How Obama and the Democrats Dropped the Ball…Again

Dr. Marc Lamont Hill says America is left with the burden of paying for the embarrassing ineptitude of Obama and the Democrats

The Senate’s passing of the debt-ceiling bill yesterday effectively ended weeks of partisan squabbling, but it marked yet another Democratic political defeat at the hands of the Republican Party, which has brought President Obama and his colleagues to their political knees over the past 12 months.

For more than a month, Democrats and Republicans have spoken ad nauseam about the need for “compromise” and “mutual sacrifice.” It’s hard to imagine how Republicans can say such words without snickering, as they walked away with nearly everything they wanted without meeting any of Obama’s demands.

Despite having the lowest tax rates in 80 years, the country’s wealthiest citizens will not be paying a penny more in taxes. No extension of benefits will be given to the nation’s 3.8 million unemployed. Oil and gas companies will not be forced to surrender their obscene tax loopholes and federal subsidies. Considerable spending cuts will be made across the board, jeopardizing necessary social programs as well as the country’s capacity for economic growth.

From the looks of things, the only thing being compromised and sacrificed are poor and middle-class Americans.

The president’s protectors will say that this was a necessary evil. Had he not made this deal, they argue, the nation would have spiraled into economic peril. Even if this were true, such an argument is only persuasive if we limit our analysis to the past few months. In truth, the president made a series of critical errors long before this week’s meltdown.

More than a year ago, while caving on the Bush tax cuts, Obama could have demanded that Republicans separate a vote on the debt ceiling from a vote on debt reduction. A few months ago, he could have mounted an aggressive offensive against the GOP and tea-party extremists by painting them as selfish ideologues willing to sacrifice the nation’s economic welfare for political points. As recently as last week, he could have pointed out that the GOP’s debt-reduction strategy does nothing to address our nation’s most desperate problem: joblessness.

Instead, Obama retreated to his all-too-familiar defensive position, responding rather than initiating and letting Republicans set the terms of the debate. As a result, the nation was seduced into believing that entitlement programs were the reason for our economic crisis and that tax increases for the ultra-rich would prevent our economic recovery.

Most disturbingly, he continued to govern for consensus and peace when his opponents have shown no interest in conceding even the smallest point.

Author Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, host of 'Our World with Black Enterprise'

In the words of Sonny Corleone, Obama spent too much time trying to patch things up and too little time trying to win.

Ironically, yesterday’s loss may be the reason for Obama’s victory in 2012. In the aftermath of the shellacking, Obama can now paint himself as a reasonable statesman willing to put his country’s well-being over his own political interests. In doing so, he endears himself to the flaky moderates and independents who abandoned him after the equally bloody health-care debates.

Of course, cynics will argue that this was Obama’s plan all along. They will claim that he willingly threw the nation’s vulnerable under the bus in order to shake off the “radical socialist” label that has followed him since the 2008 presidential elections.

Such a claim, however, is both unfair and unrealistic because he has done nothing to suggest that he is unprincipled enough to deliberately hurt his voting base. More importantly, he has done nothing to show that he could successfully execute such a complicated plan.

The more likely possibility is that the president and congressional Democrats simply dropped the ball again. Despite having more than enough resources to win, they continually find ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Sadly, we are the ones who have to pay for their embarrassing ineptitude.

Story originally published on philly.com

ACROSS THE WEB
  • Corey

    Very good article! Very good point; most disturbingly, he continued to govern for consensus and peace when his opponents have shown no interest in conceding even the smallest point. I think this president make way to many compromises at times when he should be going for jugular. I’m not sure if it’s a political or a cultural thing. I’m incline to believe it’s the latter.

    • decoratedvet

      The author gave you the answer here “ineptitude” Obama is a bungling inept individual that has never led anything to completion. He is very apt at spinning yarns but could not lead a group out of a paper bag. He shows us time and time again.

      • Corey

        That’s the author’s definition. I’m not subscribing to the author’s definition.

      • James

        I’ll second that emotion!!!

    • JW

      When the downside for not getting a deal done is what it was, you don’t have room for petty politics. As someone who is in the financial markets seing markets down 5% today after S&P downgraded the US, the cost of not getting anything done would have been much greater. Then you’d all be talking about how Obama should have compromised and saved the little that’s left in people’s 401(k)s.

      When your worst outcome is worse than your opponents, you’re screwed, period. Considering that fact, it’s actually a wonder the Republicans didn’t try to get more done because they had less to lose.

