But serious disputes remained. Boehner's aides said the White House had upped its demands on taxes. From $800 billion, it wanted to add $400 billion in revenue, staffers said. Bad Boner! Didn't recognize a good deal from His Majesty?
And, GOP staffers said, there was a dispute over a "trigger" inserted into the law. This was a provision intended to make sure the two sides kept their promises to return, after raising the debt ceiling, and reform the tax code and entitlement spending.
Boehner's aides wanted something that would be painful for Democrats, to be sure they followed through. They suggested a trigger that would repeal two cherished elements of the health-care law: the individual mandate to purchase health insurance and a special board tasked with monitoring Medicare spending. I guess they're going to have to wait until after 2012 to drive a stake thru the heart of Obamacare?
Obama's staff said he wouldn't agree to put those two provisions in the trigger. And Obama said he wouldn't accept such large cuts to Medicare if Boehner wouldn't accept that additional $400 billion in tax revenue. But the Trunks are to blame. At the WaPo site, I voted for Obama as the biggest obstacle to a deal, but of those WaPo readers who voted 40% blamed Boehner and 44% blamed House Leader Cantor. Only 12% blamed The Surrealistic Spinner and His Marvelous Media./span>
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/23/2011 08:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Just as I posted, I caught this - Obama said he wouldn't accept such large cuts to Medicare if Boehner wouldn't accept that additional $400 billion in tax revenue.
So Obama is selling out Medicare? Again?
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/23/2011 8:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Aside from the $650 billion in social services cuts, from delaying and reducing benefits, making the programs more sustainable (outgo closer to income) ...
Obama offered a billion - excuse me - a trillion in cuts for $1.2 trillion in new revenue. That's what it says. Read it again.
Who pays all this new revenue? Corporations? Doctors? Oil companies?
Where does ALL their income originate? You.
So Obama's extraordinary deal is a "cut" of adding "only $200 billion a year" in new taxes - ultimately paid by you, the consumer.
Every single thing the government gives out, it has to take from someone else. As long as you're feeling sorry for yourself and don't care a whit for anyone else, that is an extraordinary deal.
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/23/2011 9:39 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Obama is intransigent & bent on spending the US into disaster. The MSM is doing an outstanding job of covering up this fact.
#4
Every single thing the government gives out, it has to take from someone else. True, to a degree. The problem for those who advocate a spending cut is that this will cause an immediate drop in GDP and an immediate rise in unemployment. It's just mathematics: GDP = C + I + G + (X − M). Use Google to explain this to yourself.
The electorate would notice this eventually, and will tend to blame those who cut the spending. Economic growth, should it ever resume, would tend to restore GDP, but this takes a lot of time, which translates into suffering and discontent.
Those advocating a spending cut are pushing austerity. However, Obama's spending mania is leading the US off a cliff, which is always fun, until impact.
which would be the end of Obama. From which we can infer that his unspecified $3-4 trillion in "spending cuts" are (1) wholly fictitious (2) an Enron-style accounting illusion or (3) so far in the future as to be irrelevant. Or all three.
Posted by: Matt ||
07/23/2011 12:32 Comments ||
Top||
#6
All the 'spending cuts' the Democrats have spoken off are designed NEVER to take place, at some remote time, in the far future, and/or in an alternate reality. If you look at Dem-proposed spending cuts to be carried out this year, thain't none.
Obama is trying to keep up his shuck-and-jive economy until he gets re-elected. And don't think that isn't likely. AFAICT, the GOP has not been willing to make the same points I have been making, what are they waiting for?
#7
The US has a GDP of $14.66 trillion dollars. Only a stock of $1.7 trillion.
The US Federal Government takes $4 trillion right off of the top of that every year. And that's not enough to fund all of the stupid experiments they already have.
For every dollar in the government is a dollar not in the true economy. In fact, for every dollar - the activity the government conducts is detrimental to what we need to grow and thrive.
Our economy in the US exists in spite of the massive government burden, not because of it.
Governance is not a toy. It is time for accountability.
#8
I strongly suggest everybody here read George Reisman's "The Government Against the Economy". It was written based on the follies of the 70s, but the stupidity and principles remain exactly the same.
It had better get fixed very very soon. We're running out of time. Or else it ends awfully badly for all of us, for civilization.
