November 26th, 2012
07:17 AM ET
POTUS' Day Ahead: Staying behind closed doors Good morning from the White House. After a long holiday weekend, the president is back to work at the White House and out of view from the public eye. On the schedule today is his usual daily briefing and then a meeting with senior advisors. As is normally the case, those meetings are not open to the press. Jay Carney will brief reporters at 1:30 pm. Full schedule:
|
  |
 |
|||
|
|
|
||||
Hope to see progress on the fisical cliff. Norquist is really unhappy
Judy – I hope Obama calls Boehner's bluff – He campaigned on the ppl that make more than 250K must pay their fair share. To be perfectly honest – I really don't think much will happen, if we go over that so called fiscal cliff thing. The republican congress will end up kicking the can down the road, and after the 2014 mid-terms -you will see things getting done.
I think we should all be happy that Norquist is finally irrelevant and unhappy. He is the idiot that thought it perfectly okay to charge two wars on the federal credit card, without raising the revenue to pay for what the government was buying to fight those wars. Grover was all for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that is until the war turned sour for him....now he is doing a Mitt flip-flop. 2006 Grover Norquist: "The Democrats were on the wrong side of the Civil War, the Cold War, and the Iraq War."
I'm glad Alexander has pointed out that the President will receive his USUAL daily briefing...something that Howard claims he doesn't usually receive.
Warren Buffett had an opinion piece in the NYTs today. CNN gave a nod to it but, left out some interesting facts.
Buffett pointed out that the Forbes 400, who are the wealthiest in America, hit a new group record for wealth this year – $1.7 TRILLION. That's MORE THAN 5 TIMES the $300 Billion total in 1991, leaving the middle class in the dust.
The group average income in 2009 was $202 Million which works out to be $97,000 AN HOUR BASED ON A 40 HOUR WORK WEEK.
Read his op-ed for more interesting data. SPOILER ALERT – He disses those that use a Cayman Island drop box to avoid paying taxes.
Raising taxes may fund the govt for a week but won't even dent the debt. Buffett doesn't care either since he only claims a salary less than his secretary, the rest he takes in gains. I don't blame him for taking advantage of tax laws but just don't preach to everyone else when he has a clear choice to pay more if he wants. Either way this works out we know that any extra revenue will quickly be spent and the debt will continue to balloon.
According to the CBO raising taxes on the wealthy will not hurt the economy. As for spending...
"Repeat After Me:" Obama Cut the Deficit and Spending to the Lowest Level in 50 Years" -Bob Cesca 10/10/2012
And the CBO projected that the 2013 Obama budget, if enacted as is, would shrink the deficit to $977 billion - a four year total of nearly $500 billion in deficit reduction.The President signed the statutory Pay As You Go Act in 2010...Which states that new spending has to be offset by spending cuts. Do you know how many Rethugliklans voted for that bill....ZIP! NADA! NONE?
So don't get on here and preach about wanting to cut spending....this president did not start two wars without providing the revenue to pay for the cost. Obviously you don't know how to research FACTS.
jean2009 – you can't talk to these people – they are going to try to tell you that the sky is blue, in the dead of night. I guess when 2014 mid terms comes rolling around, things will change, believe me. Obama will end up having a Democratic Congress. People are so fed up with this do nothing Congress, it's pathetic.
Obama Cut the Deficit and Spending to the Lowest Level in 50 Years" -Bob Cesca 10/10/2012
Quite frankly I am not certain I really care what Bob Cesca said. The deficit has grown and this is a fact. As far as the CBO is concerned, they originally stated that Obamacare would cost 1 T. Then it was re-calculated to 2.7 T.
Personally, I believe the Rethuglicans will give in to tax increases. Despite intended cuts, spending will still increase especially without a budget.
Caramon-Go to National Priorities .org -President Obama's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget -Look in particular at the chart of deficits in relation to GDP. The president also extended the federal pay freeze for federal workers until congress does pass a budget. The president can send down a budget, but it is not his fault if congress doesn't pass it. And no the fact is the rate of growth for the federal deficit has slowed....added revenue would help.
Can you explain logically why the GOP didn't vote for a bill that would make us pay as we go?
Brian Riedl said that PAYGO didn't provide as much discipline as some claim because Congress repeatedly used gimmicks or took steps to ignore it. Yes, PAYGO rules provided some discipline that might have restrained Congress from adding more spending or new tax cuts, but the economy and the defense cuts were the biggest factors that led to the balanced budget.
