The ‘inherited’ mess

Sen. McCaskill, while you want to take credit for voting for no congressional raises next year (11/25, Letters), you miss the fact that there shouldn’t have been any for the last four or five years based on performance and ratings.

As usual, your actions are after the fact. You’ve given yourselves raises and also gave yourselves increases for office expenses and support. If there hasn’t been any inflation, why do you need those increases? If you and your cohorts were private company employees, you would have been fired a long time ago.

I had to go on Medicare in November, as required by my health insurance provider. I got my first bill this month and it was for four months of premiums. I have not even filed my first claim yet and my 2010 premiums are increasing by 14.7 percent. Thank you very much.

Your last sentence was the most galling. You refer to the “economic mess” that Obama inherited. Well, just for the record, you and Obama have made it worse with your actions. The only president who did not inherit his predecessor’s issues was George Washington. So quit whining, both of you.

David Whitaker
Overland Park

 Claire McCaskill’s letter concerning no raises for Congress was very good. But she just couldn’t resist the usual whining at the end about “the economic mess President Obama inherited.”

I am so tired of hearing this. In four years, will we be allowed to say “the mess we inherited from President Obama,” or will that be politically incorrect?

Carol Rasdall
Kansas City, Kan.

Comments

[Wild Man]

When you present facts, we can have a discussion.

[Smarter Than You]

When the facts disprove your position, Mild, it's now spin. Since you no longer are capable of supporting your position, and once again your own evidence has been used against you, I'll just accept your tacit admission of defeat and move on. I believe the expression properly utilized at this point would be:

Yawn!

[Wild Man]

All you have is spin, even when no one is looking. You don't know what honest is.

[Smarter Than You]

Nice long rambling statement that said nothing. Par for you, Mild thing.

The articles presented agree Obama has raised the deficit by the largest amount in a single year by any president. The articles presented show, our creditors are concerned that our deficit is approaching a tipping point. The articles show the deficit is a, if not the, major concern. Your article, as a bonus, indicts the President’s bogus health care reform!

Your argument isn't about the problem, but where you don’t want the blame placed. For some bizarre reason you want to give Obama a free pass on the issue. Obama has no plan. You admitted it in your prior post. My argument is, has and always will be that Obama has set a single year record for a deficit.

The one thing now clear is you have lost all your marbles. Barry ended the fiscal year with a deficit of 1.5 billion marbles, and his Stimulus package cost close to 1 Billion marbles. His “Marble for (auto)Mobiles” cost hundreds of millions more in marbles. Who, then, has the primary responsibility for the largest loss of marbles ever? Maybe if his exchange of marbles for jobs had kept employment at 92% or better, as promised, you would have an argument.

It's been nice seeing you go down in flames on this issue. Better luck next time. Maybe you should try to have some factual basis for your positioning before you take on a superior force.

[Wild Man]

Since you obviously fail to understand anything but remedial economics I will continue with your example. Little Georgie starts his turn in a game. The object of the game is to save marbles. Before he starts the game, Bill gives little Gerogie an extra marble to help him win the game. Little Georgie and his friends decide to put ten marbles into the game. At the end of little Georgies turn in the game, three of the marbles are scheduled to come out of the game in order to be saved, (Even though little Georgie and his friends want the three to remain in the game). That would mean that seven of the marbles in the game are the total responsibility, (that means being morally, legally, or mentally accountable for) of Little Georgie.

When “Barry” takes over from little Georgie he inherited, (Than means to receive as a devise or legacy, in this case from little Georgie) seven of the marbles already in the game that he has no responsibility for playing. Now, we must also understand that little Georgie played the game sooooo badly that the game is about to end causing everyone in the game to loose all of their marbles. “Barry” seeing how badly little Georgie has played the game is left in a position where he is forced to make some moves in order to save the game. He decides to keep two of the three marbles in the game that were scheduled to come out of the game at the end of little Georgie’s turn. Little Georgie’s friends like that idea, but begin to throw a temper tantrum when they find out that “Barry” has decided not to keep the third marble from the original game. Instead “Barry” decides to put in a different marble that he believes will help win the game.

