Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

White House Cheat Sheet: The Hard Part



President Obama faces a tough task in reforming entitlements, a march that begins today. AP Photo/Ron Edmonds

President Obama convenes a fiscal responsibility summit today at the White House to start a conversation about solving Washington's thorniest political problem: entitlement reform.

Over the last four-plus decades, each and every president has pledged to make Social Security and Medicare reform a priority of his administration -- insisting that the time had finally come to make these massive government programs solvent for future generations.

And, time and again, these entitlement programs have survived largely untouched as the tricky politics of making any changes to them beat out the allegedly urgent policy considerations.

Former president George W. Bush is only the latest president to learn this hard lesson, watching as his pledge to spend "political capital" earned following the 2004 election to reform Social Security was met with unified Democratic opposition that doomed the bill from the start.

Obama, however, appeared undaunted by the political careers that lay scattered alongside the "third rail" of American politics in an interview with Post editors and reporters days before his inauguration last month.

"What we have done is kicked this can down the road," Obama said. "We're now at the end of the road. And we are not in a position to kick it any further."

His answer? A summit bringing together a wide variety of groups and individuals to discuss how -- from a policy perspective -- entitlement spending (and the U.S. budget more broadly) can be brought under control.

The summit, which will be held in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, has an interesting guest list including: Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), House Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thad McCotter (Mich.), House Majority Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.), Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (Mont.) and even Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), the administration's erstwhile pick as commerce secretary. Representatives from interest groups as far flung as the Service Employees International Union and the Heritage Foundation also plan to attend.

The goal, according to one senior White House official, is "to begin a frank discussion on how we can address the long-term fiscal problems facing the nation."

The policy end of the conversation is the simple part, according to Gregg as quoted in a story by the Post's Ceci Connolly and Lori Montgomery over the weekend. "You could put 10 people who know Social Security around the table, and they could make Social Security solvent for the next 50 to 70 years within a day or so," Gregg told the duo. "It's the politics that are very hard."

Obama echoed that sentiment during his Post interview. "So much of this is politics as opposed to technical problems," he said of reforming entitlements. "The technical problems are really hard. The politics are even harder."

And, as Obama learned during the recent fight in/with Congress over his economic stimulus plan, separating politics from policy is virtually impossible. Obama has said time and again that he feels as though he was elected to tackle the big fights. The one he is about to pick on entitlements in the biggest and baddest out there.

Sked Stuff: President Obama will announce today that Earl DeVaney, who is currently the Inspector General at the Department of Interior, will oversee the transparency and accountability board dedicated to ensure the $787 billion contained in the economic stimulus package is well spent. DeVaney has served as IG at Interior since 1999 when he was nominated to that post by former president Bill Clinton, and is a former Secret Service Agent. Obama is expected to formalize the DeVaney pick during planned remarks to the National Governors Association annual winter meeting this morning, according to an administration official.

Jindal Up...: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal was authentic and effective in an appearance on the biggest stage of political journalism: "Meet the Press." Jindal parried host David Gregory's questions about his hard-line conservative stance against Obama's economic stimulus package without coming across as obstinate. His line that the GOP was "fired with cause" over the last two elections is an effective one and affirms the idea of the Louisiana governor as a voice of reform. Jindal got an unexpected gift when Gregory rolled a clip from 2006 of Obama on "MTP" insisting he was focused on the job at hand and not interested in a presidential run -- an echo of Jindal's rhetoric on 2012. The more Jindal is cast as the GOP's Obama, the better positioned he is as the next presidential election approaches.

...Crist Down: The governor of Florida had a harder time during his appearance on "Meet" -- confronted with tough criticisms from South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford and Republican media consultant Alex Castellanos on his conservative credentials and forced to defend an economic stimulus plan that almost no one in the GOP base likes. Also, Crist's unwillingness to offer any specific answers (he's not focused on whether or not to run for Senate, the "people" are in charge of the Republican Party) makes him look unwilling to take sides -- a necessity especially when running for national office in a contested primary.

ICYMI -- Messina Profiled: The Post's Anne Kornblut put White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina under the microscope in a profile over the weekend in which the man from Montana is cast as the "fixer" of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue -- a jack of all trades who takes the lead on solving the most urgent problem in any day. Kornblut rightly draws the parallel between Messina and his far more high profile boss Rahm Emanuel -- both men have VERY high metabolisms (Messina never finishes his lunch) and a tendency to use a panoply of four-letter words in casual conversation -- and recounts Messina's rise to prominence in early 2005 when he spearheaded the opposition to President Bush's plan to reform Social Security. Our favorite thing in the story? Barrett Kaiser, a former flack for Sen. Max Baucus (Mont.), insisting that Messina delivered a "beat-down sandwich" to Bush on Social Security. Our favorite thing not in the story? Messina is in a band -- called "Even Less Dignity" -- that boasts a total of one song on iTunes. The name? "Party Party Party Party Party," of course.

Steelman Leans In: Former Missouri state Treasurer Sarah Steelman signaled over the weekend that she is leaning toward running for the Senate in 2010 -- setting up a primary fight against Rep. Roy Blunt (R). Blunt is the establishment pick but Steelman has significant personal money (she loaned herself $770,000 during her loss to Rep. Kenny Hulshof in the 2008 gubernatorial primary) and will have Blunt's record in Congress to run against. National Republicans had hoped to clear the primary for Blunt as Democrats seem to have done for Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, the heir to a powerful political legacy in the Show Me State. Missouri is one of five open seats Republicans must defend in 2010.

Cooper to Knickerbocker: Starting in early March, Chris Cooper will expand the operations of Knickerbocker SKD, a New York City-based direct mail firm, to the nation's capitol. Cooper has spent decades in Democratic politics -- doing stints as campaign manager for Rep. John Spratt (S.C.), as senior aide at the New Democrat Network and, in recent years, as a partner at MSHC Partners. Knickerbocker, which was founded by former Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) senior aide Josh Isay in 2002, is a major player in New York City politics (Mayor Michael Bloomberg is a client) but is looking to expand its reach. Among the clients Cooper will bring with him to his new venture are Reps. Zack Space (Ohio) and Chet Edwards (Texas).

In Case You Were Wondering: No Baby Fix yet. But, he or she could arrive at any moment. The anticipation!

Say What?: "At times it sounds like the Soviet grain quotas of Stalin's time -- X number of jobs will be created because Washington says so." -- South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford on "Fox News Sunday" comparing the Administration's stimulus plan to Russia -- of course.

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 23, 2009; 5:31 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Friday Governors Line: The Govs Come To D.C.
Next: Fix Twitters Gibbs

Comments

--"The more Jindal is cast as the GOP's Obama, the better positioned he is as the next presidential election approaches."--

So it's probably his kiss-of-death. After all - Hillary started off on the high-seat. In contrast McCain started out hopeless and bankrupt.

Lets see him trim two billion dollars from his states budget - then revisit this issue on the other side.

Posted by: DonJasper | February 24, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

President Barack Obama, to Mr. McCain quote...
"You know, he and I had very good debates about these issue's,"Obama said- an understatement to be sure and one that drew laughter. He also praised the Arizona senator as "extraordinary consistant and sincere about these issue's.

McCain, quote....
"Well, thank you, Mr. President," McCain said and quickly delved into the issue of cost overuns on large government buys. "Your helicopter is now going to cost as much as Air Force One."

President Barack Obama, reminded Mr. McCain, quote...
"The helicopter I have now seems perfectly adequate to me," Obama said wryly, inciting more laughter. "Of course, I've never had a helicopter before. So, you know, maybe I've been deprived and didn't know it."
______________________________________
RICHARD PRYOR....EAT YOUR HEART OUT!

NO...RICHARD PRYOR LAUGHING HIS BUTTE OFF!
_______________________________________

Eric Cantor's wife's Job/Bank a "Manager of Bank"...her banking firm applied and accepted over $256 million dollars of Stimulus money.

SHAME ON YOU ERIC CANTOR....THOSE DARN REPUBLICANS!
______________________________________

I'm still selling tickets to that meeting that president Barack Obama had with your (R)Minority Leaders yesterday in the White House.

It was funny see'n President Obama feeding these ladies/gents some GERBER cookies. The funniest was Eric Cantor who didn't know what to do with himself.

Obama knew, that Cantor knew, that Obama knew, that Cantors wife, JOB/Bank "Manager of a Bank" took some Stimulus money.

fuuuuuuuuuunny

Posted by: opp88 | February 24, 2009 1:45 PM | Report abuse

TheBabeNemo –

A lot of freedom is tied into your economic freedom and the ability to go places, do things, and provide for your family. Taxes taking 70% of income is going to severely limit freedom of millions of Americans much more than the Patriot Act.

Posted by: leapin | February 24, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Eric Cantor's wife's Job/Bank a "Manager of Bank"...her banking firm applied and accepted over $256 million dollars of Stimulus money.

SHAME ON YOU ERIC CANTOR....THOSE DARN REPUBLICANS!

Posted by: opp88 | February 24, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

I'm still selling tickets to that meeting that president Barack Obama had with your (R)Minority Leaders yesterday in the White House.

It was funny see'n President Obama feeding these ladies/gents some GERBER cookies. The funniest was Eric Cantor who didn't know what to do with himself.

Obama knew, that Cantor knew, that Obama knew, that Cantors wife, JOB/Bank "Manager of a Bank" took some Stimulus money.

fuuuuuuuuuunny!