Perhaps Jean it simply sounded better than it was.
For starters any move that cuts that bloated defense budget is a good thing.
They won't actually "cut" anything, they'll at best reduce baseline growth. It'll probably go the way it has in the past, tax increases will be immediate and cuts will be decided on later which means they may not even happen. Jean for you to claim that Obama has somehow spent the least in 50 years is downright hilarious! He's operated without a budget and decifits have been $1trillion plus every year he's been in office.
Democrats have the will to see our debt reduced no matter how Republicans paint it, spin it or, obstruct it.
Yes, they have done a marvelous job reducing the debt in the past 4 years. Do you think the Senate may actually have a budget this time?
The GOP is protesting changes to the filibuster rules. The miniority party in the Senate are the Republicans and they have totally abused the process of passing bills and the American people know it. When the filibuster is used by the minority party 380 + times in the last 4 years that is ABUSE. Protesting Senators no longer have to stand in front of the rest of the Senate for 15 hours or more to try and give reason for blockage of a bill. They can just call it in and suffer no consequences. The minority Republicans have insisted on a Super Majority vote of 60. Our country moved forward rather nicely with 51 votes to pass bills before, and I don't care who is in power that should be reinstated.
The people of this nation want OUR BUSINESS TO BE CONDUCTED and those that continue to block the business of the people are going to suffer the anger they deserve!
And how exactly does this related to the excessive spending budget that was voted down unanimously by the Senate?
I don't care if it was voted down fairly.
Should have said; As long as it is voted down fairly.
I'm confused do you mean the 2014 budget? That won't be sent to Congress until February, 2013, where the House actually works on the President's budget proposal first when it is analysed by the CBO, and comes to the Budget Committee.
The president sent Congress his 2013 budget proposal last February 2012. You can either read the budget proposed by the President as a pdf at the gov site, or a condensed break down on the Washington Post site. Many real cuts in spending were proposed...but the House GOP were unhappy with the cuts ...therein is the problem. The GOP wants to keep on spending for things like tanks the army doesn't need, or even want, and not raise funds to pay for the items purchased, but they want to gut programs and balance the burden of those cuts on the backs of those who can least afford to pay.
Then in March 2012 Paul Ryan released his 2013 budget resolution which included a voucher system for Social Security and Medicare which he knew the Senate wouldn't pass in any form of its revision of his revision, and that the president wouldn't sign.
So Caramon, please tell me where the Senate was in the mix that caused the problem, and where you got the silly notion the Senate was at fault?
Jean, since you are somewhat confused, I will sum up the conversation.
Cynthia made comment that the Democrats will reduce the deficit.
My comment is they haven't been successful in the past 4 years.
Cynthia made comment that Senate Republican filibuster was the cause.
I then commented that the Senate voted down the President's budget unanimously. It was actually voted down unanimously in 2012 and 2013. Therefore, it was not Republican filibuster.
My only comment blaming the Senate was the simple fact that they have not passed a single budget in four years.
Oh, apparently the Presidents 2013 budget was also voted down in the House 0-414.
Caramon, I did not say that the filibuster was the cause of the budget failing. I was complaining about things not being fairly voted on in general.
I wouldn't have voted on the budget either after the Republicans in Congress got their sticky fingers all over the budget to get it through to the Senate. Nobody thought it was a good idea to pass the crap that was added and the stuff they wanted to cut . There. That's your answer, which I was adding an expanding comment to the first part of your snark in your post about how the president has improved the economy – which he has helped to do.
My apologies Cynthia.
Caramon The 2013 budget President Obama sent to Congress was never even voted on. What was voted on was an alternative budget submitted by Republican Representative, Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina, and yes it was voted down by a GOP House due to that misguided "let us make this President a one term president" option that failed.
"White House officials said Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), the sponsor of the alternative, was using Obama's top-line spending and revenue numbers as a budget proposal, without any specifics. On the House floor, Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) agreed that Mulvaney's amendment was not, in fact, Obama's entire budget proposal."- Source The HIll
Maybe you need to get your facts straight.
Well, you got me there Jean. But also according to the Hill a 2013 budget was voted down 99-0 in the Senate. Since the House budget didn't pass, I would think it was a different budget. So, who proposed the Senate budget?
Caramon – Because that Senate budget was also an alternative budget offered by Senator Jeff Session (R-Ala) (Source The Hill)
"The White House sought to provide cover for Democrats to vote against the Obama budget resolution before the vote, arguing the resolution offered by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) was different from Obama’s budget because it did not include policy report language.
