Republicans, White House Brace for Twin Budget Battles
110 replies, posted
[B]FOX
Republicans, White House Brace for Twin Budget Battles[/B]
[release]Republicans looking to make deep spending cuts are girding for twin budget battles in Washington starting this week -- a fiscal fight one lawmaker said will define the rest of President Obama's term.
The president plans to unveil his 2012 spending plan Monday, a $3.5 trillion-plus budget which, according to officials, will outline $1.1 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade. At the same time, Republicans are still trying to cut back this year's spending. They want to bring a bill to the floor Tuesday that they claim would cut $100 billion out of the budget for the seven months remaining in the 2011 fiscal year.
Top GOP lawmakers said Sunday they were hopeful the Obama administration would play along, and endorse a plan to sharply reduce short- and long-term spending.
But they said the snippets of information out about the upcoming budget plan suggest the president's not being ambitious enough in tackling what they describe as a fiscal "crisis." They said the proposals on the table so far will not reverse the "unsustainable" rise in the national debt.
"This is his final opportunity to change the course," Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, told Fox News, casting the upcoming debate as a make-or-break moment for the president. The same could be said for Republicans elected on a pledge to cut spending.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the political atmosphere -- one much more focused on fiscal discipline in the wake of last year's election -- gives him "guarded optimism" about what can be achieved. Still, he predicted a seminal debate on the horizon.
"I think it's going to be a confrontation," he said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "I hope it's one that can be worked out between the president and Congress."
Compounding the friction between the parties is a looming vote on whether to raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling. Republicans have vowed to extract painful concessions from Democrats in exchange for their support and will surely use that vote as leverage in the upcoming budget battles.
How precarious this game of chicken becomes is unclear. Aside from the possibility of a debt-limit freeze, which could result in default, one freshman GOP lawmaker suggested last week that a 1995-style government shutdown could still be in the cards. Rep. Tim Scott, R-S.C., told Fox News that "nothing's off the table."
But House Speaker John Boehner downplayed the likelihood of such an outcome Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."
"Our goal is to reduce spending," he said. "It is not to shut down the government."
The tone of the 2012 budget debate will likely be set during the more immediate debate over this year's budget.
After some internal wrangling over how much to cut, Republicans late last week said they would propose a full $100 billion in cuts for the rest of the fiscal year. Compared to last year's budget, the savings amount to about $61 billion. Among the programs targeted are health research, foreign aid, the Peace Corps and pre-kindergarten education.
"We must reverse this spending binge as quickly as possible," Boehner said in a letter to Obama dated Sunday, casting budget cuts as a booster for the economy.
In the face of criticism from Democrats that the cuts are too far-reaching and ideologically driven, Republicans say Democrats have offered no credible plan of their own.
White House Budget Director Jacob Lew, pressed to weigh in, reserved comment on the GOP plan Sunday.
"We look forward to working with Congress," Lew said three times, without elaborating, when asked about the GOP proposal on CNN's "State of the Union."
No matter how intense the fight, it will only apply to seven months of spending, or less. Looking ahead to the debate over the 2012 budget and beyond, Republicans warned Sunday that Washington will be no place for meek fiscal proposals.
The deficit for 2011 alone is projected to hit a record $1.5 trillion. Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf told a congressional committee last month that cumulative deficits over the next 10 years could run as high as $12 trillion. He said without serious cutbacks, the national debt could reach nearly 100 percent of GDP in that period.
Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., chairman of the House Budget Committee, acknowledged that Obama is pushing a five-year domestic spending freeze, which the administration says will save $400 billion over 10 years.
But he said that based on what he's seen in press reports, the 2012 budget plan is "very small on spending discipline."
"It looks like the debt's going to continue rising under this budget," Ryan said of Obama's plan.
Lew rejected the notion that the administration isn't making the tough decisions.
"There are scores of programs that are being reduced. And I think it's important to note that we're beyond the easy, low-hanging fruit to say that it's all waste and fraud. We're reducing programs that are important programs that we care about, and we're doing what every family does when it sits around its kitchen table," Lew said Sunday.
"Our budget will get us, over the next several years, to the point where we can look the American people in the eye and say we're not adding to the debt anymore, we're spending money that we have each year. And then we can work on bringing down our national debt," he said.
Of the $1.1 trillion in deficit reduction Obama is expected to outline over the next decade, two-thirds of that will come from spending cuts, a senior administration official told Fox News.
Among the proposals Obama is pitching is a $100 billion cut from Pell Grants. The remaining third will come from revenue increases -- which the official said would comprise a cap on itemized deductions and other loophole-closers.
