Obama: No, I can’t promise that Social Security checks will go out in August if we don’t reach a deal

posted at 6:37 pm on July 12, 2011 by Allahpundit

See James Pethokoukis’s new graph for a response to this. There should be plenty of revenue in August to cover entitlement checks and interest on the debt if Treasury has the legal authority to prioritize payments, which isn’t as clear as one would hope. Either way, the more voter angst O can create about default — and given the movement among independents, he’s doing a fine job — the more pressure there is on the GOP to make a deal and the more protected he’ll be politically if we hit X Day on August 2 without an agreement. Which, of course, is the point of McConnell’s gimmick today: If his bill were to pass, responsibility for keeping Social Security flowing coming would shift suddenly from those darned millionaire-hugging Republicans to the debt-loving Obama administration. You are willing to unilaterally order another $2 trillion in debt right before the election in order to keep grandma’s checks coming, aren’t you, champ?

If you’re looking for the case for and against the McConnell gambit, here’s Grover Norquist giving a thumbs up and Philip Klein giving a thumbs down. Norquist’s argument is straightforward: This debt-ceiling showdown has always been about politics for Obama, so let him choke on the politics of it. Force him to finally finally finally put his spending plan in writing after he and his party have ducked the issue for months. In fact, according to Roll Call, McConnell’s only question at yesterday’s debt-ceiling meeting was to ask how much the Biden plan would save in discretionary spending next year. The answer: Two measly billion. It’s time for Democrats to get serious, says Norquist, and this will force them. Au contraire, says Klein, there are lots of ways Obama can gin up phony savings to check the “deficit hawk” box for his campaign. Besides, he argues, the McConnell plan actually weakens the GOP’s ability to reach a real deal because O will read it as a sign of panic in the caucus and will press harder for concessions. I’m not so sure about that, though: To me it looks like a sign that McConnell and others in the caucus have more or less given up on making a deal, which strengthens the GOP’s hand insofar as Obama will either need to make new concessions to get them back to the table or start thinking about a Plan B like McConnell’s plan to avert a default.

I do think Klein was spot on with this post from April, though, about how the GOP promised the base too much in terms of what it could realistically achieve while sharing power with Democrats. For all the sturm and drang about the debt-ceiling deals under consideration, to my knowledge none of them — even the “grand bargain” — would actually reduce the debt over the next 10 years. Even the best-case scenario is merely a slower rate of growth. That’s not a serious solution, or even a half-solution, to such a cataclysmic problem, and yet it’s the very best we can do with the current occupants in Congress and the White House. We’ll have to shuffle the deck next year and hope for better; all McConnell’s doing is acknowledging the bleakness of the situation and trying to maximize the odds of a more favorable hand. Exit question: Given that McConnell’s bill would force Dems to own the debt hike, why would Reid allow it to pass the Senate without changes? And if it did, would Obama sign it or veto it?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

(Nathaniel Greene)
According to my Mother…I am a decedent…

I frequently walk my Rottie by his statue here in Greensboro.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nathaniel_Greene_statue1.jpg

….You are 100% correct…Intellectuals will rationalize anything no matter how hypocritical it is in support of their agenda.

Baxter Greene on July 12, 2011 at 8:59 PM

OMG. Lucky guess on my part.

Patriotism is in your genes; and in your phenotype. That passion rings through in your writings—like the Guns of Ticonderoga. Wasn’t it Greene’s idea to haul them over hill and dale? I know Knox did the hauling but whose idea was it. That was a brilliant stroke.

Geochelone on July 12, 2011 at 9:21 PM

CALL THIS little punk’s BLUFF.

petefrt on July 12, 2011 at 9:22 PM

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 9:07 PM

Perhaps you missed my previous posting:

Boehner Casts Doubt on Obama’s ‘Veiled Threats’ on Social Security

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/12/boehner-casts-doubt-on-obamas-veiled-threats-on-social-security/

“The Treasury secretary is going to have options in terms of who should be paid and who shouldn’t,” he said. “Yes, there are some debts that have to be rolled over. But there’s going to be money available on Aug. 3, and I think it’s way too early to be making some types of veiled threats like that.”

Clearly it was meant as a threat and a scare tactic.

Do you think it’s okay for the POTUS to act like a low-life wise-guy?

Chip on July 12, 2011 at 9:23 PM

The GOP Candidates have been given a Golden Ticket to use against Obowma…

… Why are they not calling him out on it?

Seven Percent Solution on July 12, 2011 at 9:23 PM

The peas are in the mail.

Christien on July 12, 2011 at 9:17 PM

Sweet peas, grown by Michelle herself.

Ugly on July 12, 2011 at 9:24 PM

I still believe the US over-reacted to the threat of al-Qaeda,……….
bayam on July 12, 2011 at 9:07 PM

Lovely.

Yeah, we should have just “Absorbed it”. No big deal.

After all, those buildings were full of evil capitalist imperialist dupes, who deserved what they got.