  • Lita

    Can anyone tell me how the President can FORCE the Senate and/or House to do what he wants how he wants? Wasn’t it the People who voted these Anti-Obama folks into office? Is this article to say that our President would not have dropped the ball if he’d been uncompromising and allowed the deadline to pass? I believe that the only way for ONE to drop the ball is when that ONE is soley responsible for any and all decisions made. It’s so easy to call the game from the bleachers, isn’t it?

    • Fred

      Lita, You comment is absolutely excellent. You completely understand the issue. I agree with you 100%. I wish some of the citizens and voters would assume their responsibility. The president is our representative leader. He did not drop the ball. America is not a dictatorship. It is time for all of these people to help fix the American crisis rather than delegating all of their responsibility to the President.

    • Nicole19

      Bravo! You must have total control over said ball to drop same!

    • robert

      Why is it that every time Obama doesn’t win it is racist.

      Hot news flash he sucks he has never held a real job in his life in the senate he was famous for voting present to avoid anything negative.

      We voted in different people because him and his cronies shoved obamacare up our butts and tried to push more stimulus which is not the way to fix the economy.

      Please take off your blinders and see the true person he is a little whiny loser who wants socialism.

      And before you start your stupid attacks I voted for Clinton twice, Gore and Kerry so Obama is the reason I was forced to vote for McCain.

    • jmb

      No, he cannot force congress to do what he wants. He has to work with them. Unfortunately for him, America gave him a lot of latitude at the start with a house majority, a senate super-majority and the presidency. He squandered that opportunity by pursuing an ideological angenda with impunity most Americans didn’t agree with. America responded by saying move to the middle, quickly. He hasn’t and because our economy not only hasn’t improved, it’s been getting worse, he has no leverage. Most of America is tired of listening to the same old speeches. It’s a hard job and most presidents don’t have super majorities meaning they actually have to build alliances and coalitions with their opposition to get tough things done. He’s proving himself an ineffective leader and intellectually lazy. If he does get re-elected, it’ll five more years of what we’re seeing now because the senate will be Republican controlled after next year.

  • Clarence Counts

    The President’s party does not control the U.S. House of Representatives and does not control 60 votes in the U.S. Senate. The only way the President can pass any legislation is by a compromise with the Republicans.

    The President did not drop the ball on the debt ceiling. I submit that the Republicans dropped the ball in order to prevent tax increases for the wealthy. They agreed to 850 billion dollars in defense cuts and cuts to providers of medical services in the medicare program. Defense stocks dropped on Monday as a result of the agreement. The President also got the Republicans to agree not to cut Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare for current beneficiaries.

    • Nicole19

      Thank you for the facts.

      • john

        But, for 2 yrs he did have the House and he did have the 60 votes in the Senate. Passed an enormous stimulus that didn’t keep unemployment below 8% as promised. Has stood by as his agencies have passed regulation upon regulation on small business. Got the first step towards Socialism with his ObamaCare, which recent reports have shown to actually increase premiums on families at a time when they can least afford them. We had debt ceiling crisis because he was leading from behind. More worried about traveling and playing golf than geting involved as the leader of this country. Since the shellacking of ’10 it’s been nothing but blaming the Tea PArty for the failure of Congress and the president to get anything constructive done. Never mind the fact that the Democrats held a majority in Congress for 2 yrs before and 2 yrs after Obama was elected. The Senate has of today still not passed a budget. Obama proposed one that was rejected by the Senate unanimously. The problem isn’t the Congress, it’s Obama. He’s in over his head and was never qualified to even be in the WH.

        • KDWinTexas

          Well said, John! The nation’s debt was $9 trillion when BO took office, and it is over $13 trillion today. And he controlled both houses for the first two years.

          Easily the Worst President Ever.

  • mark CPA

    Obama didn’t drop the ball. The president’s economists are aware of the mathematical facts: you cannot balance the budget on the backs of the “rich.”

    Even if you tax everyone over $250k at 100% – take their ENTIRE income – you will not come close to the 1.5 trillion per year needed to reduce the deficit. A balanced budget must come from spending cuts.

    And this sham of a “compromise” does nothing to solve the problem, either. For while the congressional commission looks for $2 trillion in cuts over 10 years, the national debt will have increased by $7 tillion in additional deficit spending. They are arguing over crumbs.

    The fact remains that the only way to balance the budget is to restructure Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. At the current rate, these three programs will consume the ENTIRE federal budget by 2030. That means zero dollars for defense, zero dollars for education, EPA, highways, homeland security, zero zilch nada for anything else.

