Philzone.org - Philzone Phansite Community Discussion Board: Politics: Politics - Archive 2012: Obama sends FY2013 budget proposals to Congress

Obama sends FY2013 budget proposals to Congress


WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama unveiled a $3.8 trillion spending plan on Monday for 2013 that seeks to achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade but does little to restrain growth in the U.S. government's huge health benefit programs, a major cause of future deficits.

Obama's new budget was immediately attacked by opposition Republicans as a retread of previously rejected ideas. The budget battle is likely to be a major component of the autumn election campaign.

The president would achieve $1.5 trillion of the deficit reductions in tax increases on the wealthy and by removing certain corporate tax breaks. Obama rejected Republican charges of class warfare. In his budget message, he said, "This is not about class warfare. This is about the nation's welfare."

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-sends-fy2013-budget-pr oposals-congress-145523152.html

But I thought Obama had never proposed a budget. I' so confused...

President Obama was wrong.

This is absolutely about class warfare; the class warfare that the rich and privileged have been waging against the poor and middle class for many years.

Obama proposes $800 million in aid for "Arab Spring"


inShare
25
Share this

Email
Print
Related News
Arab League backs Syria opposition, calls for peacekeepers
Sun, Feb 12 2012
Top U.S. general discusses NGO case in Cairo
Sat, Feb 11 2012
A year since Mubarak ousted, strike call shows divisions
Sat, Feb 11 2012
Obama budget signals election-year tax battle
Sat, Feb 11 2012
REFILE-UPDATE 4-Obama budget signals election-year tax battle
Sat, Feb 11 2012
Analysis & Opinion
The fast track to a balanced budget
Bad news for Countrywide MBS investors: LA judge tosses BofA
Related Topics
Politics »
Egypt »

By Susan Cornwell
WASHINGTON | Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:39pm EST
(Reuters) - The White House announced plans on Monday to help "Arab Spring" countries swept by revolutions with more than $800 million in economic aid, while maintaining U.S. military aid to Egypt.

In his annual budget message to Congress, President Barack Obama asked that military aid to Egypt be kept at the level of recent years -- $1.3 billion -- despite a crisis triggered by an Egyptian probe targeting American democracy activists.

The proposals are part of Obama's budget request for fiscal year 2013, which begins October 1. His requests need the approval of Congress, where some lawmakers want to cut overseas spending to address U.S. budget shortfalls and are particularly angry at Egypt.

Obama proposed $51.6 billion in funding for the U.S. State Department and foreign aid overall, when $8.2 billion in assistance to war zones is included. The "core budget" for the category would increase by 1.6 percent, officials said.

Most of the economic aid for the Arab Spring countries -- $770 million -- would go to establish a new "Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund," the president said in his budget plan.

Analysts said it was difficult to tell how much of the proposal was actually new money.

"As presented it's very difficult to determine if the Arab spring fund is new wine in new bottles or old wine in new bottles," said John Norris, a former U.S. foreign aid worker now at the Center for American Progress.

The Middle East and North Africa Incentive fund "will provide incentives for long-term economic, political, and trade reforms to countries in transition -- and to countries prepared to make reforms proactively," the White House budget document said.

The proposal said this approach "expands our bilateral economic support in countries such as Tunisia and Yemen, where transitions are already underway."

It would also build on other programs for the area, including up to $2 billion in regional Overseas Private Investment Corporation financing, up to $1 billion in debt swaps for Egypt, and approximately $500 million in existing funds re-allocated to respond to the region last year, the budget document said.

It did not say how the Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund would be divided between countries, or give any other details of the plan.

Egypt has long been among the top recipients of U.S. aid, getting about $1.6 billion annually, mostly in military assistance. In fiscal 2012, $250 million of aid approved for Egypt was economic; $1.3 billion was military and there was a $60 million "enterprise fund" approved by Congress.

