OBAMA TO ADDRESS NATION ABOUT STALEMATE: Looks to be scheduled for tonight (8:00 cdt)

  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jul 25, 2011 10:30 PM GMT
    The power of the bully pulpit. Glad he is taking the time and making the effort to bring Americans up to date on what is being done... and what isn't!
    I'm sure he will point out why, how and the stalemate issue itself. Concessions that he and the democratic party have made and those of the republicans... and in his assessment, why there has been no agreement.

    I hope he's damn blunt about the whole thing!

    icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 25, 2011 11:02 PM GMT
    If you look at this thread

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1701664

    specifically the messages/responses between Riddler and myself, you'll see who has been playing politics.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 25, 2011 11:21 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    HndsmKansan said
    I'm sure he will point out why, how and the stalemate issue itself. Concessions that he and the democratic party have made and those of the republicans... and in his assessment, why there has been no agreement.

    icon_mad.gif


    You're joking, right?


    No. That's an accurate assessment of what happened. By all accounts, Obama was willing to go pretty far right in the negotiations (means-testing for social security, reduction in Medicare, etc.) and Bohener can't get the Tea Baggers to say "yes."

    I think Obama may be invoking the 14th amendment tonight because the Republican fuckery is starting to mess with world markets.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 12:06 AM GMT
    The republicans need a good kick in the twat. Hope Obama gives it to them in his speech tonight.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 1:18 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    I think Obama may be invoking the 14th amendment tonight because the Republican fuckery is starting to mess with world markets.


    He didn't have the guts to do it.

    Nice speech on compromise--falling on deaf ears.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 1:21 AM GMT
    q1w2e3 said
    Christian73 said
    I think Obama may be invoking the 14th amendment tonight because the Republican fuckery is starting to mess with world markets.


    He didn't have the guts to do it.

    Nice speech on compromise--falling on deaf ears.


    I think if the Tea Baggers don't get their shit together, he will cite the 14th amendment and raise it unilaterally. BTW, how drunk do you think Bohener is during his response?
  • TheIStrat

    Posts: 777

    Jul 26, 2011 2:10 AM GMT
    I hope our AAA credit rating is downgraded. We fucking deserve it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 2:29 AM GMT
    theantijock said
    Would there be any long-term advantage for the USA by defaulting and upsetting world markets?


    Of course, there are up sides and down sides to everything. The most obvious one would be to show the country and the world that the Tea Party is insane, if it's not already obvious.icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 2:46 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    q1w2e3 said
    Christian73 said
    I think Obama may be invoking the 14th amendment tonight because the Republican fuckery is starting to mess with world markets.


    He didn't have the guts to do it.

    Nice speech on compromise--falling on deaf ears.



    Yeah, compromise - "Let's keep driving off the cliff, but a bit slower."

    No thanks.


    And the other option is...?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 2:56 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    HndsmKansan said
    I'm sure he will point out why, how and the stalemate issue itself. Concessions that he and the democratic party have made and those of the republicans... and in his assessment, why there has been no agreement.

    icon_mad.gif


    You're joking, right?


    democrats like being blunt, unless the right do it, then they find it offensive.

    I thought the republicans were blunt in: CUT YOUR SPENDING.

    I hope you all like rice.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 2:57 AM GMT
    TheIStrat saidI hope our AAA credit rating is downgraded. We fucking deserve it.


    I can already hear the wet cats screaming.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 26, 2011 3:39 AM GMT
    President Obama never acts alone, so I'm sure that he won't invoke the 14th Amendment, and raise the debt ceiling, all by himself.

    The Teabagger Republican anarchists will never compromise.
    So, I'm sure that our U.S. credit rating will be lowered FOR THE FIRST TIME, EVER.

    And, that will result in a stock market crash, and sky high interest rates for everybody who wants to borrow money, whether it's using your credit card, taking out a mortgage, or an auto loan, or a loan to start or expand your business. In other words, it spells economic ruin for the United States.

    However, Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve have numerous tricks at their disposal to get our debts paid (at least temporarily).

    But, that's only temporary.

    Asian stock markets were down, today.
    U.S. stock markets were down, today.

