If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   President Obama:"I cannot remember a time when one party promises economic chaos if it can't get 100% of what it wants." Really? Is it traumatic memory suppression of the Republicans in the 2011 debt-ceiling disaster or early onset Alzheimer's?   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 230
    More: Scary, President Obama, Bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers  
•       •       •

1924 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Sep 2013 at 2:40 PM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



230 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-16 03:47:31 PM
Remember folks.

Estimated 1 trillion over ten years helping people in our own country afford insurance is bad (Obamacare).

Estimated 6 trillion over ten years bombing the sand dunes into smaller sand dunes (military budget over ten years assuming spending levels stay the same), a prudent expenditure of money.
 
2013-09-16 03:49:48 PM

eraser8: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

That depends.  What is it you think Republicans want?


They've been very open and honest about it for awhile now:
"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president. "
-Mitch McConnell
 
2013-09-16 03:52:48 PM

Empty Matchbook: eraser8: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

That depends.  What is it you think Republicans want?

They've been very open and honest about it for awhile now:
"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president. "
-Mitch McConnell


At least the people of Kentucky have a chance to punish him for his failure in 2014.

//He'll win though, dammit.
 
2013-09-16 03:56:14 PM
That $6.2T is bullsh*t.

Sessions asked the GAO to model a scenario in which all ACA's cost control mechanisms are phased out while maintaining the rest of the law.

Surprise, that would increase the deficit. The law, as it is written, would reduce it.
 
2013-09-16 03:57:04 PM

max_pooper: Aristocles: eraser8: Aristocles: No need, ending government waste, fraud and abuse provide the needed cash. Plus, Obamacare won't be a burthen any longer.

I'd like to see your math on that.

But, I'm not holding my breath.

It depends on how much BOB wants to raise the limit, but Obamacare is estimated to cost several trillions of dollars.

Who is Bob?


31.media.tumblr.com
/hot
//what's he's got to do with politics, I don't know
 
2013-09-16 03:57:12 PM

serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?


I think the last time it was 98%.  So, pretty damned close to 100%.  WTF is the GOP's problem?
 
2013-09-16 03:59:53 PM

sugardave: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

I think the last time it was 98%.  So, pretty damned close to 100%.  WTF is the GOP's problem?


the thing that kinda gets lost in the 98 percent thing is that people assume it was 98 percent of what the GOP wanted in an effort to avoid the sequester....when in reatlity, the sequester was among the 98 percent of what they wanted out of the situation to begin with. boehner was shopping it as a desirable outcome before the negotiations even began.

when you have people slobbering at the idea of default or shutdown, negotiations to avoid that result are kinda outta whack to begin with. the desired end result is calamity, not getting what they want in an effort to avoid it.
 
2013-09-16 04:00:04 PM

cefm: The President doesn't pass laws - the Congress does.  The President runs the agencies that carry out the appropriations authorized by Congress.  It is illegal for the President to tell his agencies not to spend money they are required by law to spend.  It is therefore illegal for the President not to tell the head of the Treasury to issue bonds as needed to pay for over-spending by Congress.  The "debt-ceiling" is bullshiat, and no sane person would see it any other way.  It's up to Congress to pass a budget that works and be happy with it.  It's not up to Congress to pass a budget that requires spending X and then not let the President actually spend X.


The president does not have to spend 100% of appropriations. That is where your logic fails. He has never had to do that. Ever. He has to perform the duties that money is allocated to, but not spend it all.
 
2013-09-16 04:01:55 PM

MyRandomName: cefm: The President doesn't pass laws - the Congress does.  The President runs the agencies that carry out the appropriations authorized by Congress.  It is illegal for the President to tell his agencies not to spend money they are required by law to spend.  It is therefore illegal for the President not to tell the head of the Treasury to issue bonds as needed to pay for over-spending by Congress.  The "debt-ceiling" is bullshiat, and no sane person would see it any other way.  It's up to Congress to pass a budget that works and be happy with it.  It's not up to Congress to pass a budget that requires spending X and then not let the President actually spend X.

