So Snopes Covers For Obama

[SW03ES]

I haven't read all the posts since I posted last (lenore, do you really believe Obama wants the dollar to fail? Thats about as crazy a conspiracy theory as the people who think 9/11 was an inside job) but I wanted to weigh in on my feelings about the recent happenings.

My issue with Obama is that I think we've found that he and his people lack political experience and savvy. You know I've been a pretty staunch defender of his, but I think this whole thing with the debt ceiling debacle was pretty poorly handled, and I think much of the blame for that lies with him.

Of course the Republicans are petty and political, thats all they've been for the past 15 years. What they care about is winning, and they will say anything they need to say to do that (look at my favorite person, Michelle Bachman who blames the loss of the AAA rating on Obama raising the debt ceiling. She's either an idiot, or she is playing the electorate for idiots because S&P clearly outlined that in order for them not to downgrade our debt they needed to see deficit reduction of $4T over 10 years and the debt ceiling raised. Ergo...if "Obama" hadn't raised the debt limit, there would have been no question of a downgrade! If the Republicans had allowed some increased revenue, we might have been closer to what S&P wanted to see). The issue here IMHO was that Obama and his people handled this negotiation like a bunch of ammeters. They had nothing to give the Republicans in return for a speedy vote on the debt ceiling and defecit reduction because he had already given away the farm every chance he's had.

The issue is, I don't see an alternative on the other side of this race. Who in the Republican field is that "hybrid candidate" nc speaks of, and won't lay down for the GOP leadership thats controlled by the religious right? I don't see someone there yet...best chances are Pawlenty, Romney (he's a boob), or maybe Rick Perry if he runs...

To me the issue is not the issues...Obama just needs to learn how to take control of a negotiation. He needs some lessons from Bill Clinton...

[lenore]

I haven't read all the posts since I posted last (lenore, do you really believe Obama wants the dollar to fail? Thats about as crazy a conspiracy theory as the people who think 9/11 was an inside job) but I wanted to weigh in on my feelings about the recent happenings.

My issue with Obama is that I think we've found that he and his people lack political experience and savvy. You know I've been a pretty staunch defender of his, but I think this whole thing with the debt ceiling debacle was pretty poorly handled, and I think much of the blame for that lies with him.

Of course the Republicans are petty and political, thats all they've been for the past 15 years. What they care about is winning, and they will say anything they need to say to do that (look at my favorite person, Michelle Bachman who blames the loss of the AAA rating on Obama raising the debt ceiling. She's either an idiot, or she is playing the electorate for idiots because S&P clearly outlined that in order for them not to downgrade our debt they needed to see deficit reduction of $4T over 10 years and the debt ceiling raised. Ergo...if "Obama" hadn't raised the debt limit, there would have been no question of a downgrade! If the Republicans had allowed some increased revenue, we might have been closer to what S&P wanted to see). The issue here IMHO was that Obama and his people handled this negotiation like a bunch of ammeters. They had nothing to give the Republicans in return for a speedy vote on the debt ceiling and defecit reduction because he had already given away the farm every chance he's had.

The issue is, I don't see an alternative on the other side of this race. Who in the Republican field is that "hybrid candidate" nc speaks of, and won't lay down for the GOP leadership thats controlled by the religious right? I don't see someone there yet...best chances are Pawlenty, Romney (he's a boob), or maybe Rick Perry if he runs...

To me the issue is not the issues...Obama just needs to learn how to take control of a negotiation. He needs some lessons from Bill Clinton...

You know your right, but why was he elected if he had no expertise....Yes we need a moderate to be elected that sees the good of American people to make his/her decisions...As for the deficit, I still feel that is a major issue, and will continue to kill this country...4trillion is nothing, but even they (both parties) would not see eye to eye. How many times do politicians need to get hit in the head before they realize we cant support 40% of the public because they dont want to participate in earning a living...We need direction, our ship is about to wreck on the rocks, and there is no lighthouse guiding us...Start by making our fiscal house fixed, giving business a clear reason why they are important and bring our jobs back to the US...Heck give a real tax break to business that brings back our jobs permanantly...Look at incentives to creat a healthy climate for bussiness and jobs will happen... Green jobs are a small portion of what needs to be done...Unfortunately the Democrats dont support any jobs that dont meet their agenda in crippling our industry..

