Obama takes fiscal cliff talk to Twitter
December 3rd, 2012
03:16 PM ET

Obama takes fiscal cliff talk to Twitter

(CNN) – President Obama took his message on the fiscal cliff negotiations to Twitter Monday, personally responding to a handful of selected tweets regarding the ongoing debate over proposed changes to taxes and spending.

But while Twitter may have provided a fairly new venue for Obama to convey his message (he’s personally used Twitter only a handful of times), the president’s talking points on the issue mirrored those he has delivered repeatedly since negotiations began in earnest last month.

In his nearly 60-minute session on Twitter, conducted from a laptop set up in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Obama responded to about 10 questions, ranging from the likelihood of certain tax deductions being cut for middle class wage-earners to which spending cuts the president would agree to.

While the president said little on Twitter he and his aides haven’t said before, he made clear he is looking for more revenue than spending cuts in this deal because of the already $1 trillion in spending cuts he agreed to in last year’s negotiations.

This has come as an apparent surprise to the GOP leadership, who expected the president would be open to significantly more spending cuts this round of negotiations.

It wasn't all fiscal talk on Twitter however. The last tweet Obama replied to concerned his beloved Chicago Bears and Chicago Bulls.


soundoff (123 Responses)
  1. David from San Francisco

    Obama should not give an inch to the Republicans. Obama won, Republicans lost. Republicans always cave in to Democrat demands.
    The Republicans must give Obama everything he wants. Obama should not compromise at all. If Obama compromises one inch, the Republicans will not go along with Gun Control, Amnesty for immigrants, Euthinasia, renewable energy and unlimited raising the public debt and deficit spending. Who do those stupid Republicans think they are. Obama is our lord and savior.

    December 3, 2012 at 3:30 pm |
  2. David from San Francisco

    Obama is not from this world. He doesn't need to compromise because Obama Won and They Lost. Republicans should just give Obama everything he wants and then step down so Democrats can give out more taxpayer money.

    December 3, 2012 at 3:32 pm |
  3. David from San Francisco

    I voted for Obama because he is gay and believes in gay issues. I am glad to see Obama demanding the Republicans to pay more taxes. Who do they think they are. Obama Won and They Lost. Don't they know that Obama is soo smart that he will solve every problem by printing more money and giving it to his disciples. He is my lord and savior.

    December 3, 2012 at 3:34 pm |
  4. cmon man

    Obama is incompitent. With everything he faces he's taking a 17 day vacation now...what a great leader. All you leaches that voted for this clown should do us a favor and move to Europe where there are more socialists just like you.

    December 3, 2012 at 3:58 pm |
  5. California Gary

    Boehner and the Republicans have a great idea for you Mr. President. Lets implement the Romney plan.......you know, the one that was just soundly rejected by the American people last month. According to Boehner, it would be just the ticket for what ails our economy. Boy, those Republicans sure are sharp, aren't they?

    December 3, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
    • Jeb

      Sharp is not the word that comes to mind. Crazy is more like it.

      December 3, 2012 at 4:35 pm |
    • andrew.peter

      What the voting populous stated loud and clear was that they wanted the pols to work together. That still ain't happening! Romney's ideas did fail, but remember, it was a status quo election result, nationally.

      December 3, 2012 at 4:39 pm |
    • Dragonchef

      Nice to know the 50.7% is considerered soundly beating someone- seems the left used the reverse of that when a Republican won by 5%

      December 3, 2012 at 9:40 pm |
    • joepa14221

      California Joe,
      You must be on something to think obama won a decisive victory he only won 51% of the popular vote. And the republicans kept control of the house. So Obama needs to negotiate not tweet. He needs to tell us what he want to cut. he is president and has to lead. He doesn't have to be chicken, he can't run again so he cannot be demigoged

      December 3, 2012 at 9:58 pm |
    • floridamom1

      The truth hurts, doesn't it. The only way we can get out of this mess is to have a true economics major as President. But, we don't have one. Romney's plan was fine. You guys just want to keep all the free stuff and make the rich guy pay for it. If you want total fairness then why aren't you pushing for the President to have a fair and flat tax and get rid of loopholes? That would bring in so much more money. But, of course, that would be too easy and then the Democrats couldn't just promise all kinds of stuff it will never be able to deliver so they can get poor people to vote for them. Like those promises made to the victims of Sandy who still need help and obama will never deliver even though he promised he would.