The president does not have to spend 100% of appropriations. That is where your logic fails. He has never had to do that. Ever. He has to perform the duties that money is allocated to, but not spend it all.


Yes, because Congress is in the habit of appropriating money that isn't allocated for a specific activity.
 
2013-09-16 04:02:28 PM

MyRandomName: cefm: The President doesn't pass laws - the Congress does.  The President runs the agencies that carry out the appropriations authorized by Congress.  It is illegal for the President to tell his agencies not to spend money they are required by law to spend.  It is therefore illegal for the President not to tell the head of the Treasury to issue bonds as needed to pay for over-spending by Congress.  The "debt-ceiling" is bullshiat, and no sane person would see it any other way.  It's up to Congress to pass a budget that works and be happy with it.  It's not up to Congress to pass a budget that requires spending X and then not let the President actually spend X.

The president does not have to spend 100% of appropriations. That is where your logic fails. He has never had to do that. Ever. He has to perform the duties that money is allocated to, but not spend it all.


desertpeace.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-09-16 04:13:59 PM

Empty Matchbook: eraser8: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

That depends.  What is it you think Republicans want?

They've been very open and honest about it for awhile now:
"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president. "
-Mitch McConnell


They better work on increasing science funding then...to get a working time machine in order to make that happen.
 
2013-09-16 04:14:36 PM

eraser8: Aristocles: max_pooper: Aristocles: max_pooper: Aristocles: Actually, Republicans don't want much... they simply want to repeal Obamacare, cut taxes, put an end to government waste, fraud, and abuse, secure the border, and promote freedom and democracy.

You mean like freedom to marry whoever you want? I haven't seen any evidence they want that freedom but that is the case fine, Obama agrees to legalize universal gay marriage and Republicans agree to raise the debt ceiling. Sounds like a fair compromise.

No need, ending government waste, fraud and abuse provide the needed cash. Plus, Obamacare won't be a burthen any longer.

I see your ignorance is not limited to politcs. Math is something else you have very limited knowledge of.

Part of the whole "ending waste, fraud, and abuse" thing entails doing away with superfluous government programs, and cutting the funding to others. There's no reason we have to dig ourselves further into debt because gov't spending is out of control.

Aren't you ever bothered by the fact that you're a liar and a coward?


That would insinuate that he feels an emotion called "shame".
 
2013-09-16 04:23:15 PM

Pants full of macaroni!!: max_pooper: Who is Bob?

You know.  He's the guy who took a belt, took a belt and hung himself, hung himself in the doorway of the apartment where he lived.


I love you more than an Iowan Gal loves Sarah Palin.

// Welcome to This World of my favorites list
 
2013-09-16 04:26:44 PM

IlGreven: NFA: The Republican party has become a group of economic terrorists who are attempting to hold our financial health hostage unless they can subvert what remains of the public wealth over to the richest components of society.

They need to be treated as such.

There have been cases where Republican senators have advocated collapsing the economy to get a re-write of the US constitution and it's waved off as crazy GOP talk.  At what point do we begin to treat them as a national threat?

Hey, if you want a Second Civil War, by all means try and actually remove these guys from office by force.


They used to want to secede. I miss those days..
 
2013-09-16 04:34:06 PM

sugardave: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

I think the last time it was 98%.  So, pretty damned close to 100%.   WTF is the GOP's problem?


I'm going to go with mental illness, with a side of evil. They probably just need our help. Maybe we could set up some camps where they could go to learn how to be productive members of society.
 
2013-09-16 04:34:36 PM

sugardave: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

I think the last time it was 98%.  So, pretty damned close to 100%.  WTF is the GOP's problem?


Are you really surprised to fight out that the GOP is willing to destroy the country for the 2%?
 