While Obama is cutting in some places, he also wants to pay for increased spending on education, infrastructure, science and research that he says is needed to boost U.S. competitiveness. Obama is seeking $53 billion for high-speed rail over the next few years, and is seeking increases for his "Race to the Top" initiative that provides grants to better-performing schools.
[I]The Associated Press contributed to this report.[/I][/release]
Source: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/13/republicans-white-house-prepare-twin-budget-battles/#ixzz1DsuuSRZ6[/url]
hi glaber
Here we go again...
[img]http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRa38BVYNHyukp1AUybeC4cKVK60UT-h7I8NxmRLQLFtRJM6wj-mQ&t=1[/img]
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Image macro" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Jewsus;28037241]Here we go again...[/QUOTE]
The news seems to be more actual news than random hate, for once.
Glaber is now more of a joke than Jim Carrey.
Stop sourcing a politically biased news network, you will never make credible news threads Glaber.
Glaber...if you don't want to look like a stereotypical republican, don't count fox as a source for fuck's sake.
Glaber, i'll lay this out for you again, I know i'll probably do it again, but that's ok, maybe eventually your walls of stupidity and your desire to be uninformed will fail one day...
[b]Fox news is not a valid source. They are hypocrites, liars, and by and large, just a propaganda machine for the republican party. Fox News Network lies about stories, events, they hide very important aspects of almost anything they disagree with, and more or less just suck dick at actual reporting. All they post is editorials. The [i]ONLY[/i] news source you actually get anything from, are all editorials and opinion pieces. That is not news, that is an opinion on the news. Please learn. Please, prove to me american conservatives aren't fucking braindead, and that you can learn something for once. New info is not a bad thing.[/b]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28040940]Glaber, i'll lay this out for you again, I know i'll probably do it again, but that's ok, maybe eventually your walls of stupidity and your desire to be uninformed will fail one day...
[b]Fox news is not a valid source. They are hypocrites, liars, and by and large, just a propaganda machine for the republican party. Fox News Network lies about stories, events, they hide very important aspects of almost anything they disagree with, and more or less just suck dick at actual reporting. All they post is editorials. The [i]ONLY[/i] news source you actually get anything from, are all editorials and opinion pieces. That is not news, that is an opinion on the news. Please learn. Please, prove to me american conservatives aren't fucking braindead, and that you can learn something for once. New info is not a bad thing.[/b][/QUOTE]
I concur. Fox News never has, and never will be a valid news source. Frankly any article of theirs' that even [B]seems[/B] to be unbiased, I take with a grain of salt and look for other sources for, if any. With any other, even if I'm confident that their news is factual, I'll still see if any other reputable source confirms it. However, Fox News should never, EVER be the source for news. Maybe the 4th or 5th source in a list of sources, if other decent (when I say this, I do not mean Left-Wing outlets, merely ones that at least don't lie) news outlets have already reported on it.
Honestly I wanted to say something about Fox News not being quite a valid source, but I think the two posts above me have it covered.
No matter how many times you say fox news is invalid. It's not going to make me stop posting their articles. Besides, if Fox news was really invalid, then so would MSNBC too.
[QUOTE=Glaber;28041739]No matter how many times you say fox news is invalid. It's not going to make me stop posting their articles. Besides, if Fox news was really invalid, then so would MSNBC too.[/QUOTE]
Please tell me about MSNBC deliberately misrepresenting facts. Use examples.
[QUOTE=Glaber;28041739]No matter how many times you say fox news is invalid. It's not going to make me stop posting their articles. Besides, if Fox news was really invalid, then so would MSNBC too.[/QUOTE]
Fox News and MSNBC are not Left-Right parallels. Not even close. HumanAbyss and Prismatex have been over this with you several different times in several different news article threads where you continue to source Fox News Articles. MSNBC's level of [B]BIAS[/B] is very different from the way Fox News [B]LIES[/B].
Besides, this argument is mostly irrelevant since the majority users don't post articles from MSNBC.
Examples of legit sources:
-BBC
-Al Jazeera
-New York Times
-Financial Times
-Anything that's not a blog, or;
-Opinion piece
How is it that hard?
And besides we don't want you to source MSNBC either, just use a non-biased source.
It's not that hard, a lot of people can do it.
[media]http://youtube.com/watch?v=o3LUid0IZ2w[/media]
reposting this to make sure glaber watches it
[QUOTE=Glaber;28041739]No matter how many times you say fox news is invalid. It's not going to make me stop posting their articles. Besides, if Fox news was really invalid, then so would MSNBC too.[/QUOTE]
Show me MSNBC creating articles and events out of thin air to back their point.