LegendHasIt on July 12, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Baxter Greene on July 12, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Excellent post friend!..:)

Dire Straits on July 12, 2011 at 9:30 PM

Enough of this guy toying with the people like they were worthless, ignorant peons. Let the whole damn thing collapse and let’s start over . . . it would be better than watching this once great nation die a painful, sad death.

rplat on July 12, 2011 at 9:31 PM

karenhasfreedom on July 12, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Nice post!..:)

Dire Straits on July 12, 2011 at 9:32 PM

From what I recall, Bush questioned the patriotism of anyone who failed to support his policies,

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 9:07 PM

Please prove this allegation.

If you won’t to see people who question patriotism of Americans..here you go:

Hoyer, Pelosi call protests against ObamaCare “un-American”
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/08/10/hoyer-pelosi-call-protests-against-obamacare-un-american/

Here you have the democratic leadership calling people who disagree with the President “un-American”…right after they demonize their rights of free speech.

I still believe the US over-reacted to the threat of al-Qaeda, as this nation has done many times in the past (think the non-existent Soviet missile gap and then the non-existent Soviet bomber gap). Al Qaeda had neither the reach or resiliency that many in the defense industry predicted- almost an identical scenario to the early days of the Cold War.

They reached far enough to bring down the Twin Towers..attack the Pentagon and bring on a worse economic and job loss situation than the one Obama is screwing to the wall right now.
But hey…no big deal right…I mean all we heard before 9/11 was how we were overreacting to the terrorist threat…then when 9/11 happened…liberals like you screamed about “why we didn’t connect the dots”.
Once again…no credibility what-so-ever.

The US has poured trillions into fighting an enemy not worth pitting our financial might against.

Says the liberal sitting comfortably on his a$$ because of these measures that democrats and Republicans undertook.

Now Obama is out there telling Grandma that he can’t promise she will get her check and you’re lame response is

Fine, then you agree that Allahpundit is also fearmongering but in slightly different words:

if Treasury has the legal authority to prioritize payments, which isn’t as clear as one would hope

Glad you agree Obama is using the SS issue as a fear tactic.
Last I saw,Allah simply pointed this out…that is not “fearmongering”…it is reporting the facts.

When Allahpundit is President and commands the media’s attention on Obama’s level…then goes out to score political points off of the fears of the elderly…then you might have a point.

Baxter Greene on July 12, 2011 at 9:38 PM

From what I recall, Bush questioned the patriotism of anyone who failed to support his policies, or their commitment to defending our nation.

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 9:07 PM

I believe that’s wholly inaccurate. Have a link to substantiate this?

Midas on July 12, 2011 at 9:39 PM

Train Wreck!!

The new series starring all the DC titans you’ve grown to loathe!

What is the definition of Traitor?

PappyD61 on July 12, 2011 at 9:42 PM

OMG. Lucky guess on my part.

Patriotism is in your genes; and in your phenotype. That passion rings through in your writings—like the Guns of Ticonderoga. Wasn’t it Greene’s idea to haul them over hill and dale? I know Knox did the hauling but whose idea was it. That was a brilliant stroke.

Geochelone on July 12, 2011 at 9:21 PM

You kind of spooked me with that for a second.
Your post is very gracious and I certainly learn a lot from your postings also.

I am not sure about the Guns of Ticonderoga..but this gives a pretty good history of him.

http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/americanrevolutio1/p/greene.htm

He suffered many victories and defeats but never surrendered.A strong example and a true American.

Baxter Greene on July 12, 2011 at 9:44 PM

I believe that’s wholly inaccurate. Have a link to substantiate this?
Midas on July 12, 2011 at 9:39 PM

You’ll get nothing. It never happened. It’s a narrative myth of the Left.

But here’s just a sampling of the Left’s attacks:

• “John Ashcroft is not a patriot.”—Howard Dean
• “[In the Bush administration, there is] a group of people around the President whose main allegiance is to each other and their ideology rather than to the United States.”—Howard Dean
• “We hear them in the cries of the false patriots who bully dissenters into silence and submission”.—Ted Kennedy
• “I don’t think it’s patriotic to put on a flight suit and prance around on the deck of an aircraft carrier looking for a photo op.” — Gen. Wesley Clark
• “The policy that the administration is following in Iraq is … anti-patriotic at the core…” — Sen. Bob Graham
• “[Some Southern Senators] unpatriotically blocked a bill…” — Rep. Dingell
• “”It is unacceptable for this un-American, frankly, behavior of these U.S. senators…” — Gov. Jennifer Granholm

rrpjr on July 12, 2011 at 9:54 PM

LegendHasIt on July 12, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Except for teh JOOOOS… who were warned & escaped the final tally

/s

Ugly on July 12, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Fine, then you agree that Allahpundit is also fearmongering but in slightly different words:
bayam on July 12, 2011 at 9:07 PM

… So Obama is either totally cluele$$ about this subject or an outright li@r…either way it’s more political failure from your hero:

(perSeven Percent Solution on July 12, 2011 at 9:15 PM)


Official Treasury Reports: Coffers Full Enough to Cover Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans, Federal Salaries and Interest—Without Borrowing a Dime

However, according to the Daily Treasury Statements published by the U.S. Treasury Department, the ongoing flow of federal tax revenue since the Treasury declared that it had hit the debt limit on May 16 has been more than sufficient to cover the combined costs of federal spending on interest payments, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Veterans Affairs department and federal workers wages and insurance benefits (including wages and insurance benefits for military personnel).