    Even if you tax the “rich” at 100% AND cut defense to zero, these three programs will still consume the entire budget by 2050.

    We MUST reform this nation’s entitlement programs. There is no other option.

    • Nicole19

      You can’t balance the budget on the backs of the rich BUT the Bush taxcuts were extremely helpful in causing the situation that we’re in right now (because Bush had to borrow to cover the expenses left after he gave the taxcuts to the wealthy). Fact is that we’ve been most solvent and when the wealthier among us were taxed more and not only is this the lowest tax rate they’ve ever seen in this country it’s the lowest tax rate in the world right now.

      Entitlements need to be managed better, I totally agree with that but this assult on entitlements (with our taxpayer money) is not the answer because we’re endangering our kids futures by not giving them the funds they need to attend college, hurting seniors by trying to cut needed medical, pensions and social security and we’re hurting the middle class by making them foot more of the bill for all of it.

      The fact that many millionaires want to be taxed more is an indication that it’s not hurting anyone but the non-millionaires who defend this nonsense.

      • john

        Actually, the mess we’re in was caused by the housing bubble burst. And if you look into that part of it, you can put the blame for that firmly in the Democrat camp. Sorry, but when banks are being pushed to make home loans to people for nothing down and unemployment checks as proof of income. That’s a problem. Fannie and Freddie will pick up those mortgages so banks can write them off the books and keep making home loans. Everyone deserves to own a home right?? Bill Clinton saw this problem in ’98 and was shouted down by the party. Bush saw the problem in ’02 and was shouted down. Youtube Barney Frank from ’98 and ’02 and there it is.

      • robert

        Stop reading the leftist propaganda and read both sides of the argument before you spout. The Bush tax cuts actually worked until we were in two wars. The rich need to pay more but the entitlements need to be addressed as well not to mention the stupid spending that both sides are doing. Also just so you can have something to think about there are many many more rich democrats than there are republicans this argument is just more BS spewed by Obama and the lefties to scare the poor into voting for them. Look at all of the poorest areas in this country and you will find they are democrats not republicans.

        • Pete

          A problem with people talking about the “rich” is that the vast majority of taxes you plan to increase/restore are taxes on the high income earners. Federal Income Tax is assessed on income “earned”. Earn tends to be a word that is avoided in tax discussions as it admits that people did something to “earn” that income. (wise choices, hard work, etc.)

          Very few US taxes right now tax the tax “wealth” of the “rich”.

          Debt – spending more than one earns. By definition you only go into debt through spending.

          If you want to cut the debt, the most important thing you can do (in personal finances, corporate finances, government finances) is to cut spending.

          Yes, it is possible to also decrease debt by charging a higher rate to pay off debt. However, expecting earnings to increase is not usually dependable or sustainable.

          Most of those in debt (individuals and governments) do not want to make the hard decisions of what to cut.

          Most Americans are where they are because of decisions they have made. Wise decisions tend to lead towards more and better opportunities.

        • Lyly

          I?m not that much of a inretnet reader to be honest but your blogs really nice, keep it up! I’ll go ahead and bookmark your website to come back later. Many thanks

          • Sonia

            For the same reason it took 3 years for vrosencatives to implement the new Medicare prescription drug benefit .which was not nearly as robust as the health care plan. Implementing a program on the national level, takes time .obviously.Signed in 2003, took affect in 2006 ! .From the time Bush signed that medicare legislation . 3 years passed before it actually took affect FACTReferences :

          • Noyon

            Recalls do not prevent ppoele from buying Toyotas. As all new Toyota vehicles have been refitted with new parts. Also, the highest amount of recalls for any car company is GM, followed by Ford. The American media likes to focus more on foreign recalls for obvious reasons.Obama bought GM stocks, gave them cash and replaced their corporate leadership. He saved GM and over 300,000 American jobs that would have been lost if GM had went under. Lose your racism moron.

      • Ruchi

        I used to be segsegtud this blog by my cousin. I’m not sure whether or not this submit is written by him as nobody else recognize such detailed approximately my problem. You are wonderful! Thank you!

    • John Bates

      Agree 100% with you. ZERO entitlements. if you don’t work for it you don’t get it….

  • Donnye

    I agree with you Marc. As much as it pains me to say so, this was just another bungling of an argument President Obama and the Democrats should have easily won. They continue to allow the Republicans to set the agenda for any debate concerning this country’s future and the middle and working class pays the price. Very unfortunate.

  • DLP

    I disagree with your assessment that this capitulation will get him re-elected. I believe it will cost him the election.