    The President's speech was good, but it isn't going to have the needed result, and that is for the damn Teabaggers to compromise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 1:16 PM GMT
    A review from Charles Krauthammer of Obama's Speech. Personally I watched both, finding Obama more hesitant than I've seen in previous speeches. I think both hit the notes they wanted to - and they were very political speeches.

    I think it comes down to whether or not you believe that this debate is one about spending or revenues. I didn't find Obama's plea for compromise convincing - and Boehner wasn't calling for compromise - but seemed to be a bit angry at the fact that a deal could have already been reached had it not been for Obama's intervention and insistence that a full deal be struck now past the next election.



    I also agree with the view here that Obama's speech was a bit condescending though I don't think it was that significant -

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/baby-talk_577584.html

    Consider the condescension implicit in the president’s statement—“a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before.” These “people outside of Washington” are not little children being lectured on an obscure subject by a worldly adult. These people outside Washington are ... citizens. Judging by the polls, most of us have opinions about whether, and under what conditions, the debt ceiling should be raised. We don’t seem to be as ignorant as Obama thinks we are of the term or concept of a debt ceiling. But the president assumes we’ve never bothered our pretty little heads about such a thing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 1:27 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidA review from Charles Krauthammer of Obama's Speech. Personally I watched both, finding Obama more hesitant than I've seen in previous speeches. I think both hit the notes they wanted to - and they were very political speeches.

    I think it comes down to whether or not you believe that this debate is one about spending or revenues. I didn't find Obama's plea for compromise convincing - and Boehner wasn't calling for compromise - but seemed to be a bit angry at the fact that a deal could have already been reached had it not been for Obama's intervention and insistence that a full deal be struck now past the next election.



    I also agree with the view here that Obama's speech was a bit condescending though I don't think it was that significant -

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/baby-talk_577584.html

    Consider the condescension implicit in the president’s statement—“a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before.” These “people outside of Washington” are not little children being lectured on an obscure subject by a worldly adult. These people outside Washington are ... citizens. Judging by the polls, most of us have opinions about whether, and under what conditions, the debt ceiling should be raised. We don’t seem to be as ignorant as Obama thinks we are of the term or concept of a debt ceiling. But the president assumes we’ve never bothered our pretty little heads about such a thing.


    As usual, in a desperate attempt to deflect blame from the "crisis" they created, Republicans try to position Obama as a weird "other".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 1:37 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 saidA review from Charles Krauthammer of Obama's Speech. Personally I watched both, finding Obama more hesitant than I've seen in previous speeches. I think both hit the notes they wanted to - and they were very political speeches.

    I think it comes down to whether or not you believe that this debate is one about spending or revenues. I didn't find Obama's plea for compromise convincing - and Boehner wasn't calling for compromise - but seemed to be a bit angry at the fact that a deal could have already been reached had it not been for Obama's intervention and insistence that a full deal be struck now past the next election.



    I also agree with the view here that Obama's speech was a bit condescending though I don't think it was that significant -

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/baby-talk_577584.html

    Consider the condescension implicit in the president’s statement—“a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before.” These “people outside of Washington” are not little children being lectured on an obscure subject by a worldly adult. These people outside Washington are ... citizens. Judging by the polls, most of us have opinions about whether, and under what conditions, the debt ceiling should be raised. We don’t seem to be as ignorant as Obama thinks we are of the term or concept of a debt ceiling. But the president assumes we’ve never bothered our pretty little heads about such a thing.


    As usual, in a desperate attempt to deflect blame from the "crisis" they created, Republicans try to position Obama as a weird "other".


    Desperate is what you would call Obama's speech where he was attempting to convince Americans that this was either Bush's fault or that of Congressional Republicans when even his minions have acknowledged he moved the goal posts and is insistent that any deal goes beyond his first term.

    Effectively the message that I think is fairly transparent is that he would rather have the US default than potentially not be re-elected. Unfortunately this is an issue that I think that will haunt him.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 1:51 PM GMT
    riddler78 said... Effectively the message that I think is fairly transparent is that he would rather have the US default than potentially not be re-elected. Unfortunately this is an issue that I think that will haunt him.

