Here’s a complete video of President Barack Obama’s televised comments tonight on the debit ceiling limit crisis. Rather than tell you what we thought it meant, watch it for yourself and draw your own conclusions. And feel free to leave them in comments:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Here’s the text of the speech as prepared for delivery.
And here’s Speaker of the House John Boehner’s rebuttal comments. Again, watch it and draw your own conclusions and feel free to leave them in comments:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Obviously Obama did a better job but then he is a genius at this (plus his stated position is the wiser one, though I am not sure how firm it is)
Neither side really said much, but that is common to these kind of speeches. It’s not like it was 30 yrs ago where these speeches actually produced something new.
Boehner’s speech was disgusting. Completely and utterly irresponsible for a man(?) in his position. He should resign as Speaker of the House.
If we default:
Osama Bin Laden won.
No, actually the:
However, the United States of America LOST!
But what the hell, I got mine plus I’m liberal, happy, and old… Why should I worry about you?
The whole strategic idea of Osama Bin Ladden’s insurgency was to bankrupt us.
Bush broke the bank and the economy trying to get him and failed.
So Osama Bin Ladden wins. He must have even known it before he died, (If he died).
But indeed he has won.
Both speeches were bad, but Obama’s was worse (that’s for those of you developed enough to pay attention to content, not just style).
Boehner’s and Reid’s plans have no tax increases. Why is Obama so out of touch with reality the past two weeks, still insisting on tax increases, and scummy class-warfare gimmicks at that, while misusing the word “balance” to appeal to the stupid? And why did he stoop to blaming Bush? And why insist on a debt increase to carry him beyond next November? Presumably the demagoguery and appealing to people to pester their members of Congress is more stupid campaign stuff. Much else was another example of him and his people being out of touch.
Boehner and Reid should ignore the pretty figurehead and just get together and arrive at some agreed-upon plan, and that’s it.
Here’s a little remedial education for those who don’t understand why George W. Bush’s name needs to be mentioned when this topic is discussed:
Here’s the article the graph comes from: NYT – How the Deficit Got This Big
@SteveK
I always thought Obama and Bush were pretty similar, and your graph backs that up. Bush had 8 years, Obama has had 3 (you are talking new spending, so projected years don’t count).
Oh, they’re similar, all right — just ask any “progressive” [sic].
[chuckle]
I suppose it will be 2016 before the Usual Suspects stop blaming Bush for everything the Demmies do — unless they plan to keep doing it after then.
Prof. Elwood wrote:
Yep — compare them after eight years apiece.
(Bush was bashed by conservatives for being too Democrat-like, while to liberals Bush could never spend enough, of course, and what has the far Left been saying about spending currently?)
A better comparison is shown here (below). It blames Bush for the big 2009 deficit, but note the deficits under Obama and how they compare to Bush’s.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/dont-blame-obama-for-bushs-2009-deficit/
And, of course, the reality was known or anticipated long ago.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/03/21/GR2009032100104.html
At least Obama’s 2010 State of the Union craziness, wanting deficits forever, was scaled back. It’s still an open question what the deficits would be like were the public to have approved rather than rejected the Dem agenda in 2010.
Prof Elwood–if you notice, these are PROJECTIONS through 2017. So, NO, Bush and Obama are not the same. I thought Professors were supposed to be able to read a graph. Are you an IU grad?
[...] President Barack Obama’s and John Boehner’s Televised Speeches on Debt Ceiling Limit Cri… (themoderatevoice.com) [...]
“Prof Elwood–if you notice, these are PROJECTIONS through 2017.”
He’s got 5 years to create NEW spending. He’s not able to make NEW spending in those 5 years, because they haven’t occurred yet.
Of course since congress may have finally gotten the clue that new spending isn’t a good idea, it might slow that down a bit, but I’m sure that’s not what he, or they, wanted.
I think we can all agree that there will be no new spending while the Republicans have a majority in the House.
And after the 2012 elections, when the Democrats regain control, they will do as they have historically done… Spend less and manage better then Republicans.
And here is what the non-Villagers have to say……….
The Post-ABC poll found that the number of liberal Democrats who strongly support Obama’s record on jobs plunged 22 points from 53 percent last year to 31 percent. The number of African Americans who believe the president’s actions have helped the economy has dropped from 77 percent in October to just over half of those surveyed.
Unless President Obama changes course — but quick — what this means is: President
Romney.
David Axelrod simply cannot dig up enough “independents” or “centrists” that will be
reward Obama for being “the adult in the room” to compensate for a 69% disapproval in the Democratic base. And a 50% approval among African Americans? Staggering.
Bizarrely, the White House has been running the anti-Rove playbook since the before the
2010 midterms: screw your base and try to appeal to everyone else. How’s that working out for you, Plouffe?
Meanwhile, Republicans are still running the Rove playbook and though they’re taking a beating in the polls, they’re winning the negotiation, which is further alienating Obama’s base.
Good luck in 2012 without your base, Mr. President.
It’s just more evidence that ObamaCo is routinely out of touch.
(Yes, also more evidence of amateurishness and ineptitude.)
That pathetic speech — has Obama been missing for two weeks?
Sadly that graph is impossible to verify since the authors provide no insight into the assumptions they used to arrive at their analysis/conclusions.
As a consequence, partisan who want to believe it will and those who don’t won’t.
Personally, I went back to the CBO assessment of 2002 to 2011 and I can find no numbers to match that graph. Relative to the CBO assessment, it overstates one side and understates the other. Given the source of the chart, you can probably guess which is which.
Meaning that we’d have to type one more letter when mentioning the president by name. Is there another difference?
HOW MUCH FURTHER ARE WE WILLING TO GO IN ORDER TO PLEASE THESE VERY SAME PEOPLE WHO DENY US EVEN THE RIGHT TO EXISTENCE(what is to you country without laws or lawless country in respect to your personal rights, but the one that in contrast to your denied basic human rights recognizes you extremely liable when payments are due) !!?
IS IT INDEPENDENCE THAT WE CELEBRATE OR DEPENDENCE (what are your credit card bills or alimony saying about it) !!? HOW IS YOUR DIABETES AND LOST MARRIAGES !!? FORECLOSURES AND JOB SEARCH !!? THAT IS THE QUESTION TO BE OR NOT TO BE !!!!!! IS IT LAND OF THE FREE OR STATE OF TERROR AGAINST OWN POPULATION !!? IT IS TIME TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT COLOR ARE THE STRIPES ON OUR STAR SPANGLED BANNER !!!
VISIT(google text if links don’t work) “DICTATOR OBAMA = STALIN = BUSH or USA = SOVIET UNION” http://avsecbostjan.blogspot.com/ or http://avsecbostjan.wordpress.com/ …TO LEARN WHO, HOW, AND WHY RUINED YOU…FROM 911 TO EXILED WHITE AMERICAN REFUGEES SEEKING ASYLUM RIGHT NOW !!! TIME TO DETERMINE WHOSE INDEPENDENCE/AMERICA, WE CELEBRATE TODAY(who want to erase us and denies us the right to exist) !!! IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHOM WE ADDRESS WITH “PRESIDENT”(STOP HUMILIATING YOURSELF) !!!!