    The people who support the Republicans as they eviscerate the country for the benefit of their rich donors are angry and motivated. They are kept psyched up by constant propaganda from the right wing echo chamber. They WILL vote in 2012.

    The people who voted for the President have been betrayed. Don’t ask; don’t tell is not only still in effect, but the President went to court to defend it. The Guantanamo Bay political prison is still open. He has no plans to get out of Iraq, only to reduce the troop level. In fact, out military occupation of foreign lands is INCREASING. Now he is apparently going to abandon the elderly and the poor.

    I don’t think his supporters will vote for the Republicans. Who in his right mind would. I just think they are not going to vote at all. There doesn’t seem to be any point in it.

    • Nicole19

      I have to disagree on a few points. The President stopped going to court to defend Don’t ask, Don’t tell at the beginning of last year. Congress actually appointed a prosecutor to fight it in the courts because the Administration refused and two weeks ago D.A.D.T was officially withdrawan as a policy within the administration.

      There is steady troop withdrawal happening in Iraq and many of them are being sent to Afganistan which the President actually said he’d do during his campaign. And, even in Afganistan the troop level is going back to pre-surge levels and there have been no other large deployments.

      Also, there have been no concrete decisions about how the cuts will be made and, even at worse case scenario (if you look at the agreement) the cuts to medicare and medicaid will be made on the administrative side (no cuts to benefits) and any changes to social security would do what was suggested by the gang of 6 and raise the retirement age to 67 slowly over the course of 10 years.

      • Selvam

        Actually, he said the two go hand in hand, given the fact that each day 14,000 more people lose their ahleth insurance.2013 is the earliest date by which both Congress and private HMO’s can have the new policies up and running. You will need time to form new policies, to implement cost saving procedures, to change medical records, to provide new plans, to choose those new plans, so that HMO’s can legitimately compete. For the party that says this bill will force you into government run ahleth care’ you seem to be pushing for that to happen by demanding that the new ahleth care policies take effect immediately, without a chance for HMO’s to change their own policies.References :

    • john

      Actually Gitmo is closing. They are being moved to a halfway house in your neighborhood.

  • Nicole19

    I can’t disagree more with this article and am amazed at the lack of political knowledge displayed by the Dr.. There are real issues that bother me about the Obama administration (patriot act extensions, warrantless wiretapping, Wall Street reform Committee appointments) but ineptness would not be one of them.

    First, the author asserts that Obama “folded” on the Bush tax cuts in December when that so called “Fold” extended unemployment benefits for millions of Americans who would have lost them right before Christmas not to mention the multitude of other concessions he got to aid Americans in immediate need during that unprecedented deal.

    Second, 72% of Americans KNOW that the Tea Party is unreasonable and wanted a compromise a month ago so if John Boehner can’t control the members of his own party and branch of government to vote on the reasonable compromise that he and Obama had been working on for weeks I’d really like to know how the author expected Obama, even with the bully pulpit, to herd the 85 rabid cats in the Tea Party Caucus. Or would he, like the Tea Party, have liked to see us go over the cliff like most world economists predicted for the sake of ideology?

    Minnesota and what’s happening within the FAA are great examples of just what this caucus and this party can and is willing to do to the American people to make its point so I’m not sure how the President can be held responsible for who was voted into office.

    Obama has accomplished more than 65% of what he said he’d do in his first term and, even with all the criticism from his own side, maintains an average approval rating that floats about 20% higher than most of his predecessors during the same time in their Presidencies.

    I blame the tons of moderate republicans and democrats who didn’t vote in the last election because they’ve allowed our republic to be hijacked by an ideological, uneducated and Fox fueled minority who, according to the constitution Dr. Hill, CAN hold up the entire government if they’re numbers are strong enough (which is EXACTLY what they did and nothing short of phone calls from their corporate donors was going to stop that).

    The fact that about 50% of Americans, in the midst of the recession and during this debt crisis, still think that Obama is doing a good job as opposed to about 13% who believe the same about the Republican Congress is what will get the President reelected.

    I’d like to know what Dr. Hill, or any of the other naysayers on this board, would’ve done (that wouldn’t have required a suspension of constitutional rights and privileges) in this same position.

    Or am I just getting upset at yet another individual trying to garner attention by blanketly criticizing the President (cause this could get him a job on Fox, you know?)