…Of course this is what you would expect from a President who thinks that spending a trillion dollars to create jobs is shown to be successful by …you know…losing jobs.

The idiocy is so thick here…you really can’t make this sh!t up.

Baxter Greene on July 12, 2011 at 9:57 PM

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 9:07 PM

All Reet, bayam’s here! Let me drink a couple of bottles of $700 wine and I’ll be back.

Del Dolemonte on July 12, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Social security is an entitlement and as such can neither be repealed or defunded.
jainphx on July 12, 2011 at 8:45 PM

Please don’t say stuff like that. It depresses me.

BierManVA on July 12, 2011 at 10:00 PM

rrpjr on July 12, 2011 at 9:54 PM

But you know what is considered “patriotic” by liberals….raising taxes:

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/politics/item_Ws4erKkjIUxdoKG1bV7oxJ#ixzz1RwkgHyKM

Joe Biden wrapped Old Glory around Barack Obama’s plan to raise taxes on wealthy Americans, saying the rich should be “patriotic” and fork over more cash.

“It’s time to be patriotic, time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut,
” Obama’s running mate said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Baxter Greene on July 12, 2011 at 10:01 PM

The bottom line remains that if Soc Sec deposits aren’t made, it will be because Obama’s agencies decide not to make them. It will not be because making them is literally impossible.

Obama doesn’t have the support in Congress to carry through on the threat to withhold Soc Sec payments. He can’t win a standoff with Congress on this, and there will assuredly be one if he tries to actually deny payments as a tactic.

If Obama were to precipitate such a crisis, it would be a political event of such mangitude that Congress would almost certainly seek to adopt a sort of “War Powers Act” to constrain the executive’s discretion over how funds are expended. In other words, prevent Obama or a future president from ever using Soc Sec to threaten the voters again.

Congress has the power to do that, if it can override a veto. I don’t think anyone wants it to come to this — a crisis of government — which is why Newt Gingrich’s advice on Fox this evening is the correct course. Congress should pass a guarantee of funding for Soc Sec, defense, and Medicare for the duration of the budget battle, and present it for Obama’s signature. Even if Congress doesn’t do that, it’s still Obama’s fault if he chooses to use the funds on-hand for things other than debt service, Soc Sec, defense, and Medicare — but sending him the bill to sign would clarify for the people who’s to blame if Obama uses his executive discretion to decide not to meet those obligations.

J.E. Dyer on July 12, 2011 at 10:03 PM

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 9:07 PM

From what I recall, Bush questioned the patriotism of anyone who failed to support his policies, or their commitment to defending our nation.

You’re an unusually good liar. Here’s what he said. Link after the quote.

Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html

Strike 1.

I still believe the US over-reacted to the threat of al-Qaeda, as this nation has done many times in the past (think the non-existent Soviet missile gap and then the non-existent Soviet bomber gap).

How did the US “over-react” to al-Qaeda in the years between 1993 and 2001? Your Democrats treated them as a law enforcement problem. The result was 9/11. Epic Fail.

Strike 2.

Al Qaeda had neither the reach or resiliency that many in the defense industry predicted- almost an identical scenario to the early days of the Cold War. The US has poured trillions into fighting an enemy not worth pitting our financial might against.

Yet they were able to do something that no other enemy of the US had ever done-kill 3,000 Americans on US Soil.

F-, and Strike 3.

Del Dolemonte on July 12, 2011 at 10:12 PM

Please prove this allegation.

You have excellent memory.

• ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT: When concerned citizens voiced opposition to excessive provisions of the Patriot Act, Attorney General John Ashcroft said on 12/6/01, “your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America’s enemies, and pause to America’s friends.”

• HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER TOM DELAY: When criticism was raised about poor planning in the creation of the Homeland Security Department, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) said on 9/25/02, “These are people that don’t want to protect the American people. They will do anything, spend all the time and resources they can, to avoid confronting evil.”

• SECRETARY OF DEFENSE DONALD RUMSFELD: Under the headline “Rumsfeld: Critics Give Terrorists Hope,” Newsday reported on 9/9/03 that Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld said “that critics of the Bush Administration’s Iraq policy are encouraging terrorists and complicating the ongoing U.S. war on terrorism.”

• PRESIDENT BUSH: When some raised objections to how the Homeland Security Department was being structured, President Bush said the Democratic-led “Senate is not interested in the security of the American people.”

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 10:14 PM

PRESIDENT BUSH: When some raised objections to how the Homeland Security Department was being structured, President Bush said the Democratic-led “Senate is not interested in the security of the American people.”

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 10:14 PM

That’s the best you can do?

F-

And no link. Why is that?

Del Dolemonte on July 12, 2011 at 10:16 PM

BierMan=== Yeah I read up above a post that made me wrong, so I guess I’m sorry about that, but my goodness HOW WE BEEN LIED TO.

The worst thing is that on Rush Rubio made a scary point, not only is the money we paid in not there (because they spent it) they are borrowing or benefits from CHINA. These sleeze balls never intended to make SS safe for the future. I get a check and if they quit giving them out, it will hurt, but I know who it is that is doing it to us. We have a PIG in the White House that will do anything to bring us to our knees. WE must get him out at all cost, him and his cadre of traitors. STAND TALL R’s please for once do the absolute right thing, we are behind you.

jainphx on July 12, 2011 at 10:17 PM

ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT: When concerned citizens voiced opposition to excessive provisions of the Patriot Act, Attorney General John Ashcroft said on 12/6/01, “your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America’s enemies, and pause to America’s friends.”

