign was an endless stream of bumper sticker quotes. Elections are the only thing I think they really care about at this point, as they've repeatedly demonstrated facts don't matter.

Yeah. Well bumper sticker quotes are just fine during a campaign. When it comes time to govern, it's time for politicians to put that stuff aside and do their frickin' jobs.

Obama to address nation on debt limit stalemate

Quote :

WASHINGTON | The White House says President Barack Obama will address the nation at 8 p.m. region time Monday to discuss the approaching debt limit deadline and an apparent political stalemate over deficit reduction proposals.

White House spokesman Jay Carney announced the address after House Republican and Senate Democratic leaders unveiled competing plans to meet an Aug. 2 deadline to raise the government's borrowing authority.

Obama is supporting a proposal by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that would trim $2.7 trillion of government spending over 10 years.

Reid's plan does not include new tax revenue, as Obama has demanded. But unlike the GOP plan, it would extend the debt ceiling into 2013 — an Obama ultimatum. The House plan trims about $1.2 tillion but would only extend the debt ceiling for less than a year.

sparks wrote:

BigWhiteGuy wrote:

Cut, Cap and Balance. Gray, blue or otherwise.

IMO, anyone who wants to tie the hands off government by requiring them to always have a balanced budget is a simpleton. The federal government has been in debt since 1790 and we are the most prosperous nation in the world. The government needs to have the ability to borrow money for long term projects just like businesses and individuals. I wonder how many projects that BWG has designed that weren't built on credit?

The kind of people who mindlessly chant mantras they don't understand!

happy jack wrote:

sparks wrote:

The kind of people who mindlessly chant mantras they don't understand!

“Bush Lied, Kids Died!”

Unless you've found those WMD's that statement is factual.

These pesky facts keep getting in the way....
Republican Leaders Voted for Debt Drivers They Blame on Obama

Quote :

July 26 (Bloomberg) -- House Speaker John Boehner often attacks the spendthrift ways of Washington.

“In Washington, more spending and more debt is business as usual,” the Republican leader from Ohio said in a televised address yesterday amid debate over the U.S. debt. “I’ve got news for Washington - those days are over.”

Yet the speaker, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell all voted for major drivers of the nation’s debt during the past decade: Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts and Medicare prescription drug benefits. They also voted for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, that rescued financial institutions and the auto industry.

Together, a Bloomberg News analysis shows, these initiatives added $3.4 trillion to the nation’s accumulated debt and to its current annual budget deficit of $1.5 trillion.

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

sparks wrote:

The kind of people who mindlessly chant mantras they don't understand!

“Bush Lied, Kids Died!”

Unless you've found those WMD's that statement is factual.

OK, I'll rephrase that.

"Bush Lied (Along with a Gigantic Shitload of Democrats), Kids Died!"

Happy now, Artie?



Quotes from Democrats about WMD

1. "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

Quoted on CNN

2. "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." — President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Quoted on CNN

3. Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." — Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall meeting in Columbus, Ohio — from USIA

4. "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." — Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18, 1998

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall Meeting in Columbus, Ohio — From USIA

5. "We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." — Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D — MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

See letter to Clinton by Levin, Daschle, Kerry and others

6. "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." — Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

Statement by Rep. Nancy Pelosi — House of Representatives website

7. "Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

Answer to a question at the Chicago Council of Foreign Affairs

8. "There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." — Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

Letter to President George W. Bush signed by 9 Congressmen, including Democrats Harold Ford, Jr., Joseph Lieberman, and Benjamin Gilman.

