A Dem President vows to veto any attempt at repealing public spending cuts

[reggie the dog]

and people on a left wing blog cheer it???

did i miss something????

will VETO any attempt to undo pre programmed spending cuts (many on social services) and people here cheer it???

he should encorage congress to write a bill taxing the rich more and only keeping cuts in military spending

but no, that is off the table


sometimes being on here is like being with a beaten spouse just waiting to "feel some more love"

[DCBob]

1. I see poltical reality is not your strong suit.

sometime being on here is like being in bizarro world.

[reggie the dog]

2. enlighten me with your political reality

[ProSense]

3. Here:

Krugman: Failure Is Good

More

[reggie the dog]

7. that article does not even talk about the social spending cuts programmed

, it has fuck all to say about how these cuts will affect americans
and you present it to convince me that a left wing president should be willing to sign a bill stopping these cuts from happening.


do you take me for a fool?

[ProSense]

9. Hmmmm?

that article does not even talk about the social spending cuts programmed
, it has fuck all to say about how these cuts will affect americans
and you present it to convince me that a left wing president should be willing to sign a bill stopping these cuts from happening.


do you take me for a fool?

Rhetorical question, right?

[reggie the dog]

11. no, the article says nothing about the people affected by the cuts

NOTHING

it does nothing to refute my initial claim that a democratic president should not say they will veto any bill that will stop pre ordained cuts in social spending


sorry, i know how to think critically

there is absolutely no substance to your arguments, none

[ProSense]

13. Let me help:

NOTHING

it does nothing to refute my initial claim that a democratic president should not say they will veto any bill that will stop pre ordained cuts in social spending


sorry, i know how to think critically

there is absolutely no substance to your arguments, none

Only confusion would lead someone to not realize that a veto is the appropriate course of action.

[reggie the dog]

16. yet you still do not explain why

because you can't

you really do take me for a fool

a veto is appropriate??? i can see you dont give a damn about people who depend on social spending

a left wing president should be willing to sign a bill in to law that stopped cuts in public spending


since i began this thread you still have still not explained your reasoning once

[ProSense]

18. Well,

yet you still do not explain why

you really do take me for a fool

a veto is appropriate??? i can see you dont give a damn about people who depend on social spending

...it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

[reggie the dog]

24. if providers dont get the money from medicare

where do you think it is going to come from?

plus HALF of the money is non defense spending

so HALF of this money is coming out of spending on our country, non defense spending, which creates jobs

a democratic president should welcome a bill stopping these cuts

and you still have not formulated an argument in your own words

seriously this is getting boring, it is not a debate at all

you send me a link showing that these cuts of public spending will happen (and defense cuts hurt states with military bases)

obama is so right wing he is not even keynesian

[ProSense]

31. Oooh

"if providers dont get the money from medicare where do you think it is going to come from?"

...fear mongering.


If they cut the swipe fees, banks will pass it onto consumers. How'd that work out?

If they eliminate the oil company loopholes, where do you think....

By that logic, nothing should get cut.

[girl gone mad]

35. You're seriously comparing swipe fees to public spending?

Economics is definitely not your strong suit.

[reggie the dog]

37. once again the article you cite has nothing to do with your assertion

if they eliminate oil company loopholes and make them pay taxes they better put in price controls or the price for us will go up


what does this have to do with medicare spending?

your article shows people leaving banks, so people will stop getting healthcare? that is your analogy?

YOU STILL DO NOT EXPLAIN YOUR LOGIC!!! debate me on your logic, dont just cite sources that have little or nothing to do with the assertions you make

[karynnj]

43. I think Obama is saying he will not accept the bill several Republicans are already

writing. That would be a bill that eliminates the cuts to the military and retains the rest - possibly adding more cuts to make up for the military cuts.

I do think that there is a possibility - say if the economy improved somewhat - NATURALLY lowering the deficit, a bill that credited that reduction from the cuts might be acceptable. I don't think the savings of more than 50,000 soldiers leaving Iraq has been included in the baseline. There might be other things that happen between now and 2013 that would enable him to not veto a bill that changes this before it is implemented.

The things cut by it are things that will hurt many with the least.

[DCBob]

4. For starters GOPers control the House and are also able to block anything in Senate.

with filibustering.

[reggie the dog]

8. well no shit

but a democratic president does not have to instantly cave and say he will veto any bill stopping the cuts in public spending

he caved from the get go AGAIN cant you see that???