No U.S. assistance is moving to Egypt at the moment, U.S. lawmakers and their aides said last week. Some legislators favor cutting off aid to Egypt entirely if it does not drop accusations against American democracy activists and lift a travel ban on them.

Obama continued the practice of putting proposed foreign assistance for war zones in a separate account. This account, known as the "Overseas Contingency Operations," includes $8.2 billion for the State Department and foreign aid.

It includes $3.3 billion for Afghanistan, $1 billion for Pakistan, and $4 billion for Iraq, where U.S. troops have left the country but the State Department has picked up some of their functions such as police training.

(Editing by Christopher Wilson)

POLITICSEGYPT

Tweet this
Link this
Share this
Digg this
Email
Reprints
After reading this article, people also read:

This is the first in a Daily Caller investigative series on Media Matters For America. Daily Caller reporters Alex Pappas and Will Rahn contributed to this report.

David Brock was smoking a cigarette on the roof of his Washington, D.C. office one day in the late fall of 2010 when his assistant and two bodyguards suddenly appeared and whisked him and his colleague Eric Burns down the stairs.

Brock, the head of the liberal nonprofit Media Matters for America, had told friends and co-workers that he feared he was in imminent danger from right-wing assassins and needed a security team to keep him safe.

The threat he faced while smoking on his roof? “Snipers,” a former co-worker recalled.

“He had more security than a Third World dictator,” one employee said, explaining that Brock’s bodyguards would rarely leave his side, even accompanying him to his home in an affluent Washington neighborhood each night where they “stood post” to protect him. “What movement leader has a detail?” asked someone who saw it.

Extensive interviews with a number of Brock’s current and former colleagues at Media Matters, as well as with leaders from across the spectrum of Democratic politics, reveal an organization roiled by its leader’s volatile and erratic behavior and struggles with mental illness, and an office where Brock’s executive assistant carried a handgun to public events in order to defend his boss from unseen threats.

Ads by Google

Yet those same interviews, as well as a detailed organizational planning memo obtained by The Daily Caller, also suggest that Media Matters has to a great extent achieved its central goal of influencing the national media.

Founded by Brock in 2004 as a liberal counterweight to “conservative misinformation” in the press, Media Matters has in less than a decade become a powerful player in Democratic politics. The group operates in regular coordination with the highest levels of the Obama White House, as well as with members of Congress and progressive groups around the country. Brock, who collected over $250,000 in salary from Media Matters in 2010, has himself become a major fundraiser on the left. According to an internal memo obtained by TheDC, Media Matters intends to spend nearly $20 million in 2012 to influence news coverage.

Donors have every reason to expect success, as the group’s effect on many news organizations has already been profound. “We were pretty much writing their prime time,” a former Media Matters employee said of the cable channel MSNBC. “But then virtually all the mainstream media was using our stuff.”



The group scored its first significant public coup in 2007 with the firing of host Don Imus from MSNBC. Just before Easter that year, a Media Matters employee recorded Imus’s now-famous attack on the Rutgers women’s basketball team, and immediately recognized its inflammatory potential. The organization swung into action, notifying organizations like the NAACP, the National Association of Black Journalists, and Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, all of which joined the fight.

Over the course of a week, Media Matters mobilized more than 50 people to work full-time adding fuel to the Imus story. Researchers searched the massive Media Matters database for controversial statements Imus had made over the years. The group issued press release after press release. Brock personally called the heads of various liberal activist groups to coordinate a message. By the end of the week, Imus was fired.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-mat ters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-c oordination-with-white-house-and-news-organization s/

America’s most distinguished leaders get their hair cut at the Senate barbershop, but taxpayers are the ones really getting clipped.

The barbershop ran almost $300,000 in the red last year but received an infusion from Senate coffers that is keeping it in business, the Senate sergeant at arms, Terrance Gainer, told The Daily.

A federal bailout isn’t that unusual since the economic downturn, but some senators didn’t even know their salon was in hot water — and don’t think it should be, considering what they pay for a little off the ears.