    • Starley

      Nicole19, where is all the money coming from to pay for all these programs? Do you realized the Republicans only wanted to cut less than 4 billion from the budget? 1 percent.
      The reality of the current budget would be for a family earning 24 thousand to have a household budget of 38 thousand. It is unsustainable and irresponsible. Eventually, no one will loan you money and your payments would exceed your income.
      You call the TEA party uneducated, however, it does appear they are trying to prioritize and balance the checkbook. As far as being financed by corporate America, you will find that the Democrats have historically received the majority of corporate contributions, Mr Obama having received more Wall Street money than any other politician in history.
      Next point. Calling this a Republican congress. That ignores the fact that the Republicans have had a majority in the house for only 10 months of the last 5 years without a supermajority. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats. And it is the Senate that has tabled all budget proposals without offering one of their own in over 3 years.
      Last point I’ll make. Why do you think the TEA party arose? Lack of satisfaction with the results of the current administration and poor management of existing assets. If Mr Obama had positive results from his actions, do you really think the Democrats would have lost so many seats during the last election?

  • kyle roberts

    For every failure he has, Obama has 10 excuses. He is a total failure and the media just attacks everybody who says it. They are in denial. We are even blaming the TEA Party. This is taking political correctness to the limit. He was elected strickly because he is black. Opposing the presidents job is a constitutional right of the people. The reason we have two parties is what makes this country great. Now it is un-american to oppose the great Obama. If you think back to his promises, he has not even did one of them. He did not even close Gitmo.Wake-up people and vote for experience and somebody that knows economics, not a liberal socialists.

  • Enoch mubarak

    ……and not one word about personal responsibility.

    DEAR BLACK AMERICA 2011 AND BEYOND
    On team Black America we have black professionals and University intellectuals teaming up on Barak Obama with the complaint that the rich get richer… and the poor gets poorer.

    We have 1.1 million African Americans with advance degrees, plus a plethora of African American ministers/leaders, senators, congressman, representatives, councilmen and alderman but yet, African Americans have no verifiable evidence of a technology, infrastructure or industry.

    African American organizations, political leaders and African American ministers/leaders concertedly lack the collective intelligence to create a foundation of inclusion for the survival of African Americans. How can this be?

    It staggers the imagination how young African Americans can complete high school, college and graduate school only to stand before the global community of the 21st century with their hands and pockets out looking for hand outs, ideas, leadership and for President of The United States Of America Barak Obama to win the game and save the day single-handed.

    The NAACP, CBC, National Urban League and the Chicago Black Star Project target and hypocritically blame poorly uneducated African Americans for not living up to the highest and best use of the opportunities afforded them by this great country,

    In all actuality it is the black professionals and university intellectuals that are not living up to the highest and best use of the opportunities afforded them by their elite education and professional classifications.

    Black professionals and intellectuals are guilty of cowardliness and gross dereliction of duty.

    Black educated professionals and intellectuals in the name of black organizations shuck their responsible to provide a workable strategy for the inclusion and existence of the black race in and beyond the 21st century.

    They shuck their responsibility by cowardly and hypocritically putting the responsibility and burden upon the shoulders of Obama, the weak, the poor, the uneducated and the elderly.

    The 21st century is ours to see, command and become a part of. The 21st century belongs to readers, writers and producers. African Americans move away from give me, lend me ,can you spare, Obama takes us here, carry us there mentality and mindset.

    African Americans “Let us” stop being afraid of your own lives. Be brave enough to stop letting these black professionals and university intellectuals get away with black genocide because as long as they hide behind Obama, the weak, the poor, the uneducated and the elderly they are kiling the 21st century for us all…including themselves.

    There are plenty jobs available in the 21st century but they are only available to readers, writers, and producers.

    There is nothing the rich are doing that you nor I can’t do because what the rich knows how to do they also learned it from a book and what one person can learn to read…. so can another.See More

    • Anthony

      Wonderful story, reeokncd we could combine a few unrelated data, nevertheless really worth taking a look, whoa did one learn about Mid East has got more problerms as well

  • VINCENT JACKSON

    Mr. president you have done well with a fixed deck ,a war , a bankrupt
    economy what do the people expect and you dont get it they are trying
    very hard to keep down for know other reason then you are black .

    • john

      the race card has gotten old. It’s his policies, the failed ones in particular that have cooked his goose. The fact that he is leader in position only. The fact that he was never qualified for the job in the first place. What experience did he have to be the leader of the greatest country on Earth? Because he was black?? You really think he knows the hardships black americans faced in the 50′s and 60′s?? You think he ever rode in the back of a bus?? No he didn’t have to endure that living with his white grandparents, and going to Columbia university. Obama never ran a business, never took a stand in the illinois Senate voting “present” most of the time. And was elected to the Congress as he was throwing his name in the ring for President. No, it’s not because he’s black.