Oh wait, you can't.
[QUOTE=Glaber;28041739]No matter how many times you say fox news is invalid. It's not going to make me stop posting their articles.[/QUOTE]
There are suppose to be rules stopping people from posting non-news articles. Because Garry can't be bothered to take shit from people, you always seem to get away with everything. You are nothing more than a troll.
Rules need tightening up.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28040940]Glaber, i'll lay this out for you again, I know i'll probably do it again, but that's ok, maybe eventually your walls of stupidity and your desire to be uninformed will fail one day...
[b]Fox news is not a valid source. They are hypocrites, liars, and by and large, just a propaganda machine for the republican party. Fox News Network lies about stories, events, they hide very important aspects of almost anything they disagree with, and more or less just suck dick at actual reporting. All they post is editorials. The [i]ONLY[/i] news source you actually get anything from, are all editorials and opinion pieces. That is not news, that is an opinion on the news. Please learn. Please, prove to me american conservatives aren't fucking braindead, and that you can learn something for once. New info is not a bad thing.[/b][/QUOTE]
I agree Fox shouldn't be treated as a valid source but saying all American conservatives are braindead isn't much better or any less biased.
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;28042919]I agree Fox shouldn't be treated as a valid source but saying all American conservatives are braindead isn't much better or any less biased.[/QUOTE]
I know it's biased and I know it's overstepping my point.
However, you, glaber, ridge, all the other conservatives here regularly demonstrate a lack of ability to reason things through, or to actually examine evidence and historical events. It's tiring and it's lame, and I know there is no objective view on history, but all the same, there are views that are more humanitarian and more realistic than others.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28042961]I know it's biased and I know it's overstepping my point.
However, you, glaber, ridge, all the other conservatives here regularly demonstrate a lack of ability to reason things through, or to actually examine evidence and historical events. It's tiring and it's lame, and I know there is no objective view on history, but all the same, there are views that are more humanitarian and more realistic than others.[/QUOTE]
You people need to get off your highchair with your attitude of "Everybody with a different view than me must be stupid compared to me"
Forget the conservatives with Economic degrees, I'm sure YOU could outwit them any day because they're just conservatives and clearly don't understand reason as well as you.
It's not always about which is right and which is wrong. Sometimes people just have different preferences not because one person is smarter than the other.
Can conservatives and liberals band together to call Glaber a complete idiot? Tune in later tonight!
Those of you who say it's not a valid source, why are you not talking about the budget debate?
[QUOTE=Glaber;28043163]Those of you who say it's not a valid source, why are you not talking about the budget debate?[/QUOTE]
Because it's too predictable.
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;28043109]You people need to get off your highchair with your attitude of "Everybody with a different view than me must be stupid compared to me"
Forget the conservatives with Economic degrees, I'm sure YOU could outwit them any day because they're just conservatives and clearly don't understand reason as well as you.
It's not always about which is right and which is wrong. Sometimes people just have different preferences not because one person is smarter than the other.[/QUOTE]
Never said I could outsmart them and never said they were right. Also never looked down on people of a different opinion than mine. Assumption thrice? I think so.
I appreciate different views to mine, I've changed my views tremendously in the last 2 years. I refuse to hold on to one idea as truth, I want to know as much as I can. But that being said, there are conservative economists who have been proven wrong, and who have been proven right. Just like with "liberal" ones. It depends on the time and situation. However, there is never a situation when social conservatism should be welcomed. There's never a time when cinching your belt tighter than it can go and just not spending money raked in money for anyone.
Alright, some people just have different preferences based on the news they watch? Well, I guess those that like watching fox like being uninformed and misinformed.
[QUOTE=Glaber;28043163]Those of you who say it's not a valid source, why are you not talking about the budget debate?[/QUOTE]
Because we've already talked about it bunches.
[QUOTE=Glaber;28043163]Those of you who say it's not a valid source, why are you not talking about the budget debate?[/QUOTE]
Because frankly, dealing with your lack of reasoning on sources is a little more important than talking about the same conversation we've all had countless times before with nothing changing. I'd rather tell you to start looking for sources that don't lie or exist entirely as editorials.
That's going to be hard then as that even rules out CNN. Of course do you even watch Fox News or visit their website?
I stopped watching Habsburg's video because it was an attack video on Fox once I got to where Rachel said MSNBC.
Instead of actual discussion this thread is more about bitching at glaber.
niiiiice.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.