      December 3, 2012 at 11:38 pm |
    • floridamom1

      And California, remember all the guff President Bush got over Katrina? Yes, we see, it never works both ways, does it. Obama can ignore all those people on the east coast and not hear one word about his incompetence from you or the media, but not Bush. Somehow, if you are a Democrat then it's not the same thing. But, speaking of California, this state is the poster child of what not to do. Run into the ground by liberals and liberal ideas. Money does not grow on trees, but in California, they think it does. You don't like the way things are going? Ask all you rich hollywood types to pony up their cash. They talk a lot of big talk, but none of them would give up what they have to help the poor. They pretend to, but they never really do. It's all about how much TV coverage they can get.

      December 3, 2012 at 11:41 pm |
    • Ray M

      soundly rejected by the American people?

      I'm not sure what results you were watching but Obama clearly did not have full of America's support. Democrat's approach of bullying based on Obama's re-election will not amount to anything

      December 4, 2012 at 7:53 am |
  6. Disgusted

    Wouldn't it be better to talk to someone who can actually do something about it – like the Senate and House members? Oh, but that wouldn't get him any press. Rough decision – actually save the country, or play with his new stuff.

    December 3, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
  7. ANOEL2005

    When has Obama "the country's leader" ever rolled up his sleeves, gotten in a room with the both sides and attempted to help hammer out a deal ?

    Answer : NEVER

    December 3, 2012 at 4:30 pm |
    • bmorelady

      dumbass!

      December 3, 2012 at 4:38 pm |
    • andrew.peter

      He's never hammered out a deal with anyone, just hammered people for his deals. Big difference.

      December 3, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
    • Lynda Jones-Owings

      When has the republicans excepted and offer to meet with hi, to attempt any type of deal.

      Answer: NEVER......

      December 3, 2012 at 4:48 pm |
    • California gary

      Wrong answer.......he had a deal hammered out with Boehner during the last big debt ceiling crisis......and compromised a great deal........but the Tea party types wouldn't let Boehner sign off on the deal. How quickly we forget....

      December 3, 2012 at 4:52 pm |
      • John

        How's that democrat controlled thing working out for you in California Gary? About as good as Detroit Philly or Chicago i see. I understand you all voted a tax increase on yourselves. Guess you'll want the rest of the country to bail you out like we did GM.

        December 3, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
      • ANOEL2005

        Obama moved the goal post.

        "...Obama, reacting to pressure from Democrats in Congress, panicked at the last minute and suddenly demanded that Republicans accede to hundreds of billions of dollars in additional tax revenue. A frustrated Boehner no longer believed he could trust the president’s word, and he walked away. "

        December 3, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
      • California Gary

        But you said he "never" got in the room and tried to work out a deal. Now you say the deal he tried to work out forced Boehner to walk away from it. I'm afraid you are having a bit of a credibility problem.........by the way, what news source are you quoting from?

        December 3, 2012 at 5:33 pm |
      • ANOEL2005

        HEY GARY FROM CALIFORNIA,

        WHEN YOU GO INTO A ROOM TO MAKE A DEAL, YOU STAY UNTIL YOU HAVE ONE AND YOU DON'T MOVE THE GOAL POST AFTER THE FACT, AS OBAMA DID.

        December 3, 2012 at 5:54 pm |
      • California Gary

        First you said he never went into the room........then you said he moved the goal post when he was in the room.......both things can't be true my friend........and I suspect neither is. What news source are you quoting that he "moved the goal post"? As I recall......when all was said and done, a smiling Boehner came out bragging that he got 98% of what he wanted......just before we got our credit rating dropped as a result. So the goal post was moved, what.....2%?

        December 3, 2012 at 6:10 pm |
      • jean2009

        No, President Obama didn't move the goal post. From the very beginning he has stated that tax rates on the top 2% should go back to the Clinton era rates...which was in the being set to expire a lot sooner than now. The extension is currently in its second go-around extension, and the witching hour for the expiration is midnight December 31st.

        I'm behind the President 100%. If we need to go over the cliff so be it, but don't cave. Enough GOP obstructionism already! No more allowing them to present fake sham budgets saying they are the President's budget, and then voting them down..... without very vocally calling them out on it.

        December 3, 2012 at 8:55 pm |
      • joepa14221

        Quit drinking the coolaid, he presented a budget that didn't get a single democratic vote. And before you say the GOP blocked it. it only takes 51 votes to pass a budget in the senate.

        December 3, 2012 at 10:01 pm |
      • floridamom1

        always looking for a scapegoat for Obama so he never has to take any heat.

        December 3, 2012 at 11:35 pm |
      • floridamom1

        Blaming the tea party again for the actions of the Democrats who, by the way, called the tea party movement – Nazis.