He's still saying, no, no, I'm not running. And it is getting late for 2012 presidential planning. Ask Rick Perry, the man who's been Texas governor ever since George W. left the Austin mansion across the street from the Capitol. Perry will likely be jumping into the crowded but lackluster GOP field in early August. Here's how the two-term, bilingual governor of the crucial Sunshine State described a possible candidacy (On a recent Sean Hannity show - RbR):
I dont anticipate that. You never say never. This is a standard answer that Ive kind of learned how to give which is -- you never say never, but I never rule out being on Dancing with the Stars either there are a lot of ways you can make a difference.
Good grief...if the Republicans are awash in enough self-immolating stupidity to actually nominate YET ANOTHER BUSH for '12, then it's definitely time to stock up on the MRE's and shotgun shells. Because Ogabe will run the table in November, and the Trunks - who'll lose every independent voter the second Jeb! makes his acceptance speech - will be lucky to replicate Mondale's stunning finish from '84.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
07/23/2011 16:38 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Joger Oppressor of the Lichtensteiners9577 ||
07/23/2011 06:45 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
He only lost $3m out of pocket. The rest was profits he thought he was due from the get rich quick scheme. Pity he didn't go the typical gambler route and double down.
Posted by: dan ||
07/23/2011 9:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
What is a no-count, bottom-feeding, scum-sucking congressturd--but I repeat myself--doing with $3 mill in the first place?
It's like in the Army when you discover your mess sergeant has five overweight kids. Not on his...pay.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey ||
07/23/2011 10:10 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Grayson asked: "What could go wrong? After all, the continuing Social Security Ponzi scheme has worked so well to bilk the taxpayers."
If he lost $3M/ month it wouldn't be fast enough. Cro-Magnon Man is running again next year
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/23/2011 11:20 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I believe about two weeks ago that he 'threw his hat into the ring' to go after the congressional seat he lost last election. Good luck with that!!/sarc
I think he wants his old title back as "Florida Congressloon of the Year" from Debbie W Schultz!
#8
Between 2000 and 2005, Grayson was the most frequent participant in Deriviums 90-percent stock-loan program, transferring about $29 million in stocks to Derivium
Were not talking "chump change" here--or maybe we are.
Grayson was ranked as the 11th-wealthiest member of Congress in 2010, based on financial disclosure forms with a minimum net worth of $31.41 million, according to Roll Call.
Sounds like he lost most of his money and then some. I read an internet article where it was claimed he made a bundle of money suing military contractors. That's the problem with jumping into Madoff-like Ponzi schemes.
The White House said Thursday it saw "momentum" toward a deal to avert a disastrous early August debt default, but denied media reports that a compromise with top politicians may be imminent.
President Barack B.O. Obama huddled for nearly two hours at the White House with top Senate and House Democrats unsettled by news accounts he was close to a broad agreement with Republican House Speaker John It is not pronounced 'Boner!' Boehner. ... the occasionally weepy leader of House Republicans...
"We believe there is momentum behind the idea of massive tax increases a balanced approach to a significant agreement," front man Jay Carney told news hounds with time running short before an August 2 deadline to raise the dollar 14.3 trillion US debt ceiling.
But Carney rejected a New York Times ...which still proudly displays Walter Duranty's Pulitzer prize... report, citing anonymous congressional officials, which said aides to Obama had started informing key politicians that a deal was in the works with Boehner.
"There is no deal. We are not close to a deal," said the front man. "There is no progress to report, but we continue to work on getting the most significant deficit-reduction package possible."
The Times said the accord would include cuts to government health and retirement benefits programs dear to Democrats as well as new revenues -- a blend in line with how the White House has previously defined a "balanced" deal -- generated through closing loopholes and ending tax breaks.
Such an agreement would likely anger Democrats who pledged to protect the US social safety net as well as Republicans who vowed to oppose increasing revenues, endangering its prospects for passage in the divided Congress. The Pubs are not opposed to increasing revenues. Get Americans back to work and the new tax revenues from that would be welcome. The Pubs are opposed to increasing taxes on the people who are still working. "The decisions we've got to make right now are tough ones, and nobody likes them. I mean it's always easier to give people more benefits and cut their taxes than it is to raise more revenue and reduce benefits," the president told National Public Radio (NPR) in an interview to be broadcast Friday.
The National Journal, a publication that covers US politics, said the White House and top House Republican leaders were discussing a 10-year, dollar 3-trillion plan to cut the deficit while raising the debt ceiling.
A senior Democratic aide later described media reports of a looming deal as overblown and said it would take another few days to hammer out a compromise from three deficit-cutting options he described as small, medium, and large.
Boehner's office also denied the New York Times report, with front man Michael Steel saying that "while we are keeping the lines of communication open, there are no 'deal' and no progress to report."