    He was against both Reid's and Boehner's proposals because they did not call for tax hikes. No leadership at all. He was in campaign mode, again squandered an opportunity, but what else would you expect?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 2:54 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    riddler78 said... Effectively the message that I think is fairly transparent is that he would rather have the US default than potentially not be re-elected. Unfortunately this is an issue that I think that will haunt him.

    He was against both Reid's and Boehner's proposals because they did not call for tax hikes. No leadership at all. He was in campaign mode, again squandered an opportunity, but what else would you expect?


    The president's desire to have the proposal extend into 2013, while maybe benefiting him electorally, is actually based on the fact that ratings agencies are now saying that a 6-month extension will not be sufficient to avoid a downgrade of the US credit rating.

    And his leadership on the manufactured crisis, is that revenues need to be part of a balanced approach, including cutting some liberal sacred cows, which the vast majority of Americans support.

    The question to be answered is why is the Republican Party being held hostage by its fringe elements.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 3:00 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    riddler78 said... Effectively the message that I think is fairly transparent is that he would rather have the US default than potentially not be re-elected. Unfortunately this is an issue that I think that will haunt him.

    He was against both Reid's and Boehner's proposals because they did not call for tax hikes. No leadership at all. He was in campaign mode, again squandered an opportunity, but what else would you expect?


    The president's desire to have the proposal extend into 2013, while maybe benefiting him electorally, is actually based on the fact that ratings agencies are now saying that a 6-month extension will not be sufficient to avoid a downgrade of the US credit rating.

    And his leadership on the manufactured crisis, is that revenues need to be part of a balanced approach, including cutting some liberal sacred cows, which the vast majority of Americans support.

    The question to be answered is why is the Republican Party being held hostage by its fringe elements.

    It's not, and I noticed you completely avoided Riddler and my posts in the other thread about how it is the Democrats who have been playing politics.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 3:16 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    riddler78 said... Effectively the message that I think is fairly transparent is that he would rather have the US default than potentially not be re-elected. Unfortunately this is an issue that I think that will haunt him.

    He was against both Reid's and Boehner's proposals because they did not call for tax hikes. No leadership at all. He was in campaign mode, again squandered an opportunity, but what else would you expect?


    The president's desire to have the proposal extend into 2013, while maybe benefiting him electorally, is actually based on the fact that ratings agencies are now saying that a 6-month extension will not be sufficient to avoid a downgrade of the US credit rating.

    And his leadership on the manufactured crisis, is that revenues need to be part of a balanced approach, including cutting some liberal sacred cows, which the vast majority of Americans support.

    The question to be answered is why is the Republican Party being held hostage by its fringe elements.

    It's not, and I noticed you completely avoided Riddler and my posts in the other thread about how it is the Democrats who have been playing politics.


    Sadly Christian is right that it is an entirely manufactured crisis of Obama's own making and made even more dire with his unwillingness to compromise and allow for more time in negotiations.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 3:25 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Sadly Christian is right that it is an entirely manufactured crisis of Obama's own making and made even more dire with his unwillingness to compromise and allow for more time in negotiations.


    Lol, unwillingness to compromise. Viz. Mike Lee (R-UT), representative of the Tea Party way of "my way or the highway":

    CHRIS MATTHEWS: How many days do you think we have, on the outside, to get this debt ceiling through before we have a problem? How many days?

    LEE: I don’t know, maybe ten days.

    MATTHEWS: Okay, in ten days you want to change the United States Constitution by two-thirds vote in both houses? That’s what you’re demanding.

    LEE: Yes. If possible we can’t change the Constitution just in Congress but we can submit it to the states. Let the states fight it out.

    MATTHEWS: And you think you’re being reasonable by saying you want a two-thirds vote in the House, which is Republican, and in the Senate which is Democrat. You want the Democratic Senate, by a two-thirds vote, to pass a constitutional amendment or you want the house to come down?

    LEE: Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying and I’ve been saying this for six months.

    Vs. the "uncompromising" spine of Obama:
    obamaplanrightii0725.jpg
    And he's endorsed the Reid plan with NO new revenues.

