world

Obama: Shutdown encouraged U.S. enemies, dismayed its friends

93 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

93 Comments
Login to comment

Yeah, Obama, try not to add any more to the $7 trillion you've already added to the national debt.

-9 ( +13 / -22 )

This guy is beyond a pathetic joke. As usual being the evader and the new Teflon Don in action. Trust me, Obama will add more than $7 Trillion to the National debt, the borrowing will continue the denying will continue, the lack of accountability and responsibility will still be there he and liberals can't help it. That's what liberals do, spend other folks money, therefore, why should they keep tabs, It's NOT theirs. These loons won't be happy until the earth is scorched.

Ahh, Chicago tactics at its best.

-10 ( +12 / -22 )

bass4funkOct. 18, 2013 - 09:24AM JST

Trust me, Obama will add more than $7 Trillion to the National debt, the borrowing will continue the denying will continue, the lack of accountability and responsibility will still be there he and liberals can't help it.

Wrong, bass. You may need to do some research first. He has been successfully cutting a deficit into half since 4 years ago. So he is doing a lot better than W. FYI

5 ( +15 / -11 )

I will say this here. This president will go down in history as the worst president since the great depression. The damage this administration has done. The invisible vice president, and the scandals swept under the rug.

I certainly hope it is not the new norm.

-12 ( +8 / -20 )

Obama is of course correct.

And the right wing couldn't care less.

See how far the worms have spread.

7 ( +15 / -9 )

Wrong, bass. You may need to do some research first. He has been successfully cutting a deficit into half since 4 years ago. So he is doing a lot better than W. FYI

But he's borrowing another $7 Trillion, he is ADDING, again ADDING to the National Debt, NOT to mention once Obamacare is fully running (if they can fix those darn servers lol) not only will it add to the deficit, even if Obama tries (LMAO) to cut the deficit, it's going to be a washout. There is NO way this far left Progressive President will cut ANY entitlements, therefore, there is no way he can ever cut and bring down this debt. Why are liberals so delusional about money? Oh, yeah, it's NOT theirs to begin with.

@MarkG

EXACTLY!

-5 ( +10 / -15 )

Didn't Clinton leave a surplus at the end of his two terms? Then some little rich man pretending to be a Texan came along and turned it into a massive deficit? Obama was left with a horrendous mess to clean up and to my mind has done a pretty good job given the circumstances.

9 ( +18 / -9 )

Didn't Clinton leave a surplus at the end of his two terms? Then some little rich man pretending to be a Texan came along and turned it into a massive deficit? Obama was left with a horrendous mess to clean up and to my mind has done a pretty good job given the circumstances.

The problem is with Obama, he talks TOO much and wants to paint himself as if he is the most honorable person ever to have tried to advert this shutdown. He didn't do Jack! Also you talk about the National debt. The same way, Reagan had to fix Carter's almost unfixable mess? How about the minorities, Under GW Blacks and Hispanics faired better. GW gave more money to Africa than any other president,and still does? How about the wounded warriors, how many times has Obama visited the troops in Afghanistan? How much has your generous president givenHow about under Obama? Not at all, the people that were the biggest voting block almost 92% are suffering more under this guy. Yeah, he's doing a swell job. Also, in 3 years, who will clean Obama's mess once he's gone? Hilary?

-10 ( +9 / -19 )

Didn't Clinton leave a surplus at the end of his two terms?

Actually no - he added to the debt. The debt is what matters and he did not reduce it at all.

-10 ( +6 / -16 )

Obama cut the deficit which he nearly tripled since Bush. That's like saying this year I will spend instead of

Using round figures....

$10,000 (Bush) increase to $28,000 (Obama) 4 yrs. Now let's cut that to $18,000! I cut the deficit! Stop the illusion sir.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

Anyone that thinks Obama got anywhere near of cutting the deficit is completely out of their mind! I don't understand how liberals can lie so easily, it's not even difficult to lie, you guys say it with a straight face too! You guys harp on Bush for being a big spender and yes, especially the last 2 years of his presidency, he did spend like a drunken sailor, I and most conservatives can admit that, but you guys don't want to even remotely acknowledge that Obama contributed anything to the National debt, because it would make you guy seems like he is flawed and NOT Godly like you guys all want us to think he is. I can make a list of money just wasted by Obama, the man is on steroids when it comes to spending money. The man doesn't want to throw anyone under the bus that screws up, in fact, he promotes them, he has been a divider, divisive, always MIA, unwilling to work with the opposition, stubborn, never listens to anyone, hates capitalism, hates success, wants to penalize people that are successful. In order to be a strong leader, you need to show proper leadership, something that Obama needs to learn how to do.

-7 ( +6 / -13 )

As a non-American but admirer of the great American economy that used to exist, what dismays me was not the recent shutdown, but rather the massive amounts of debt that the US government has racked up, and their central bank continue to buy 85 billion dollars of assets each month with "money" created from nowhere.

I can't see how it all ends well without the leadership in the US waking up and looking at the reality of what is going on over there. I want the US to be a great economic powerhouse in the world once more, and obviously spending even more money that doesn't exist isn't the way it's going to be achieved.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

But the money does exist. The ink may need more time to dry buy it is there. What it represents is a small sheet of paper, but it is there. Just ask the Fed Reserve.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

So childish

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Yes the current administration really is childish. Very divisive also.

-7 ( +6 / -13 )

Kentucky Wins Sweet Deal In $2.9 Billion Budget Bill Earmark

The Senate Conservatives Fund is none too pleased with the deal. The conservative PAC called the move "the Kentucky Kickback," saying it insults families in Kentucky who are against funding Obamacare and raising the debt ceiling.

