Or, why I think Barack Obama has his head up his…..somewhere.
Action on raising the debt ceiling nears, and some Republicans have voiced their potential opposition to raising it.
To some conservatives, refusing to raise the limit on the federal debt could be an effective tactic to force lawmakers into cutting spending and facing such contentious issues as the rising costs of Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs.
Austan Goolsbee had strong words for that idea.
Goolsbee added: “I don’t see why anybody’s talking about playing chicken with the debt ceiling.”
He said it could be “catastrophic.”
My, how times change. A certain stick legged Senator from Illinois once opposed raising the debt ceiling and not very long ago.
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.
Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling in 2006, but at least he voted.
Obama did not vote at all in all during the debt ceiling issue in either 2007 or 2008. Which is to say, he voted “present.”
He did vote for TARP, but only after John McCain did.
UPDATE:
Baghdad Bob Gibbs says that Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling only because his vote didn’t count.
Gibbs said Obama’s vote was not necessary at the time to secure passage of the bill, which squeaked by 52-48, and that he was using the occasion to call for fiscal discipline.
This ought to sound really familiar. While in the Illinois State Senate, BArack Obama voted “present” 128 times. As he always done, he waited for the dust to settle and then safely took the “noble” position.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
Social security? Almost non existent in this country!
“To some conservatives, refusing to raise the limit on the federal debt could be an effective tactic to force lawmakers into cutting spending”
The Repubs have the perfect tool to FORCE cuts in spending, use it and then work to end the massive amount of bloat in government.
So, Obama did a ”Ron Paul,” huh?
Yeah.
He did.
Ron Paul adds tons of pork for his district to big bills.
Then, when he is sure that bill must pass, he votes NO.
That way he can claim to always be against pork.
Sure.
And same to you, Obama.
Sure, you’re opposed to spending that piles on top of our huge national debt.
Sure you are!
Social Security and MEDICARE are ‘vested’ Programs that were paid into on an up-front methodology.
The money was paid but went to General Fund and just was spent on other things…by Congress…
@Old Trooper 2:
Damn straight! That’s why there never was any “Trust” in the Social Security “Trust Fund.” Anybody who has seen the contradictions, power plays, thievery, and outright lies by BOTH major parties over the past several decades is an ABSOLUTE FOOL to believe the Republicans and Democrats are capable or interested in fiscal restraint.
It’s time for all concerned Amreicans to read Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” if they have not read it in a while (if ever.) Our government is nothing more than an aristocracy that holds itself superior to the peons it oversees. Government has become exactly that beast that our forefathers fought against, and in many ways, our fight is magnitudes more difficult. Unless the Republicans and Democrats are made irrelevant by the other so-called “third party” candidates, we are royally screwed. I do NOT see this ending well for my children and future generations . There is no accountability in government, when the worst thing that happens to most of the crooks is being forced out of office and receiving fat pensions. We need to impose fiscal regulations that reduce or eliminate pensions and other perks for government officials who do not act as faithful stewards of public funds OR the public trust. Censure and other “slaps on the wrist” are a pathetic joke – and the joke’s on us!
Jeff
@JVerive: I read both Common Sense and the Federalist Papers many years ago. I heartily recommenced both as Primers on Government as it was intended to be by the Founding Fathers.
Public Office is a position of Public Trust. There are Enumerated Powers in Article I of the Constitution that need to be understood by Voters before they cast Ballots. Those found in Violation need to be recalled from Office. At ANY level.
No Mystery here! I AM Non-Partisan and aim to stay that way.
@Old Trooper 2:
You appear to be asking for actual representation … Couldn’t agree more
My sense of the cause of the non-representation, assuming some politicians actually want to represent their constituents, is the cost of running a campaign. For example:
“…Two House Republicans have cast votes as members of the 112th Congress, but were not sworn in on Wednesday, a violation of the Constitution on the same day that the GOP had the document read from the podium.”
The party affiliation is irrelevant. The need to start raising money from day 1 is the problem. It become the number 1 priority …. and who become the ‘actual’ constituents once they raise enough money?
The second problem is grandstanding political theatre …
“…. According to Peter Keating at Vanity Fair, $1.1 million is the estimated cost of GOP plans to read the document on the House floor. ” The amount I get is nearly $1.1 million. $1,071,872.87, to be exact, though of course this is more back-of-the-envelope than exact. When one chamber of Congress is in session but not working, we the people still have to pay for members’ salaries and expenses, and for their police protection, and for keeping their lights and phones and coffee machines on” ….”
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2011/01/how-much-will-it-cost-republicans-to-recite-the-constitution-on-the-house-floor.html
How many people actually heard or listened to this! What difference will it actually make in legislators that hear it? I don’t care what party it is, it’s just window dressing, put there to appease the smaller government voters that are about to get screwed.
What do these 13 men and women have in common?
Gary Ackerman of New York,
Yvette Clarke of New York,
John Conyers of Michigan,
Keith Ellison of Minnesota,
Bob Filner of California,
Mike Honda of California,
Jesse Jackson Jr. of Illinois,
Barbara Lee of California,
Jim Moran of Virginia,
Donald Payne of New Jersey,
Jan Schakowsky of Illinois,
Edolphus Towns of New York,
Lynn Woolsey of California.
Yes, if you answered, ”They are all DEMOCRATS in the House, you’d be right.
|But what else?
They are the ONLY House members who voted against a five percent cut in “the amount authorized for salaries and expenses of members, committee, and leadership offices in 2011 and 2012.
You can call them the Rapacious Thirteen.
LOL!
The final vote was 410-13.