[SW03ES]

You know your right, but why was he elected if he had no expertise....

I think that he has one side of what we need in a President, he's a good speaker, he's good at moving people and getting people to follow him. Thats what got him elected. What he lacks is the ability to get things done behind the scenes. He needs someone in his administration who can go to Congress and make things happen. Some sort of modern day LBJ...

As for the deficit, I still feel that is a major issue, and will continue to kill this country..

Of course its a major issue, but its not the most major issue thats in front of us right now....

How many times do politicians need to get hit in the head before they realize we cant support 40% of the public because they dont want to participate in earning a living...

I don't know, how many times do they need to get hit in the head before they realize that tax cuts for the wealthy and tax loopholes for big corporations don't "create jobs"? If you look at the budget, welfare isn't the issue (and I would hope that you don't actually believe 40% of the public is on welfare...).

What created this issue we're in today is not welfare, its waging protracted multi-theatre wars in the middle of a recession.

[nc211]

For those of you with iPods/pads/phones, download the Bloomberg App and watch the equities futures. International markets have been open for about two hours. I just got back from OHare, had Bloomberg on in the car, Sydney market opened first....tomorrow is looking to be a historic day for the NYSE, and not in a good way. It might fall so fast, that the "stops" are put in to freeze trading, which did happen a couple of times in 08', when we HAD a AAA rating from all agencies.

I agree with SWO on Obama. I also think many weren't voting for Obama as much as they were NOT voting for Palin. 08' was a year you had to vote. I think we're seeing the lack of true political experience in Obama now. These are times that even the most entrenched DC power player would have a tough time managing, so Obama is basically a sitting duck, with a circle of support that plays the blame game better than building a result for the American public. Republicans arent much better, but like SWO said, they're in it to win it at all costs. We need some winning right now, and not Charlie Sheen style.

In my admitted limited exposure to the offerings, my favorite so far is Romney. Perry and his religious angle spooks me a bit. Pray Day for rain, isn't what I'm looking for from my leader, if I'm a farmer in Texas. I can pray on my own. I want my Governor on the phone to the truckers, to bring in water from Illinois "we had a foot in July alone."

I will say this as well - no more publically apologizing to any world player, no matter if they deserve it from us or not. What the world needs to understand, is that a world without a cocky America, is even more dangerous than a world without one. Kind of like the toughest kid in class, who isn't necessarily the bully. All may hate him, but none want to face Johnny Bully without Mr. Whip Your !Removed! if you push too hard in the room, both militarily, and now as we're all about to learn in a very basic way, economically. Humility? Yes. Please forgive ms? Tough, no more.

[nc211]

Now that time has passed, and venom has eased, I think some of Bush's strengths are being sought after by the public. Not all, I understand that, but some.

[pj8708]

NC, watching "Meet the Press" and "Face the Nation" this morn. Alan Greenspan was on MTP and remarked that the markets in Israel had already opened by 9:00am, eastern. He felt that even there we would see a shudder in values as trading opened. After that, of course, the conversation quickly decayed into each of the guest blaming the others party for the fricking mess last week and the rating downgrade. It's so nice to know their always working together on a solution.

I wonder whats going to happen to the Republican/Democrats pi..ing contest when Spain and Italy implode, there is no one left in Europe that can bail them out, and the dollar goes south.

I agree with Steve and NC about Obama and his political acuity. I believe he has and is trying to do the right thing as he sees it. But his advisor's lack of skill and his own naiveté have been obvious. I have listened to his current chief of staff twice now during a lengthy interview. He still is pushing the responsibility for current affairs on other parties. (Just like the Republicans do.)