Little Georgie’s friends, who now see how badly the game is going and want to take absolutely no responsibility for their actions in the game fearing that they will never be invited to play the game again, continue their temper tantrum and claim that all of the marbles in the game are the total responsibility of “Barry”. It is very clear to everyone else in the game however, that little Georgie’s friends behave badly, and are at least partially responsible,) for 9 of the ten marbles in the game. When they discover that they can not hide from the responsibility of the seven marbles, little Georgie’s friends decide to try a different strategy, (that means a careful plan or method). They decide to totally blame “Barry” for the four marbles that were played during his turn in the game, and refuse to acknowledge that they were also in favor of playing three of the four marbles that were played. By using this strategy, little Georgie’s friends are trying to say, “Yeah maybe we did play seven marbles during our turn, but “Barry” has played four marbles in just his first move”. Everyone else in the game knows that little Georgies friends are just continuing their bad behavior.

If you would actually learn to read, you would have noticed that I made several references to the fact that the President does not seem to have a plan to deal with the deficit. Your problem is that you want to lay blame for the mess on the feet of the current President for political gain, and you also ignore the implications that the republicans also have no plan to bring down spending. Even the Cato Institute acknowledges that much.

[Smarter Than You]

Ooops!

[Smarter Than You]

Nice article. I notice you omitted the parts where Obama's policies aren't addressing the deficit and his health care agenda is being given priority over the deficit. I also liked the parts where it admits the health care plan will not address the pressing need, the rising cost of health care. All in all, pretty devastating to our current occupant at 1600.

Now, for the analysis your pea brain couldn't grasp. Each YEAR we have been operating at a deficit. My argument, documented, has been that Obama has the record for any single year deficit. Your article, looking at the whole of accumulated deficits, points out that the Obama deficit is only a portion of the accumulated debt. It's not my responsibility that you are so blinded with the need to strike out at me that you can't grasp simple economic factors. I guess when I posted before that I was disappointed in the deficits Bush rolled up you thought I was saying "he had no deficit."

Let's see if I can put it in terminology your limited rational thought process might understand. If each year George sets aside three marbles, and that goes on for eight years, there are 24 marbles in the pile. Then if Barry comes along and puts in five, he has a small portion of the entire 29 marbles even though he put in the most at any single time.

I REALLY liked your article for it's indictment of the Obama policies. It took a lot of guts for you to post a article that impeaches this President's economic program. At he end of the day, it actually strengthens my arguments that the deficit should be our highest priority. Thanks!!! (I'm glad you "looked forward" to this)

[Wild Man]

It would help if you would try to keep current. The article that you mentioned that you posted on November 4th was a response to a different article that I had cited at the time. Last week, on November 25th, I presented a very detailed and cited argument from a NY Times article on 6/9/09 that was not disputed.

According to the Times, “President Obama’s agenda, ambitious as it may be, is responsible for only a sliver of the deficits, despite what many of his Republican critics are saying. The second is that Mr. Obama does not have a realistic plan for eliminating the deficit, despite what his advisers have suggested.” As you can see this is not a one sided, defend Obama article.