2013-09-16 04:37:30 PM

MyRandomName: cefm: The President doesn't pass laws - the Congress does.  The President runs the agencies that carry out the appropriations authorized by Congress.  It is illegal for the President to tell his agencies not to spend money they are required by law to spend.  It is therefore illegal for the President not to tell the head of the Treasury to issue bonds as needed to pay for over-spending by Congress.  The "debt-ceiling" is bullshiat, and no sane person would see it any other way.  It's up to Congress to pass a budget that works and be happy with it.  It's not up to Congress to pass a budget that requires spending X and then not let the President actually spend X.

The president does not have to spend 100% of appropriations. That is where your logic fails. He has never had to do that. Ever. He has to perform the duties that money is allocated to, but not spend it all.


You're wrong.  The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 confirms that the President must spend as Congress directs.  He cannot spend less without proposing a specific recission and having that approved by Congress.
 
2013-09-16 04:39:56 PM

Evil High Priest: Maybe we could set up some camps where they could go to learn how to be productive members of society.


I see now how you became a High Priest. Do you have a newsletter?
 
2013-09-16 04:40:14 PM

UrukHaiGuyz: Pinner: When the next election rolls around will the GOP become the misogynist party while bashing Hillary?
It only adds to the current racist label. How much longer can they last?

Nah, they'll run some clown-shoes candidates in the primary for 2016 that happen to be non-white and/or female as "proof" that big-tent Republicanism is still a real goal for the party. Then they'll put up another white guy when they remember their voting base consists primarily of white guys.


No, it is going to be the runner up from the last primary. Which if I recall right was Santorum!
Which should be epic as fark. I hope it comes to pass, just for the lulz. If he actually gets elected then  it would be even lulzier.
 
2013-09-16 04:40:25 PM
The President is getting closer and closer to saying what we all know is true:

"You're doing this because I'm black, right?"
 
2013-09-16 04:40:37 PM
President Obama:"I cannot remember a time when one party promises economic chaos if it can't get 100% of what it wants."

Well then maybe you should reconsider your, "Send me a bill that funds all of government except Obamacare and I'll veto it and shut down DC" stance.

i40.tinypic.com
 
2013-09-16 04:42:48 PM

jjorsett: President Obama:"I cannot remember a time when one party promises economic chaos if it can't get 100% of what it wants."

Well then maybe you should reconsider your, "Send me a bill that funds all of government except Obamacare and I'll veto it and shut down DC" stance.

[i40.tinypic.com image 447x234]


So you're admitting that 100% of what the GOP wants at this point is to shut down ObamaCare, even to the point of forcing a government shutdown over it?
 
2013-09-16 04:43:12 PM
Republicans just need to accept that we can't have both tax cuts and balanced budgets, the math just doesn't add up.

The lost decade that followed the Bush tax cuts proved that once and for all.
 
2013-09-16 04:44:55 PM

MyRandomName: The president does not have to spend 100% of appropriations. That is where your logic fails. He has never had to do that. Ever. He has to perform the duties that money is allocated to, but not spend it all.


What?  You can't be serious?  This must be a troll response.
 
2013-09-16 04:46:28 PM

odinsposse: eraser8: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

That depends.  What is it you think Republicans want?

Actually they are pretty clear about it this time. Last time their demands were some pretty incoherent ramblings about balanced budget amendments and the unworkable Ryan Budget plan. This time it's "Defund the ACA." It's true you can't meet them halfway by, say, reducing funding for the ACA but at least this time it's an actual coherent demand.


Actually they have moved from don't fund the ACA to delay the starting date of the ACA to next year.

/Can't defund something that is not yet funded.
 