Pawlenty has campaigned hard here in Iowa. IMO he is a lightweight. His high points on his stump speech are that he shut his state government down for weeks throwing all the employees out of work, but also showing how tough he was. He actually thinks bringing the state government to a point were the only option is to stop all government in its tracks is a good thing. He also does not like !Removed! and identifies with the evangelical Christian side. In his TV ads he likens himself to a hockey player and the election is a hockey game. (I guess that makes Obama the puck).

[nc211]

Israeli markets had their "stops" triggered today to prevent a market meltdown. DOW Futures down 260 already tonight. Any bets on the lead story for tomorrow's news reports? I can already hear Matt Lauer's voice in my head....

Additionally, any bets S&P has a few "spooks" lurking around their building tonight? I wouldn't take that bet, if I were you....

[SW03ES]

Perry and his religious angle spooks me a bit. Pray Day for rain, isn't what I'm looking for from my leader

Yeah...this will keep me from looking to him as well.

Republicans arent much better, but like SWO said, they're in it to win it at all costs. We need some winning right now, and not Charlie Sheen style.

To be clear, I don't feel the Republicans being in it to win it at all costs is a good thing. We need someone who wants to do what is right for the country, not themselves or their party politically. IMHO the Republicans have shown over the last 3 years that its them first, destroying the Democrats second, and the country's interests third. I don't see that as being a platform to be proud of.

Say what you will about the Democrats and Obama, they are attempting at least to move their agenda forward, which is what theoretically the American people hired them to do. The Republicans have been running opposition...not leading.

We need leadership. I think we have ideological leadership in Obama...they just can't get it going on the ground.

As for the market...its going to get killed tomorrow...but it'll come back. I'm going to buy some stuff I think...

[nc211]

I agree with ya' amigo! Little doubt in my mind this has been a huge failure of all involved to contain this issue to the proper setting. I do think Obama screwed up though by going on live TV last week about it, for a pitch for everyone to call their congressman/woman to vote for the plan. Right or wrong, it looked desperate.

Oh, I'd definitely buy some stock soon! I'm eyeing the financial sector big time! Principal Financial Group out of Ees Moines, could've been bought for $6 two years ago. Now, they're in the $25 range, which is a huge off-mark from their pre-08 days. They are MUCH stronger now in their asset pool too. Have been dumping their Class B assets and replacing with much safer Class A stuff, especially in DC. They recently entered NoMa on a slam-dunk safe bet (I had a connection to it). They get pressured down to the $14 point, I'm buying a lot of it!

[nc211]

Banks are on my radar too, one specifically I had a run-in with... ;-)

I've seen their play-book. Not great, but very good, and fundamentally sound. You know which one I'm talkin about!

I thInk the next wave to ride is in the financial sector in general. The manufacturing side had thier wave (cars, tech, etc). This next wave is going to be trickier than consumer demand issues. S&P not only too a shot at the country, but every financial institution that makes up the vertebrae of our backbone. Not all of them are bad, but all are sure to get pulled down due to guilt by association! Perfect opportunity!

[pj8708]

I agree with ya' amigo! Little doubt in my mind this has been a huge failure of all involved to contain this issue to the proper setting. I do think Obama screwed up though by going on live TV last week about it, for a pitch for everyone to call their congressman/woman to vote for the plan. Right or wrong, it looked desperate.

Oh, I'd definitely buy some stock soon! I'm eyeing the financial sector big time! Principal Financial Group out of Ees Moines, could've been bought for $6 two years ago. Now, they're in the $25 range, which is a huge off-mark from their pre-08 days. They are MUCH stronger now in their asset pool too. Have been dumping their Class B assets and replacing with much safer Class A stuff, especially in DC. They recently entered NoMa on a slam-dunk safe bet (I had a connection to it). They get pressured down to the $14 point, I'm buying a lot of it!