The following is the full text of the November 25th posting

How did we go from surplus to deficit? 37% of the swing is a result of the business cycle. The 2001 recession and the current recession reduced tax revenue and the government increased spending by both the current and last presidents for social safety nets. The current economic slow down clearly began as early as the second quarter of the last year of the Bush administration, due to the poor oversight of the financial institutions. The increased spending during the 2001 recession ate the surplus, but more importantly changed assumptions of how much tax revenue the government could collect in future years. About 33% of the swing to the projected deficit comes from new legislation that was signed into law by former President Bush, such as the tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, as well as other programs that were never paid for. These programs not only continue to cost the government, but they also contribute to increases on the interest being financed in the debt. 20% of the swing can be accounted for by President Obama’a support of extending some programs that were enacted by President Bush such as extending tax cuts for households making under $250,000 per year, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as TARP (Which then Senator Obama also supported). Only about 7% of the deficit comes from the stimulus package that President Obama signed earlier this year, and about 3% comes from his agenda on health, education, energy and other areas. As much as republicans would like the American people to ignore the facts, it can not be denied that about 70% of the budget crisis that republicans want to blame on the President come from inherited programs and problems that he had no control over. I will agree that I do not see a plan from the Democrats or the President that will effectively address the problem. In a recent White House summit with Congressional leaders, the President urged them to only enact legislation on a pay as you go basis. If they follow through, they will only be paying for new programs, not paying down the debt. Congressional republicans aren’t proposing anything either. Recently on the Senate floor republicans held up a chart showing that President Obama would increase the deficit. They failed to mention however that most of the increase was because of his support for extending many of the Bush programs. They also failed to mention that they support extending the full Bush tax cuts that will increase the deficit even more. Even the conservative Cato Institute says that the republicans are not serious about cutting the deficit. http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/06/04/the-gop-not-serious-about-spending-cuts/ Popular programs may be slashed and taxes may go up in order to seriously address the problem. It needs to be understood that one man did not create the problem as some would have you believe. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html

I truly look forward to your enlightened response.

[Smarter Than You]

Do I have to spoon feed you like the child you obviously are? The "facts" have been presented, multiple times, but your rectal-cranial obstruction somehow has allowed you to ignore any one of the numerous posts that disprove your asinine theories and outright lies. I’ve felt no need to re-post the many arguments you’ve lost or sources I’ve provided. Your being slow doesn’t mean the rest of the posters should suffer.

We’ve got some room now so for your edification here’s an example: you told your usual lie about the deficit being 70% Bush and Obama’s part only being 10% earlier in this blog. Way back on Nov 4th I offered ““Wall Street Journal, March 23, 2009 President Obama's 2010 budget looks more astounding by the day, especially when someone other than the White House budget office is analyzing it. The latest case of epic sticker shock came Friday when the Congressional Budget Office published its assessment, which found that the proposals would increase the federal deficit by $2.3 trillion more over 10 years than the White House had claimed. Mr. Obama keeps saying he has "inherited a trillion dollar deficit," which is true. But he's hardly an innocent bystander. CBO shows that the President is seeing that $1 trillion and raising it again and again, as far as the eye can see. In only two months, since the last CBO budget review in January, Democrats have passed laws that increase spending by $134 billion in the last six months of this fiscal year alone, and $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years. And that's all before his 2010 budget proposals.”

So where is your “factual sourcing?” You just keep telling the same lie without a fact to stand on.

Or let’s play with your actual quotes. Like:
“The only reason why we are even talking is because you want to absolve President Bush of all responsibility for his actions”

But then in the same blog you argue

“I don't think you are a supporter of Bush.”

Kind of like your argument that you “didn’t blame the field commanders” then arguing that listening to the field commanders was “the problem.”

You’re so confused you are now arguing in circles against yourself. I AM glad not many people are reading this particular section now because it’s obvious that I’m picking on a mentally impaired child who can’t defend himself. I apologize to the world for the beating I’ve been throwing you for these months. It’s not fair to you. You’re trying your best, and I’m proud of you!!!

Now, go change your diaper, Junior; it, like your unsubstantiated arguments, baseless lies and delusions of adequacy is full of shi. . .

[Wild Man]

“After your arguments have been proven baseless on fact, logic and accuracy you're reduced to attacking me personally.” - STY

You have the nerve to talk about the basis in fact, logic and accuracy in our discussion. Your arguments have not discussed accuracy of any facts, or made any logical sense in days. You have called me a liar, called into question my intelligence and used degrading names when referring to me on multiple occasions on this strand alone. You have been the one that has put the “personal” into the term personal attack. You make these claims but you have not presented any facts to support your positions in days, and when facts have been brought forward to dispute your position you ignore them and move to a different subject. Then when I question your desire to have an honest conversation you resort to this. This is beneath even you. The only thing that is saving you from complete embarrassment is that this strand is so old now that few people are actually reading it.