Washington hit its debt ceiling on May 16 and has used spending and accounting adjustments, as well as higher-than-expected tax receipts, to pay its bills and continue operating normally. But it can only do so until August 2.
Finance and business leaders have warned failure to raise the US debt ceiling by then would send shock waves through the world economy, while Obama has predicted a default would trigger economic "Armageddon."
China, the largest US creditor, has twice warned that Washington must protect investor interests, while ratings agencies Moody's and Standard & Poor's have said the sterling Triple-A US debt rating was in danger of a downgrade.
Word of a deal came after Boehner told news hounds that he had braced his restive Republican majority in the House of Representatives for the possibility of having to support a potentially difficult compromise.
Boehner acknowledged that some Republicans would reject any debt-ceiling deal with Obama and his Democratic allies, "but I do not believe that would be anywhere close to the majority."
It would be irresponsible" for Congress and the White House "not to be looking at backup strategies for how to solve this problem," the speaker added.
With time running short, the US Senate was expected to kill, in a procedural vote on Friday, a House-passed Republican plan calling for steep cuts and a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced US budget as the price for a debt ceiling increase.
Obama again praised a plan, crafted by a "Gang of Six" Republican and Democratic senators, to cut the deficit by nearly dollar 4 trillion dollars while ending some tax breaks as a sign of cross-party cooperation.
And politicians were discussing a plan crafted by Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid ... the charismatic senator-for-life from Nevada, currently majority leader ... and Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell that would let the president raise the debt ceiling by dollar 2.5 trillion in three increments through 2012 with just Democratic votes.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/23/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
How about no new negotiations unless televised and online live. Now why would anyone object to that? /rhetorical question.
#2
There's the deal"Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell that would let the president raise the debt ceiling by dollar 2.5 trillion in three increments through 2012 with just Democratic votes".
They go home first part of August for vacation. Some may already have left. Gold and silver can only go up. So after the 2012 election this will all come back much worse than it is now. Tax revenues will drop, unemployment up, yep the "momentum" is there to pass the buck. What I like is the media will take the biggest hit. No advertising revenue. $5000 dollar incentive to hire new people is gone in first month due to Tax/social programs. So small business will sit it out and hope for better times. Socialism at its best. Things will not improve as long as this group is in power. The long winter is here.
#3
I'd suggest having some cash on hand August 1st
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/23/2011 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#4
AUG 15th is when the interest is due and there will not be enough to go around. Bring it on. Starve this POS government.
If you raise debt ceiling, you lose credit rating.
If you take long term cuts and keep the debt ceiling, you lose credit rating.
If you cut spending and cut now and balance budge now, you may keep your credit rating.
#5
That's all there is to it.
You left out the Worst Case Scenario: US keeps spending like a maniac, borrowing ever vaster sums at low interest rates, until lenders wise up, and/or interest rates spike (same thing ultimately), at which point US Treasury paper gets very difficult to sell or impossible to service (same thing ultimately), followed by a slashed credit rating, not the biggest deal compared to the associated full-bore crash of the US and world economy. At that point US troops in Afghanistan will have to replicate the Anabasis and march to an ocean shore close to home, where what is left of the US Navy can sail them home. I sure hope the Navy has stocked up on wooden oars and hardtack.
#6
Anguper Hupomosing, Yup yup.
That also has crossed my mind.
For were that to come to be, they would keep their weapons, but know with whom to use them on after being forsaken. I would trade my cloak as well.
#9
Obama is trying to act presidential, like he is the only adult in the room, and like he is not playing politics. However, is trying buy time by kicking the can down the road until after the 2012 elections. He is the worst, most ineffectual, least qualified President we have ever had. I can't believe the Democrats don't bail on him like they did with Jimmy Carter.
(KUNA) -- US Senate politicians voted 51 to 46 on Friday to reject a conservative Republican-proposed bill aimed at slashing federal spending and raising the debt ceiling.
The "cut, cap and balance" bill passed earlier this week by the House of Representatives as an alternative to the Obama-backed legislation to raise the nation's debt ceiling before it defaults on its loans on August 2nd.
The vote against the measure, which would have imposed strict caps on all future federal spending while making it significantly tougher to raise taxes, came shortly after House Speaker John It is not pronounced 'Boner!' Boehner ... the occasionally weepy leader of House Republicans... told news hounds he and President Barack B.O. Obama had failed to reach a separate agreement to resolve the debt crisis.
