Washington (CNN) - President Barack Obama called Tuesday for a short-term agreement to put off deep cuts to government spending, including the military, set to take effect next month.
Obama made his pitch in a statement to reporters at the White House, urging Congress to pass a measure that would put off imminent spending cuts - known as sequestration - that were part of a 2011 debt ceiling deal.
oh...and we need to steal (tax) more money from citizens to walk amnesty through, that will fix the debt and fiscal crisis and employment while making classrooms smaller.....
As much as we need to cut spending as part of the solution to the debt problem, we need growth more, for now.
$100 billion a year in spending cuts equals roughly 2 million jobs ($50,000 per job, average).
If Congress would work with the President to make the spending a long-term investment into our Country, we would all be better off. Fat Chance!
Self inflicted wounds is what this President does every day he is in office to this country. How could this country be so stupid to re-elect this man. He will create such an economic downfall to this country. He will of course blame it on congress and only the fools among us will believe it.
Make no mistake – the sequester would be the fault of the Republican Party. If we move to that disasterous tactic the Congress will have shown their complete lack of usefullness caused by Republican hostage-taking – AGAIN! Get those recall petitions ready! I can't wait for 2014 to help throw out anybody supported by the Tea Party.
Fat chance of Obama working with anyone that has a brain. He will simply continue the campaign brainwashing of the liberal fools...and not surprisingly they will all swallow it hook line and sinker baby, as long as they get their cut!
Obama has done more damage than the Senate and House together. Leave the sequester in place. It is painful on defense but its the only way cuts will occur. Working together involves two groups and Obama never budges or negotiates.
The President is the commender and chief of all defence unit and thus he is a soldier at the highest rank and needs to be armed. This non sense about him having a rifle goes to his job and time in the defense and commender and chief unit.
Keep the debate going, this gun and guns that he should carry and practice as a commender and chief not along needs to protect himself along with his secret is irrelevant to the gung debate and his executive order.
The President is the commender and chief of all defence unit and thus he is a soldier at the highest rank and needs to be armed. This non sense about him having a rifle goes to his job and title in the defense and commending unit.
Keep the debate going. This gun and guns that he should carry and practice as a commender and chief, not along that he needs to protect himself along with his secret is irrelevant to the gung debate and his executive order.
Apparently LibParrots, Critical Thinking, and Jabez have not gotten the memo. Repubicans are tired of losing national elections. They are changing their talking points and even their positions. You guys are way behind the curve. They are not going to tank the economy for the sake of a shrinking base.
The President and his fellow Democrats have deaf ears to what the American taxpayers is stating," CUT THE SPENDING". There has not been a budget for well over three years, due to the fact a budget would limit the spending. Why is it the American Taxpayer doesn't see that Democrats who state support the "rule of law" do not follow by example. The debit ceiling was increased to cover the spending done by this administration over the pass 3 years. Obama's give away gift to those who can and don't work is costing taxpaying Americans. After 4 years the President still doesn't get it, you cannot continue to do runaway spending, with out eventually having to pay the bill. CUT BACKS have to happen and loop holes on the VERY WEALTHY have to happen. To many are depended on government, those who pay or did pay into medicare and social security are entitled to receive payment, the government borrowing from those systems need to be paid back , to meet there needs. Medicaid, welfare and food stamps are paid for by taxpayers and many do not use those gifts from the federal government.
I thought the House passed a bill and sent it to the Senate regarding the defense department sequester. So why hasn't Mr. Reid introduced the bill, oh it doesn't meet the Obama/Democratic Senates approval. The government under this administration is going quickly down the commode!
The CBO states that the sequester will cause the loss of 1.4 million jobs. Taking the sequester money out of the economy will simply lessen demand for goods/services which in turn will lessen production, which will lead to higher unemployment in all sectors of the economy, not to mention the govt employees that will lose their jobs. We need to grow the economy and maintain federal spending at current levels to grow the economy. Now is not the time for austerity, just look at Europe with double digit umemployment and a double/triple dip recession. Macro economics 101.
