“President Barack Obama said he is “agnostic” about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit.
“The whole point of it is to make sure that all ideas are on the table,” the president said in the interview with Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which will appear on newsstands Friday. “So what I want to do is to be completely agnostic, in terms of solutions.”
Obama, in a Feb. 9 Oval Office interview, said that a presidential commission on the budget needs to consider all options for reducing the deficit, including tax increases and cuts in spending on entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
Consider all options? All ideas are on the table? Hmmmm, I don’t see War Defense Department spending cuts on that list. Just an oversight, I’m sure.
“And it may be that — you know, if Congress decides — if Congress decides we’re not going to do it [health care reform], even after all the facts are laid out, all the options are clear, then the American people can make a judgment as to whether this Congress has done the right thing for them or not. And that’s how democracy works. There will be elections coming up and they’ll be able to make a determination and register their concerns one way or the other during election time.”
Sincerely,
Grandma,
Reverend Wright,
Public option supporters,
Defenders of civil liberties,
And a litany of other once upon a time hopers and changers.
The hypocrisy never stops. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) in a press release last Wednesday following President Obama’s State of the Union address:
“In the upcoming elections, voters will face a choice between Republicans who are standing with Wall Street fat cats, bankers and insurance companies – or Democrats who are working hard to clean up the mess we inherited by putting the people’s interests ahead of the special interests.”
“Twelve Democratic Senators spent last weekend in Miami Beach raising money from top lobbyists for oil, drug, and other corporate interests that they often decry, according to a guest list for the event obtained by POLITICO.
Across the table was a who’s who of 108 senior Washington lobbyists, including the top lobbying officials for many of the industries Democrats regularly attack: Represented were the American Bankers Association, the tobacco company Altria, the oil company Marathon, several drug manufacturers, the defense contractor Lockheed, and most of the large independent lobbying firms.”
The guest list for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee’s “winter retreat” at the Ritz Carlton South Beach Resort doesn’t include the price tag for attendance, but the maximum contribution to the committee, typical for such events, is $30,000. There, to participate in “informal conversations” and other meetings Saturday, were senators including DSCC Chairman Robert Menendez; Michigan’s Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow; Bob Casey of Pennsylvania; Claire McCaskill of Missouri; freshmen Kay Hagan of North Carolina and Mark Begich of Alaska; and even left-leaning Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
Nice job, Bob. I’ll sleep better at night knowing you’re looking out for the “people’s interests” and sticking it to those “fat cats.”
Since the “Gang of Six” in the Senate Finance Committee worked out so well, and produced such outstanding results (sarc) in writing health care reform legislation, why not just repeat the process in the Senate Banking Committee as they tackle reforming the financial industry? More openness and transparency from our elected officials in Washington:
“For two months, four pairs of Senate Banking Committee members — each with one Democrat and one Republican — have been meeting behind closed doors to reach a bipartisan compromise on regulatory reform.”
Here are the 8 senators involved, along with the amounts each has taken from financial industry PACs:
Chris Dodd, (D-CT) $3,124,237
Richard Shelby (R-AL) $2,171,369
Mark Warner (D-VA) $330,800
Bob Corker (R-TN) $426,750
Jack Reed (D-RI) $1,554,449
Judd Gregg (R-NH) $709,941
Chuck Schumer (D-NY) $1,629,295
Micheal Crapo (R-ID) $1,237,955
That’s a grand total of $11,184,796. And these are the people who are going to reform the financial system? That’ll be the day. But as good as things are for this new “Gang of Eight.” they’re about to get better:
“…the president’s new proposals have already provoked a sharp increase in the volume and energy of the lobbying on regulatory reform, with more chief executives stepping over their government relations staff to request personal meetings with lawmakers. The big banks, the lobbyists say, have become increasingly alarmed that the legislative process may move in unexpected directions outside their control.”
Well, we certainly have to put a stop to that. Can’t have anything going on that the banksters can’t “control,” can we? Speaking of banksters:
“...Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase had lunch with Mr. Obama last Tuesday, and then met separately on Friday with the Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke and the Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner.”
No doubt to discuss who they like in Sunday’s Super Bowl.
It’s nice to see that the Obama Department of Obstruction of Justice has its priorities straight. Investigate Bush administration officials for violations of the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture? Nah, gotta look forward, not back. How about at least going after the authors of the torture memos in the Bush DOJ? Nope, they just used “poor judgment,” nothing worth pursuing there. How about allegations that detainees at Guantanamo may have been murdered, which was then allegedly covered-up by those in charge who reported it as suicide? Nothing to see there either, move along.
“The Obama administration is considering several steps that would review the legality of the controversial Bowl Championship Series, the Justice Department said in a letter Friday to a senator who had asked for an antitrust review.
…Weich made note of the fact that President Barack Obama, before he was sworn in, had stated his preference for a playoff system. In 2008, Obama said he was going to “to throw my weight around a little bit” to nudge college football toward a playoff system, a point that Hatch stressed when he urged Obama last fall to ask the department to investigate the BCS.”