2013-09-16 04:47:42 PM

Stile4aly: MyRandomName: cefm: The President doesn't pass laws - the Congress does.  The President runs the agencies that carry out the appropriations authorized by Congress.  It is illegal for the President to tell his agencies not to spend money they are required by law to spend.  It is therefore illegal for the President not to tell the head of the Treasury to issue bonds as needed to pay for over-spending by Congress.  The "debt-ceiling" is bullshiat, and no sane person would see it any other way.  It's up to Congress to pass a budget that works and be happy with it.  It's not up to Congress to pass a budget that requires spending X and then not let the President actually spend X.

The president does not have to spend 100% of appropriations. That is where your logic fails. He has never had to do that. Ever. He has to perform the duties that money is allocated to, but not spend it all.

You're wrong.  The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 confirms that the President must spend as Congress directs.  He cannot spend less without proposing a specific recission and having that approved by Congress.


Technically incorrect. The Impoundment Control Act mostly governs budgetary authority; the President may not say "I choose not to have NASA this year", but he may over the course of the year spend less than the exact amount budgeted for a line item. If, say, there's a line item to perform some service and the service is billed cost plus and comes in under budget, the dollars may be reappropriated to a similar color of money project or simply go unspent.

It's nowhere near enough to make a dent in the budget, but...
 
2013-09-16 04:48:20 PM

udhq: Republicans just need to accept that we can't have both tax cuts and balanced budgets, the math just doesn't add up.

The lost decade that followed the Bush tax cuts proved that once and for all.


But Reagan proved that deficits don't matter (unless a Democrat is in the White House)!
 
2013-09-16 04:48:25 PM
I do not think its fair that Obama is not wanting to delay Obamacare. If the country shuts down and goes into default, we will have no Obamacare to deal with. Lets not forget Obama wanted to raise taxes. In the end, the Bush era tax cuts have continued for all Americans.

Seriously, fark poor people in this country for our problems of having no healthcare and demanding high wages. Poor people should just emigrate to China, Canada, or Europe in ships or trains.
 
2013-09-16 04:48:44 PM

max_pooper: Aristocles: Actually, Republicans don't want much... they simply want to repeal Obamacare, cut taxes, put an end to government waste, fraud, and abuse, secure the border, and promote freedom and democracy.

You mean like freedom to marry whoever you want? I haven't seen any evidence they want that freedom but that is the case fine, Obama agrees to legalize universal gay marriage and Republicans agree to raise the debt ceiling. Sounds like a fair compromise.


imageshack.us
 
2013-09-16 04:49:31 PM

Slaves2Darkness: odinsposse: eraser8: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

That depends.  What is it you think Republicans want?

Actually they are pretty clear about it this time. Last time their demands were some pretty incoherent ramblings about balanced budget amendments and the unworkable Ryan Budget plan. This time it's "Defund the ACA." It's true you can't meet them halfway by, say, reducing funding for the ACA but at least this time it's an actual coherent demand.

Actually they have moved from don't fund the ACA to delay the starting date of the ACA to next year.

/Can't defund something that is not yet funded.


Except that it is funded.  The funds for the ACA are appropriated as part of the bill itself, not as part of the annual budget process.  That's why the shutdown threat is doubly ridiculous; even if they succeed, they won't stop Obamacare.
 
2013-09-16 04:50:55 PM

udhq: Republicans just need to accept that we can't have both tax cuts and balanced budgets, the math just doesn't add up.

The lost decade that followed the Bush tax cuts proved that once and for all.


You wish. Math didn't convince them -- when makes you think empirical evidence will?
 
2013-09-16 04:53:36 PM

Mister Buttons: ManateeGag: you know who else had early onset Alzheimer's?

/seriously, do you know?
//I forgot.

[i.imgur.com image 400x339]


this is more appropriate

www.polderdash.com
 
2013-09-16 05:01:13 PM

sprawl15: Stile4aly: MyRandomName: cefm: The President doesn't pass laws - the Congress does.  The President runs the agencies that carry out the appropriations authorized by Congress.  It is illegal for the President to tell his agencies not to spend money they are required by law to spend.  It is therefore illegal for the President not to tell the head of the Treasury to issue bonds as needed to pay for over-spending by Congress.  The "debt-ceiling" is bullshiat, and no sane person would see it any other way.  It's up to Congress to pass a budget that works and be happy with it.  It's not up to Congress to pass a budget that requires spending X and then not let the President actually spend X.