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 10:14 PM

Tell us about how this very same guy was roundly booed by your fellow travelers when he testified to the 9/11 “Commission” under oath.

He correctly observed that the Democrats, to shift the blame for 9/11 where it belonged to others, placed someone on the 9/11 “Commission” who should have in reality been questioned under oath about how she as Assistant US Attorney General created the Wall that prevented the CIA and FBI from sharing their intel.

I’m sure you can find the video of his testimony on youtube. When he stated this Inconvenient Truth your fellow nutbars in the visitors gallery (who were given their tickets by the Democrats, no doubt) started acting like the high school dropout O’bama voters in the audience of “The View”.

Do you need another shovel? Or how about a manure spreader? I know someone in West Paris who has one for rent.

Del Dolemonte on July 12, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Force him to finally finally finally put his spending plan in writing after he and his party have ducked the issue for months.

Why don’t we have Obama’s preferred budget/speech-transformed into-something-that-can-be-assessed publicly, like Paul Ryan’s plan? Isn’t that a minimum requirement for a situation like this?

disa on July 12, 2011 at 10:24 PM

Poo to you, Mr. President. You, Sir, are a sack of embarrassment.

Mason on July 12, 2011 at 10:26 PM

Gives a whole new meaning to the word Extortion. This is what the Hope and Change Gang have brought – holding up checks for Vets and Seniors to get their way. Something tells be that if the Congress controls the money – how does the Treasury trump that? I know Timmy the Tax Cheat is a complete nasty little snake. But with Barry O – the imposter seems to feel he can be a “gangsta” and threaten the PEOPLE. Call his bluff – he doesn’t have a pair.

IlonaE on July 12, 2011 at 10:28 PM

Do you think it’s okay for the POTUS to act like a low-life wise-guy?

Chip on July 12, 2011 at 9:23 PM

Do you think it’s okay for the POTUS to act like a low-life wise-guy domestic terrorist?

FIFY!

belad on July 12, 2011 at 10:29 PM

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 10:14 PM

Predictable response.

Here’s what you alleged, in case you can’t “recollect”:

From what I recall, Bush questioned the patriotism of anyone who failed to support his policies, or their commitment to defending our nation.

He did not, and you can’t cite where he did. You’re referring to comments he made in 2002 regarding the democrats’ insistence that the Homeland Security Bill provide collective bargaining rights for public employees. They were holding up the bill. In this context, the comment is an understandable and partisan response — and arguably accurate.

The rest of the comments were not made by Bush, and I don’t think any reasonable observer of politics would find them anything but typical or partisan (and in some cases accurate). They don’t compare to what the Left has said and continue to about conservatives.

Over his 8 years in office, despite the most sustained campaign of personal calumny against a president in modern history (including approximately 75 major film documentaries, and endless late night monologues, comedic sketches and books alleging, in some fashion, that he contrived a war for oil or for the enrichment of his oil and corporate business friends, that he knowingly committed troops to die in a war cooked up from a lie, that he engineered the destruction of the Two Towers to start a war, etc.), Bush exercised a nearly superhuman rhetorical restraint and even went out of his way to preface and qualify his political comments with a respect for free speech and the rights of dissent.

rrpjr on July 12, 2011 at 10:31 PM

Where are the ads with Obama pushing grandma over a cliff at?

Kjeil on July 12, 2011 at 10:39 PM

bayam comes in here and gets owned yet again.

SSDD

fossten on July 12, 2011 at 10:42 PM

i’d love to see a body language person tell us about Bthis pos when he say he can’t guarantee anything. He actually has a hint of an evil smile that flutters across his face

Scott Pelley must be a pos too. I mean please, how stupid do you have to be to “forget” that the government always gets money in. I mean how stupid do you have to be to believe that that larder is empty. Scott Pelley=PoS

So it falls to a Reuters blogger to get the GS data to show that barry is lying.

r keller on July 12, 2011 at 10:44 PM

Well Zero, it’s not as though your promises have ever been more than worthless anyway.

viking01 on July 12, 2011 at 10:44 PM

Here we have a great example the classic troll tactic of throwing a bunch of excrement on the wall, hoping some it sticks and distracting away from the main topic.

Here we are discussing Obama’s little threat to Social Security checks and bayam comes along and goes off on with the questioning of patriotism tangent.

This has nothing to do with the subject at hand – that of Obama using scare mongering techniques to get what he wants.

Chip on July 12, 2011 at 10:45 PM

upinak on July 12, 2011 at 9:06 PM

I hope your grandma recovers well. This is truly awful and makes me angry.

AshleyTKing on July 12, 2011 at 11:03 PM

So Obama has used the old dead horse head in the bed gambit.

I think he may have gone too far this time, and really exposed himself for what he is: a cold narcissist sociopath. He actually does want to ruin America.

If he has the authority he really will cut off social security checks in order to keep funding the UAW, Acorn, and SEIU.

A true scum sucking pig!