9. " We should be hell bent on getting those weapons of mass destruction, hell bent on having a credible approach to them, but we should try to do it in a way which keeps the world together and that achieves our goal which is removing the... defanging Saddam.." — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Dec. 9, 2002

Online with Jim Lehrer — Public Broadcasting Service

10. "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

Transcript of Gore's speech, printed in USA Today

11. "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

Transcript of Gore's speech, printed in USA Today

12. "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

U.S. Senate — Ted Kennedy

13. "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." — Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

Congressional Record — Robert Byrd

14. "When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable." —Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

Congressional Record — Sen. John F. Kerry

15. "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. Jay Rockefeller

16. "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" — Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

Congressional Record — Rep. Henry Waxman

17. "In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad. In the 4 years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein wiill continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. Hillary Clinton

18. "The Joint Chiefs should provide Congress with casualty estimates for a war in Iraq as they have done in advance of every past conflict. These estimates should consider Saddam's possible use of chemical or biological weapons against our troops.

"Unlike the gulf war, many experts believe Saddam would resort to chemical and biological weapons against our troops in a desperate -attempt to save his regime if he believes he and his regime are ultimately threatened."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Oct. 8, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. Ted Kennedy

19. "There is one thing we agree upon, and that is that Saddam Hussein is an evil man. He is a tyrant. He has used chemical and biological weapons on his own people. He has disregarded United Nations resolutions calling for inspections of his capabilities and research and development programs. His forces regularly fire on American and British jet pilots enforcing the no-fly zones in the north and south of his country. And he has the potential to develop and deploy nuclear weapons... — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. Bob Graham

20. But inspectors have had a hard time getting truthful information from the Iraqis they interview. Saddam Hussein terrorizes his people, including his weapons scientists, so effectively that they are afraid to be interviewed in private, let alone outside the country. They know that even the appearance of cooperation could be a death sentence for themselves or their families.

"To overcome this obstacle, and to discover and dismantle Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, UNMOVIC and the IAEA must interview relevant persons securely and with their families protected, even if they protest publicly against this treatment. Hans Blix may dislike running ''a defection agency,' but that could be the only way to obtain truthful information about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction — Sen. Joseph Biden

Congressional Record — Sen. Joseph Biden

21. "With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. John F. Kerry

22. "Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.

"Iraq has continued to seek nuclear weapons and develop its arsenal in defiance of the collective will of the international community, as expressed through the United Nations Security Council. It is violating the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the Gulf war and as many as 16 Security Council resolutions, including 11 resolutions concerning Iraq's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction. — Sen. John Edwards, October 10, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. John Edwards

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

“Bush Lied, Kids Died!”

Unless you've found those WMD's that statement is factual.

OK, I'll rephrase that.
"Bush Lied (Along with a Gigantic Shitload of Democrats), Kids Died!"

Happy now, Artie?

Nope.....Let me refresh your memory. The topic is "Bush Lied..kids died". Got it?

LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." -- President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.

FACT: This story, leaked to and breathlessly reported by Judith Miller in the New York Times, has turned out to be complete baloney. Department of Energy officials, who monitor nuclear plants, say the tubes could not be used for enriching uranium. One intelligence analyst, who was part of the tubes investigation, angrily told The New Republic: "You had senior American officials like Condoleezza Rice saying the only use of this aluminum really is uranium centrifuges. She said that on television. And that's just a lie."

LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." -- President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.

FACT: This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA. Sold to Italian intelligence by some hustler, the document carried the signature of an official who had been out of office for 10 years and referenced a constitution that was no longer in effect. The ex-ambassador who the CIA sent to check out the story is pissed: "They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie," he told the New Republic, anonymously. "They [the White House] were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more strongly."

LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." -- Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."

FACT: There was and is absolutely zero basis for this statement. CIA reports up through 2002 showed no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." -- CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush.

FACT: Intelligence agencies knew of tentative contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda in the early '90s, but found no proof of a continuing relationship. In other words, by tweaking language, Tenet and Bush spun the intelligence180 degrees to say exactly the opposite of what it suggested.

LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: No evidence of this has ever been leaked or produced. Colin Powell told the U.N. this alleged training took place in a camp in northern Iraq. To his great embarrassment, the area he indicated was later revealed to be outside Iraq's control and patrolled by Allied war planes.

LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: Said drones can't fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline. Furthermore, Iraq's drone-building program wasn't much more advanced than your average model plane enthusiast. And isn't a "manned aerial vehicle" just a scary way to say "plane"?

LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." -- President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.

FACT: Despite a massive nationwide search by U.S. and British forces, there are no signs, traces or examples of chemical weapons being deployed in the field, or anywhere else during the war.

LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." -- Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.

FACT: Putting aside the glaring fact that not one drop of this massive stockpile has been found, as previously reported on AlterNet the United States' own intelligence reports show that these stocks -- if they existed -- were well past their use-by date and therefore useless as weapon fodder.

LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.

FACT: Needless to say, no such weapons were found, not to the east, west, south or north, somewhat or otherwise.

LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." -- President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

FACT: This was reference to the discovery of two modified truck trailers that the CIA claimed were potential mobile biological weapons lab. But British and American experts -- including the State Department's intelligence wing in a report released this week -- have since declared this to be untrue. According to the British, and much to Prime Minister Tony Blair's embarrassment, the trailers are actually exactly what Iraq said they were; facilities to fill weather balloons, sold to them by the British themselves.
http://www.alternet.org/story/16274?page=entire

happy jack wrote:

[b]Artie, you cannot have this both ways.

Democrats in Congress, many of them claiming as early as 1998 that Saddam had WMDs, and who pushed for and then voted to legally authorize the war, were misled or misinformed, as was Bush.

…. or ....

Democrats in Congress, many of them claiming as early as 1998 that Saddam had WMDs, and who pushed for and then voted to legally authorize the war, lied, as did Bush.

Pick one, and only one.

Democrats were not "pushing" for a war. Iraq was Dubya's idea. Unfortunately he got the Dems to go along with it. Significant numbers of Democrats voted against the war.

Quote :

Democrats held both houses of Congress from 2006 to 2010. If they believed the case for war in Iraq was predicated upon lies and/or misinformation, they could have pulled funding immediately.
But they didn’t.
Why not?

Because it would have emboldened the terrorists that were created as a result of the invasion and the country needed to be stabilized.

Now can we please get back on topic?

happy jack wrote:

Artie, you cannot have this both ways.

Democrats in Congress, many of them claiming as early as 1998 that Saddam had WMDs, and who pushed for and then voted to legally authorize the war, were misled or misinformed, as was Bush.

…. or ....

Democrats in Congress, many of them claiming as early as 1998 that Saddam had WMDs, and who pushed for and then voted to legally authorize the war, lied, as did Bush.

Pick one, and only one.

Yeah, well I invited you to discuss this back in March...

https://nofree.forumotion.com/t1723p40-no-comment-necessary#24775


but you declined.

Scorpion wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Scorpion wrote:

The Resolution on Iraq was passed in October 2002.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

You talk as if we invaded the next day. That's not what happened, Jack. If you want to reopen a discussion on the run-up to the war, we can do that. But let's not pretend that nothing at all happened between the AUMF and the invasion.

This lays it all out pretty well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAyCdfOXvec&feature=player_embedded

No, actually it doesn't, because once again, it ignores the events that happened during the run-up to the invasion., specifically the events between the vote and the invasion. Like I said, if you want to have a discussion on the run-up to the war, we can do that. But I don't think that you really want that, do you?

That would require you to leave the comfort zone of partisan talking points, and actually discuss how and why Bush lost the trust of a large portion of the American public, especially in the 5 months leading up to the invasion. But IMHO, it would be good for you, Jack.

BTW - For what it's worth, I did find the video to be mildly amusing.

So again, if you really want to discuss what really happened during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, then just start another thread, and we can discuss it all in detail...

But this thread is about the National Debt limit. Let's get back on topic.

I really think we're hosed. It sounds like regardless of any plan offered, they're having a really difficult time convincing the Tea Party freshmen that default is bad.