Democrats made the same point on the floor Wednesday in explaining their votes.
The Senate also voted on four GOP budget blueprints, which were all defeated."
I'm amazed that you are so gullible...from you I expected better. Are you so brainwashed by the right that you actually believe Democratic congressmen and senators would in mass vote against the actual budget legislation the President presented...really?
These were not the only budget proposals rejected in 2013....the Ryan proposal, and even one based on the Simpson-Bowle's proposal were rejected in the House.
What has happened for the last 4 years is a recalcitrant/ obstructionist GOP who lost the 2008 election, and in their determination to make a legally elected president a one term president have continually thumbed their nose at the White House, while mooning the will of the majority of the electorate.
Well Jean, this brings me back to my original question. Did the Senate Democratic leaders propose a budget, any budget at all? Nice cut and paste from The Hill.
And what about the 2011 budget submitted by the President? Was it the President's budget that was voted down 97-0 or something a Republican submitted? You were correct about the 2013 Budget. It was not the Presidents plan. My apologies.
Caramon ....You are a dreamer if you think it would not have been filibustered to death, and it takes a 2/3's majority to pass either house for a spending bill. As a matter of fact, the Senate spending level agreement by both parties during the previous summer( 2011)when they reached a bipartisan debt-deal seemed to cover what was necessary. As someone who has been party to preparing a few budgets...not on the scale of the Federal budget, by any means....the fact is, a budget is only a guesstimate based on previous known situations and facts...with no crystal ball included for the unexpected. The only known fact is you can't keep spending what you are not taking in...then remember the one thing Congress has the power to do is levy taxes under Article 1 Sections 7 & 8 of the Constitution.
Basically, the whole fiasco was one of the major reason Olympia Snow decided to retire. We all know certain facts Congress is dysfunctional. This is not about the President's budget proposal, it is about Congress being dysfunctional.
Maybe read at: Politico Senate Games: Every Budget Goes Down -Scott Wong 5-16-12
Have you ever seen the one-page poster book by Jess Bachman titled "Death & Taxes? Sort of an eye-opener.
Arrgh awaiting the moderator again.
Caramon whether you call it a budget or a spending resolution the President's spending resolution has cut the amount of the "spending resolution" deficit each year. The fact that is still not enough to be balanced is obvious to everyone without all the whining....at least it is less than the "budget" deficit of the Bush years....still waiting on the moderator.
Jean, a simple question. Did the President submit a budget in 2011 and did the Senate vote it down 97-0?
Caramon you seem to be misinformed – read – Fox News- "Congress Passes Budget For 2011, Sends To Obama For Signature"
Congress on Thursday passed a long-awaited budget funding the government for the rest of the fiscal year, though dozens of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle voted against the compromise proposal.
The legislation making $38.5 billion in cuts from domestic programs now goes to President Obama for his signature. He is expected to sign the bill into law Friday.
Final vote in the House was 260-167, with 59 Republicans opposing.
The Senate final vote was 81-19,with 14 Republicans dissenting
Whats-his-name stays behind doors. It was reported, if I read correctly that in private negoations with the republicians the adminstration did nothing because they were unhapppy with the deal. So will we have a budget in this next 4 years or will we just have continuing resolutions? Until the democrats have the votes in the senate there will be no budget. No nothing but delays waiting for the political climate to change.
You do know one of the good things about a continuing resolution is it freezes all federal employees wages at the wage in the last passed budget, including the salary of those who voted for the resolution?
I think you might be a little too sure of your budget predictions, Ray. Republicans are seriously worried about loosing the Congress in the next go around, as they should be. They've been publically kicking both Romney and ol' Grover to the curb and pulling away from the Tea Pubs. More so, everyday.
@Ray – you continue to amaze me, with your one sided – and fox news type of remarks, on a lot of these posts . To answer your comment , it goes like this : Just wait til the mid-terms, in 2014 – I have a funny feeling that the GOP is going to be blown out of the water, so this administration can get things done, for the voters of this country. So, the bottom line is this : If they(Boehner & company) kick the can down the road til 2014, It wouldn't surprise me.
Larry, it will be very difficult to predict what will happen in 2014. I remember the number of journalists predicting the finish of the Republican party in 2008. The 2012 election was won only by 2 percent in the popular vote. There are still many conservative districts who want some balance in government. That is what the check and balance system is about. However, I would have to agree with Cynthia. Republicans are worried. They need to have some leadership and well defined goals. Right now, it doesn't appear to be happening.