A shampoo, cut and blow dry is $27 and highlights are $105, according to the barbershop’s website. A trim costs $20, more than double what Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., gets charged when he goes to his barber back home.

“I give him $12 with a tip,” Leahy said.

When Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Md., learned about the shortfall, he said, “It did? It shouldn’t. It should pay for itself.”

A Senate barbershop subsidized by the government is a sore point with GOP members, too.

Former Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, R-Ill., blames the money woes on the stylists, who are federal employees. He contends they’re overpaid compared to their private-sector counterparts.

“They are using union labor, and so their benefits and wages are higher than those of many jobs,” Fitzgerald said.

To support his argument, Fitzgerald contrasts the salaries and benefits of the Senate’s stylists to what is offered by Capitol Barber, three blocks away.

Capitol’s four barbers and stylists made $22,000 to $30,000 last year with no benefits, manager Lynn Dang said. At the Senate barbershop, formally called Senate Hair Care Services, the top four barbers and stylists made more than twice that — $54,761; $70,349; $73,658; and $81,641 — plus they have a generous 401(k) plan, health care and paid vacation. In all, the government contributed $230,000 in benefits for the barbershop, said Eve Goldsher, a spokeswoman for the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Gainer acknowledged the barbershop’s staff members “are well paid, and it gives them a leg up on their nongovernment counterparts.”

Regardless of where they stand on lending the barbershop a financial hand, senators agree the barbershop is first rate.

One of the barbershop’s most loyal customers is Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who has been going there since he was the Navy’s liaison to the Senate in the late 1970s. McCain told The Daily he is fond of all the stylists, especially longtimer Mario D’Angelo.

“I call him the butcher. He is a butcher, and I’ve got the scars to prove it,” McCain joked. “I’m lucky to be alive and have needed several blood transfusions to survive.”

Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., called D’Angelo “an institution.”

“I’ve been going to him for 20 years. He is so real. I know his extended family, which is Italian, of course,” Kent said. “We’re very close.”

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, described D’Angelo as “one of the finest people in the whole Senate.”

As a sign of appreciation, Hatch said he sends D’Angelo’s family a card and candy every Christmas.

Housed in Room 70 of the Russell Senate Office Building, the barbershop is easy to get to from the Senate floor. All a customer has to do is take the elevator and to the basement, hop on an underground Senate train and walk a few hundred feet.

Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., had her well-coiffed dark hair cut done at the barbershop once — simply for the convenience.

“Usually, I get my hair cut at Posh Hair Studio in Concord [her home state’s capital], but it was right there,” she said.

For the barbershop’s first 110 or so years of operation, from 1859 through the early 1970s, senators were its only customers — and they didn’t hand over a dime for their dos, according to Senate historian Donald Ritchie.

Today, the barbershop is open to the public and had 27,000 customers last year. Legislators are still special, though. Hanging on one wall is a white 2-foot-by-3-foot sign stating: “Members and employees of the Senate shall have priority in this shop.” On other walls hang two photos that show the exclusiveness of the barbershop’s clientele: One is a color photo of President Obama, inscribed: “Best wishes!” The other is a signed photo of John F. and Jacqueline Kennedy.

Perhaps a future president gets his — or her — hair done now at the salon; it’s anybody’s guess. What is certain is that the barbershop is an institution — and Gainer wants to make sure it survives, however he has to.

After struggling to stabilize the barbershop’s finances for the five years he’s been on the job, Gainer has decided privatization is the only answer.

“There’s no way to sugarcoat” the barbershop’s fiscal woes, he said.

“If you put aside [the employees’] livelihoods, it’s costing the government money, and that includes taxpayers like you and me. That’s the way it is,” he said. “I just have not pulled the trigger. That’s on me.”