"This is what's wrong with Washington and it's what's wrong with Mitch McConnell," the Senate Conservatives Fund said in a statement.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) criticized the practice of adding extra provisions to must-pass bills.

.....One of the tricks around here, one of the abuses around here, is you get a big bill that needs to go forward and needs to pass, and the people try to load it up with things that are important to them. In the long run, that's not good for the public."

Well the Shutdown worked out for somebody.....

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

gogogoOct. 18, 2013 - 11:05AM JST

So childish

Well said.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Is that were the dollars come from? Nobody knows if we have the gold reserves. Do we have enough to back the US dollar?

Flirting with financial collapse if not.......

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

The republicans are too ignorant to be in power and ought to be broken up - the tea party loonies are nothing more than dumb cultists. Unbelievable in a world leading nation!

10 ( +15 / -5 )

So are to have a one party system? Or is it form a new political party? Honestly they both are self interest groups and individuals with the common private sector taxpayers left with the respocibilities.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

The republicans are too ignorant to be in power and ought to be broken up - the tea party loonies are nothing more than dumb cultists. Unbelievable in a world leading nation!

I think now in hindsight, Americans deserve what they get, They voted for this mess, they'll find out soon enough, sometimes you have to bump your own head to find out what reality really is like, personal experience. if they want a political party that has shown time and time again that math is a word that is vile and repugnant and used as profanity. Let them have it. You get what you paid for, in this case, NOT. If you think the Tea Party are loons for wanting the government to curb its insatiable appetite for out of control spending which LIBERALS NEVER, EVER WANT TO TALK ABOUT, WHY? BECAUSE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IS NOT RECOGNIZED IN THEIR LEXICON.

Unbelievable in a world leading nation!

Amen to that, brother!

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

Many posters do not realize that US treasury is borrowing more money for paying interest of bonds. Another meaning is US is borrowing more debt for paying the interest of debt. Getting more debt for paying the debt will sink Americans into the debt sea with no hope for surviving. Since the 1970s, successive US governments spent the more money than they earn. Bad and dumb presidents have spent the fortune for wasteful and unnecessary wars such as Vietnam, Irag and Afgan. US also needed to foot the bills of reconstruction of the war torn nations and refugee settlement. That herculian bills are nightmares for newer generation.

Sarah Palin who is full of widsom and energy is correct to say that

"Fiscal conservatives are more energized than ever after last night's deal where Americans came out as the losers," she said, "because we are just going to incur more and more debt and this unsustainable spending spree Barack Obama is on, no, we are saying 'enough is enough' and we are energized."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/17/palin-says-fiscal-conservatives-more-energized-than-ever-after-end-budget/

Bush wrecked US reputation and budget. Obama who thinks himself Santa Clause wants to spend more and more like drunken sailor. No nation on the earth can afford to repay the 17 trillions or more of debt within ten generations.

Electing fiscally irresponsilbe Obama likes a Greece tradegy of US politics. History will judge Obama as the highest spending and fiscally irresponsible president.

The forefathers of Bonston Tea Party movement will be sad and embarassed about the helpless US trade and budget deficits.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

From the early looks of the ACA thus far, it will flop. It will be a downfall for those who aggressively supported it if what I see and read continue. The rates are either higher than expected and or the deductibles are outrageously high.

I will say this again. This economy in the condition it is in does not need this mandatory healthcare system.

We need jobs! Real jobs. We need to reduce the state and federal workforce. We need nearly generated private industry tax dollars. State and fed tax dollars are recycled ones. They are not newly injected into the economy.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Obama: Shutdown encouraged U.S. enemies, dismayed its friends

US have friends and enemies? That's new....

America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests.

Henry Kissinger

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

"Another meaning is US is borrowing more debt for paying the interest of debt."

Who is receiving the interest? And why does the govt need to "borrow" dollars if the govt is the one that prints those dollars?

"That's what liberals do, spend other folks money"

Reagan was the godfather of deficit spending and big govt. He cut taxes but gave one trillion dollars to the US military. Government money to buy government equipment for government employees. And then the deficit skyrocketed.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

From the individual who refused to negotiate whatsoever.

To him, " And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"

-8 ( +3 / -11 )

Reagan May have beefed up military excessively but can you attribute the collapse of the Soviet Union on that. We were in the Cold War those days. Soviet oppression was alive and present. 2 Germany's then, under Reagan that changed to 1.

No where near what has been spent in the last 4.5 years. And we have no global, national, or even reagional gains. Russia brokers a deal for us, China is dictating what we should do. I say we lost ground.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

For all the blathering, the bottom like is the republicans lost. The country therefore won, and the world for that matter. But children that they are they will try again to hold the US economy hostage. The only hope is that now the moderates in the US see the tea party for what it is, a bunch of sore loser quasi-terrorists. Who hate the black President so much that they behave like four year olds who do not get a cookie from Dad after dinner. Next election the republican party should become the permanent and fully defanged minority party. At this point for 2014 it looks like they have lost the Senate again and maybe even the House will turn over. And Hillary, she is just finishing her acceptance speech now for 2016. The tea party republicans are the gift to democrats that just keeps on giving. Thank you for being so incredible wacky.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

I can understand the anger from Republicans on here. Obama basically took them out back and bent them over a barrel.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

The tea party is racist, childish, quasi-terrorists hostage takers.

Hateful and divisive. Not what the USA needs.