[Smarter Than You]

That's really the best you've got? After your arguments have been proven baseless on fact, logic and accuracy you're reduced to attacking me personally.

If you ever get new material, or at least can actually document a position, get back to me.

[Wild Man]

I don't think you are a supporter of Bush. I think you're a party hack with an agenda. It does not fit your agenda to have honest conversation about how the policies of your party and it's last standard bearer are still affecting the government today. It is ok for you to criticize the former president when it fits your agenda, but you can not let anyone else. You will do anything to absolve him from the responsibility that they own.

[Smarter Than You]

On Bush; my opinions of his mistakes are on record. If you could read for content you’d know that! The only thing I’ve done is point out your outright lies and distortions.

I get you hate it when I do that. That does make you pathetic, but I’m guessing you know that already.

[Wild Man]

Do you want honest STY, lets get real honest. The only reason why we are even talking is because you want to absolve President Bush of all responsibility for his actions and I called you out on it. Now you find yourself in an indefensible position you pull pitiful. Nice try.

[Smarter Than You]

Asked and answered, Mild one. Your arguments, like our President, are failures.

I get you have to make it about me, or about Bush, because defending Obama is an impossible standard for you to meet. Could you at least try to be honest? (What am I thinking, asking for honesty from a plagiarist?)

[Wild Man]

You are so comical. To defend your flip flopping on the issue, you use two quotes from me, taken out of context, from a strand where you accused the President of being a terrorist at Tora Bora, that have nothing to do with what we were talking about. It doesn’t change the fact that you flip flopped on the issue. It does make me wonder if you’re still having those little problems that we talked about earlier.

The President is responsible for about 30% of the budget mess we are in. About 2/3s of what the President is responsible for is being spent on programs and policies that were initiated under the Bush administration, carried forward by the Obama administration, and supported by Congressional republicans. Those are the facts. The problem with your argument is that you have none. Republican hacks want to scream about the budget issue, but even the Cato Institute, your Mecca for political thought, says that republicans are not serious about cutting the deficit. These facts have been out there for some time and you have not disputed them.

The fact is that you still want to run away from the Bush legacy. The problem is, when all you can do is spin, you wind up right back where you started. That’s still the problem with the party of “NO”, you have NO where to go and NO solutions to the problems.

Keep talking.

[Smarter Than You]

Bozo boy, you still make me laugh. Then again, I've always had a fondness for a good clown.

Your continued reliance on a deficit argument that has been proven untrue is a perfect example of your lies and deceit. Obama has the record deficit. You've been provided the specific data. Your ignorance doesn't make you correct. Amusing. Pathetic. But alas, not correct.

Your willful ignorance also includes previous exchanges where your repetitive argument on Iraq was shown to be fallacy. It's just another example of your lies and deceit.

Your self contradiction within the same blog on Afghanistan is proof of your lies and deceit.

If you insist on plagiarizing, like your little ditty on Reagan, it's deceitful to not credit the original author (Anthony Gregory in 2004).

As for Bush, my opinions of his mistakes are on record. If criticism of certain policies of his make me a "fan-boy" in Mild world, I can live with that.

It's sad, really. You seem to be stuck in some H.G. Well's time continuum that doesn't allow you to look past 2000-2008. Your repetitive and disproved arguments have become inconsequential, yet you soldier on with the same stupidity.

If you can actually conjugate a verb or two and come up with a salient defense of THIS administration, I for one would be amazed. It would be really nice if you could pull of this feat on your own; but given your limitations we'll accept more cut and paste art work and grade you on the curve you deserve. You've failed thus far on the deficit, the economy, health care and Afghanistan.

But keep trying, if for no other reason than you are a funny guy.

[Wild Man]

Lies and deceit? Really?