MORE EXCLUSIVES FROM THE DAILY

Toxic shock: Residents fear town’s troubled environmental past caused teens’ illness 

The New Peoria: Obama campaign focuses on bellwether Ohio to mount town-by-town election push

Vigilante City: Detroit citizens no longer rely on police as self-defense killings skyrocket

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/02/13/021312-new s-senate-barbershop-1-4/

HOUSING: President’s Budget Would Increase Taxpayer Losses on TARP
By Stacy Kaper
Updated: February 13, 2012 | 2:03 p.m.
February 13, 2012 | 12:12 p.m.

From National Journal:

CAMPAIGN 2012
Santorum: 'I Don't Try to Rig Straw Polls'

PICTURES
Printing the President's Budget

CAMPAIGN 2012
Romney on Obama: I Will 'Knock Him on His Heels'
President Obama’s fiscal 2013 budget proposal touts the administration's recent long-shot mortgage refinancing proposal and says the White House's increased emphasis on the housing crisis will lead to larger taxpayer losses from a 2008 emergency bailout fund.
The budget, as expected includes a call for broadening the availability of refinancing options for borrowers who are current on their mortgages but owe more than their homes are worth. The administration said it plans to finish doling out unspent funds for housing assistance, which is likely to increase the costs of the emergency financial bailout by $20 billion -- something that is likely to generate criticism from Republicans for increasing taxpayer costs.
(CAMPAIGN 2012: Ron Paul 'A Little Bit Disappointed' After Maine)
Chief among the problems with Obama’s refinancing ideas is that the budget renews calls for a bank tax as a way to help pay for the latest housing initiative. It is a funding idea that has repeatedly gone nowhere on Capitol Hill and has even worse chances of moving in a divided Congress in an election year.
The proposed fee would generate $61 billion over 10 years. The budget said the fee would help “offset the cost of the President’s new, broad-based mortgage refinancing program which is designed to help homeowners who are still suffering as a result of the financial crisis.”
(SUNDAY SHOWS: Palin on Romney: 'I Am Not Convinced')
The big banks are blamed for helping fuel the financial crisis and for benefiting from the 2008’s Troubled Asset Relief Program emergency $700 billion financial bailout, so the fee is envisioned to help make up these costs.
But the administration’s goal of spending all of the $45.6 billion set aside for housing initiatives under TARP will likely drive up the ultimate cost to taxpayers of the TARP program to $68 billion from last year’s projected $48 billion.


http://nationaljournal.com/2013-budget/housing-pre sident-s-budget-would-increase-taxpayer-losses-on- tarp-20120213

^^The group scored its first significant public coup in 2007 with the firing of host Don Imus from MSNBC. Just before Easter that year, a Media Matters employee recorded Imus’s now-famous attack on the Rutgers women’s basketball team, and immediately recognized its inflammatory potential. The organization swung into action, notifying organizations like the NAACP, the National Association of Black Journalists, and Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, all of which joined the fight.


Perhaps Don Imus should not have made racist remarks over the airwaves. He deserved to be fired.

^^The big banks are blamed for helping fuel the financial crisis and for benefiting from the 2008’s Troubled Asset Relief Program emergency $700 billion financial bailout, so the fee is envisioned to help make up these costs.



So the big banks are being charged a fee to help make up for what President Bush allowed them to steal under TARP and the damage they did to the housing market.

Good.

So the big banks are being charged a fee to help make up for what President Bush allowed them to steal under TARP and the damage they did to the housing market. >>



In this case, it was the Clinton administration.

In 1994, the administration pushed through some fundamental changes to the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The goal of these changes was to make sure that banks were “serving low and moderate income geographies” and making sure that these banks “economically empowered persons of low and moderate income”. Regulators were then given more power to punish banks that did not comply with the new rules These changes led directly, I believe, to the explosion of subprime mortgages and contributed heavily to our current financial debacle.