9 ( +14 / -5 )

I am having a very good laugh over all this. The "Yes we can" man has done nothing but drone attack, shut the government down, cause upheavel and piss off everyone with a brain. He is NO different than Bush. In fact, when it comes to drones and government policy, he's worse. Wake up America! I said before his got in that America will regret voting for him based on race and believe all his hot air. Hiliary sure looks good, doesn't she?

-11 ( +3 / -14 )

My, the "independent conservative" world is certainly in a tizzy today. That would make sense as they hate Obamacare and they hate to lose, so losing over Obamacare has got to sting. Have heart, though: experience makes everything bearable. Experiencing one loss after another on their slide into irrelevance may eventually inure them.

On the other hand, their continued ability to block is of concern. Like petulant little children, they will turn up their noses at vital legislation already overdue such as the farm bill and immigration - and, most importantly, the budget. I fear we are facing another year of obstructionism. Certainly, this will only serve to emphasize their pettiness, parochialism and pure idiocy, but it will damage America nonetheless.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

"American Empire Before The Fall" is a very relevant read at this time, just watching the decline heading into fiscal oblivion at the hands of career spendthrifts led by an obstructionist community organizer. Yes, We Can, indeed.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Laguna

Yeah, gotta love the "independent conservatives."

I fear another year of b.s. from the right as well. Still, I am hopeful. This blunder by the idiot right could be a harbinger for things to come. Big Money Republican donors from the coasts are sick of the Tea Bagger asshats. Beohener is as heart a country club Republican. If he bends to the Big Money, he could make it a habit of passing legislation with -- gasp -- the solid Democratic block.

Ah, wouldn't that be nice for everyone.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

“Let’s be clear. There are no winners here.” Let's be absolutely clear. Our enemies do not need additional encouragement and our friends already know this administration is dysfunctional.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

MarkGOct. 18, 2013 - 01:08PM JST

The tea party is racist, childish, quasi-terrorists hostage takers.

Hateful and divisive. Not what the USA needs.

Then why are you defending the Tea Party? That's what they are.

There is a good book to read that was once on the NYT best selling book. This should be a must read book for political science major students. You can get a digital version if you like.

<http://www.amazon.com/The-Party-Remaking-Republican-Conservatism/dp/019997554X>

The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism by by Vanessa Williamson

3 ( +4 / -1 )

This president will go down in history as the worst president since the great depression.

Mark G, that title is already copper-bottomed and ring-fenced.

Don't misunderestimate the holder.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Get Real

You realize, of course, that FDR is consistently rated as one of the top three US presidents.

IOW, its like saying, the worst basketball player since Michael Jordan..

LOL GOP. Ooops, I mean LOL "Independent conservatives"...

0 ( +2 / -2 )

KapunaOct. 18, 2013 - 01:50PM JST

“Let’s be clear. There are no winners here.” Let's be absolutely clear. Our enemies do not need additional encouragement and our friends already know this administration is dysfunctional.

From what I have been told is that the Republicans and the Democrats can conduct business as usual. The problem is a Tea Party.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Let's be absolutely clear, there's only one party: the RINO/DEMO coalition and the asshats that support McBama.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

“It’s encouraged our enemies, it’s emboldened our competitors and depressed our friends who look to us for steady leadership.”

Dude, so now your gonna blame the handover to leadership in the middle east to the Putin and the resurgence of Al Qaeda on the government slowdown

The “Panda Cam” at the National Zoo in Washington was up and running again for fans starved for two weeks of a glimpse of the Smithsonian Institution’s cutest new addition—a cub.

Well the Panda Cam is back up so I guess we can get back to leading the free world.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The Panda Cam is back.

If you want to watch other creatures who don't like sex and don't know the earth is older than 6000 years, tune into FOX.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Obama must look Who is behind the Shut Down Is the person who want to shut u down Shut down is just the reasons

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Why is the US government borrowing (at interest) money from a privately owned central bank?

-48 ( +2 / -50 )

" You realize, of course, that FDR is consistently rated as one of the top three US presidents."

That really depends on what parameters the presidents are rated.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

These threads have become little more than a support group for enraged right wing radicals.

Seriously people, you were told you would be blamed for making this crisis, and you are well gee because you did.

Pick up your ball and go home please. It's time for a moment of reflection as to why you're such a disliked, angry and at times insane minority.

Cheers

5 ( +7 / -2 )

MadvertsOct. 18, 2013 - 03:38PM JST

Cheers

ditto, and thanks.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

"Why is the US government borrowing (at interest) money from a privately owned central bank?"

Um, because it isn't? And why would the gov't need to "borrow" the money that it alone prints?

Never have I seen so many people rant with great emotion about something they have so little knowledge of.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I bet the U.S. national debt will be near $20 trillion by the time Obama leaves office, heck, he's still got over 2 years left...

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

I am having a very good laugh over all this. The "Yes we can" man has done nothing but drone attack, shut the government down, cause upheavel and piss off everyone with a brain. He is NO different than Bush. In fact, when it comes to drones and government policy, he's worse. Wake up America! I said before his got in that America will regret voting for him based on race and believe all his hot air. Hiliary sure looks good, doesn't she?

I'm not so sure about Hilary, but you are exactly right. At least you've figured it out what's really going on.