Dhuka on July 12, 2011 at 11:06 PM

I read this morning that we have more revenue from SS withholding every month to more than pay for the SS checks that are sent each month. So, I say we call his bluff.

Voter from WA State on July 12, 2011 at 10:22 PM

SS is certainly a ponzi scheme but overall the system is still in the black (it will not be for very long however). The problem is that the government is using all of the money collected above SS service to pay the current accounts, and then borrow even more. Maybe the Obama threat will finally wake people up as to what huge ponzi schemes SS and Medicare actually have become (or always were).

Nobody who reads their yearly SS statement should be surprised, because it clearly states that it is not a guarantee of any kind of payment.

whbates on July 12, 2011 at 11:11 PM

Chip on July 12, 2011 at 9:23 PM

Do you think it’s okay for the POTUS to act like a low-life wise-guy domestic terrorist?

FIFY!

belad on July 12, 2011 at 10:29 PM

Either way, it’s no way for a respectable person to be much less close to acting presidential.

Chip on July 12, 2011 at 11:13 PM

Guess it’s time to pull off that bandaid, eat your peas, and start actually dealing then, f**khole.

Blacklake on July 12, 2011 at 11:25 PM

Right now the federal government is borrowing about 40 cents on every dollar it spends which also means that it has enough revenue to cover about 60 cents on each dollar. If the debt ceiling is not raised, the federal government has the choice between cutting current expenditures by 40%, all the way back to the levels of the FY 2004 budget when George Bush was fighting two wars and spending like a drunken sailor, defaulting on its debt or a combination of the two.

There are two types of federal debt: privately owned debt held as Treasury Bills / Bonds, both here and abroad, and inter-agency government debt such as that held in the Social Security trust funds.

What is Obama saying? If he is not happy with the deal worked out, he will default on the debt already paid into trust funds and payable to senior and disabled residents before defaulting on the debt held by the Chinese or cutting government programs.

What the hey: cut off Social Security and a lot of us old folks will die before the next election and that might help save Medicare in the process.

That will be his choice. It is nice to know where his priorities lie.

Laurence on July 12, 2011 at 11:28 PM

Obama is maneuvering to place the blame for any economic downturn next year on the Republicans: “If only they had acted responsibly in 2011 all this new pain would have been averted.” To Obama, there is no downside to Utopia always being just out of reach, as long as he can shift the blame to someone else.

Fred 2 on July 12, 2011 at 11:38 PM

• PRESIDENT BUSH: When some raised objections to how the Homeland Security Department was being structured, President Bush said the Democratic-led “Senate is not interested in the security of the American people.”

bayam on July 12, 2011 at 10:14 PM

….Is this the best you can do.
Not one part of this shows Bush calling people “un-patriotic” for not supporting his policies.

• ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT: When concerned citizens voiced opposition to excessive provisions of the Patriot Act, Attorney General John Ashcroft said on 12/6/01, “your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America’s enemies, and pause to America’s friends.”

…Ashcroft called liberals out for putting their activism before country.He was correct in stating that this gave ammo to the enemy.Liberals politicized every single aspect of the War on Terror.

What’s the matter Bayam…don’t remember your liberal friends yelling and screaming about how horrible Renedition was…

……….forget all the whining and accusations of destroying our rights with NSA wiretapping.

…………..forget about how horrible Gitmo was and that it was such a big recruitment tool.

….and don’t forget Indefinite detention……OH MY GOD how EEEEEEEEEvil that was….

Bush lied us into war….”no blood for oil”…..”war is not the answer.”….

All of this was total exploitation of the difficulties of war by liberals in their quest to gain power on the Hill.

Obama uses all of these policies including the Patriot Act…..launches wars against oil rich countries,that did not attack us,and posed no imminent threat….
……and now all of those selective outrage is gone from the streets…they have all gone to the coffee shops and now pat each other on the backs calling it “Smart Power”.

This not only eroded support for the war in Iraq THAT WE WON….but it definitely emboldened the enemy.

Here we have Bush/Obama’s Secretary of defense stating that opposition to the surge emboldened the enemy.
Of course Obama and his democratic allies were 100% wrong in their opposition to the surge:

Video: Gates says the anti-surge resolution “emboldens the enemy”

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/01/26/video-gates-says-the-anti-surge-resolution-emboldens-the-enemy/

…Obama had no problem bringing Gates into his administration and gave glowing reports about him when he stepped down.

This from Major Niel Smith in Iraq:

“We also took a different IO (Information Operations) tack with the sheiks. Instead of telling them that we would leave soon and they must assume responsibility for their own security, we told them that we would stay as long as necessary to defeat the terrorists. That was the message they had been waiting to hear. As long as they perceived us as mere interlopers, they dared not throw in their lot with ours. When they began to think of us as reliable partners, their attitudes began to change. Still, we had to prove that we meant what we were saying.”

So straight from the front we get a Soldier stating how Iraqis started to work with the US in fighting against the enemy when they saw that we were not “imperialist occupiers”
and going to abandon them like liberals were yelling about in the streets.