        December 3, 2012 at 11:43 pm |
      • darkbraincomics

        ANOEL2005
        "A frustrated Boehner walked away. "

        ANOEL2005
        "WHEN YOU GO INTO A ROOM TO MAKE A DEAL, YOU STAY UNTIL YOU HAVE ONE"

        December 4, 2012 at 9:04 am |
      • ghags17

        even if you tax the 2% say 45% it only covers 2-3 weeks of interest we pay the chines on money borrowed. Lets stop the BS from both sides. Eliminate all tax loopholes .Majority of the tax loopholes are written to help the wealthy ( this includes politicians) go across the board 20% tax. Stop growth of government/unions, stop spending, create jobs in the USA, stop companies from sending jobs overseas and the country will be back on its feet

        December 4, 2012 at 12:13 pm |
      • Claudia Joanne Renshaw

        Gary, I applaud your efforts; standing your ground. I sometimes enjoy engaging in a little back-and-forth with the Obama opposition, but then I become weary of talking to the brick wall. "Anushole2005" is so typical; starting first with a blatant falsehood (Obama "NEVER got in room") then goes down the black hole, losing more and more traction and credibility trying to defend the lie by compounding the lie with more lies. Seems that by now, these "deniers" would have learned at least one lesson from Mitt: all Americans are not so foolish as to attempt to wishfully make a lie the truth. If all else fails, add Obama's to the long list of those whose names have been branded as the "anti-Christ", intent on world domination.

        December 6, 2012 at 8:42 am |
    • Ranger Luna

      "The President turns to "twitter" to resolve the nation's fiscal cliff..." now that's as moronic as it gets!

      December 3, 2012 at 7:52 pm |
    • floridamom1

      So very true.

      December 3, 2012 at 11:42 pm |
    • weddingblogtest

      Obama said it a million times on the campaign trail THE TOP 2% WILL HAVE TO PAY MORE TAXES. He said it again, and again, and again. He posted it on his website, he said it on facebook, twitter, youtube. He said it on every debate. He said it in every speech, he said it in his acceptance speech. The people HAVE VOTED for him in a VERY WIDE majority.

      What is it the Republicans don't understand here???

      December 5, 2012 at 7:11 am |
    • uncdig

      Let's face it Obama would rather rule by phone – or by twitter – than go into a room with leaders and actually lead. Inferiority complex?

      December 5, 2012 at 6:31 pm |
  8. andrew.peter

    Is it just me, or is the President acting more and more like a dictator. Since when is it his job to determine legislation. He only has veto power. If a bill is vetoed, then 2/3 needs to override it. If there is no other option, then congress will have to override his veto to pass whatever is created in the LEGISLATIVE branch's bill.

    December 3, 2012 at 4:36 pm |
  9. ugh

    How many people use Twitter. Mr. President? I bet most Democrats do, because they have nothing else to do between Unemployment checks...

    December 3, 2012 at 5:01 pm |
  10. Big D

    Oweblamo, what a loser just like his constituents. Bet you clowns are proud.

    December 3, 2012 at 5:04 pm |
  11. carlos

    Sorry, but Obama is a pompus A$$ Clown

    December 3, 2012 at 5:05 pm |
    • David from San Francisco

      An Obama TSA re-education camp for you.

      December 3, 2012 at 5:07 pm |
    • wtf

      That is such a typical Republican reply, can't answer the question, name-calling without facts. This reply is definitely FACT!

      December 4, 2012 at 10:14 am |
    • weddingblogtest

      Call him what you want. He is the president of the United States elected and loved by the large majority of Americans. That's a fact. You don't want him to be your president, move to Mexico or Canada and let us know if you like it better there.

      December 5, 2012 at 7:14 am |
      • Caramon

        He is the president of the United States elected and loved by the large majority of Americans.

        Just because people voted for the President does not necessarily mean they love him. Some simply voted against Romney. Others voted for their own special interest.

        If I recall, the Constitution does not prohibit the right to question our leaders. Nor does it require us to leave if we do. I believe it is called the First Amendment.

        December 5, 2012 at 1:51 pm |
  12. Majestic

    I pledge allegiance to Mr. Grover Norquist (whoever he is) and swear to follow his advice re all tax issues. If I break this pledge, I understand I will be on Grover's "@#$ – LIST"

    December 3, 2012 at 5:05 pm |
  13. Big D

    Nothing worse than a Leftard.

    December 3, 2012 at 5:05 pm |
  14. David from San Francisco

    What did I say, censor?

    December 3, 2012 at 5:06 pm |
  15. Big D

    It's comical how the Left thinks so much of Obama. If he asked you to jump off a bridge, would you? I think you would

    December 3, 2012 at 5:07 pm |
  16. Big D

    I love Obama

    December 3, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
  17. tim

    after witnessing countless times folks using the welfare cards to get pop, chips, energy drinks, and all other masses of junk food at gas stations recently... I'd say, head for the cliff...jump.