The president does not have to spend 100% of appropriations. That is where your logic fails. He has never had to do that. Ever. He has to perform the duties that money is allocated to, but not spend it all.

You're wrong.  The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 confirms that the President must spend as Congress directs.  He cannot spend less without proposing a specific recission and having that approved by Congress.

Technically incorrect. The Impoundment Control Act mostly governs budgetary authority; the President may not say "I choose not to have NASA this year", but he may over the course of the year spend less than the exact amount budgeted for a line item. If, say, there's a line item to perform some service and the service is billed cost plus and comes in under budget, the dollars may be reappropriated to a similar color of money project or simply go unspent.

It's nowhere near enough to make a dent in the budget, but...


There's a difference between an item coming in under budget and refusing to spend what is allocated, which is what MRN is suggesting.
 
2013-09-16 05:04:17 PM

heap: sugardave: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

I think the last time it was 98%.  So, pretty damned close to 100%.  WTF is the GOP's problem?

the thing that kinda gets lost in the 98 percent thing is that people assume it was 98 percent of what the GOP wanted in an effort to avoid the sequester....when in reatlity, the sequester was among the 98 percent of what they wanted out of the situation to begin with. boehner was shopping it as a desirable outcome before the negotiations even began.

when you have people slobbering at the idea of default or shutdown, negotiations to avoid that result are kinda outta whack to begin with. the desired end result is calamity, not getting what they want in an effort to avoid it.


An analogy to further this point:
Democrats want to go to see a movie while Republican want to lock themselves in the basement after kidnapping, murdering, raping, then eating the neighbors kid.  However, the Republicans are willing to compromise with only molesting the kids while watching Hannity in the living room then letting the kid go.
 
2013-09-16 05:05:34 PM

heap: sprawl15:
I heard Mitt Romney doesn't have anything planned for the near future.

could be some lucrative options in being a Bruce Campbell impersonator.


You know Republicans ... buncha biatchy little girls.

/I already miss "Burn Notice."
 
2013-09-16 05:05:59 PM

Stile4aly: sprawl15: Stile4aly: MyRandomName: cefm: The President doesn't pass laws - the Congress does.  The President runs the agencies that carry out the appropriations authorized by Congress.  It is illegal for the President to tell his agencies not to spend money they are required by law to spend.  It is therefore illegal for the President not to tell the head of the Treasury to issue bonds as needed to pay for over-spending by Congress.  The "debt-ceiling" is bullshiat, and no sane person would see it any other way.  It's up to Congress to pass a budget that works and be happy with it.  It's not up to Congress to pass a budget that requires spending X and then not let the President actually spend X.

The president does not have to spend 100% of appropriations. That is where your logic fails. He has never had to do that. Ever. He has to perform the duties that money is allocated to, but not spend it all.

You're wrong.  The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 confirms that the President must spend as Congress directs.  He cannot spend less without proposing a specific recission and having that approved by Congress.

Technically incorrect. The Impoundment Control Act mostly governs budgetary authority; the President may not say "I choose not to have NASA this year", but he may over the course of the year spend less than the exact amount budgeted for a line item. If, say, there's a line item to perform some service and the service is billed cost plus and comes in under budget, the dollars may be reappropriated to a similar color of money project or simply go unspent.

It's nowhere near enough to make a dent in the budget, but...

There's a difference between an item coming in under budget and refusing to spend what is allocated, which is what MRN is suggesting.


Even then, oftentimes the budget is over the estimate of what something will cost. Funding for fixed price contracts are budgeted before negotiations begin. Though again, I am basically saying 100% is not technically correct and that 99.97% would be more accurate.
 