..and of course the anti-war movement was important enough to the Viet-con that they have an anti-war museum set up with John Kerry and Jane Fonda front and center.
Here is how the enemy followed the anti-war movement.
http://www.all-encompassingly.com/john-kerry-anti-war-protests-and-stubborn-historical-facts/

look what america’s peace movement did for the north vietnamese, even though the enemy only had radios to listen in with:

Anti-war protests in the U.S. during the Vietnam War were a major source of moral support to the enemy. We know that not only from plain common sense, but from the statements of former North Vietnamese military leaders who evidently didn’t get the memo telling them not to say so. In an Aug. 3, 1995, interview in The Wall Street Journal, Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, called the American peace movement “essential” to the North Vietnamese victory.

“Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American anti-war movement,” he said. “Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses.” [source]

….liberals knew that their massive anti-war movement helped lose the war in Vietnam and wanted to do the same thing concerning the Iraq war.
Thank God it didn’t work.

The leaders of al-qaeda certainly saw what democrats were up to:


Al Qaeda declares ‘failure and defeat’ for U.S. troops in Iraq

CNN
Zawahari:

He also accuses Democrats seeking the presidency of “trying to deceive their people by saying that they will withdraw their troops from Iraq by talking to Iran.”

…and dam# if he was not spot on there:


Congressman admits Dems “stretched the facts” about stopping the war to get elected

Submitted by Jeff Emanuel on Thu, 05/22/2008 – 8:18pm.


More specifically, Paul Kanjorski’s problem is that he was publicly honest about the intentional dishonesty of Congressional Democrats (and Democrat candidates) in the run-up to the 2006 election — particularly with regard to the War in Iraq.

:


Transcript:

“I’ll tell you my impression. We really in this last election, when I say we…the Democrats, I think pushed it as far as we can to the end of the fleet, didn’t say it, but we implied it. That if we won the Congressional elections, we could stop the war. Now anybody was a good student of Government would know that wasn’t true. But you know, the temptation to want to win back the Congress, we sort of stretched the facts…and people ate it up.”

The bottom line is that liberals exploited the sacrifice of our Soldiers and used the difficulties of war for political gain.

You must be so proud Bayam…….

Baxter Greene on July 12, 2011 at 11:39 PM

Why don’t we have Obama’s preferred budget/speech-transformed into-something-that-can-be-assessed publicly, like Paul Ryan’s plan? Isn’t that a minimum requirement for a situation like this?

disa on July 12, 2011 at 10:24 PM

That would require little Bammie to actually put some numbers on his non-existent ‘plan’. He might actually have to do (the horrors, I hate to suggest such a thing) –some work!

slickwillie2001 on July 12, 2011 at 11:44 PM

Bring it and be demmed, Barak Hussein Obama. You have crossed the Rubicon except in your case it is from weakness. You expect America will rise to force Republicans to bend. Fool! We are long since tired of you and your lying D’rats. Go Boehaner, McConnell and the rest of the House. Refuse to “meet” any more. We want a $2T cut for this year and shame on Harry if he won’t schedule it.

You LOST! in 2010.

Caststeel on July 12, 2011 at 11:46 PM

upinak on July 12, 2011 at 7:26 PM

Blessings and health to you and family.

Remember that one of the greatest organizations ever stands ready to help should you need them. The Salvation Army. No matter where you and loved ones are, worldwide, they can coordinate, assist, provide help, aid and comfort… gracefully and gladly.

viking01 on July 12, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Baxter Greene on July 12, 2011 at 11:39 PM

Good work.

rrpjr on July 12, 2011 at 11:54 PM

Good work.

rrpjr on July 12, 2011 at 11:54 PM

Thanks…
Your posts were excellent also…
Especially this:

Over his 8 years in office, despite the most sustained campaign of personal calumny against a president in modern history (including approximately 75 major film documentaries, and endless late night monologues, comedic sketches and books alleging, in some fashion, that he contrived a war for oil or for the enrichment of his oil and corporate business friends, that he knowingly committed troops to die in a war cooked up from a lie, that he engineered the destruction of the Two Towers to start a war, etc.

Dead on…….
This is when democrats claimed “dissent was patriotic”…
Now..if you oppose raising taxes and a disaster of a health care bill….it’s treason.

Baxter Greene on July 13, 2011 at 12:05 AM

Over his 8 years in office, despite the most sustained campaign of personal calumny against a president in modern history

Yes, one of the great victims of all time… although perhaps the lack of impeachment charges against Bush calls into question your comparison.

Boehner Casts Doubt on Obama’s ‘Veiled Threats’ on Social Security

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/12/boehner-casts-doubt-on-obamas-veiled-threats-on-social-security/

How many times has the GOP raised the debt ceiling in the past? Did the GOP ever threaten to NOT raise the debt ceiling when Bush was pushing US federal spending up by almost 40% during his first 6 years?
Of course Obama is going to respond to one party’s decision to turn a routine vote into a possible crisis scenario, given the unknown as to how the global markets will respond.

You’re not the victim you imagine yourself to be.

bayam on July 13, 2011 at 12:08 AM

I suggest we have a sing along in honor of that big eared pos. Are you ready? “All we are saying just give peas a chance” I don’t hear you!!! “All we are saying just give peas a chance. Well done.

jainphx on July 13, 2011 at 12:18 AM

Is this the best you can do.
Not one part of this shows Bush calling people “un-patriotic” for not supporting his policies.

No, I don’t have time to Google for Bush quotes. But here’s a clear illustration. From a major policy address, the type of comments his lieutenants repeated in a similar vein.