To all you liberals, I don't think Conservatives are angry, more like, feeling sorry for how the American people are getting it right up the back side! from this hoodlum. The man that cares or allegedly cares. So when do you think Obama will talk about the out of control murder rate in his home state of Chicago? Oh, yeah, it's not important, if he doesn't care, why should anyone else, that's not a high priority. If you liberals think, you guys are doing a good job, why is it for the last 30 years, California is a frickin-basket case and in financial ruins. Anyone been to San Francisco lately?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

I'm a liberal and the American conservatives scare the crap out of me but let's be honest, Obama is horrific. He claims he's going to do XYZ, plays the good guy and yet, more drones, plenty of wars started under him, even less respect from other countries... Let's be honest, he's a dud but so many refuse to believe the first "black" president can't fix it all. Whatever.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

marie,

That's because you believe in unicorns. The world is a big bad place and drone strikes have worked better than the predecesor, who spunked trillions of dollars to excaberate the problem.

And what do you know - some of the fools that voted and cheered Bush on during his spendandtaxcut-a-thon are here on this very subject shrieking about how big the deficit is.

Head meet wall. Shriek. And repeat.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

This thread is entertaining as well as evidently clear on one thing.

Many supporters of this administration show they are full of hate and disgust for those who do not. Personal attacks and insults.

Those who oppose this administration here few if any display such hate.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Perhaps not as strong as hate, but there's certainly plenty of understandable unrequited disgust for those supporting government by minority extortion. I understand tea party extremists will never, ever grasp this.

It also denotes nothing more than abject lack of intellect, incomprehension of complex systems yields the desire for simple solutions for some, denial of economic facts however is just plain Fox "news" sponsored ignorance.

The hate in fact has come from the party of racist, angry old white men obsessed since the election in 2008 of someone they perceive a Marxist Muslim born in Kenya. You guys own that particular strain of hate and intolerance, Mark G.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Wow, I had no idea that JT was a bastion of Tea Partyism. Lot of ignorance in these comments.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Bollocks! Give me examples of hate or racism from the the mainstream right.

Extremists exist on both sides. Read the question with mainstream in mind.

A bit too much MSNBC on the brain of many. The president can do no wrong with them.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

One of the worst presidents ever. And whats up with the VP bringing muffins and some other Obama butt kisser handing out high fives to White House employees? High fives for what? I thought there were "no winners" in this whole thing. Only winners were the employees who stayed home for 2 1/2 weeks and got paid for not coming to work, all the rest of them look like clowns, muffins and high fives or not.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Canuck,

No bastion, it's become a support group now they've raised the white flag and imploded under the stupidity of their own attempted economic terrorism. Clearly one of them still thinks there is a "mainstream" right to speak of in the US, when these few remaining people are cowering away from the extremists that have hijacked their own party.

Heh, I heard someone refer to the tea party as "surrender monkey's" since they capitulated. The irony sitting here in France was not lost on me.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Wait an see. It's all I can say.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

It's beyond disgusting that the Republicans played politics with the USA's international standing over a domestic policy. It's as reprehensible as when the LDP refused to work with the then-PM Kan to respond to the Tohoku / Fukushima disaster unless he called an election. Any Republican who disagrees is really blinded by their own ideology. I say this as an outsider, non-American, who has no stake or say in Democrat or Republican politics.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@tmarie

I'm a liberal and the American conservatives scare the crap out of me but let's be honest, Obama is horrific. He claims he's going to do XYZ, plays the good guy and yet, more drones, plenty of wars started under him, even less respect from other countries... Let's be honest, he's a dud but so many refuse to believe the first "black" president can't fix it all. Whatever.

Ok, I feel the opposite about liberals, especially these modern liberals, but basically, you are right on everything else, can't argue. Even the Obamabot loyalists can't say with a straight face that Obama so far his presidency has been excellent. They just don't want to admit because of blind ideology. Like the lemmings they are, they will go off a cliff if he were to. Who'd thought the first Black President would fail miserably.

@madverts

That's because you believe in unicorns. The world is a big bad place and drone strikes have worked better than the predecesor, who spunked trillions of dollars to excaberate the problem.

And what do you know - some of the fools that voted and cheered Bush on during his spendandtaxcut-a-thon are here on this very subject shrieking about how big the deficit is.

Soooo what's Obama's excuse for adding and tripling the deficit? And the tab is climbing, please what's the difference and by the way, if the Sainted one is so great, why is China so worried about Obama's open bottomless purse policy? Do enlighten me, please.

Head meet wall. Shriek. And repeat.

Yup!

One of the worst presidents ever. And whats up with the VP bringing muffins and some other Obama butt kisser handing out high fives to White House employees? High fives for what? I thought there were "no winners" in this whole thing. Only winners were the employees who stayed home for 2 1/2 weeks and got paid for not coming to work, all the rest of them look like clowns, muffins and high fives or not.

Well, because they know that since they ARE the political party of dependence,cthe more people, poor minorities, single mothers, illegals they can strengthen their base as a political group, but make no bones about it they don't care, neither party really, but the Dems even less so. If they did, they would teach the poor HOW to fish, instead of GIVING them a fish.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Its bad enough that some people don't understand that the national debt has pretty much only gone up since Reagan (Under Clinton it was dented and that is all). But its just as ignorant when people go from saying it happened under a president to actually blaming that president for it 100 percent. No. A president cannot put us in debt without approval from the Congress. In fact the Congress can pretty much put us in debt without even approval from the president.

There is a whole helluvalotta blame to go around, and its nothing to do with you and me. Its the fat cats at the top, and never mind their stripes or our stripes for a second; they are fat cats robbing the little guy, and the little guy is you and me and no reason why we little guys should not stick together since we are equally getting robbed.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

MarkG: Bollocks! Give me examples of hate or racism from the the mainstream right.

Besides the wars on gays, minorities, and women? Besides a President who had to produce a birth certificate?