2008’s Troubled Asset Relief Program

President Bush

Obama's Budget Is A Political Document That Breaks His Promises On The Deficit While Shirking His Duties To Tackle The Nation's Debt

OBAMA'S BUDGET IS A POLITICAL DOCUMENT FOR RUNNING A RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN, NOT A GOVERNMENT

Bloomberg's Julianna Goldman: "What It Really Does Is It Fleshes Out The President's Blueprint For His Campaign." "The White House says that this budget fleshes out the President's blueprint for America, but what it really does is it fleshes out the President's blueprint for his campaign. He's essentially putting deficit-reduction on the back burner." (Bloomberg's " With Betty Liu," 2/13/12)
Bloomberg 's Juliana Goldman: "This Is A Real Miss For The President." "Well, when you look at the projections for the deficit, this is a real miss for the President. Remember, he had promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term, Betty." (Bloomberg's "With Betty Liu," 2/13/12)
Watch Video Here
National Public Radio: "Rather than a realistic road map for government spending, the White House budget is likely to serve as a political tool in the president's re-election bid." (Scott Horsley, "Obama's Budget: Political Tool Or Spending Plan?" National Public Radio , 2/13/12)

ABC News: Obama "Doubles Down On Populist Proposals Central To His Re-Election Campaign." "President Obama today officially unveils a 2013 budget that outlines his tax and spending priorities for the coming year, and doubles down on populist proposals central to his re-election campaign." (Devin Dwyer, "Obama Budget Doubles Down on Populist Proposals," ABC News, 2/13/12)

The New York Times: The Budget Is "Seen As More A Platform For The President's Re-Election Campaign Than A Legislative Proposal." "But the latest budget document can be seen as more a platform for the president's re-election campaign than a legislative proposal for budget debates that will begin next week." (Jackie Calmes, "Obama's Budget To Focus On Cutting Deficit And Adding Jobs," The New York Times, 2/10/12)

The Wall Street Journal: "Administration Officials Acknowledge That The Bulk Of Their Plan Is A Campaign Blueprint More Than Anything." "But administration officials acknowledge that the bulk of their plan is a campaign blueprint more than anything-at least until the end of the year." (Damian Paletta and Laura Meckler, "Budget Sets Stage For Year-End Clash," The Wall Street Journal, 2/13/12)

OBAMA IS BREAKING HIS PLEDGE TO CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF AND ACTUALLY INCREASES DEFICITS IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS

The Washington Post's Ezra Klein: "The Obama Administration Is Officially Breaking Its Promise To Halve The Deficit By The End Of Their First Term." (Ezra Klein, "Wonkbook: 5 Things To Watch In Obama's 2013 Budget," The Washington Post 's Wonkbook, 2/13/12)
Klein: "The 2013 budget envisions a deficit of more than $1 trillion -- not halved by any stretch of the imagination." (Ezra Klein, "Wonkbook: 5 Things To Watch In Obama's 2013 Budget," The Washington Post's Wonkbook, 2/13/12)
The New York Times: Obama's Budget "Will Show Mr. Obama Has Failed To Meet His Pledge To Cut The Deficit In Half By The End Of His First Term." "But the document's numbers will show Mr. Obama has failed to meet his pledge to cut the deficit in half by the end of his term, and for Republicans, that will be the bottom line." (Jackie Calmes, "Obama's Budget To Focus On Cutting Deficit And Adding Jobs," The New York Times, 2/10/12)

USA Today : Obama Will Fall "Far Short Of His Goal To Halve The Deficit In Four Years." "President Obama's proposed 2013 budget will forecast a $901 billion deficit for next year, falling far short of his goal to halve the deficit in four years." (Richard Wolf, "Obama Budget To Miss Deficit Goal," USA Today's "The Oval," 2/10/12)
USA Today: "The Budget Will Show A Higher Deficit This Year Than In 2011." "The budget will show a higher deficit this year than in 2011, up from $1.3 trillion to $1.33 trillion. And the projected decline to $901 billion in 2013 is dependent on enactment of the president's policies, including spending reductions agreed to last summer and ending George W. Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy at the end of this year." (Richard Wolf, "Obama Budget To Miss Deficit Goal," USA Today's "The Oval," 2/10/12)
ABC News: "But despite such cuts, the president's budget would mark the fourth straight year that deficit spending exceeds $1 trillion and falls well short of his 2009 promise to 'cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office.'" (Devin Dwyer, "Obama Budget Doubles Down on Populist Proposals," ABC News, 2/13/12)