    December 3, 2012 at 5:09 pm |
  18. Callmegee

    It is not considered negotiation when you say it must be done my way or not at all. Why would Obama let the middle class suffer rather than reach the same goal of raised revenue another way?

    December 3, 2012 at 5:10 pm |
  19. Sam

    You can't hammer out a deal with Republicans. The Republicans want there way or no way.

    December 3, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  20. Dan B

    Obama can make any of his followers believe anything he says. He can't face Republicans because when someone doesn't agree with him, he gets angry. His budget is pretty ridiculous. Republicans need to demand more cuts or walk away and let the Democrats screw up the country.

    December 3, 2012 at 6:15 pm |
    • jean2009

      Really what a bunch of poppycock.

      December 3, 2012 at 9:18 pm |
    • jean2009

      Honestly ......I'm going to send Alexander Mooney a thesaurus.

      December 5, 2012 at 10:17 am |
    • Claudia Joanne Renshaw

      Seems to me it is Boehner who is angry. Have you looked at his face. He has either been crying (which he can do at the drop of a hat), or he has been consoling himself with strong drink. He is looking beaten. We re-elected Mr. Obama. He said repeatedly what is his intention, and he is fighting for us. I say, if over the cliff (lol, I mean, the slant) we must go, then enjoy the ride.

      December 6, 2012 at 8:54 am |
  21. eviltaxpayer

    Our great comunity agitator obama is more interested in being "cool" than being the president.
    Let the economy collapse, its now or in 2014 when the final nail in americas coffin hits thatnk you obama (doesnt) care.
    When the welfare checks stop his army of leeches will riot then we can cull the heard and overthrow this marxist goverment.
    Let the collapse begin, this is what the liberals want anyway.

    December 3, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
  22. Alex

    Obama has an obligation to his supporters on the platform he fought election on – return the tax rate for the top 2% to Clinton era and protect the SS and Medicare!!! He won the election on that agenda. Republicans fought on reducing taxes for rich that was the major difference and lost.

    Is Congress more important than electorate??

    Obama don't compromise- We are behind you!!!
    Keep all the communication transparent so citizens can see. Make all the proposals posted on internet!!
    We are going to pay taxes and lose benefits – we have right to see before voted on.
    Make sure it is very simple! So there is no excuse to say not supported because of blah blah
    Bush Tax Cuts for people making less than $250K. Nothing else.
    All the people who are voting against or for pushed on internet...

    People we need to make sure the politicians who does not support loses election!!!

    December 3, 2012 at 6:32 pm |
    • Steveo

      Obama don't compromise- We are behind you!!!
      --------
      So if Obama does not compromise and Boehner does not compromise, where does that leave you and the rest of us?

      December 3, 2012 at 7:30 pm |
      • Ranger Luna

        Well, it has been rumored that he likes it from "behind."

        December 3, 2012 at 7:53 pm |
      • mforrest

        It means we all pay more taxes. I'm fine with that. As a country, we already have one of the lowest effective tax rates in the world. If people want more social services, we need to pay more in taxes.

        December 4, 2012 at 12:00 pm |
      • DDW 1946

        At the bottom of the cliff

        December 4, 2012 at 2:32 pm |
      • uncdig

        screwed

        December 5, 2012 at 6:36 pm |
      • Steveo

        uncdig,

        You got that right!

        December 5, 2012 at 8:29 pm |
    • janelle

      Since we seem to all be so enamored by the Clinton years, why don't we go back to them. Clinton era tax rates, AND CLINTON ERA SPENDING. Not to mention the Clinton era welfare reform, inabilty of Hilarycare to pass, etc. It wasn't just the tax rates that gave us economic growth, it was the amount of revenue related to federal spending as percentage of GDP etc. Our current President can't even work with anyone to pass a budget, much less a balanced one.

      December 3, 2012 at 7:30 pm |
      • jean2009

        Oh janelle....are you talking about those two fake sham budgets presented by Republican Representative, Mike Mulvaney of South Carolina in the House that was voted down 414-0, and the equally sham mock Obama budget brought to the floor of the Senate by Republican Senator, Jeff Session of Alabama which was voted down 99-0.....Right wing nut cases obviously will believe anything Fox tells them without checking actual facts.

        FYI The cost of what we are paying for now is due to all the borrowing for two unfunded wars....and bleeding the treasury dry to send every family a $600 or better rebate check each year to buy their votes for a second term.....and that was not Clinton's doing..