  • Pingback: How Obama and the Democrats Dropped the Ball…Again | Be Lifestyle Magazine

  • sanje

    easy to monday morning quarterback…the author is just like all pundits whether democrat or republican. they always come out to offer solutions after the fact. he offered no solution now and none when the events he is highlighting were happening. what’s his solution for the future? better yet instead of criticizing the president for things that have already occured, why doesn’t he run for president to see how many balls he can juggle and not drop any of them. ridiculous. the truth is that our political system was not designed to solve the massive problems we are facing today. our forefathers could not have forseen the mess we’ve created for ourselves. no one person can solve these huge issues alone either for that matter. the economic situation requires collaboration by everyone in the nation and politics thrives on conflict…cable tv loves it, talk radio loves it and so do the pundits. If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. We should not vote to elect people to govenrment who has no intention of collaborating to solve the nations problem, period. looking at our history, all great accomplishments by our nation required political collaboration. that is the solution I am offering. Change the political class. it is our fault for putting people in office who don’t want to work together in the first place, and for listening to monday morning quarterbacks…

  • george burns

    This is a sponsored advertisement bought and paid to be put in this paper. No doubt, one of the rich republican lobbies trying not to have to pay employee soc.sec. do away with the minimum wage. medicare, unemployment benefits , the U.S. postal service and anything else they want. Finish off the economy. Vote republican

  • Larry Peterson

    Why does everybody blame Obama? He is the President, and as such cannot make laws. Everybody dropped all of Bush’s mess on his desk and said<"Here! fix this, and we will give you two weeks." Then, the Republicans, said,"we hope you fail, and we will do anything to make that wish come true." Know Why? Cause he is Black and I expected more out of you. We all stood there and watch his wife turned into a monkey, and planted all over the web. And see, when the Republicans made that statement, we were fighting 2 wars-so why weren't they charged with treason? But no-and we all stood there and watch one man fight every body by himself-alone. Now, looking back_where was I? Where were you? Then "the party of no" set up obstructionism, and we couldn't understand, What's the matter with him? I feel ashamed. You should feel ashamed. We elected him, then we abandoned him.He tried, for Gods sake! The Republicans would not let him think, let alone-work! And I will vote for this fine, intelligent man again! Cause he has integrity! And we let him down, and that won't happen again-if I am the only one! and you?

    • Pete

      This is ignorant. I have never run across an investor or CEO who hoped for failure because the President was Black.

      Most investors and CEO I know have indicated (usually privately) that they have concerns perceiving the current Administration and Democrat-controlled Congress as anti-profit (anti-greed, if you will) and anti-business, as a result. Yes, hiring is an investment (depending on the individual and job, it is often distributed over 3 months to 2 years for the employee to become a positive investment).

      Take a look at the 2nd Bailout where unsecured debts/contracts (unions) were given priority over secured debts/loans/shares. This was done by the DoJ and Administration for the first time in history.

    • Pete

      Congress (Legislative branch) “holds the purse strings”. A better choice in looking at deficit is to look at control of the Legislative Branch (specifically the Senate, since a simple majority is insufficient to pass most bills).

      The wars have been expensive, but are small compared to deficit spending on entitlements. Some of these did originate and grow under the previous Congress and Administration, of course (compassionate conservative = liberal with fiscal policy/spending, but conservative with social policy).

    • Pete

      The leading candidate right now for the Republicans is another man with even darker skin tone, Herman Cain. Why don’t all Republicans hate him if they hate all darker skin tone people succeeding?

  • Pete

    Debt – spending more than one earns. By definition you only go into debt through spending.

    If you want to cut the debt, the most important thing you can do (in personal finances, corporate finances, government finances) is to cut spending.

    Yes, it is possible to also decrease debt by charging a higher rate to pay off debt. However, expecting earnings to increase is not usually dependable or sustainable.

    Most of those in debt (individuals and governments) do not want to make the hard decisions of what to cut.

    Most Americans are where they are because of decisions they have made. Wise decisions tend to lead towards more and better opportunities.

  • How To Naturally Improve Eyesight

    I’ve been browsing on-line greater than three hours as of late, but I never found any fascinating article like yours. It is lovely worth enough for me. Personally, if all website owners and bloggers made just right content as you probably did, the web shall be a lot more helpful than ever before.