2013-09-16 05:06:07 PM

serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?


That is why Obama has never really negotiated with the Republicans. Sure he's offered up lots of things. But the very instance that words leave Obama's mouth, whatever he's offered has become disgusting, an insult really, There have even been times when the mere rumor that Obama is about to offer something is enough to make the offer dead to Republicans.
 
2013-09-16 05:06:12 PM
And by "getting 100% of what it wants" he means if they don't take 100% of the bullshiat I'm selling.

Rino's have caved on 99%.
 
2013-09-16 05:07:21 PM

serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?


The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not up for negotiation.
 
2013-09-16 05:08:28 PM

eraser8: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

That depends.  What is it you think Republicans want?


Impeach!
 
2013-09-16 05:10:07 PM

Zeno-25: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not up for negotiation.


Oh But it is.

www.wwrl1600.com
 
2013-09-16 05:11:35 PM

OnlyM3: And by "getting 100% of what it wants" he means if they don't take 100% of the bullshiat I'm selling.

Rino's have caved on 99%.


Yeah, we all remember Boehner saying, "I got 1% of what I wanted. I'm pretty happy."
 
2013-09-16 05:12:19 PM

Heliovdrake: Zeno-25: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not up for negotiation.

Oh But it is.

[www.wwrl1600.com image 640x477]


i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-16 05:12:59 PM

ZoeNekros: OnlyM3: And by "getting 100% of what it wants" he means if they don't take 100% of the bullshiat I'm selling.

Rino's have caved on 99%.

Yeah, we all remember Boehner saying, "I got 1% of what I wanted. I'm pretty happy."


imageshack.us
 
2013-09-16 05:21:57 PM

LarryDan43: eraser8: serial_crusher: What percentage of what the Republicans want has Obama offered them?

That depends.  What is it you think Republicans want?

Impeach!


Why do they want to cosplay as Princess Toadstool?
 
2013-09-16 05:26:42 PM

Funk Brothers: I do not think its fair that Obama is not wanting to delay Obamacare. If the country shuts down and goes into default, we will have no Obamacare to deal with. Lets not forget Obama wanted to raise taxes. In the end, the Bush era tax cuts have continued for all Americans.

Seriously, fark poor people in this country for our problems of having no healthcare and demanding high wages. Poor people should just emigrate to China, Canada, or Europe in ships or trains.


No they should just cook meth. If our government would pay for comprehensive universal health care Walter White would never have had to turn to crime.
 
2013-09-16 05:27:33 PM
images.politico.com
 
2013-09-16 05:39:27 PM

OnlyM3: And by "getting 100% of what it wants" he means if they don't take 100% of the bullshiat I'm selling.

Rino's have caved on 99%.


when you threaten to destroy the US economy if your political demands aren't met, you are a terrorist. we do not negotiate with terrorists, be they al qaeda or GOP. so your point is moot.
 
2013-09-16 05:49:43 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: udhq: Republicans just need to accept that we can't have both tax cuts and balanced budgets, the math just doesn't add up.

The lost decade that followed the Bush tax cuts proved that once and for all.

But Reagan proved that deficits don't matter (unless a Democrat is in the White House)!


Sadly I have had debates with people who ahve used that argument.  One even claimed that Reagans deficits helped win the Cold War.
 
2013-09-16 05:57:49 PM

Flappyhead: LouDobbsAwaaaay: udhq: Republicans just need to accept that we can't have both tax cuts and balanced budgets, the math just doesn't add up.

The lost decade that followed the Bush tax cuts proved that once and for all.

But Reagan proved that deficits don't matter (unless a Democrat is in the White House)!

Sadly I have had debates with people who ahve used that argument.  One even claimed that Reagans deficits helped win the Cold War.


I used to work with a guy who insisted the US debt did not go up under Reagan. I shiat you not.
 
Displayed 50 of 230 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report