        December 3, 2012 at 9:03 pm |
      • purplerain

        Why did no Republican vote for those sham Republican Budgets?

        December 4, 2012 at 8:14 am |
      • Seb

        So right you are ! It's Obama's way or the Highway. Newt was the brains that helped the economy during the Clinton Era.
        The Russian news were correct when they stated the illiterate voted for Obama !

        December 4, 2012 at 8:17 am |
      • jean2009

        janelle- You do know that tax rates were 90-94% on incomes over $200,000 in the 1940's and under Eisenhower, and in 1953 the top tax rate was 92% on incomes over $200,000?.And that period of our history was considered Happy Day's!

        Read Henry Blodget's-The History of Taxes....July 12, 2011.... at the Business Insider website

        December 5, 2012 at 5:19 pm |
    • floridamom1

      No Alex, he won the election because people believed he would give them lots of free stuff off the backs of other people. And, surprisingly, a lot of people actually believe that nonsense.

      December 3, 2012 at 11:45 pm |
  23. CW

    It reads as if someone who was illiterate wrote that. If that is leadership, we are doomed.

    December 3, 2012 at 7:12 pm |
  24. arixskyfire

    Don't U.S. Corporations get a TAX RETURN just like the rest of us?

    December 3, 2012 at 7:23 pm |
  25. Dan B

    Alex, if Obama wants to go back to the Clinton era he has entitlement reforms to make too. People always seem to forget that Clinton raised taxes, but also cut a lot of waste less spending.

    December 3, 2012 at 7:24 pm |
  26. arixskyfire

    Don't U.S. Corporations get a tax return? Regular households get their tax return don't they?

    December 3, 2012 at 7:25 pm |
  27. Dan B

    Clinton era tax rates should come with Clinton era spending

    December 3, 2012 at 7:26 pm |
    • jean2009

      I would suggest reading the following article in Forbes for May 24, 2012 by Rick Unger.
      "Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would you Believe Barack Obama?"

      The article is accompanied by graphs, charts and credible source references....something most on here wouldn't and couldn't provide if life depended on it. .

      December 3, 2012 at 9:17 pm |
    • Caramon

      Or maybe read "Rick Ungar Is Wrong: Obama Is The Biggest Spender In World History" by Peter Ferrara also in Forbes September 20, 2012. It comes complete with whose budget was actually passed in 2008.

      December 3, 2012 at 9:31 pm |
      • jean2009

        The real question is who signed the budget in 2008? Plus, the budget signed in 2008 was for 2009 Budget year which ran from 10/1/2008 to 9/30/2009. You must remember for several years including the 2008 and the 2009 actual budgets were not passed it was the same as now a continual fight, a Budget Resolution was passed. These were continuing resolutions for appropriations. sources – u.s.gov and wiki.sites

        “But here’s the thing: If you want to spend 21 percent, you really need to tax 21 percent. If you want to tax only 18.5 percent, you can only spend 18.5 percent.” This isn’t true. The federal government can, and should, run a structural budget deficit in perpetuity. The key is just that the deficit should not be too large; roughly, 2 percent of GDP would be an acceptable figure....

        The actual problem is that George W. Bush's budgets that were passed from 2001-2006 were totally unsustainable deficits that were out of sync with the GDP.

        I would suggest reading: "The Bush Budget Deficit Death Spiral" at Common Dreams by Robert Freeman Oct.22, 2004

        December 5, 2012 at 10:03 am |
      • Caramon

        That would indicate that the Democrats who controlled both the House and the Senate failed to pass a budget in 2008 and 2009. And since we are playing musical articles...

        The actual problem is that George W. Bush's budgets that were passed from 2001-2006 were totally unsustainable deficits that were out of sync with the GDP. Read Obama’s Deficit Dodge at FactCheck dated September 28, 2012.

        However, I totally agree with this statement...

        “But here’s the thing: If you want to spend 21 percent, you really need to tax 21 percent. If you want to tax only 18.5 percent, you can only spend 18.5 percent.” This isn’t true. The federal government can, and should, run a structural budget deficit in perpetuity. The key is just that the deficit should not be too large; roughly, 2 percent of GDP would be an acceptable figure

        December 5, 2012 at 11:37 am |
      • jean2009

        The Democrats may have controlled the House, but the Senate was not a clear 60 majority and hasn't been for years....an I doubt if Bush would have signed anything he didn't agree with....so Budget resolution it was. Do you realize that is not all bad....when it is a Budget Resolution spending bill...Federal wages are frozen and cannot be increased.