You can talk about taking "a stand on principal" but while you are patting yourself on the back over your convictions you never ask yourself if what you're doing is really right (or relevant). Polls show time and time again that you are out of touch and representing a smaller base. Obstruction is the only thing you have left and the endless a Republican crisis machine is creating a drag on the economy.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The government shutdown occurred because Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid allows the Senate to lurch from deadline to deadline without passing a single appropriations bill. Had he done his job and passed each of the 12 appropriations bills, the government could have stayed open.

Opening government has not resolved the big picture — a debt problem so large that it dwarfs all deadlines and threatens the very fabric of the nation. What remains is an unsustainable debt, precisely the problem that motivated me to run for office.

There was never any reason to shut down government. If both sides were willing to compromise, we could have found amicable solutions to these severe problems. But let the record state clearly, no significant spending restraint was accomplished because President Obama steadfastly refused to negotiate. Let us also remember his promise that he will negotiate as long as the compromises are outside of any budgetary deadlines.

We’ve heard this before, and I, for one, am skeptical.

When Mr. Obama, then a senator, opposed raising the debt ceiling in 2006, it was $8 trillion. Today, it has more than doubled to $17 trillion. If we are to survive this breakneck spending that has become the norm in Washington, it must be stopped and reversed. Many polls showed that Americans were fed up with both parties over the shutdown. A Bloomberg poll showed that 61 percent — 6 in 10 Americans — think that spending cuts should be tied to raising the debt ceiling. A Rasmussen survey and Fox News poll found similar results.

Americans want leaders who are willing to rein in a government that is completely out of control.

There are solutions. Perhaps we should not raise the debt ceiling without also enacting a balanced-budget amendment. Many states are forced to balance their budgets, and there is no reason the federal government cannot begin to do the same.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Jean: Opening government has not resolved the big picture

Neither did closing it.

The Republican brand is damaged goods. They need to find some kind of leadership and have a platform beyond being against what Obama does. You might have good ideas but people are going to look at who they are following, and the GOP image is as bad as it's ever been. I never see any attempts to repair that.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I bet the U.S. national debt will be near $20 trillion by the time Obama leaves office, heck, he's still got over 2 years left...

This is why conservatives cannot balance a budget or even their checkbooks for that matter. Obama has over three years left, not two.

Jean, why are you so passionate now about the budget when for decades the republicans ran up huge debt numbers. It is only when the guy in the white house is not white?

Obama has driven down the annual debt from 10% of GDP in 2010 to 3% today. The fastest drop ever. And next year it will be 2%. Like Clinton and Carter he may actually balance the budget if he can clear the crazies in the republican party. If you really care about debt control then your party is not the way to go. Cheney even said debt does not matter, he learned that from Reagan. No, the whining about the debt is just another phony republican talking point that means nothing. It is Fox news again fooling the gullible.

Japan has debt that is 230% of GDP, the USA 100%. Japan's interest rates are super low and the economy is growing. Go figure that one out Jean.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

This is why conservatives cannot balance a budget or even their checkbooks for that matter. Obama has over three years left, not two.

Priceless...

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Guess Obama (& the world) can wait and see which one works; the "spending spree" method which is "Abenomics" or the "austerity plan" which was much of Europe's approach.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

US Shut Down US can get Finance Assistance from its Allies Israel ,British , France to pay its Debts & its Costs Well ! What are Friends for anyway By the way US has fought for Israel sacrificing US Soldiers Perhaps Bush can assists Obama to ask money from US friends in need North Korea built military on Poverty America built military on Debts Debts are poorer than poor

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I'm no fan of Obama but he is correct that the loose cannon approach to government is doing nothing to help anybody and all of the elected officials share the blame - maybe some more than others - but they were all in on the rhetoric and posturing. Bunch of idiot kindergarteners. Fire them all and start over. Get rid of congressional districts drawn up by the states, go to a nonpartisan committee with a mathematical model. Term limits. Once an elected official never a lobbyist or consultant. All elected officials are subject to the same laws and regulations as the average citizen.

What are the chances of that happening?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

There was never any reason to shut down government. If both sides were willing to compromise, we could have found amicable solutions to these severe problems.

Said the guy who voted against the deal that opened government and suspended the debt ceiling. How typically self-serving of the sen. from Kentucky. Rand Paul 2016, eh?

Anyway, it's good form to attribute, especially whole-cloth copy-pastes from @sshats like Rand Paul.

A Complete Timeline of Republican Obstructionism on Budget Negotiations They Are Now Demanding (Part 1)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/a-complete-timeline-of-re_b_4074372.html

May 21 -- Senator Murray requests unanimous consent for naming a conference committee on the budget. Senator Paul blocks this request.

*''I think if we keep saying, ‘We wanted to defund it, we fought for that, but now we’re willing to compromise on this,’ Paul said. “I know we don’t want to be here, but we’re going to win this I think.'' - Rand Paul

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Jean Val

I have to admit, we have a lot more in common than I previously thought.

@superlib

Polls show time and time again that you are out of touch and representing a smaller base. Obstruction is the only thing you have left and the endless a Republican crisis machine is creating a drag on the economy.

Which polls are we talking about, you do know how most polls are conducted, right? Most these recent polls were to government workers about 22% of them and 8% from the private sector. So if you go by that, you are right, but if you think the Republicans are dragging this economy, wait until Obamacare kicks in from next year. Not that the economy is already bad.

The Republican brand is damaged goods. They need to find some kind of leadership and have a platform beyond being against what Obama does. You might have good ideas but people are going to look at who they are following, and the GOP image is as bad as it's ever been. I never see any attempts to repair that.