Thanks for your support of one of our local companies! One of our closet friends is a senior vp and has been in charge of shutting down their Health insurance company;cutting a losing product. Pre 08', the Principal stock was trading in the 70's. A huge fall from where they are now, but as you know, a well managed company with a strong ability to reinvent itself as the market demands. A good opportunity for growth, but even paced, not a rocket ride. I would definately buy.

[lenore]

I hope Obama finally realizes that Timothy Geitner is a complete flop...He needs to resign and get someone with real common sense...

[nc211]

I like Principal today. They needed an ego/check though after they went public and brought in a Wall Streeter to run the show. I know Proncipal very well, as they have been a part of my family for nearly 20 years. I can say, they were doing some goofy things in their commercial real estate department from 06-08. They got away from the traditional portfolio lending plays that are slow and steady money makers. They got lured into the Wall Street game, and clearly didn't know what they were doing. Many of us were left scratching our heads in 07/08 with Pricipal entering the CDO game, as everyone else was running away. They lost some credibility with that move, and were seen as Iowa suckers on Wall Street. They took a huge bath because of it too. Had it not been for their golden goose 401k business, they would've probably gone down. I'm still surprised a certain Canadian life company didn't make a hostile takeover bid when they were the most vulnerable.

Today though, they can been seen in the market making moves that a portfolio lender should be making. Long term safe bets on the best assets in the country. Their primarily adopting the TIAA approach, buying real estate instead of lending on it. However, as many in my business will confirm, that play in general is getting risky and bubble/ish now too. Returns are so low, that many will have to own the real estate for at least 15 years to see the profit potential. Dangerous and wreckless times in that sector. A move of desperation to get some yield on investments, because there are none left for the long term player, which life companies are needed to be to survive.

I like them now, quite a bit, both personally and professionally. I have a feeling your friend and I probably know many of the same people in Des Moines...

[SW03ES]

I hope Obama finally realizes that Timothy Geitner is a complete flop...

How so?

[lenore]

Timothy has not a clue. He feels the Congressional budget ceiling vote was a good down payment, When actually the Cap, TAX, and trade amendment would have cut 4.3 trillion and possibly given the S&P a reason not to downgrade. He still believes spending our way out of crisis is the only solution...We need to freeze our budget, and pay our debt. It is so simple, that is what we do at our households...

[SW03ES]

Timothy has not a clue. He feels the Congressional budget ceiling vote was a good down payment, When actually the Cap, TAX, and trade amendment would have cut 4.3 trillion and possibly given the S&P a reason not to downgrade.

But reducing the deficit was only part of what S&P needed to see to avoid a downgrade. If we saw 4.3T in cuts, but we still didn't raise the debt ceiling and defaulted on our debt...we would still see a downgrade obviously. Default=downgrade...bottom line.

He still believes spending our way out of crisis is the only solution...We need to freeze our budget, and pay our debt. It is so simple, that is what we do at our households...

The government is not a household. You won't find a lot of economists that say massively reducing government spending in a weak and recovering economy with reduced consumer spending is going to get us out of a crisis. Like I said before, we're still trying to get the economy growing on its own...debt is not the primary concern right now. Thats simplistic thinking that the right wing uses out on the stump, but in reality comparing the activities of the federal government to a household is about as ridiculous as it gets. Apples and oranges.

[lenore]

And rediculous is what we have received from our government...Good financial habits are a must...If government were a business they would be more concerned about what they spend, but since they have to show no profit, than spend is what they do. There are no incentives for departments, employees, etc to save anything...They know that next year they will get more, and more, and more....That is why we are in the mess that is going to be over 20trillion debt in 10 years... Government was originally meant to protect our country, and provide safety to our citizens...Safety doesnt mean entitlement programs that create generations of welfare...LBJ was the evil that started this and we have never stopped. What is needed now is a leader with advisors that take reins and stop this madness. You are not correct that their is a correlation between home economics and the US economics...The similiarity is that when we run out of money we cut spending....Government has to do the same. That is what the S&P is telling us. NOT one program has ever ran efficiently when government has stepped in....The Bailouts should not have happened, but the doomsayers from Congress said it would have been a disaster, but what do we have now. Banks and Financials that have done nothing to help AMERICANS...And still sit on our tax money and gather bonuses. I know it is a complicated problem, but spending is one part of it, and regulations killing our industry is another. It would have been far better if GM, Chrysler, Bank of America, etc had failed...The strongest would have filled the vacuum...Then the players that made the right decisions could have taken over and grown...

