• Obama Rejects Latest GOP Spending Bill as Government Looms
    69 replies, posted
FOX Obama Rejects Latest GOP Spending Bill as Government Shutdown Looms [release]A visibly frustrated President Obama said Tuesday that Democrats have agreed on how much to cut from the budget and that he won't accept another temporary spending bill that House Republicans are rallying behind to prevent a government shutdown this weekend. "We've already done that twice," Obama said in a surprise appearance at the White House briefing room. "That is not a way to run a government. "I can't have our agencies making plans based on two-week budgets." Obama said both sides are closer than ever to a deal and that politics shouldn't stand in the way of preventing a shutdown that would harm the economic recovery. "There is no reason why we should not get an agreement," Obama said. "At a time when the economy is just beginning to grow, the last thing we need is a disruption that's caused by a government shutdown." House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid were to meet on Capitol Hill later Tuesday to continue negotiations, Obama said, adding that if that meeting does not lead to a deal, he would summon the pair back to the White House Wednesday. "Myself, Joe Biden, my team -- we are prepared to meet for as long as possible to this resolved," Obama said. In a statement following the private White House meeting earlier Tuesday, Boehner had said there was no deal. And he warned that House Republicans "will not be put in a box" of accepting options they refuse to endorse. Boehner has proposed an agreement that would keep the government running for one more week and slash another $12 billion in spending. The GOP-led House has already passed a pair of stopgap bills, so far cutting $10 billion from an estimated $1.2 trillion budget to fund the day-to-day operations of government through Sept. 30. Obama said he would only accept another short-term funding extension, of two or three days, in order to get a longer-term deal through Congress. But he ruled out a longer extension to allow negotiations to continue. "What we are not going to do is once again put off something that should have been done months ago," the president said. Republicans are already pointing their fingers at the White House for not considering another temporary spending bill. "The White House has increased the likelihood of a shutdown," House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said. The extension was a backup that Boehner would only "break glass" on if he had to, and senior budget negotiators say they weren't sure it had the votes to pass even if it were accepted by Democrats. Tea Party-backed freshmen lawmakers said they will support the new resolution, particularly since it is attached to a Defense spending bill. But a spokesman for House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called the new resolution "irresponsible and unacceptable." Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said he will oppose the one-week resolution and added that he hopes other Democrats will follow his lead. Hoyer, who has voted for previous temporary spending bills, said they are "ineffective, inefficient and costly." Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., also said he wouldn't support another short-term extension. "The can has been kicked down the road long enough," he said in a statement. "It is time to stop playing political games and finish the job that the American public is paying us to do." Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told a Senate legislative committee Tuesday that forcing the government to live week-by-week this far into the fiscal year risks undermining the economic recovery underway. The last-ditch deal -- which had been drawn up because the House needs to allow a three-day buffer before considering a longer-term budget, pushing back a vote beyond Friday night's deadline for a shutdown -- includes $12 billion in cuts from an array of places and a funding plan to provide for the Pentagon through the end of the fiscal year ending Sept. 30. Most every department of the government would face some kind of cut from prior spending levels, including military construction, high speed rail corridor funding, first responder grants, foreign assistance accounts and hospital readiness grants. Other "riders" are not as high-profile as earlier proposals to cut government aid to Planned Parenthood or de-fund the health care overhaul, but would include a ban on federal and local money from paying for abortions in the District of Columbia, prohibition from transferring Guantanamo detainees to the United States and a requirement that the secretary of defense certify the transfer of a detainee to another country that would not put the U.S. at risk. Stopgap measures, though, have become increasingly unpopular in Congress, particularly among House conservatives, and Republicans could have to look to moderate Blue Dog Democrats to help pick up votes. At the same time, congressional leaders were at the White House trying to work out a deal to fund the government for the rest of the year. As negotiations continue, the administration is preparing for a possible government shutdown. A top official at the White House Office of Management and Budget has written a memo to agency heads directing them to review and share their contingency plans for a shutdown. The Committee on House Administration also sent out a memo instructing employers in the House of Representatives to determine which "essential personnel" should keep working should funding lapse. The only House employees allowed to keep working would be those whose jobs are "directly related to constitutional responsibilities, related to the protection of human life, or related to the protection of property." [/release] Source: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/05/house-senate-leaders-head-white-house-ditch-dealing-budget/#ixzz1Ig9RqIYF[/url] Ladies and gentlemen, prepare for Government shutdown.
Only Glaber would post a fucking fox news article. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Why reply?" - Starpluck))[/highlight]
[quote]Obama said both sides are closer than ever to a deal[/quote] They don't actually believe this, do they?
read more: [url]http://www[/url]
Wait wait wait. Now they're criticizing him for [b]NOT[/b] spending? What the fuck!?
[QUOTE=Last or First;29001543]Wait wait wait. Now they're criticizing him for [b]NOT[/b] spending? What the fuck!?[/QUOTE] That's Republicans for you, if their opponent does anything, he's wrong.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;29001534]read more: [url]http://www[/url][/QUOTE] I just noticed that. still better than forgetting the source. Edit: that bit is gone now.
They wasted all that time focusing on abortion too.
[QUOTE=Last or First;29001543]Wait wait wait. Now they're criticizing him for [b]NOT[/b] spending? What the fuck!?[/QUOTE] People will criticize him for anything they can.
This bill stripping planned parenthood of funding is our [i]top priority[/i] ~ The Bohenernator
Isn't this the same spending bill that would cut 700,000 jobs?