And you think, you honestly think that Harry Reid's image is good??? lol

@zurcronium

J>ean, why are you so passionate now about the budget when for decades the republicans ran up huge debt numbers. It is only when the guy in the white house is not white?

Here we go again, using the race card. Don't liberals EVER get tired of it?

Obama has driven down the annual debt from 10% of GDP in 2010 to 3% today. The fastest drop ever. And next year it will be 2%. Like Clinton and Carter he may actually balance the budget if he can clear the crazies in the republican party. If you really care about debt control then your party is not the way to go. Cheney even said debt does not matter, he learned that from Reagan.

This is why conservatives cannot balance a budget or even their checkbooks for that matter. Obama has over three years left, not two.

Don't remind me.

Obama has driven down the annual debt from 10% of GDP in 2010 to 3% today. The fastest drop ever. And next year it will be 2%. Like Clinton and Carter he may actually balance the budget if he can clear the crazies in the republican party. If you really care about debt control then your party is not the way to go. Cheney even said debt does not matter, he learned that from Reagan. No, the whining about the debt is just another phony republican talking point that means nothing. It is Fox news again fooling the gullible.

Yawn, ok, so here are the REAL HARD FACTS:

President Obama likes to say that raising the nation’s borrowing limit “won’t add a dime” to the federal debt, but he neglects to mention that the government already has borrowed the equivalent of more than 60 trillion dimes since he took office. When Mr. Obama became president in January 2009, the total federal debt stood at $10.6 trillion. This week, it hit $16.7 trillion — an increase of 57 percent. In the same time frame under President George W. Bush, total federal debt rose 38 percent. Under President Clinton, it rose 32 percent. The administration says the government will run out of authority to pay its bills by Oct. 17 unless Congress raises the debt limit again to allow more borrowing. The president portrays the move as one of simple responsibility. “It does not increase our debt,” Mr. Obama said. “It does not grow our deficits. All it does is allow the Treasury Department to pay for what Congress has already spent.” The president rarely mentions that he, by law, approves congressional spending, and his argument glosses over the nation’s burgeoning total debt. “It’s certainly not the whole story,” said Alex Brill, a budget specialist at the American Enterprise Institute. “We’ve seen a dramatic increase in the debt held by the public in the last four or five years, and it’s projected to only get worse.” On Oct. 4, the debt held by the public — not including Social Security and Medicare — had risen 89.3 percent since Mr. Obama took office, according to FactCheck.org, a nonprofit project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The administration recently projected an annual deficit of $750 billion in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 and $626 billion the year after that. “At that rate, the debt owed to the public will more than double during the Obama presidency,” FactCheck said in its quarterly statistical report on Mr. Obama’s tenure in office. Many Republican lawmakers say that is the reason spending cuts and entitlement reform should be part of the discussion to raise the debt limit. “We are in trouble financially,” Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, said Tuesday. “We are $30 trillion in the hole, plus another $17 trillion in debt. Wouldn’t it be smart if we started addressing that problem before we blankly allow an increase in the level of the credit card?” Mr. Obama said he won’t talk about long-term budget issues until Republicans agree to reopen the government and raise the debt limit without conditions. The office of House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, said Wednesday that linking spending reforms to increases in the debt limit is “common, bipartisan practice.” The Republican leadership pointed to a Congressional Research Service report last month that said Congress has used debt-limit laws to change fiscal policy 20 times since 1917. In that same 96-year span, the nation’s debt limit has been raised 103 times. In the increasingly contentious showdown with Congress, Mr. Obama also is fond of pointing out that budget deficits — the annual red ink that contributes to the total debt — have been falling at the fastest pace in 60 years. That’s true largely because spending rose dramatically in his first term as the administration tried to blunt the impact of the Great Recession. Although a “grand bargain” on spending and entitlements eluded the president and congressional Republicans in 2011, Mr. Brill said, it is the kind of approach still needed to get the debt under control. “It’s logical and appropriate what we’re hearing from many Republicans that we need to not only deal with the debt limit itself but we need to deal with the underlying cause of this pressure to increase the debt,” he said. “That means we need to deal with entitlements.”

No, the whining about the debt is just another phony republican talking point that means nothing. It is Fox news again fooling the gullible.

No whining about the debt is something that Independents care about, the people that are the corner piece and key to winning ANY election and right now, Independents are NOT happy with both parties and in particular the party that says they just did major cuts when that is clearly NOT the case.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Canuck35Oct. 18, 2013 - 07:30PM JST

Wow, I had no idea that JT was a bastion of Tea Partyism. Lot of ignorance in these comments.

Ignorant? A 2/3 of the Tea Party followers has no higher education or some less than 2 years college degree. Only a 1/3 has more than 4 years college degree.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@global

Ignorant? A 2/3 of the Tea Party followers has no higher education or some less than 2 years college degree. Only a 1/3 has more than 4 years college degree.

So that means because you might not have the best of an education that makes you less of a person, or less qualified or ill informed? I find that kind of insulting. Many liberals like the president have a Harvard education. Obama and Biden claim that they're so much! and yet! I don't see any of those smarts being used. Why is it these so called smart liberals can't stop borrowing and spending? Why can't these smart liberals increase jobs and help minorities have better lives? Why these smart liber scant get unemployment and welfare down. Why is it these liberals have to brag about how smart they are and use ad homenim attacks to make a point? How come lthese smart liberals give less money towards charity as opposed to their conservative counterparts. How is it that smart rich liberals want other people's money, but don't want their money touched?

Well, I'm convinced and now I know why liberals are so much smarter, it's because of all those hallucinogenics liberals like to take, which opens their mind and viewpoint giving them a broader sense of reality. Now I understand why they are so much smarter.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

@zurc:

Obama has driven down the annual debt from 10% of GDP in 2010 to 3% today.