But Democrats and Republicans have been deadlocked over terms of a deficit-reduction package linked to the debt-limit increase, with Democrats demanding some tax increases and Republicans insisting on doing it just with spending cuts.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/23/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Democratic Party controlled Senate Rejects House-Proposed Budget Cutting Plan on Party Line Vote
#2
the same Democrat-controlled Senate that hasn't produced a budget- any budget - in over two years
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/23/2011 10:50 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Reid acted shabby in cutting off debate in the cut, cap, and trade bill although it probably would not have made any difference in the vote outcome. He comes across as a bitter, mean-spirited old fart.
#4
Today is the 24th of July. We have approximately ONE WEEK? Yes?....until the United States defaults?
Gas goes up to $6/gallon and the dollar is devalued to about a dime. Businesses fail, banks fail. Government services fail. No body picks up garbage, mail only three times a week. Houses standing empty and the bank goes under. Crime increases. And your daughter is a prostitute and a thief. And your son sells drugs.
President Barack Hussein says he cares about the United States, but what if he doesnt and thinks privately to himself that an economically crippled Nation in financial chaos will be easier for him to manipulate so that he can institute changes which will PERMANENTLY make the US like some EUroweenie country....what if the President of the United States HAS NO INTENTION of reaching a deal or making a compromise in any form which will keep the US credit status? What if he WANTS the US to slide and wants to see a chaos and ruin where he can better manipulate the changes he has in mind?
They are going to default. Its going to happen. And Congress wont survive but Obama will. There is going to be an election and the Democrats were the ones who gave us Dan Rather, arent they? That's the way Democrats play. They knew THAT was a lie and that it was right during an election and they lied ANYWAY. That IS what they are.
You own a gun?
Posted by: de Medici ||
07/23/2011 22:27 Comments ||
Top||
(KUNA) -- A member of Indian Parliament's Upper House 'Rajya Sabha' was on Friday grilled by the Delhi Police in connection with his role in the infamous 'cash-for-votes' scam which hit the country in 2008.
In the scam a plot was hatched by the Treasury benches in the Parliament to offer cash to a few Opposition MPs in return of their votes during the voting over the Indo-US Civil Nuclear deal which was being debated upon. In addition, it was alleged that the MP, Amar Singh, played a key role in approaching the Opposition MPs, arranging the money, and sending the same to the MPs.
The Opposition MPs, however, took the money inside the Parliament while the debate over the Civil Nuclear deal was on, and alleged that the Treasury Benches had made a bid to buy their votes. It also sparked off one of the biggest scams that hit the Indian Parliament.
The Delhi police had summoned Amar Singh after he was named by two accused -who have already been arrested- as the alleged 'mastermind' of the entire operation to buy votes to save the Manmohan Singh-led UPA Government during the 2008 trust vote.
The Delhi Police is learnt to have prepared a 12-point questionnaire for Amar Singh on the basis of the interrogation of the accused already in custody.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/23/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
[Dawn] Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani ... Pakistain's erstwhile current prime minister, whose occasional feats of mental gymnastics can be awe-inspiring ... Friday said that PML-N MNA Anjum Aqeel Khan will be produced in the National Assembly to represent his constituency.
The House can issue the production order of a member, he said.
"When I was Speaker, I myself issued production of members on different occasions. I assure the House that he (Anjum Aqeel Khan) will be produced in the House. It is his right to represent his constituency," Prime Minister Gilani said while speaking in the National Assembly.
Earlier, PML-N's Sheikh Aftab said that Mr Aqeel was not produced in the National Assembly despite the fact that his production order had been issued.
Deputy Speaker National Assembly Faisal Karim Kundi informed the House that the production order of Mr Aqeel was issued on the evening of July 21.
He asked PPP's Khursheed Shah and Secretary National Assembly to find out why Mr Aqeel had not been produced in the House.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/23/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
But serious disputes remained. Boehner's aides said the White House had upped its demands on taxes. From $800 billion, it wanted to add $400 billion in revenue, staffers said.
The White House said Thursday it saw "momentum" toward a deal to avert a disastrous early August debt default, but denied media reports that a compromise with top 
"The decisions we've got to make right now are tough ones, and nobody likes them. I mean it's always easier to give people more benefits and cut their taxes than it is to raise more revenue and reduce benefits," the president told National Public Radio (NPR) in an interview to be broadcast Friday.
It would be irresponsible" for Congress and the White House "not to be looking at backup strategies for how to solve this problem," the speaker added.
(KUNA) -- US Senate 
(KUNA) -- A member of Indian Parliament's Upper House 'Rajya Sabha' was on Friday grilled by the Delhi Police in connection with his role in the infamous 'cash-for-votes' scam which hit the country in 2008.
Prime Minister 