”Americans face the choice between two parties with two different attitudes on this war on terror. Five years after 9-11, the worst attack on American homeland in our history, the Democrats offer nothing but criticism and obstruction, and endless second-guessing. The party of FDR and the party of Harry Truman has become the party of cut and run. ” – George W. Bush, Sept. 28, 2006

bayam on July 13, 2011 at 12:31 AM

….GOP ever threaten to NOT raise the debt ceiling when Bush was pushing US federal spending up….
bayam on July 13, 2011 at 12:08 AM

They should have. And since he had a democrap majority in congress and senate for most of that time, why the hell didn’t THEY stop the outrageous spending.

You infantile little kid. Whining that because someone else did the wrong thing in the past, even repeatedly, it is OK for your hero 0bama to do it three times as bad, now.

LegendHasIt on July 13, 2011 at 12:34 AM

Hey bayam are you American?

jainphx on July 13, 2011 at 12:36 AM

It’s hard to tell Obama is from Chicago…

“It would be a shame if something were to happen to your Social Security payments, fortunately my friends and I can offer you insurance against such things.”

gwelf on July 13, 2011 at 1:09 AM

This will Fail just as everything else Failbama touches fails.

dogsoldier on July 13, 2011 at 6:09 AM

See also: “Kids, if your parents don’t pledge money for us at PBS, Big Bird will go away….”

apostic on July 13, 2011 at 6:17 AM

If Granny is not paid, it is Obama making the choice freely without any hands being tied or anything. Income expected for the month is way higher than debt service, SS, and Medicare combined. There’s even some left over to pay for the wars.

{^_^}

herself on July 13, 2011 at 6:52 AM

No, I don’t have time to Google for Bush quotes.
bayam on July 13, 2011 at 12:31 AM

…But you have plenty of time to make false accusations.
Bottom line is you can’t back up your lame rhetoric.

”Americans face the choice between two parties with two different attitudes on this war on terror. Five years after 9-11, the worst attack on American homeland in our history, the Democrats offer nothing but criticism and obstruction, and endless second-guessing. The party of FDR and the party of Harry Truman has become the party of cut and run. ” – George W. Bush, Sept. 28, 2006

bayam on July 13, 2011 at 12:31 AM

Which was dead on.
This liberal selective amnesia you have is making you look like a fool.
Democrats were in the streets and on the Hill yelling 24/7 to “leave Iraq”.
Your hero Obama put forth a resolution to withdraw troops immediately in 2007.
This was flat out surrender being pushed by democrats and if they had gotten their way….we would have lost the Iraq war.

So there was a clear choice that had to be made…
Stay,fight,and win what we started….
…or cut-n-run like democrats wanted to do.
President Bush and the American Soldier stayed strong,stayed in the fight….and brought home the victory that Obama now brags about being such a “beacon of democracy” in the Middle East.

So how does it feel Bayam…to not only be a supporter of a political party that exploited war for political gain…but also be a supporter of a political party that endorsed surrender in the very war they cheered and voted for just years earlier.

Baxter Greene on July 13, 2011 at 8:40 AM

As expected, Obama and his ilk are playing the fearmongering card straight out of the ratty old liberal Democrat playbook.

And also as expected, Obama lied through his teeth when he claimed he can’t guarantee the SS will go out in August if no deal is reached.

I hope he loses in a landslide in 2012 but the Republicans, as a whole, will have to present a united front AND collectively grow a pair.

Carl on July 13, 2011 at 8:49 AM

How many times has the GOP raised the debt ceiling in the past? Did the GOP ever threaten to NOT raise the debt ceiling when Bush was pushing US federal spending up by almost 40% during his first 6 years?
Of course Obama is going to respond to one party’s decision to turn a routine vote into a possible crisis scenario, given the unknown as to how the global markets will respond.

You’re not the victim you imagine yourself to be.

bayam on July 13, 2011 at 12:08 AM

Of course Bush had to handle the effects of the worst attack on American soil on 9/11…

……had to handle the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq

…………and had to handle one of the worst natural disasters this country had ever seen in Louisiana.

So yes Bush did raise spending beyond what he should have to cover these National emergencies.
….and here is what your hero Obama said about “raising the debt ceiling:

Here are Obama’s thoughts on the debt limit in 2006, when he voted against increasing the ceiling:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

What happened to the “Hope and Change” Bayam?????

Obama called it a “failure of leadership” ….now he is on his what..sixth time raising the ceiling?????
By Obama’s own words…he has failed.

…and what have we gotten from Obama’s massive spending binge,massive deficits,and massive debt that dwarfs other Presidents???:

In January 2007 before the Democrats took over Congress, unemployment was 4.6 percent; now it’s over 9% percent.
America has lost 1.9 million jobs since Obama signed the stimulus.
Chronic unemployment worse than Great Depression
In January 2007 there were 7.1 million unemployed people in America; now there are over 14 million.
US house price fall ‘beats Great Depression slide’
* In January 2007 the median home price was $210,600; today it’s $179,300.
* The poverty rate in 2006 was 12.3 percent; now it’s over 14% percent
2007 Deficit: 162 billion …………..2011 Deficit: 1.6 Trillion
2007 Debt: 9 trillion…………………..2011 Debt: over 14 trillion

2000-2007 strongest productivity growth (2.5) in 4 decades
Robust GDP growth (2-3%) after the devastation of 9/11
In the 13 Quarters since the recession,Obama has only produced .8% GDP growth

The federal government has accumulated more new debt–$3.22 trillion ($3,220,103,625,307.29)—during the tenure of the Democratic 111th Congress than it did during the first 100 Congresses.