There are some good folks in the Republican party that need to address this right away because, letting John McCain be the mouthpiece for your party is only sealing the deal on a burial plot. Not what I want to see but, it will happen if they can't find balance and most of all, rational leadership in the party that isn't afraid to face it's own extreme factions. People will continue to pull away and no amount of voter suppression, gerry-mandering districts or, big money backing will stop that train.
rational leadership in the party-I agree
I think that any Democrat who says that my party needs to diversify itself is right, the Republicans do. I think that if Republicans wrren't so hard line on issues that turn away some voters that they would win far more elections. People view the Repubs like they view the Tea Party and I guarantee not every Republican is as hard line as the Tea Party. Republicans win on economic issues already, but lose a lot of other categories. I think that the Republicans should and will do some soul searching and see if they like the path that they are on. The Democrats did the same thing in 1992 when they had not had a Democrat president since 1980
I LOVE MY COUNTRY AND AM PROUD TO HAVE SERVED IN WAR AND PEACE. IF I HAD A WISH I WOULD SEE ALL HAVE TURN AT SERVING THEIR COUNTRY IN UNIFORM, YOU MAY SEE THINGS THAT WOULD GIVE YOU SENSE OF PRIDE IN YOUR FAMILY AND COUNTRY THAT YOU HAVE MISSED SOMEWHERE IN YOUR LIFE. YOU MIGHT ALSO
BE VERY SELECTIVE OF THE SOCIAL MEDIA THAT TURNS GOOD FOLKS INTO SLOBS.
IF YOU THINK OF ANY VET AS A GRANDFATHER,MOST OF YOU WILL VOMIT,IF YOU THINK OF A VET AS YOUR
FATHER YOU HAVE NOTHING BUT LOVE AND RESPECT. WHEN YOU HAVE ONLY HATE YOU HAVE A LOVE OF
OB , YOU NEED HELP!!!!!!! THIS DUDE IS ONLY INTERESTED IN THE DESTRUCTION OF THE COUNTRY WE HAVE AND
THAT GAVE US AND PROTECTED OUR RIGHTS. I WAS ONCE YOUNG AND HAD OTHER THOUGHTS,BUT HAD RE-
SPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES. YOU MIGHT THINK LONG AND HARD TO WHAT YOUR DUTIES AND RESPONSIBLITIES
ARE TO YOUR FAMILY,WIFE,CHILDREN AND COUNTRY REALLY ARE. SCREW YOUR LEARNED PROF. IN THE BIG
SCHOOL-THEY HAVE AN AGENDA THAT WILL PUT YOUR RIGHTS IN THE TOILET.
I WISH TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO OPOLIGIZE TO NO ONE FOR WHAT I MAY HAVE SAID. YOU SEE I HAVE A RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH AS WELL AS OTHERS. I WILL NEVER GIVE THEM UP TO ANYONE,BE IT THE NUT IN THE HOUSE OF WHITE OR THE HOUSES OF CONGRESS. IT IS NOT OFTEN THAT I CAN SPEAK IN THIS FASHION AS IT SEEMS BIG BRO, ONLY LETS A VERY FEW TO COMMENT WITHOUT JOINING A RABBLE OUTLET THAT WILL MONITOR ME---THE NET IS GETTING MORE RESTRICTIVE AS THINGS GET MORE "PROGRESSIVE",IF YOU GET MY MEANING. IF YOU REALLY BELIEVE IN A FREE AMERICA,SPEAK OUT AS A TRUE AMERICAN WITH YOUR OPINIONS
AND NOT THOSE OF OTHERS. YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT LIES ARE NOT WHAT WE ARE ALL ABOUT,BUT
OUR FREEDOMS AS AMERICANS. DO AS YOU WILL,IT'S YOUR LIFE NOW AND YOUR CHILDRENS–MAKE YOUR
THOUGHTS AND DEEDS FRUITFUL FOR THE FUTURE,THE FUTURE IS NOT FOR YOU, BUT FOR YOUR CHILDREN.ROOS.