The biggest obstacle in getting an agreement is the President. This individual refuses to comprimise. The other obstacles are both the senate and the house of both parties. The President needs to understand you cannot spend what you do not have and that you need to have a fiscal plan. The President also does not understand that he is the leader of this country which includes the people regardless of party affiliation. He needs to be a leader. He talks the talk but fails in walk the walk.
It seems no real ideas or suggestion from this site just the usual president bashing from the sore loosing right. The few intelligent comments made here where not addressed at all. Bill and Larry both made valid points. Economist all seem to think sequester is a bad idea right now. Lets hope we do not have to go through any more drama from the congress. The head drama Queen Lindsey and his buddy McCaine will I am sure put up some resistance.
Obama dont hurt the people by cutting the budget, we the people need help. Them white house leaders dont care if we suffer all they are is for the rich an themself.
Paying off $16 TRILLION in National Debt requires significantly higher revenues AND spending reductions.
People paid into Social Security and "Great Presidents" like Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush & Bush along with Kennedy & Carter misappropriated that money and we never held them accountable. Now, despite FICA taxes funding SocSec, some politicians want to attribute our problems to "entitlements" [which are really paid-in benefits].
The spending cuts justified to reverse our National Debt are in the military industrial complex. Did we really need an F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-20, F-22, F-35, F-117, B-1, B-2, B-52H all at THE SAME TIME? War mongering politicians have funneled excessive tax dollars to defense firms. A kick-the-can-down-the-road cop out on the defense cuts in the sequester hurts America`s economy.
The President and his fellow Democrats have deaf ears to what the American taxpayers is stating," CUT THE SPENDING".
Let's. Let's "cut the spending", just so that we can then turn around and spend trillion on deporting 11 million people.
Don't forget. We need to round them all up, Texas Hold 'Em style. Feed them, clothe them, teach the kids, and care for the sick. Heck, we might have to spend 10 trillion because this is gonna take at least a decade just to create the goverment bureacracy to deal with this. We'll buereacrats, armed guards, new facilities, new courts, new judges. Nah, we don't need judges. Put GOP in the Whtie House and just executive order them outtta here. Right?
Hey, Parrot. Do me a favor, will you? You seem to think you know what you're babbling about. Let me in on the secret.
What is "my cut" for supporting President Obama, and how do I go about getting it? It's awfully cold right now in Minnesota. Well, OK, I'll admit it: it's ALWAYS cold in Minnesota at winter time – but hey, just trying to keep the conversation going. A windfall would be just super for me and mine. Preferably from my utility company.
Now, about that cut you think I'm getting ...
There need to be several things done. A way to change the cost of programs like Social Security and Medicare needs to be done. There should be some limited means testing for Medicare and increase slowly over time the eligibility age for Social Security. That will slow the growth of the cost of those programs. It isn't going to be an easy thing, but should be done. That goes along with clearing out bad and over funded programs at the DoD. We need a lighter better trained military force. That means less heavy tanks and artilary and more special forces with better weapons and armor.
S.B. Stein E.B. NJ wrote:
There need to be several things done. A way to change the cost of programs like Social Security and Medicare needs to be done.
The best strategy ti improve Social Security and Medicare would be to eliminate the socio-economic reason that caused their creation in the first place. In the case of Social Security, it was people depositing money into a savings bank only to find out that there had been no law against banks keeping the money and spending it for themselves. Glass-Steagall was passed to separate savings and loans institutions from investment banks. That law was circumvented a decade, back when the problems began.
In the case of Medicare, it was created because people would reach a certain age and their health insurers would drop them. No other insurers would pick them up. People would spend a lifetime paying premiums to one company only to be dropped when they needed to file claims. The ACA has tries to correct much of the driving factors that led to the creation of Medicare, but there is still a ways to go.