[SW03ES]

This whole idea of "if Government was a Business" is equally meaningless...Government is not a business...its Government.

Safety doesnt mean entitlement programs that create generations of welfare

So I assume you have refused Social Security and Medicare right?

Banks and Financials that have done nothing to help AMERICANS...And still sit on our tax money and gather bonuses. I know it is a complicated problem, but spending is one part of it, and regulations killing our industry is another. It would have been far better if GM, Chrysler, Bank of America, etc had failed...

Banks and Financials have done nothing to help Americans? Thats a pretty bold claim. Much of the wealth in America would not exist without banks and financials. How would a family buy a home? How would someone start a business? Banks and financials are the bedrock of our economy and our way of life. Have they lost their way? Are they run for profit? Sure...but to say they have done "nothing to help Americans" is not reality. Sitting on our tax money? You do know that most of the big banks have repaid the bailout money, right? Anyways, what you're saying makes no sense...on one hand Banks and Financials are evil and have done nothing to help anyone...but then regulating them is the problem? Huh?!?

As for it being better if the institutions you mention had failed, again...I don't know a lot of economists that would agree with you. Whether you believe it or not...these economists know more about this subject than you or I do. Had that occurred, we would have seen another Great Depression. Would the country ultimately be better for having been through that? Impossible to say...but it would have hurt a LOT of people and there is no doubt in my mind that we would be worse off today than we are now. You wanna see welfare spending go up? Wow...

You are not correct that their is a correlation between home economics and the US economics...The similiarity is that when we run out of money we cut spending....Government has to do the same.

I assume you mean that I am not correct that there is no correlation between home economics and US economics...

I think you need a lesson in how the economy works.

In order for the economy to grow, consumers have to spend money. If consumers don't buy things, consumer items, homes, cars, travel, etc, then the economy doesn't grow...it shrinks. This is called a recession. In order to turn a recession around...somebody needs to spend. The government stimulates consumer and private sector spending by providing incentives to spend. When that doesn't work...the Government spends. This is how every recession in our history has been combatted successfully...by administrations of both political parties. Its how we got out of the Great Depression.

If you have a situation where the private sector and consumer is not spending, and the Government sharply pulls back their spending on social programs, infrastructure improvements, etc BEFORE the private sector and consumer recovers and begins spending again...then nobody's spending...and the economy slips back into recession...or worse.

This is not fear mongering, this is economic principle and fact. This is why you can't draw a correlation between how a household is run, or a company is run, and the way the Government is run from a financial perspective. The Government has a bigger overall responsibility and their actions have a far greater impact. The decision between a family choosing whether or not they can afford to go to Disney World or go out to dinner is a little less consequential to the bigger picture.

Yes we have racked up huge deficits, a lot of that is these long protracted multi-theatre wars we've been fighting, a lot of it is due to actions the Government took to stop the slide into economic ruin. What we have to make sure of though is that we don't cause more harm trying to reign that in.

When the economy is growing again, and the outlook is strong, these deficits won't be as big a deal...

[nc211]

In my opinion, I don't think anyone would disagree that regulations of the banking and financial sector had slipped below acceptable levels under Greenspan's rule of the Fed. Nobody was watching the store.