3.66 billion dollars a day

When the Pelosi Democrats took control of Congress on January 4, 2007, the national debt stood at $8,670,596,242,973.04. The last day of the 111th Congress and Pelosi’s Speakership on December 22, 2010 the national debt was $13,858,529,371,601.09 – a roughly $5.2 trillion increase in just four years.

…liberals complaining about Bush’s spending is like whining about him lighting a match while Obama burns down the house.

bayam…democrats have held the purse strings since 2006 and have produced nothing but economic failure.

Baxter Greene on July 13, 2011 at 8:56 AM

There is a simple solution…

Publish a list of everything that he does pay. If he send out money to Planned Parenthood, then Seniors need to know his priorities are abortions over SS. If he funds Tatoo removal in LA, then seniors need to know he values that over SS.

This is simple really, let’s call his bluff. It is his call as to what he is going to pay when the money runs out.

jeffn21 on July 13, 2011 at 9:08 AM

Nice Social Security check you have there, it would be a shame if something happened to it.

Chip on July 12, 2011 at 6:42 PM

Gangster.

rrpjr on July 12, 2011 at 6:42 PM

Obama and whoever IS the DNC today really are working toward destroying what remains of the USA to use the place for their own making of something else.

I’ve never witnessed this in my lifetime before, politically, but I do think the nation’s under real threat by the Obama ‘Administration’ and today’s whoevertheyare Democrats. They are busy doing and saying anything and everything regardless of reality: words as weapons.

Lourdes on July 13, 2011 at 9:11 AM

jeffn21 on July 13, 2011 at 9:08 AM

Good idea. We can start with the wreck he’s encouraged as to the Dept. of Ed. and the Dept. of Labor, not to mention National Security and the Intelligence communities.

Lourdes on July 13, 2011 at 9:13 AM

My God! Republicans are stupid! This is the club they need to pound this idiot of a president out of office. Just think about it. Of all the wasteful and useless programs in the federal budget, like aid to illegals and ethanol subsidies, which one does Obama threaten? Why Social Security of course! This is money that the recipients have ALREADY paid into the system. It’s their money. And this bozo wants to keep them from getting it. This shows what a true Chicago thug he really is. “We’ll break your legs if you don’t pay up”. The R’s should be shouting to every senior in America that this gangster will take their retirement checks as the first thing he would cut in a budget crisis. Then this swine threatened the veterans checks next. There is no bottom to this man.

inspectorudy on July 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM

The peas are in the mail.

Christien on July 12, 2011 at 9:17 PM
Are you doing “Operation Pea Party” lead by Schnitt?

theaddora on July 13, 2011 at 10:34 AM

I read where Obama gave ACORN hundreds of thousands of dollars last year! This after it being found to be a nest of corruption….(Of course, HE already knew this)….Has this been reported in the mainstream media?

theaddora on July 13, 2011 at 10:39 AM

PLEASE tell me someone is using video of him saying this in their campaign commercials. Obama is now blatantly threatening soldiers, the disabled and the elderly.

Isn’t THAT a smart political move. //eye roll//

Jewels on July 13, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Liberal governance at it’s finest…

Can’t get what you want? Threaten not to deliver on the last thing you promised once you’ve got enough people dependent on it.

Next big fight and it will be Obamacare that can’t get paid for.

Scrappy on July 13, 2011 at 1:17 PM

Boehner Casts Doubt on Obama’s ‘Veiled Threats’ on Social Security

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/12/boehner-casts-doubt-on-obamas-veiled-threats-on-social-security/

“The Treasury secretary is going to have options in terms of who should be paid and who shouldn’t,” he said. “Yes, there are some debts that have to be rolled over. But there’s going to be money available on Aug. 3, and I think it’s way too early to be making some types of veiled threats like that.”

Exactly!!! Obama wouldn’t have the political cojones to cut off Social Security benefits, so he would probably have to pay (1) interest on the national debt; (2) funding of the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya; (3) Social Security, and (4) Medicare out of tax revenues.

There wouldn’t be enough money left to fund other Government agencies at current levels, so he would then have to make drastic cuts, MUCH more drastic than what Republicans want to cut from the budget in exchange for a debt-ceiling hike. Republicans could then blame Obama for cutting their funding, and tell the public that if spending is cut across-the-board, these agencies will be cut LESS than Obama cut them!

If Boehner understands this, he should have the House pass its own debt-ceiling bill with spending cuts, then pass it on to the Senate, take-it-or-leave-it. If Democrats in the Senate block it, or Obama vetoes it, then Obama will be blamed for any emergency de-funding, and Republicans can ride to the rescue AFTER the default.

Steve Z on July 13, 2011 at 1:57 PM

But there’s a SS Trust Fund… right? Surely it hasn’t all been spent… right?

Yakko77 on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3