This is a dumb argument that the Left continues to make. The annual deficit is not what really matters. It is the combined debt that is killing America's future. So what if Obama reduced his annual deficit from $1.4 trillion to $700 billion! As per current CBO projections this years' annual deficit is about as good as it gets for the next ten years. After that the annual deficits begin to spike upward again. Obama has still racked up more debt than all previous presidents combined and there is no plan to bring them down.

The Tea Party is warning America that it is destroying itself financially. America spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year on interest payments. The current generation will be leaving continuously growing debts to future generations and a limited ability to generate the wealth needed to repay it. It is hardly extreme to demand that Americans be financially responsible. What is extreme is exhausting America's wealth now and leaving future generations tapped out.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

"This is why conservatives cannot balance a budget or even their checkbooks for that matter. Obama has over three years left, not two."

"Priceless..."

It's also true he has over 2 years left, ha ha, well, it sounds better than 3 years left, that's 1 more year he can do more financial damage to the country. Obama and the Democrats make Bush and the Republicans look like spendthrifts.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

I saw the tantrum on TV. Mr. President, it's time to "man up". All because some people said "NO".

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Obama: Shutdown encouraged U.S. enemies, dismayed its friends

Yes it is so

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Obama and the Democrats make Bush and the Republicans look like spendthrifts.

Oh Jesus.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

"Opening government has not resolved the big picture — a debt problem so large that it dwarfs all deadlines and threatens the very fabric of the nation."

Jean Val-Jean: Assuming you live your daily life in Japan--a country where debt as a percentage of GDP is far higher than almost anywhere else--it's a bit ironic that you're expressing these types of fear-mongering sentiments about the USA. How awful it must be to live your daily life thinking the sky is going to fall at any minute. What is your solution for America--a traumatic, cauterizing dose of "shock therapy" like that which the IMF administered to Russia 20 years ago? What on earth for? The USA is not an economic basket case as Russia was in 1993, and not even Russia was deserving of what was inflicted upon it by ignorant outsiders.

Yours is a fear of big numbers with 12 zeroes attached to them. Just take a breather, get over it, and stop believing that these situations are unmanageable. They are not.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I don't understand why everyone is bickering about Obama's spending and the Federal Debt ceiling. The government has been raising the limits for decades. It's standard practice, and you can't blame it all on one administration. Obama isn't the first president to increase the federal debt limit.

Here's a breakdown of debt ceiling increases before Obama by presidency:

Dwight D. Eisenhower (R): 4 John F. Kennedy (D): 5 Lyndon B. Johnson (D): 7 Richard M. Nixon (R): 7 Gerald R. Ford (R): 6 Jimmy Carter (D): 6 Ronald Reagan (R): 17 George H. W. Bush (R): 5 Bill Clinton (D): 4 George W. Bush (R): 7

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@Vernie: Do Liberals think that debt can ever be too high? Is there a debt number that would concern the Left? Would $30 trillion be too much? How about $50 trillion? A $100 trillion?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@Wolfpack. That's a question for Everyone including the Conservatives. Even the Mighty Ronald Reagan (by the way I actually met him in person) increased it 17 times during his administration. It's not just a Liberal problem my friend.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Do Liberals think that debt can ever be too high? Is there a debt number that would concern the Left? Would $30 trillion be too much?

It's a real doofus question, Wolfpack. The metric would be tied to a percentage of GDP. Why? Because GDP indicates the ability to service the debt. Whatever the debt was to a $1 Trillion economy, one could reasonably expect it to be 16 times higher on average in a $16 trillion economy. The US government ran up the most massive debt in its history to fight WWII. That debt was brought down fairly quickly in the 1950s, but keep in mind the top marginal tax rate was over 90%. (Didn't seem to stifle entrepreneurship or the economy very much.)

Isn't that easy? The mind of the average young person -- not rotted away by years of listening to Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and other right-wing outlets -- can grasp it. Fortunately, the young are turning away in droves from the lunatic fringe that now controls much of the Republican side.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Because of Obamacare, an entire generation is being turned into a part-time workforce. When you do the math, it’s cheaper to pay the penalty, but that’s not the way the system was designed. It counts on young people enrolling, but most young people don’t want any part of it. They would rather pay the penalty in the first year for being uninsured than pay hundreds of dollars each month in premiums for Obamacare. In order to offset the high costs associated with insuring the elderly, premiums for the healthiest segment of enrollees, those between the ages of 18 and 49, will need to increase. So risking going uninsured seems the best option for the young people.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Them don't realize Obama, Repub's and Dem's are playing you suckers and getting Paid..!! You need a plan to get rid of All the Clowns and control who you let handle your life... You are falling for the BS..... Think about it from this angle//// IF you individually or as a group acted the same way with someone else's money... What would happen !! Seriously !!!!.... One, you would be convicted of a number of crimes !

Another crackpot with no plan whatsoever. They talk a good "revolution" but couldn't manage their own way out of a paper bag.

America needs to wake=up and quit being so intellectual

Way to lead by example....

Because of Obamacare, an entire generation is being turned into a part-time workforce. When you do the math,

An entire generation???

Not sure whether to file that under "ordinary stupidity" or "complete ignorance." I happen to run a business and do the math regularly. When you've got really good workers, it costs more to lose them by playing the kinds of stupid games you are claiming many business owners play. (I'm not buying it.)