        December 5, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
      • Caramon

        Jean, it seems relatively difficult to find out whether George Bush signed the 2008 budget resolution or not. From what I have found, it is passed and signed as a series of appropriations of which there were 12. Apparently George Bush did not sign all of them while he was in office. Also, I don't think the senate needs 60 percent when it concerns budget. Maybe you can find out more.

        December 5, 2012 at 10:09 pm |
      • jean2009

        Caramon Federal Budgets are signed, but Budget Resolutions are not....we hear so much about the President hasn't passed a budget....Well Hello! That practice has been going on a lot longer than this president, and is standard operating procedure when the House and Senate cannot agree...due to political inequalities. It happened during George W. Bush's administration, and many others.

        Read "White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew Says Budget Requires 60 Votes" a bit of flack was heaped on that statement....t a Budget Resolution only needs a simple majority of 51 votes, and the President doesn't sign it.
        "In fact, Mr Lew, while wrong on the narrow wording, is right on the substance. It is true that the Senate can pass a budget resolution with a simple majority vote. But for that budget resolution to take effect, it must have either the cooperation of the House, or at least 60 votes in the Senate."

        "Budget Resolutions

        The annual budget resolution is an agreement between the House and Senate on a budget plan for the upcoming fiscal year and at least the following four fiscal years. The budget resolution is in the form of a concurrent resolution , so it is not sent to the president for his signature and thus does not become law, but it does provide a framework for subsequent legislative action on the appropriations bills."

        Appropriation bills are basically the spending framework based on previous known facts....it probably works as well as a formal budget.

        December 6, 2012 at 2:16 pm |
  28. stephanie diane curry.

    taxes count_curry.

    December 3, 2012 at 7:49 pm |
  29. EllisF

    Why don't you understand? Taxing the "rich" doesn't work, they only pass the cost down to the working men and women. If resturant owners have to pay more in taxes we will pay more for eating there. Make the leaners and takers that pay zero taxes pay something even if its just a penny!

    December 3, 2012 at 8:47 pm |
  30. greginsgso

    Pres. Obama needs to stop acting like he is still campaigning and start to deal with the problems I voted for him to deal with. I was a reluctant Obama voter who really only had a choice of either not voting or voting against Romney by voting for Obama. You only received my vote, Mr. President, because I saw you as the lesser of two evils. Twitter is for dolts who have nothing better to do and like to hear themselves talk. Why are you wasting your time on twitter when there is so much that you need to be focusing on. You are a GREAT CAMPAIGNER, and a wonderful speaker, now how about showing us what kind of LEADER you are by making some painful choices. That means angering your base not pandering to them.

    December 3, 2012 at 9:13 pm |
  31. greginsgso

    Stop campaigning and start leading. Get off of twitter and start to deal with our problems.

    December 3, 2012 at 9:15 pm |
  32. Dan B

    I can't believe that jean, unless there is some funky math. Reagan spent more than Obama? By the way, anyone out there can answer this- any picks for Repub and Dem nominations 2016. No follow up, just wondering.

    December 3, 2012 at 10:31 pm |
    • JerryO

      The Country has to survive until then....

      December 4, 2012 at 7:19 am |
    • Kool-Aid Police

      It's all creative math, the real numbers don't back that up at all, by hey when a lefty says it then it's to be accepted as gospel. The bottom line is that the debt is larger today than when Obama took office therefore whatever the increase in the debt is belongs COMPLETELY to Obama, that's all the math you need.

      December 4, 2012 at 8:14 am |
      • William

        True.

        December 4, 2012 at 8:32 am |
    • Seb

      Yes! vote out all who have the highest Seniority. Get term limits, put all of Congress including the President on SS and Medicare. no more money for oil paintings or vacations at tax payer expense.As for your question there are no candidates on the horizon from either party who could straighten this mess out !

      December 4, 2012 at 8:24 am |
    • jean2009

      No it is not creative math....Reagan spent more for his era than Bush II, he tripled the national debt.

      December 5, 2012 at 6:10 pm |
  33. floridamom1

    And once again we see that Obama is playing games. Will he ever get off the campaign trail?

    December 3, 2012 at 11:33 pm |
  34. Chris

    I like the old days where the President stayed in Washington, met with Congressional leaders and LEAD!!! No twitter..no flying across he country....just good ol MEETINGS and calling in specialists when needed. This nonsense of 'bring it to the people' is just a publicity stunt. Get off the plane Mr President and DO SOMETHING!!

    December 4, 2012 at 6:33 am |
  35. Washington Is Out Of Touch with reality

    the campaign is over obama why dont you try to lead besides using your color to blame, because a storm is coming and you cannot do anything about it, people are arming themselves.