This is the problem with the party of “NO”, and the reason that they are out of power. If anyone disagrees with neocons, they are liars and demons. There is only right and and further right, no middle ground. That’s the reason there has been a Democrat representing the Kansas 7th for the last twelve years, (Yeah I know that it’s going to be hard to keep the seat in the next election, but I have no doubt that the republicans will nominate another ultraconservative right winged fringe candidate just to make the race more competitive) even though registered republicans outnumber Democrats in the district. That’s the reason that President Obama is in office, and that’s the obstacle that you will have to overcome in the next election.

I love your contradictions. No one can talk about the legacy of the Bush administration and our current problems, but when talking about the invasion you mention the complicity of Congress and former administrations. The past can come alive when you’re trying to protect your boy, but we can not talk about the past when your boy was clearly to blame. The problem is that you keep forgetting to mention that Congress did not act on bad intelligence, it acted on documented deliberately cooked intelligence that was provided by the Bush administration. You don’t get a pass on the spin that the Bush lie spanned two previous administrations. There is no evidence that that any other administration distorted intelligence, and certainly no evidence that any other administration took us to war in Iraq when US interests were not at risk. You also selectively forgot to comment on the Bush budget distortions. And none of your arguements changes the fact that 70% of the current budget is the total responsibility of your boy. As I mentioned before, and you did not dispute, another 20% of the budget is extended policies of the Bush administration, supported by Congressional republicans and the President.

I have not defended the President for the mistakes that he has made. He is a big boy and when he does something stupid he has to live with it. I still have to laugh at you though. You still seem to be in your psychotic hallucination. When last we spoke you said that you still say that you’re a Bush critic, but you still are the first to ferociously defend him anytime he is criticized. Still can’t see the contradiction can you? You can only run from the truth so far.

[Arminius]

I feel sorry for you folks in Missouri who are represented by this pig.

[Smarter Than You]

Wild Man’s back, and his lies and deceit get Wilder as he goes. Otherwise, it’s his same “blame Bush” song and dance.

Wild’s absolution of the Obama lies is that there may have been lies from other administrations. What is transparent from the Mild ones response is a desire to see Obama’s credibility go out the window with his accountability.

Wild’s Iraq example; as evidenced prior, WMD concerns ran through two different administrations from two different parties. The Obama jobs/stimulus lies are unique to the current occupant of 1600 Pen.

Obama could easily fix the “Democratic Senate leadership” mistake by announcing he will not sign a bill with the “Louisiana Purchase” included. Have you heard anything like that from this White House? Please, Wild, enlighten us.

“As for Afghanistan, it's understood that Candidate Obama knew exactly what to do, entered office and did it. It's understood that our soldiers are now dying in record numbers in this conflict. It's understood that Obama has sat on his hands and done nothing for weeks. It's understood that he has announced he has a plan, but curiously would rather wait until he has a news conference next week to make the announcement instead of immediately acting to support/protect our troops and allay the fears of our military families. STY Commented 2 days ago on Slow on Afghanistan, fast on health care”

Or

“Dealing with and avoiding the decision on Afghanistan is two different things.” STY Oct 23, 2009 on Obama can’t win

No flip-flop there. But since you brought up that curious standard, Mild, two quotes from you:

“Your third point is a bold faced lie. I never blamed the field commanders for anything.” Wild Man Commented Nov 20, 2009 on Withdraw troops from Afghanistan

Or

The problem is that he honored the requests of the field commanders when he took office. Wild Man Commented Nov 20, 2009 on Withdraw troops from Afghanistan

So the only documented flip flop is you don’t blame the field commanders but the problem is Obama listened to the field commanders.

Bush isn’t in office. Even if the fairy king of Democratic wishes were to magically appear on this blog and grant you the power to make us all believe your distortions, Mild, what does that really change about the reality of where we are today? Obama is responsible for his decisions. Obama is responsible for his distortions. Obama is responsible for his actions.

The voters will hold him responsible at the mid-terms.