[DCBob]

14. "instantly caved" ?? Have you been living under a rock?

He has been fighting this battle since day one. Have you forgotten this nation nearly defaulted on its debt obligations for the first time in its history due to the fking Republicans? But they are legally and legitimately elected members of congress and they have votes. There is nothing you or I or Obama can do about that. The automatic cuts are our best option.

[reggie the dog]

20. he fought a real hard battle

when did he propose letting bush tax cuts expire???


please

tell the people that you need more revenue, not less spending in times of economic crisis and that the revenue shall come from the top

that is the fight a democratic president should have been doing since 2008

default is better than capitulation so long as the democrats had great proposals the public new of that were blocked by the republicans, it would actually help the democrats win in 2012... you know, by supporting the base...

[lamp_shade]

5. Sweet Mother of God....

[reggie the dog]

10. yet no critical argument

you cannot defend that a democratic president said he will veto any bill stopping the pre destined cuts to social spending

bashing a head against a wall is what a lot of poor people will feel like doing when programs they depend on are cut

[JuniperLea]

26. Confucius...

Not to enlighten one who can be enlightened is to waste a man.

To endeavor to enlighten one who cannot be enlightened is to waste words.

A wise man wastes neither men nor words.


~~~~~~


In other words... people here linked to your enlightenment, and you refused it. Shame on them.

[TheKentuckian]

44. Since the "links of enlightenment" complete fail to address the concerns of the writer, you can dial

your shitty snark down some.

Both were links to blog entries, one was about bank fees and only holistically related to the subject at hand and I mean pure butterfly effect level holistic and the other in no way address this persons concerns, though it is certainly on subject.

What the deal is, there is a concerted effort to keep the conversation focused on what isn't cut and to completely avoid what is being cut beyond a dollar figure for the military that turns out to be fairly small as a percentage of the military budget as a whole but still no specifics on what is cut there.

There may be wisdom in accentuating the positive but only a fool willfully ignores the negative and only a con-artist dutifully works to tamp down all dialog on the less than desirable features of a thing that they are promoting.

You folks are very insistent on talking about what isn't cut and running like hell from any dialog on what is being cut and what impact they will have and refuse to consider the shrinkage to an economy with a demand crisis.

Refused enlightenment=did not buy non-answers or answers to different questions.

I think gurus who live by "don't ask no questions" are shysters not the wise.

[Autumn]

6. He really has no choice.

It's not like he has a magic wand or some shit like that. It's got to be a "win".:crazy:

[reggie the dog]

12. he could have said nothing

or said he would read any bill that comes across his desk then decide whether or not to veto it.


no, he led with capitulation.

[Autumn]

15. Well that is the way he operates

Capitulate and give a nice speech. As someone else said "They will not have to account for any of cuts they approve until AFTER the 2012 election." It's a win win for him.

[reggie the dog]

17. and lose lose for us

[frazzled]

19. Yes, you missed something

The trigger was the agreement that everyone came to, and that Congress voted for. Now it's here, and it has huge cuts for defense while shielding entirely from any cuts Social Security, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and other programs (including everything in Medicare except 2% payouts to doctors). And the Bush tax cuts will expire. The only problem for the Democrats is how to make only the cuts to the wealthiest expire.

It's better than anything the committee was going to come up with. Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are off the table for now.

[reggie the dog]

23. the trigger agreement is better than the committee i know this

but it is not better than a bill that would say stop the 123 billion from coming out of medicare

plus congress spends 294 billon LESS in non defense spending (our infrastructure perhaps)

whats wrong with a bill that stops that?

[msongs]

28. get it through your head, obama is a helpless victim who can do nothing at all lol nt

[reggie the dog]

30. just another victim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXW1iMeOMms

[LWolf]

21. I'm not cheering anything.

Edited to add:

These days, DU is a "left-wing" blog the way the DLC is "liberal."

[lillypaddle]

22. You don't live here, do you?

...

[reggie the dog]

27. no, i moved to france 8 years ago

i still vote in us elections though

what does that have to do with anything??

oh yes, you noticed that my mind wasnt polluted by american television "news"

[lillypaddle]

32. Yes, I know

My son's Father lives in china. His mind isn't polluted by american television "news" either.

[reggie the dog]

38. it is amazing what not seeing us tv does for ones mind

i dont even watch french tv, dont even own one.