My problem with the current administration though, and I think a huge key to our recovery ability to get people spending and banks investing more, isn't just the amount of new regulations Geitner's rule wants to put in place, but the utter confusion and extrememly long delay in what those regulations are going to be, and when they're going to take effect. This, is the cause for the banks to be hesitant to "invest" in the American success story, which isn't the top-tier credit profile. Nobody seems to know with certainty what is coming out of DC anymore. Lots of speculation, but very little concrete evidence. This isn't Republicans fault entirely either. Democrats ran the entire show for quite some time, and instead of getting new bank regulations written and in place, they got side-tracked by the healthcare business, then the energy business. If a banker knew that the investment he is considering would require a KNOWN amount of reserve cash to be set aside for potential loss, he could model that transaction in a manner to get it closed, and money in the borrower's hands. But, the banker still doesn't know, after 3 years. So, the banker then defaults to the credit rating of the borrower first. And that's where the problem is. If you "need" the money, you're less-likely to get it. If you "want" the money, you have a better chance. There is a big difference between the two.

I said a few years back, when we were all debating Obama, McCain, Clinton, that my biggest fear of a democrat-led show, would be the reintroduction of too much red-tape in the process. Some is fine, and needed for safety purposes. But too much chokes the system. We have too much again, and it's choking the system. What Obama has been wanting to avoid during his watch, by creating rules and regulations, he has just caused. I hate to keep referring to 9/11, because that was an act of war. But, some lessons beyond war can be learned from it. If you make it so hard for the general public to access a flight, the general public will quit flying, which does decrease the odds of a repeat situation like 9/11, but at the cost of the airline business in general. There must be balance, which the democrats have not been good at creating over the past few years. Too much confusion. The restuarant guy who want to grow his booming business to three more locations with "franchise" dreams in his eyes, doesn't understand the Risk Based Capital model his banker is citing for reasons to deny him the loan. He just hears an excuse. Government must do a better job at speaking "American", and doing it much quicker than they have been.

BUT, as those old-timers around here have heard me say for years....there is only one number that makes/breaks the consumer confidence to go spend some discretionary income on luxury items. A number that does not discriminate against education levels, savy speak, or political view points....

GAS PRICES!

Why nobody has done a full-court press on this part of the economy, is beyond me. It's the "golden ticket" for any politician to be re-elected by the American public. You give me a person(s) who can make that number start with a $2.XX, and I'll show you a re-elected politician with a lot of political capital from the American people to spend when the time comes for other pressing issues. I think the $30/barrel prices from the 2008 crash proves that the argument of supply/demand is weak, at best. It's an investment activity argument. It's speculators, it's profitering at it's ugliest....and it CAN be stopped! But, nobody seems willing to confront it.

[pj8708]

Timothy has not a clue. He feels the Congressional budget ceiling vote was a good down payment, When actually the Cap, TAX, and trade amendment would have cut 4.3 trillion and possibly given the S&P a reason not to downgrade.

But reducing the deficit was only part of what S&P needed to see to avoid a downgrade. If we saw 4.3T in cuts, but we still didn't raise the debt ceiling and defaulted on our debt...we would still see a downgrade obviously. Default=downgrade...bottom line.

He still believes spending our way out of crisis is the only solution...We need to freeze our budget, and pay our debt. It is so simple, that is what we do at our households...

The government is not a household. You won't find a lot of economists that say massively reducing government spending in a weak and recovering economy with reduced consumer spending is going to get us out of a crisis. Like I said before, we're still trying to get the economy growing on its own...debt is not the primary concern right now. Thats simplistic thinking that the right wing uses out on the stump, but in reality comparing the activities of the federal government to a household is about as ridiculous as it gets. Apples and oranges.

Allow me to add to this Steve:

Your government has the ability to print more money and infuse it into the economy so your household budget can still buy bacon for $2.69 a pound.

A government can only cut it's budget so far just like a household that needs to keep the water, gas, and electricity turned on. Sometimes a member of the household has to take on a part time job to help pay the bills. The government in a crisis sometimes need extra income as well. This morning on CNN, a Republican Senator said that there needed to be a revision of the tax code to allow for revenue enhancements. Obama has said that we need to eliminate the Bush tax cuts on those making over a million. Tax revenue, revenue enhancements. Same thing.