    December 4, 2012 at 7:01 am |
  36. JerryO

    The President needs to lose the cronies he has doing his bidding on the budget and set down with leaders from both parties and hammer out a deal on the budget now...

    December 4, 2012 at 7:18 am |
  37. William

    Republicans made a counter proposal. Instead of making speeches and lambasting on Twitter why doesn't he cancel his Hawaii vacation and negotiate?
    Oh right, Turbo Tax Tim is leading the negotiations.

    December 4, 2012 at 8:31 am |
    • Cynthia L.

      Since Congress will be gone for the holidays who is left to negotiate with? Duh. Besides, Hawaii is a state and should be able to have the President visit like he does the other states. Or, did you think it was another country?

      December 5, 2012 at 11:43 am |
  38. aesculapius

    obama, what a twit...

    December 4, 2012 at 9:20 am |
  39. aesculapius

    lol. moderate your face cnn POS's

    December 4, 2012 at 9:24 am |
  40. BarryG

    As one of the "rich" who make $250k, I am now starting to think, let the cliff thing happen, since my taxes go up either way with Obama. The thing that also kicks in that Obama doesn't want to do is mandatory program cuts which have to happen on the cliff, which I am in favor of. So everyone hold hands, "we are going over the cliff".

    December 4, 2012 at 10:32 am |
  41. Vickie

    Twitter? Really????? Sounds a little juvenile. If I speak on Twitter I don't have to have face to face combat with someone who disagrees with me....and I can use as much time as I need in order to respond to the other tweeters' concerns and ideas. That's why I am on Twitter to begin with....for ideas....I HAVE NO CLUE AS TO WHAT I AM DOING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Think anyone will notice?????

    December 4, 2012 at 10:33 am |
  42. Janet

    He's still campaigning. How about doing some WORK??? Or would that take away from your photo-op moments?

    December 4, 2012 at 11:27 am |
  43. DP

    When will either side going to address the $1 Trillion per year deficit. We need a plan that cuts 10 times the amount the dem and repub plans are proposing.

    December 4, 2012 at 11:56 am |
  44. OBomba

    Though many Americans are quite gullible, all in the know recognize that Obama intends to destroy our economy to show that capitalism has failed and that we need to new kind of government–Communism. Thus, whether we go off the fiscal cliff or simply implement irresponsible policies that further destroy our economy, it doesn't matter to him. We will still be on tract to meet his objectives.

    December 4, 2012 at 11:56 am |
  45. Fish

    The President should focus on reinstating Glass-Steagall to improve the economy to permenantly heal the fiscal cliff. He has neglected to deal with repealing the Bush Doctrine as we expected when we elected him the first time. After 4 years, we are still waiting, no more excuses!!!

    December 4, 2012 at 12:17 pm |
  46. Overland Park

    If Obama could stimulate the private sector, which would create jobs in this country, then we wouldn't need all of this entitlement spending – then taxes could come down. However, his goal to move the US towards Socialism, and we are very close to a tipping point. Once we are more Socialist than not, with our fiat currency, the US will simply collapse financially. Another problem is that the government is inefficient. Hold management accountable for efficiency and fire 20% of the government staff – that will go a LONG way to solving our problems. And yes, it can be done – if you don't thinks so that is for one simple reason: you have never worked for the government!

    December 4, 2012 at 12:30 pm |
  47. judy

    as usual repos pull their facts and numbers out of the air. Why bother even discussing it with them . They have been citing polls and budgets all through the election . Except somebody sitting down and writing down numbers is not a budget and asking a question on twitter is not a poll. But you cant explain it to these idiots,

    December 4, 2012 at 2:16 pm |
  48. Christine

    I'm not so sure that any of the duly elected officials have attempted to roll up their sleeves and really hammer out a plan. The fiscal cliff is one more in a long list of unattended, ignored and or pushed off til after the last minute issues that face us all. It is what our government does, delay delay delay. Our economy, despite their publicized reports is not getting better. The debt that we have accumulated is beyond rediculous. Lets compare Obama's personal check book. I promise that he nor any other person who claims to be responsible and hard working is spending money that isnt there. Not to mention the bank. I believe that a bad check or multi bad checks is a felony offense. We are spending money we don't have and refuse (seen by lack of true effort and not only with the fiscal cliff) to DO anything to really make a difference. We couldn't do worse with a bunch of second graders making these decisions.

    I am saddened by this countries current financial disaster and even more disappointed in the ability of those that we have put in place to make the decisions that control the future of our world as we know it. STOP THE BLEEDING STOP THE SPENDING!