[Hippo_Tron]

25. I think you misunderstood what he meant

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68877.html

Yes the headline says "Obama will veto any bill that overturns the cuts". But he also said that he wants the committee to continue to find a solution to the problem. Considering he's called for congress to raise taxes on the richest Americans several dozen times now, if the committee put such a bill on his desk, I can't fathom that he would not sign it.

I'm pretty certain that what he meant (and somebody feel free to correct me if you think you have a good argument otherwise) is that if Congress sends him a bill that does nothing except reverses some or all of the automatic cuts, he will veto it. If they send him a bill that reverses some of the automatic cuts and raises revenue (from those who can afford to pay it), he will sign it.

[reggie the dog]

29. why didnt he just say what he meant???

then you would not have to tell me what he meant, then my own ears could do it for me

that would be more simple wouldnt it?

[whistler162]

33. Perhaps if you had listened to what he said.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n0a1xMhDrM

[lamp_shade]

34. That was my first thought. It would have helped.

:thumbsup:

[reggie the dog]

39. i did listen

he said he will veto any bill that stops spending cuts

UNLESS IT IS A BALENCED BUDGET

so he is to the right of keynes.

keynes would agree that in economic hard times it is ok for a state to defecit spend to help its people get by and that this would stimulate economic growth or at least keep things stable

obama is giving huge cuts to domestic spending during the worst economic downturn since the 1930's


where i am not hearing what he is saying? he thinks a balenced budget is more imporatant than assuring the needs of his people during a time of crisis.

there has not been a balenced budget since clinton

for 8 years it was not important at all for republicans to have a balenced budget

a left wing president would question defecit spending during good times but not during hard times

obama is far to the right of my "right wing" president sarkozy.

[whistler162]

42. Obviously you didn't!

[reggie the dog]

46. what didnt i listen to

either tell me what the hell your argument is or leave me be

i listened to what he said.

what makes you think i didnt listen?

i heard it and i dont like hearing he will veto any bill that would stop cuts in domestic spending.

[quaker bill]

36. Taken fully out of context, it does sound strange

But life is actually lived fully in context. In context, without the veto threat, republicans will push a bill that restores only defense spending and tax cuts for the rich. Those are the only two elements they are at all interested in.

To avoid the veto, they have to produce a bill that taxes the rich and balances any shortages with defense cuts. This is the context. Context is the only thing that gives action meaning.

[reggie the dog]

40. the Democrats control the senate

any bill has to be apporved by the senate first

why would a democratically controlled senate approve a bill stopping only defense cuts?

obama doesnt need to veto, the democrats in the senate will never vote such a law through

[montanto]

41. OMFG hilarious. Did I miss something?

Uh, yes.

[reggie the dog]

47. explain what i missed then

if you dont that is because you cant

perhaps i am just of a different social and econmic class than you

i dont like it when "left wing" presidents are to the right of keynesians

perhaps you do

i didnt miss anything i just dont like that a democrat vows to veto any bill that stops cuts in domestic spending

[woo me with science]

45. K&R What they are doing is an outrage.

This President was warned by hundreds of economists not to slash the budget during the worst economy since the Great Depression.

This will not only hurt millions of individuals in cruel, unnecessary ways, but it will starve the economy during a time when the economy desperately needs stimulus.

Austerity is a good plan only in the eyes of a corrupt and thieving oligarchy. Just ask the Greeks and Italians who will now be ruled by un-elected corporate bosses.

SHAME on our government.

[reggie the dog]

48. and people here attack me with insults

and no arguments in an effort to defend obama being to the right of keynes.

on 3 threads i am still waiting for one of them to give me a straight forward logical argument, but all they do is insult, insinuate that i dont understand what obama meant (i am the kind of person who says what he means, so if the president is such a great communicator why cant he do that??? because he did say what he meant

[Fuddnik]

49. Kick and Rec!

Liberals indeed!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[lumberjack_jeff]

50. Embrace the madness.

Until bases and defense contractors close in key congressional district, the idiot republicans will continue to sing from their newly-found austerity hymnal.

[mmonk]

51. It's not about right or wrong or fixing what's wrong.

It's about politics and good footsoldiers for the party in victory quest 2012. Don't expect to have people agree except by people like me who understand what's wrong.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.