Why are Republicans so hung up over non-defense discretionary spending? All of it combined is less than 16% of the budget! If you want to cut the debt, CUT MILITARY SPENDING. [editline]5th April 2011[/editline] Also, if Re-pube-lick-ans actually shut down the government then they're guaranteeing that Obama will win in 2012.
[QUOTE=analrapist;29001889]Why are Republicans so hung up over non-defense discretionary spending? All of it combined is less than 16% of the budget! If you want to cut the debt, CUT MILITARY SPENDING. [editline]5th April 2011[/editline] Also, if Re-pube-lick-ans actually shut down the government then they're guaranteeing that Obama will win in 2012.[/QUOTE] also close corporate tax loopholes and raise taxes on the mega ultra rich.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;29001953]also close corporate tax loopholes and raise taxes on the mega ultra rich.[/QUOTE] Yeah. In California if they raised the tax on the rich like 1.5% for one year, it would completely solve all our budget problems. But Republicans are blocking any attempt at doing that. And, of course, no Republican will ever call for a decrease in military spending, which makes no damn sense. If they're so worried about our debt, why aren't they complaining bout how we are in THREE FUCKING WARS that cost us hundreds of millions of dollars per day? And of course why is the Peace Candidate Obama starting MORE wars and continuing the ones we already had? American politics are shit.
[QUOTE=analrapist;29002043]Yeah. In California if they raised the tax on the rich like 1.5% for one year, it would completely solve all our budget problems. But Republicans are blocking any attempt at doing that. And, of course, no Republican will ever call for a decrease in military spending, which makes no damn sense. If they're so worried about our debt, why aren't they complaining bout how we are in THREE FUCKING WARS that cost us hundreds of millions of dollars per day? And of course why is the Peace Candidate Obama starting MORE wars and continuing the ones we already had? American politics are shit.[/QUOTE] Uh, Obama campaigned on expanding the war in Afghanistan. And I wouldn't exactly call our airstrikes in Libya a war - we're not even flying sorties, for christ's sake.
[QUOTE=analrapist;29002043]And of course why is the Peace Candidate Obama starting MORE wars and continuing the ones we already had? American politics are shit.[/QUOTE] I don't think he ran on a platform of complete and total peace and withdrawal from all war, but even so, the airstrikes in Libya aren't really a war of the US, if you can even call it a war. It's being commanded by NATO now, with Britain and France at the helm.
Obama ran on the idea of getting out of Iraq, and finishing the fight in Afghanistan. So far he hasn't done either. We've spent about $600 million bombing Lybia so far. Close enough.
I love how democrats are just as bad, however facepunch targets republicans more. funny
[QUOTE=redBadger;29004385]I love how democrats are just as bad, however facepunch targets republicans more. funny[/QUOTE]I love how people always say that but hardly ever provide serious examples.
[QUOTE=analrapist;29003405]Lybia[/QUOTE] Clearly that $600 million should've gone into education. [editline]5th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=analrapist;29003405]Lybia[/QUOTE] Clearly that $600 million should've gone into education. [editline]5th April 2011[/editline] And buying FP better servers
[QUOTE=redBadger;29004385]I love how democrats are just as bad, however facepunch targets republicans more. funny[/QUOTE] I love how people think the dems are just as bad when they're not the ones trying to push through massive longterm cuts to many important organizations, and risking a government shutdown and big hit to the economy if they don't get their way.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;29004432]I love how people always say that but hardly ever provide serious examples.[/QUOTE] Those democrats fleeing the state of Wisconsin? Of course, since it was just a few democrats, I'm going to base my entire opinion of an entire political party based on those small percentage of men.
[QUOTE=redBadger;29004385]I love how democrats are just as bad, however facepunch targets republicans more. funny[/QUOTE] I like how people equate both sides to be terrible and shitty, even though one side is running on an obstructionist, self-righteous platform. funny
[QUOTE=redBadger;29004562]Those democrats fleeing the state of Wisconsin? Of course, since it was just a few democrats, I'm going to base my entire opinion of an entire political party based on those small percentage of men.[/QUOTE] Your republicans in that state were forcing the bill through with absolutely no debate over the matter, and the bill is a union killer, plain and simple. They fled because it was the only way to stop that bill from being passed for as long as possible.
[QUOTE=teh pirate;29004453]Clearly that $600 million should've gone into education. [editline]5th April 2011[/editline] Clearly that $600 million should've gone into education.[/QUOTE] Oooh good one! 'Cause education fixes dyslexia right? :hurr:
[QUOTE=redBadger;29004562]Those democrats fleeing the state of Wisconsin? Of course, since it was just a few democrats, I'm going to base my entire opinion of an entire political party based on those small percentage of men.[/QUOTE] Did you even see the video of the Republican senators pretty much just ignoring the Democrat minority leader? He asked them what they'd changed in the union bill since the last debate, and he (The Republican chairman) refused to answer or give any time for discussion. And really, Dems just as bad as Republicans? Based on one thing that happened [B]just this fucking year[/B]? When Republicans have been trying to pass shitty bills for years now? Get your head out of your ass.
I have the urge to go and slap every political leader in the face and go "Wake up!". We're already in the shitter and nothing they're doing is really helping.
With all this bullshit the republicunts are pulling, the dems won't have to spend much for campaigning next election.
Good for him. Unless the gop wants to cut things that are useless like the war on drugs or military then we shouldn't have to stop health care because the gop has foreigner murdering fetish.
[QUOTE=redBadger;29004562]Those democrats fleeing the state of Wisconsin? Of course, since it was just a few democrats, I'm going to base my entire opinion of an entire political party based on those small percentage of men.[/QUOTE] Believe me the Wisconsin electorate will not be angry at them because of it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.