The Affordable Health Care Act helps to level the playing field. Simple as that. Frankly, it would be FAR better if no American had to depend upon an employer for health insurance. It would be FAR better to have universal healthcare for every American.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@yabits

The Obamacare was broken before it launched, its become a complete failure So far the actual sign up numbers are abysmal, and look at California, less than 20K out of an uninsured population of many millions? Premiums in many states have risen 20% to 200%. Many states and regions have only one provider instead of the "numerous choices" touted by the supporters. People aren't singing up because of the sticker shock, what they are now learning the costs much more even with the subsidies.

Massachusetts had a simlar plan since 2006 when less than 6% of the resident had no coverage to begin with, today roughly half of those folks are still without coverage. As for premiums, they have gone up from to $16,000 to $24,000 for a family plan with large deductibles and co-pays.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Everything, EVERYTHING comes at a cost. This so called ACA (Affordable Care Act) is anything but affordable, yes maybe to those that are already on welfare, unemployment, disability etc (and are younger than 26 years old ,which BTW is the part of the people that are in the least need). But to those that are working and used to get coverage from their employers are in for a big sad surprise (the deductibles are HUGE). Even Democrats are starting to cry . Wait a year or so and when the whole thing collapses it will turn into a single payer system which is exactly what the WH (and it's hidden advisers are after). And as far as you that this big hate-on regarding the TEA party ??? Take a deep breath it stands for T axed E nough A lready' So if you like to pay more and more taxes just vote for Clinton next time around you know the wife of "Slick" Willy, and their company that seems to be in trouble regarding mismanagement of a CHARITY?? But I guess should not have expected anything better from these weasels.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@Vernie:

That's a question for Everyone including the Conservatives. Even the Mighty Ronald Reagan (by the way I actually met him in person) increased it 17 times during his administration. It's not just a Liberal problem my friend.

I couldn't agree with you more that this is a question for Conservatives. That's why they are fighting Obama tooth and nail to cut spending and reform entitlements. More importantly, this is a question for Republicans - which are not one in the same with Conservatives. As for Democrats we know they could care less about the national debt unless there is a Republican president to attack at which point the debt becomes "unpatriotic". After Bush and his buddies in Congress passed the Part D prescription drug plan I was done with the Republicans. Both parties are growing government and choking the economy while constraining individual liberty. With respect to Reagan, he grew government to defeat Communism. Afterwards, the so called "peace dividend" is what made Clinton's annual deficits so small on average (that and the tech bubble).

@yabits:

It's a real doofus question, Wolfpack. The metric would be tied to a percentage of GDP. Why? Because GDP indicates the ability to service the debt.

Look at the bigger picture yabits. The US government spends nearly $300 billion a year just on interest payments. That's bad. However what's worse is when you look at the high amount of debt along with the projected spending due to the baby boomers and additional entitlements such as ObamaCare. Both Medicaid and Social Security as currently configured are unsustainable. In the next 10 to 20 years these programs will require money from general revenues. Remember, there is no lock box. The IOU's must come from general revenues. Over the next 10 years until these programs begin to hit insolvency, the annual deficits will continue to average around half a trillion a year according to CBO.

I am really glad that you brought up the example of WWII. Following that war, America had a huge debt. However, America also constituted 50% of world GDP and was an economic powerhouse. It was perfectly situated to provide the goods and services to the nations that were literally destroyed by warfare. Now, instead of being an ascending economic power - America is in relative decline compared to the rest of the world. Barring any future calamity such as another world war, the US has no prospects for economic growth in any manner remotely similar to the post war period. In fact, the opposite is the case. High levels of government debt is now restricting the countries ability to respond to economic downturns. A massive amount of new regulations, high energy costs, a byzantine tax structure, and unemployment that has stabilized at a relatively high level point to a future in which the debt continues to skyrocket. Economic growth and a social welfare state are not compatible. I know the debt doesn't faze most Liberals but it worries me a great deal.

That debt was brought down fairly quickly in the 1950s, but keep in mind the top marginal tax rate was over 90%. (Didn't seem to stifle entrepreneurship or the economy very much.)

Except that very few if anyone paid an effective rate of 90% due to the enormous amount of loopholes. Do you remember what happened after the Kennedy tax cuts that removed that rate and simplified the tax code? The economy boomed.

Think about the future and not solely on your short term ideological goals.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Wolfpack Oct. 23, 2013 - 08:57AM JST the US has no prospects for economic growth in any manner remotely similar to the post war period.

I would never underestimate the U.S. The reality is that U.S. will become the world's largest oil producer next year, overtaking Russia due to its shale oil boom. The U.S. resurgence as an oil producer is already reshuffling game of world energy diplomacy, playing it a new hand in relations with long-term ally and top OPEC producer Saudi Arabia.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I hope you are right sfjp330. But with half of the country at war with fossil fuel energy, any great economic gains would likely be in spite of the heavy hand of Uncle Sams regulatory establishment. Americans have inherited the greatest governing structure in world history yet they have spend the last 75 years working deligently to undermine it.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Remember the Bart Simpson line? "Nobody saw me do it." Don't blame me. The [un] Affordable Health Care Act (ACA or Obamacare) has snuffed the economy in the US, caused thousands of businesses to shift to part time workers (under thirty hours a week), and required insurance companies to cancel existing policies because they don't comport to Obamacare standards. The latest news from Florida is 300,000 policy cancellations by Blue Cross which will require those customers to find something on the "Exchanges" (good luck) or do without and pay the "tax" [really, a fine] to the IRS. "You're doing a heck of a job, Barry." [Taking liberties with one of Bush's comments after Katrina.]

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The USA does not have 'friends'... it has 'interests'.... do not be forget this to your peril.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites