Archive for Obama
While acknowledging the problems with the rollout and selling of the Affordable Care Act, Jon Stewart this week saved his sharpest barbs for its critics:
“His opponents have been lying like motherf-ckers,” said Stewart, before fact-checking several reports by CNN and Fox News.
“So many people seem to feel the need to stretch the truth to attack it,” said Stewart. “If something is genuinely bad, just telling the truth about it should be sufficient. There’s a reason ’12 Years a Slave’ doesn’t have vampires and zombies — it doesn’t need them! Not to mention that some of the arguments against the Affordable Care Act make no sense whatsoever.”
Denialism is the go-to strategy for Republicans these days. If you confront a problem where facts are not on your side, simply deny the facts. Examples abound but one of my favorites was UnSkewedPolls.com. Polls showing President Obama ahead of Mitt Romney had to be wrong, or skewed. So Dean Chambers did some “analysis” and came up with a different set of “facts”. On Election night, the shock and awe on Republican faces including the candidate himself told the story of just how many people believed the “un”skewed polls.
Recent events have the Republicans butting up against a fact they just can’t live with. If we don’t fund the government and let it borrow more money we will be unable to pay our obligations which will trigger a default. This will have a chilling effect in world capital markets and would probably plunge us into a recession worse than the one we just went through. But none of this is a problem if you just don’t believe it’s true. Until it is true. President Romney can tell you how it works.
Now we have the Treasury Truthers.
“There’s always revenue coming into the Treasury, certainly enough revenue to pay interest,” said Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich. “Democrats have a different definition of ‘default’ than what we understand it to be. What I hear from them is, ‘If you’re not paying everything on time that’s a default.’ And that’s not the traditionally understood definition.”
Representative Mick Mulvaney, R-South Carolina:
“We’re not going to default; there is no default,” said Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C. “There’s an [Office of Management and Budget] directive from the 1980s, the last time we got fairly close to not raising the debt ceiling, that clearly lays out the process by which the Treasury secretary prioritizes interest payments. Tim Geithner understood that, because the last weekend in July of 2011 he was in New York City telling the primary dealers that we were not going to default on our debt.”
“I’m not going to vote for the so-called clean debt ceiling where we just give the president a blank check. I will not vote for that.”
“So, we are not going to default on the public debt. But that doesn’t mean that we have to pay every bill the day it comes in.”
“I will hear language like, ‘Well, we are heading toward the debt ceiling and you are going to default.’ Anyone that says that is looking you in the eyes and lying to you, either that or they don’t own a calculator,” Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., said in a House debate Friday.
“I don’t think the credit of the United States is going to be collapsed. I think that all this talk about a default has been a lot of… false demagoguery. We have plenty of money coming in to service the debt.”
“I think, personally, [not raising the debt ceiling] would bring stability to the world markets.”
The Barton quote is unsurprisingly a double whammy. Raising the debt limit doesn’t give the President a blank check. Instead it allows the government to operate at the level authorized by Congress. Of course, this is from the guy who apologized to BP after the Gulf spill.
Matt Yglesias makes a good point.
Stepping back a little, I’d also note that House Republicans can’t have it both ways here. Either the debt ceiling is a major leverage point to extract concessions from the president, or else it’s no big deal. If it’s no big deal, there’s no leverage. If there’s leverage, then it’s because failing to raise the debt ceiling would be very damaging.
This shutdown situation sucks. There will be hardships everywhere. And recalling the 1995 shutdown, the hardships will come in places people least expect. The 1995 shutdown ended with Republicans having to buckle under the public outcry.
But when you think about it, plenty of government will remain operational during this shutdown. This CNN Travel article gives us a hint:
While essential air security and traffic control operations won’t be impeded, travelers visiting the country’s national parks and other government-run tourist attractions will find the gates shuttered and the doors locked.
Translation: In order to fly to that national park that you won’t be able to get into, some federal agencies need to remain open.
“Government shutdown” doesn’t mean what I think it means. Republicans would have a little less shutdown-geist if we really shut down the government.
- All US military operations stop.
- Veterans services and payments stop.
- All passenger jet travel stops.
- Social Security, Medicare payments stop.
- All federal food inspection stops.
- No National Weather Service.
- No US Mail Service.
- No CIA, NSA, FBI, Homeland.
- Federal prisons un-staff, unlock.
Of course we will have some essential level of all these essential things. And there are things I’m leaving out. If only Republicans had to explain to the public why repealing Obamacare was more essential than all these essential things, the government might just still be open. Maybe.
More about the shutdown situation below the fold. Note: NSFW! Read More→
[h/t John Aravosis]
Once again, very serious people are warning Americans that it would embolden our enemies if the United States doesn’t make some foreign rubble dance. Syrian rubble this time. Seems like just yesterday they were debating whether leaving Iraq would embolden our enemies. It’s a phrase that if you don’t think too hard sounds like common sense, end of discussion. That’s why it’s flung around so freely — to shut down debate.
Somehow, every time a foreign military conflict arises, bombing something seems to be the Washington cocktail circuit’s default position. We don’t want to attack, of course. Our enemies force our hand. Because if we don’t intervene, bad guys will be emboldened. Thus, the Ledeen Doctrine (for neocon pundit Michael Ledeen): “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”
The following is a transcript of remarks made by President Obama to the White House press corps on Friday 19 July 2013:
The reason I actually wanted to come out today is not to take questions, but to speak to an issue that obviously has gotten a lot of attention over the course of the last week: the issue of the Trayvon Martin ruling. I gavea preliminary statement right after the ruling on Sunday, but watching the debate over the course of the last week, I thought it might be useful for me to expand on my thoughts a little bit.
It occurred to me tonight to juxtapose two speeches. I was reminded of the first by Digby, who posted The Day of Affirmation speech by Robert Kennedy, from 1966. That led me to remember the second, the famous “Yes We Can” speech by President Obama which was his message upon coming in second in the New Hampshire primary to Hillary Clinton early in 2008. Read More→
This is my second experience with misleading headlines today. The first was the headline on my letter on the opinion page. Then this.
Politico: Poll: 54 percent against Obamacare
Fifty-four percent of Americans oppose President Barack Obama’s signature domestic policy achievement, according to a CNN poll released Monday, while 43 percent support the law.
But that headline is misleading, which the reader finds out a few paragraphs later. From the CNN poll:
According to the poll, 43% of the public says it supports the health care law, a figure that’s mostly unchanged in CNN polling since the measure was passed in 2010 by a Congress then controlled by Democrats and signed into law by President Barack Obama. Fifty-four percent of those questioned say they oppose the law, also relatively unchanged since 2010.
But wait! There’s more. A minor detail someone finally decided to ask [emphasis added]:
The survey indicates that 35% oppose the health care law because it’s too liberal, with 16% saying they oppose the measure because it isn’t liberal enough.
Organizations Representing Tens of Millions of Americans to Deliver Over 2 Million Petition Signatures Directly to the White House Rejecting Cuts to Social Security Benefits
Will Be Joined By U.S. Senator Who Vows to Block Benefit Cuts
Coalition Includes AFL-CIO, MoveOn.org, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, CREDO, National Organization for Women, Social Security Works, Alliance for Retired Americans, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, Democracy For America, Campaign for America’s Future, The Other 98%, Progressives United, Blue America, Rebuild the Dream, Center for Community Change, Health Care for America Now and Others
(Washington, DC) – Senator Bernie Sanders and Reps. Mark Takano and Rick Nolan will join organizations representing tens of millions of Americans to deliver more than two million petition signatures opposing cuts to Social Security benefits to the White House on Tuesday, April 9, 2013 at 12:30 p.m. ET.