Politico: "And Looking Back At Obama's First Budget In May 2009, He Almost Appears To Be Alice's Red Queen, Running Hard Just To Stay In Place." "Republicans were quick to pounce on the higher deficit numbers, reported earlier in the day by the Wall Street Journal. And looking back at Obama's first budget in May 2009, he almost appears to be Alice's Red Queen, running hard just to stay in place." (David Rogers, "Obama Budget Goes Big On Highways," Politico, 2/10/12)
Politico: "The $1.33 Trillion Deficit For This Fiscal Year, Ending Sept. 30, Is Almost Identical To The $1.25 Trillion Deficit Obama Predicted Then For Fiscal 2010." (David Rogers, "Obama Budget Goes Big On Highways," Politico, 2/10/12)
OBAMA'S BUDGET IS A CLEAR SIGNAL THAT HE HAS NO INTENTION OF TAKING THE NATION'S LONG-TERM FISCAL CHALLENGES SERIOUSLY

Former U.S. Comptroller David Walker: "We Are Not Going To See Any Significant Tax, Social Insurance Or Other Reforms Before The Election." (CNBC's, "Squawk Box" 2/13/12)
Walker: "It Should Have Been Much More Specific, Much More Substantive Than It Is." (CNBC's, "Squawk Box" 2/13/12)
Watch The Video
The Hill: Obama Is Not Going To Outline A Plan For Medicare's "Long-Term Demographic Challenge." "He has so far not outlined a plan that would deal with Medicare's long-term demographic challenge. Experts do not expect him to do so, giving the GOP a chance to once again draw a contrast." (Erik Wasson, "Obama's Budget: 10 Takeaways," The Hill, 2/11/12)
The Hill: "Nothing Is Expected On Social Security." (Erik Wasson, "Obama's Budget: 10 Takeaways," The Hill, 2/11/12)
Los Angeles Times: "But The President's Budget, Like His Previous Proposals, Steers Clear Of Major Changes." (Kathleen Hennessey and Christi Parsons, "Obama Budget Is Preview Of Election Battle," Los Angeles Times, 2/13/12)

The Boston Herald: "President Barack Obama has apparently decided that he is not going to be part of the solution to the nation's enormous deficit - which would make him, yes, part of the problem." (Editorial, "Obama Punts On Budget," The Boston Herald, 2/13/12)

most of the politicians our idiotic voters re-elect are rich and yes they the repugs and don't cry the dems, they have been fucking the poor and middle class for years, kool aid makes you blind.

>> most of the politicians our idiotic voters re-elect are rich and yes they the repugs and don't cry the dems, they have been fucking the poor and middle class for years, kool aid makes you blind.

Pufo mad. Pufo type words. Pufo incoherent.

budget?? *snicker*

harry reid said they don't need no stinkin' budget.

But I thought Obama had never proposed a budget. I' so confused...>>

The guy has NEVER proposed a serious budget. You know, one that even A Dummycrat could vote for, they haven't and won't vote for this one either.
The guy is so mired in politics, he is incapable of actually being a leader AND DOING HIS JOB!

What about this one do you find not serious, Seadog? Which provisions in this one do you find the least serious...so unserious that even a Dummycrat couldn't vote for it?

It will get zero votes.

Just like the last one.

A trillion dollar deficit is not a serious budget by definition.

stop being obtuse and asking stupid questions.