    December 4, 2012 at 3:12 pm |
  49. Dan B

    Judy, your friend jean just pulled numbers out of the air... By the way 2016 nomination picks anyone?

    December 4, 2012 at 3:54 pm |
    • jean2009

      Yea Dan...but that air just happened to be from Fox News.

      December 5, 2012 at 10:12 am |
    • Cynthia L.

      I know you like to think Fox Entertainment News is 'Fair and Balanced' so how about the woman reporter from Fox telling General Petraeus that Murdock would bankroll his presidental run and Roger Ailes would put forth talking points of his choosing?? Busted.

      December 5, 2012 at 11:56 am |
  50. freedom

    Will someone please clue in the president that he was re-elected and he doesn't need to keep campaigning on twitter? This is not only embarassing, but damaging. Why isn't he leading? Why isn't he meeting with Congress to reconcile our fiscal issues? This is no time for community organizing. Get to work!

    December 4, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
    • Cynthia L.

      The American people on the most part, like it when a President cares about what they think and reaches out for their opinions. But, Republicans don't govern that way by evidence of your diss. I say good for him for doing it. Keep it up, Mr. President.

      December 5, 2012 at 11:47 am |
    • Caramon

      President cares about what they think and reaches out for their opinions...

      Does that include me, a nasty old white guy?

      December 5, 2012 at 12:41 pm |
      • jean2009

        i'm sure he does include you, but facts are facts Caramon....when faced with hard choices and with facts the president will select the method which is best for the majority of people. I think for him the key word is sometimes "majority" (maybe not), but it will always be based on who will be hurt the least by his actions, and who would be hurt the most if he did not make the right choice. Life is not always going to go your way, or my way when these choices are made.

        My feeling is he doesn't make these decisions lightly. He is not going to cut Medicare or Social Security and balance the federal budget on the backs of those least fortunate just to keep people who are doing really well from paying 3 cents more on every dollar over $250,000. for which they can't find a write-off, loophole, or tax deduction.

        December 5, 2012 at 5:46 pm |
      • Caramon

        You know Jean, I have not argued against the tax increases. Unfortunately, if you read through all of these posts, for and against, they are all about increased revenue. Very little discussion if any about spending cuts. I know that Giethner has supposedly sent Congress a list of cuts. Is there anyplace at all where these cuts can be viewed by us?

        December 5, 2012 at 9:41 pm |
      • jean2009

        I doubt very much if there is any place where we can view the current list of proposed cuts that are the suggestions made by the White House. I did read the GOP cuts proposed in the Ryan plan and those were a joke and sensibly so the President would never sign on to them.

        I'm sure, if they sit you and me down in a room with the federal budget and said: We need to cut the federal budget by this amount of $ over X number of years...and remember do it so it doesn't hurt people who are already hurting, or those working within limited means. I think that you an me wouldn't have make the bulk of the cuts where the Ryan Plan did....and we would have taken a bigger pair of scissors to that bloated military budget, and the federal hog trough for big corporations.

        December 6, 2012 at 1:35 pm |
  51. Megamimi

    Rather than tweeting, why not meet with the leaders of Congress on both sides of the aisle? Campaigner in chief, not chief executive.

    December 5, 2012 at 8:05 am |
    • jean2009

      He has...now it is time for Bonehead to throw in the towel....rates are going up on those who make over $200,000 per year.
      John Boehner said an hour ago, that tax rates for the wealthy are going up.

      December 5, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
      • uncdig

        So now it's $200,000 – knew we couldn'ttrust O. Why don't you go get your welfare check & buy some more crack.

        December 5, 2012 at 6:38 pm |
      • jean2009

        Sorry for missing the 5...
        A.) I do not receive welfare
        B) I do not do crack..
        .and if we go over the fiscal cliff my taxes will go up with everyone else's. My feeling is if we do.... so be it... I've actually lived and survived when tax rates were much higher. How old are you.... probably not dry behind the ears?

        December 6, 2012 at 1:44 pm |
  52. Dan B

    Jean, 200,000 isn't that much, and for a small business owner in a place like New York with a dual income of that much and already high state taxes that would be tough.

    December 5, 2012 at 8:04 pm |
    • Steveo

      Reid and Pelosi suggested a cool $1M as the starting point. These two are making a little sense! I thought the full moon was a week or two ago!

      December 5, 2012 at 8:38 pm |
    • jean2009

      Dan $250,000 is not a lot. i agree that in some areas such as LA and NY it costs a lot more to live...I have stated many time that starting number could be higher....and I am sure the president is open to that suggestion. But currently the GOP has been using people in that $250.000 income range as a shield to keep those making more from higher taxes.

      December 6, 2012 at 1:16 pm |