    Who, may one ask, tied the debt ceiling to deficit reduction? Boehner, and Obama took the bait.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 3:33 PM GMT
    BTW, I hope that what Obama meant when he said that "this may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield" is that he will use the constitutional option at the very last moment, and let them impeach away.

    But, no, it's unlikely for him to show backbone this late.icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 3:51 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    riddler78 said... Effectively the message that I think is fairly transparent is that he would rather have the US default than potentially not be re-elected. Unfortunately this is an issue that I think that will haunt him.

    He was against both Reid's and Boehner's proposals because they did not call for tax hikes. No leadership at all. He was in campaign mode, again squandered an opportunity, but what else would you expect?


    The president's desire to have the proposal extend into 2013, while maybe benefiting him electorally, is actually based on the fact that ratings agencies are now saying that a 6-month extension will not be sufficient to avoid a downgrade of the US credit rating.

    And his leadership on the manufactured crisis, is that revenues need to be part of a balanced approach, including cutting some liberal sacred cows, which the vast majority of Americans support.

    The question to be answered is why is the Republican Party being held hostage by its fringe elements.

    It's not, and I noticed you completely avoided Riddler and my posts in the other thread about how it is the Democrats who have been playing politics.


    Sadly Christian is right that it is an entirely manufactured crisis of Obama's own making and made even more dire with his unwillingness to compromise and allow for more time in negotiations.


    Socal - Why would I respond to a thread that is grounded in fiction? I don't recall the Democratically led House threatening default when Bush requested debt ceiling raises. This entire "crisis" is manufactured by the Tea Baggers, and Boner is no doubt shitting himself as we speak because he knows that the American people will blame the Republicans for any bad outcomes resulting from their relentless hostage taking.

    riddler - Obama has been negotiating for months in person and through the VP. And it's your fabled "markets" that will not tolerate default, or even Boner's six-month extension. S&P has already said that it will downgrade the US's rating if Boner's plan passes.

    The so-called "free market" seems to understand what the Republican party does not. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2011 4:14 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    riddler78 said... Effectively the message that I think is fairly transparent is that he would rather have the US default than potentially not be re-elected. Unfortunately this is an issue that I think that will haunt him.

    He was against both Reid's and Boehner's proposals because they did not call for tax hikes. No leadership at all. He was in campaign mode, again squandered an opportunity, but what else would you expect?


    The president's desire to have the proposal extend into 2013, while maybe benefiting him electorally, is actually based on the fact that ratings agencies are now saying that a 6-month extension will not be sufficient to avoid a downgrade of the US credit rating.

    And his leadership on the manufactured crisis, is that revenues need to be part of a balanced approach, including cutting some liberal sacred cows, which the vast majority of Americans support.

    The question to be answered is why is the Republican Party being held hostage by its fringe elements.

    It's not, and I noticed you completely avoided Riddler and my posts in the other thread about how it is the Democrats who have been playing politics.


    Sadly Christian is right that it is an entirely manufactured crisis of Obama's own making and made even more dire with his unwillingness to compromise and allow for more time in negotiations.


    Socal - Why would I respond to a thread that is grounded in fiction? I don't recall the Democratically led House threatening default when Bush requested debt ceiling raises. This entire "crisis" is manufactured by the Tea Baggers, and Boner is no doubt shitting himself as we speak because he knows that the American people will blame the Republicans for any bad outcomes resulting from their relentless hostage taking.

    riddler - Obama has been negotiating for months in person and through the VP. And it's your fabled "markets" that will not tolerate default, or even Boner's six-month extension. S&P has already said that it will downgrade the US's rating if Boner's plan passes.

    The so-called "free market" seems to understand what the Republican party does not. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Wrong. The S&P has indicated that the primary problem is that the US has an unsustainable debt and deficit projectory particularly given that US growth has slowed. Let's review.

    wapoobamabudget1.jpg

    Default is not tolerated by anyone because if you can't pay the interest then you are surprise surprise not considered a safe person to lend to. Is it any surprise that you don't seem to understand "free markets"? No.