So, it's the amount of the deficit/debt, not the deficit/debt itself?

Because Ryan's budget contained both deficit spending and increasing the debt. Is that a serious budget?

Charles Krauthammer opines on President Obama unveiling his budget today. Krauthammer says Obama "just wants to get past election day" on the budget "as he does everything on."

"They're not going to win the general election unless they make spending and debt the issue that it really is and that Americans are worried about," Charles Krautahmmer said on "Special Report" tonight.

"They are accepting the President's premise that somehow all of us have become Occupy Wall Street and everybody thinks if you redistribute income it would solve our economic problems. The cynicism -- I'm rarely accused of being not cynical enough, so let me be even more cynical. The President knows that we are heading over a cliff and he just wants to get past election day as he does everything on. Keystone, on debt ceiling limits, on everything. But this is a budget worthy of Greece. And for the President of the United States to offer it, knowing how dire our situation is, is truly scandalous," he said.

Paul Ryan is but one member of the congress.


Get off your knees for Obama.


2 more stupid questions.


I bet you learned such sophisticated debate skills in public school.


Seriously, who taught you dolts that asking moronic questions was a serious and effective debate tactic?


It happens far too often to be a coincidence.

You're a grown man, Blair. Why constantly resort to that demeanor? And, perhaps more troubling...why do you always invoke images of men on their knees?

The question about the Ryan budget--supported by, if I'm not mistaken, every Republican member of Congress--is a fair one.

If deficit spending makes Obama's not serious by definition, it's fair to compare it to Ryan's.

Ryans has passed a house of congress.

Barrys has received zero votes.

Thems the facts.,

I'm aware of that. Also not what I asked about.

Obama promised to halve federal deficit in his first term.

According to a White House historical table, the deficit was $458.6 billion in 2008, the year he won election.

Now it's 1.3 Trillion while he extended the "Bush tax cuts" and cut funding for social security and medicare via payroll taxes?!?!?

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/de c/02/matt-mackowiak/Republican-consultant-Barack-O bama-promise-deficit/

I think you'd have to go back to his first fiscal year to get a good number, but he dropped the ball big time on that. He either shouldn't have made the promise or should have followed through once he did.

Still wondering why Ryan's deficit spending and increasing of the debt is acceptable but Obama's is not.

i heard Rep Flake from AZ say on the tv tuesday morn say:

"we were headed towards a fiscal cliff long before barrack obama took the wheel, let's get that straight, we didnt govern well as republicans when we controlled both chambers and the white house"

"main driver of our debt, which is medicare spending"

sorry.

carry on.

>> we didnt govern well as republicans when we controlled both chambers and the white house

Yep, hollis. That's why I'm not voting anymore. I literally keep looking at the voter registration form, but find no reason to fill it out.

"main driver of our debt, which is military spending and tax loopholes"


fixed it for you.

i found it interesting he said both those things within a few seconds of each other.

The Gainesville Tea Party seems to have the right idea: They take some of our key economic numbers — how much money the U.S. government brings in, how much it spends, and how much brave politicians are “cutting” to bring those numbers into balance — and simply lop off eight zeros (i.e., divide by 100 million) to make those numbers something that American families can relate to:

Why S&P Downgraded the US:

U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000
Federal budget: $3,820,000,000,000
New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000
National debt: $14,271,000,000,000
Recent [April] budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000

Let’s remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s a household budget:

Annual family income: $21,700
Money the family spent: $38,200
New debt on the credit card: $16,500
Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710

Budget cuts: $385



$385.00

Budget cuts: $385


Electric Car Rebates Would Increase To $10,000 Under Obama Budget


President Obama's proposed Fiscal Year 2013 budget includes a new provision for hybrid and electric car tax credits that would broaden the program, increase the rebate in some cases to $10,000 and change the way the money is doled out.


the average income of people who buy these "electric" cars is $117,000.00 per year