The Constitution gives the power to tax and spend to Congress. Not Obama.

Obama is making mistakes.

[SW03ES]

You really should read this Lenore:

http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheadername3=MDT-Type&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3DUS_Downgraded_AA%2B.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8

This is the official package released by S&P discussing the rationale and reasoning behind the downgrade.

This are some excerpts:

We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.

We have taken the ratings off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by delays to raising the government's debt ceiling. In addition, we believe that the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course of U.S. fiscal policy for the next few years.

The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy.

So...there is no doubt that raising the statutory debt ceiling was a requirement in any scenario that saw the US keeping its AAA rating. Regardless of what the right may say out on the stump, raising the debt ceiling did NOT cause this downgrade, refusal to agree to revenue enhancements really is what caused it.

[lenore]

"We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade."

That is the final line, meaning debt, which is not reduced, is a major issue, Ialong with the inablility of Congress to reduce this debt....If the original plan passed by the house had been passed in the Senate and approved by OBAMA he would have saved us...It had over 4trillion in reductions...and cap and trade....It also would have been difficult for him to have been defeated in the next election...because than the country would have come first, not his party.

[pj8708]

"We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade."

That is the final line, meaning debt, which is not reduced, is a major issue, Ialong with the inablility of Congress to reduce this debt....If the original plan passed by the house had been passed in the Senate and approved by OBAMA he would have saved us...It had over 4trillion in reductions...and cap and trade....It also would have been difficult for him to have been defeated in the next election...because than the country would have come first, not his party.

IMO the last three words, "not his party", are the most important you said. For regardless of our banter about deficit, budget, taxes, rating,leadership, etc., the inability for our elected officials to concentrate on problem solving instead of working to find fault with the "enemy" for sake of racking up political collateral on the evening news. Whether it was the Tory's or the Whig's, Lenin or Marx, or our Elephant's and Donkey's, politics has always been a battle ground. But in our present time in has become more than just a matter of varying opinions such as the Continental Congress. This is deliberate, open character assassination and undermining the other sides efforts purposefully just to make them look bad.

If I had a solution I'd tell you. I don't. I do know that all of the discussions all of us have had over these last seven pages regarding the countries problems will go nowhere until and unless this one problem is stopped.

[lenore]

thankyou Paul, yes problem solving, that is what is needed....All solutions should be thrown on the board, and then selectively the good and bad picked out of them. The Senate not even looking at the first Bill presented by the Representatives was tragic...All because of the party hard lines. These folks (both parties) are not problem solving or even making an attempt...NO Media showed me solutions from the Democratic Party....I wanted to see their solutions versus the Republicans solutions (which were presented) and see what strengths there were in the two solutions...But no....it aint happening.

[LEXIRX330]

No it's simple since our credit has been down graded and the value of a dollar is c r a p! Let's stop all...ALL foriegn aide. Let's stop the tax breaks for millionaires...and let's tax the hell out of companies that send jobs over seas...any country that needs our military in their country to protect them...fine they are paying in oil or other ways. NO more handouts. Any and all welfare programs will be reviewed on a quarterly basis to prove that those receiving benefits are still eligible and they are actively seeking employment or to better themselves. I am sick of this B S in this country that someone can sit at home have kids and get a check for food, rent, utilities, cell phone, cable, etc. Don't say it doesn't happen I know landlords that have to send a check to the tenants of their HUD housing apartments for utilility allowances. It is B S...and I just can't believe that this is what is normal now.

Now after my little rant, I know that I am as well as most of you here in this discussion are truly blessed and fortunate. I donate a lot of money as I am sure most of you to as well...but shouldn't it be my choice who I give my money too? I am sorry but I do not agree with the handouts and handouts that the government keeps giving then they turn around and cut funding to after school programs...education...and many other needed programs!