In the letter to Sen. Orrin Hatch, obtained by The Associated Press, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich wrote that the Justice Department is reviewing Hatch’s request and other materials to determine whether to open an investigation into whether the BCS violates antitrust laws.
Well, that would bring the number of campaign promises kept to…….one.
When I read Paul Krugman today, it brought to mind something that I’ve been thinking about off and on for the last few months:
“…this is about the president. After Massachusetts, Democrats were looking for leadership; they didn’t get it. Ten days later, nobody is sure what Obama intends to do, and his aides are giving conflicting readings. It’s as if Obama checked out.
Look, Obama is a terrific speaker and a very smart guy. He really showed up the Republicans in the now-famous give-and-take. But we knew that. What’s now in question isn’t his ability to talk, it’s his ability to lead.”
More and more I have the sneaking suspicion that this conversation took place sometime on the night of November 4, 2008, with Barack Obama in the role of Bill McKay, the character portrayed by Robert Redford in the movie The Candidate. “What do we do now?” seems to be the operative phrase in the Obama administration.
“President Barack Obama said reducing the federal budget deficit is “critical” to ensuring future growth as the U.S. economy recovers from the recession...Obama in his address today highlighted some of the measures he proposed in his Jan. 27 State of the Union address, including a three-year freeze on spending (see Deficit Peacocks) for some domestic programs (but certainly not the sacred cow MIC) and creation of bipartisan commission to draft deficit-reduction recommendations for Congress to consider.”
.
Ah yes, the old bi-partisan deficit-reduction commission. The place of refuge for the gutless politician who doesn’t want to go on the record with a controversial vote. D.C. CYA at it’s best.
Also President Obama, the old adage is that those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. 1937 for example.
That was the year FDR listened to the fiscal hawks of his day and decided to cut spending and balance the federal budget, assuming that the worst of the Great Depression was over. The result? Unemployment rose again, the economic growth of the previous 3 years was reversed, and the country slid back into what became known as the “Roosevelt Recession.” The dreaded double-dip.
President Obama in last night’s State of the Union Address (emphasis mine):
“We face a deficit of trust — deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years. To close that credibility gap, we have to take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue — to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; to give our people the government they deserve.”
“A day after bashing lobbyists, President Barack Obama’s administration has invited K Street insiders to join private briefings on a range of topics addressed in Wednesday’s State of the Union.
The Treasury Department on Thursday morning invited selected individuals to “a series of conference calls with senior Obama administration officials to discuss key aspects of the State of the Union address.”
…Another lobbyist said these types of teleconferences occur “all the time.”
…The invitation stated, “The White House is encouraging you to participate in these calls and will have a question and answer session at the end of each call. As a reminder, these calls are not intended for press purposes.
…A handful of lobbyists told The Hill on Thursday morning that they received the invitations and were planning to call in.
Some lobbyists say they are extremely frustrated with the White House for criticizing them and then seeking their feedback. Others note that Democrats on Capitol Hill constantly urge them to make political donations.
One lobbyist said, “Bash lobbyists, then reach out to us. Bash lobbyists [while] I have received four Democratic invitations for fundraisers.”
A “deficit of trust” Mr. President? I can’t imagine why?
The “birthers,” that formerly fringe element of the Republican Party who still question the citizenship of President Obama, are back in the news because of this video from a townhall meeting held by Congressman Mike Castle of Delaware.
The disturbing part of this clip is not the lady waving her own birth certificate around and screaming “I want my country back,” but the cheers she gets from the others in attendance, and the boos Rep. Castle receives when he says that President Obama “is a citizen of the United States.”
The reason I say this is a formerly fringe element is that this view is quickly becoming the mainstream of the Republican Party and the right.
Legislation has been introduced by Rep. Bill Posey of Florida, and co-sponsored by nine other Republican members of the House, five of whom are from Texas by the way, that would “require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee’s statement of organization a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate.”
De facto leader of the Republican Party, Rush Limbaugh said on his radio program that “Barack Obama has yet to have to prove he’s a citizen.”
When a caller to Lou Dobbs radio show said President Obama was “rushing all these programs through by whatever means, knowing he will soon be exposed as a fake, a fraud, a . . . Kenyan,” Dobbs’ response was, “Certainly your view can’t be discounted.”
Then there was Liz “Baby Dick” Cheney, who was on Larry King Live with James Carville. Instead of saying outright that the “birthers” are, to use Carville’s word “ludicrous,” Ms. Cheney tried to elude the issue by saying,“People are uncomfortable with a president who is reluctant to defend the nation overseas.”
When later asked for a clarification, Cheney gave the equally slippery answer, “I don’t have any question about Barack Obama’s right to be President of the United States.”
What these “birthers,” and those who continue to aid and abet their lunacy, are doing is to not only question Barack Obama’s citizenship, but his legitimacy as president of the United States. Let’s see, what could be their motivation? What is the difference between the 44th president and the previous 43.
Desperado's Outpost 