OB SHOULD STAY BEHIND CLOSED DOORS,HE IS PART OF THE PROBLEM AND NOT PART OF THE SOLUTION,HE HAS
AN EGO AND AGENDA THAT IS THE TOTAL DESTRUCTION OF OUR WAY OF LIFE. IF YOU ARE FAT DUMB AND ALIVE
YOU REALLY NEED TO GO ON A DIET AND GET YOUR SORRY CRAP TOGETHER AND SEE THE LIGHT AS TO WHAT
HE IS DOING TO EACH AND EVERYONE OF US IN AMERICAN. HE IS A USER AND CON MAN–YOU KNOW THE DUDE
DOWN THE BLOCK WHO IS SELLING DRUGS TO YOUR KIDS-NOT HIM IN THE FLESH,BUT THOSE WHO HE MAKES IT
EASEY TO KILL YOUR KIDS. ITS THE CHICAGO POLITICS AND TOTALLY THOSE WHO ARE DEMOCRATES. yES I SAID
THE F-WORD –DEMOCRAT--.MY FIRST PARTY WAS AS A DEMOCRATE--JFK --HE WAS A FATHER AND NOT A
HUSBAND--ALL THE KENNEDY FAMILY FOLLOWED SUIT AND DESTOYED THE IMAGE,AS DID ALL THE REST OF
THAT FOLLOWED. YOUNG JOHN AND HIS BRIDE DID NOT -–TEDDY WAS A SHIT ,HIS DATE DIED AND HE SWAM
TO THE NEAREST BAR,----THE DEMS IN ACTION,ON THE BEACH AND IN THE BARS.IN THE SENATE. IT SUCKS!
I AM ON A RUN FOLKS–NOT OFTEN A COMMENT SECTION THAT WILL LET A VET SPEAK HIS MIND AS FEABLE AS
YOU MAY THINK IT MAY BE. JFK MADE A TRIP TO WEISBADEN GERMANY WHILE I WAS STATIONED AT USAFE, HE WAS IN MY SIGHTS AS HE PASSED I SHOT HIM ON FILM, HE WAS A GREAT HERO TO THE GERMAN PUBLIC THEN-
AND FOR A LONG TIME,TO ALL OF US. THEN THE TERD REVERTED TO THE MALE KENNEDY FASHION AS JUST
ANOTHER PUSSY HUNTER AS THE REST OF THE FAMILY WAS RECORDED FOR THAT ERA. NOT PROUD OF WHAT
I HAVE NOTED OF THOSE WHO WERE SWORN TO REPRESENT OUR COUNTRY. AN THE STORY GOES ON----
IS OB RESPONSIBLE FOR PAST DEMS-NO–HE IS JUST ANOTHER DASTERDLY EPISODE OF THE THINGS THEY DO
AND WILL FURTHER ERODE US AS A NATION AND TO THE WORLD------–
Thank you for your past service, but I totally disagree. BTW are you off your meds, or just another brainwashed Fox troll? Regardless of what you think the moderator is here too.
JEANNIE2009--–GROW UP
Nam Vet, are you wearing that Darth Vader outfit around the house again??
At age 77, I am grown up...and FYI my real name is neither Jean or Jeanie, my first job was when I was 15 cleaning bird cages, and CNN does have a moderator....my suggestion is quit whining with that Nam Vet swill, and if you are not off your meds you could certainly use some.
EVER GET BLISTERS ON YOUR HANDS FROM HARD WORK AT 30 CENTS A MILE LONG ROW OF POTATOES,OBJECT
BEING TO PULL MUSTARD WEEDS FROM THE ROW. YOU NEVER DID THAT WHEN YOU WERE AN EARLY TEEN DID
YOU. WELL I DID AND I LIED WHEN I TOLD THE BOSS I DID ONE ROW JUST TO GET MY 30 CENTS FOR THE BLOODY
FINGERS.. NOT PROUD OF THAT-------WE ARE NOT ALL AS WE WOULD LIKE OURSELVES TO BE,BUT
LIVE THE BEST LIVES WE CAN AND DO BETTER FOR OUR KIDS. WE ALSO LEARN FROM THE THINGS WE DID AND
IMPROVED IN OUR ETHICS IN THE WAY WE WORKED. WHAT I WISH TO REWARD YOU WITH IS TO KNOW YOUR
LIMITATIONS AND LEARN TO DO THE THE RIGHT THING. YOU WILL FEEL BETTER FOR IT AND BE A BETTER FATHER
AND HUSBAND.-DO YOU REALLY CARE?????
PLEEZE DO NOT THANK ME FOR MY SERVICE-MY FAMILY DID THAT 40 YRS AGO,THANK THE HERE AND NOW THAT KEEP YOUR SORRY ASS SAFE AND VOCAL.
hiding behind closed doors more like it