Posted by: opp88 | February 24, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

I think your soft spot is in the "above the neck" region.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 11:33 PM | Report abuse

Hey zookie, please post an address........we all want to donate some $$$ to you so you can buy a dictionary.

Just want to do all we can to help you sound somewhat intelligent. I know it's probably impossible but we have soft spots for you minority republicans.

Posted by: jasperanselm | February 23, 2009 9:41 PM | Report abuse

I thought you moonbats hated humans and loved trees. Try this. Put a bag Over a tree. Fill it with all oxygen and no co two.

The funniest thing about libs is when they try to use math and science. They can't use religeon, they burst into Flame.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 8:29 PM | Report abuse

PRES. OBAMA HAD PUT THE (R) SENATORS IN CHECK TODAY. IT WAS FUNNY WHEN PRES. OBAMA ASKED ERIC CANTOR "YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY" ERIC CANTOR WAS TO AFRAID TO STAND.

RATHER THEN STANDING, CANTOR STAYED SEATED AND RESPONDED LIKE THE BYSH HE IS.

OBAMA HAS ALL THESE SENATORS IN HIS BACK POCKET. SO WHAT DOES THESE COWARD SENATORS DO? PICK ON A WOMAN...NANCY PELOSI. FUNNY ARSS SHYD.

Posted by: opp88 | February 23, 2009 7:52 PM | Report abuse

"Carbon dioxide, a harmless gas essential to life on Earth is labeled a toxic substance and a pollutant and must be reduced."

This is a fun one. Put a plastic bag over your head. Make sure it's tight. You'll eventually stop breathing due to the build-up of CO2. Point being, CO2 is essential, but it's not harmless.

Well, Zouk, it's been a fun day of batting down your softballs. See you in the funny pages.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 23, 2009 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Oh oh. Things are not going well on all fronts. Time for another rousing speech offering empty promises, high rhetoric end a heavy dose of finger pointing. The campaign rages on.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

"Carbon dioxide, a harmless gas essential to life on Earth is labeled a toxic substance and a pollutant and must be reduced. "

I know that KoZ is all about his Kaufmanesque shtick, but there was actually an ad like this a few years ago by some independent conservative group saying that Democrats want to kill off the trees by reducing carbon emissions.

Art imitates life this time.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 23, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

I watched the sum-up meeting at the end of the summit this afternoon.
One committee reporter got to and told the President that this business of conducting major operations "off-budget" simply has stop.
The actual load of the Iraq War is about $53 trillion.
(I just cheered.)
Another thing he said was that, in their committee, they came to the conclusion that contracting work for the government is much more expensive that having the work done by federal workers.
(Wha-hoo!!!)
Obama has attracted some sensient people to help him.
What a change from the previous 8 years.

Posted by: Judy-in-TX | February 23, 2009 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Conservative logic - There will be no hurricanes, earthquakes, floods or any emergencies requiring spending. 4 years into the Iraq war, the Bush administration still couldn't figure out it's a regular defense appropriation.

And the topper. Don't cut taxes permanently. Set it as a temporary tax cut to expire so the total cost is lower. It's the law you folks wanted. And deserve.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 23, 2009 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Lib logic- try to follow
Step one. Double spending on nothing useful
Step two. Promise to cut spending in half

Act as if both moves are brilliant. Hope no one notices and laughs.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 5:54 PM | Report abuse

leapin, does your mom know you're using her computer? It's time to clean your room and go down for dinner. Mom hates it when you're late.

Posted by: jasperanselm | February 23, 2009 5:37 PM | Report abuse


oh heck no leapin.....

Bush DID take freedom away. It's part of Dad's "New World Order".
And what helped him was a little old thing called the USA Patriot Act.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Koolkat - It's actually a lot worse. Assuming 2% - 3% inflation, the dollar is about 30% to 40% less valuable than in 1997. So, a 7000 now is more like 5000 back then.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 23, 2009 5:34 PM | Report abuse

jasperanselm -

You will be in a soup line by the end of next year. That's something you can take to a BHO bank.

Posted by: leapin | February 23, 2009 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Jindal is learning how to be a good GOP candidate, that is, a hyperpartisan liar.

Jindal vs Palin should be fun!

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | February 23, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

i like it..
the Rahmster
the Rahminator
the Rahm-a-tolla

the steam rollin' Rahm-a-tolla

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Just like FDR blamed Hoover for years and years the neo-Marxists will blame Bush for an equal period of time. They still complain about Bush taking away freedoms and spending while the BHO and company will dwarf taking away freedoms and spending in just a few weeks.

Posted by: leapin | February 23, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Back to 1997 levels? It's as if George W. Bush had never been president.

Oh, were that only the case...

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | February 23, 2009 5:30 PM | Report abuse

how special..
1) Spend like crazy on government waste - a. Bush tax package 45 days into his presidency - a cost of 6 trillion - and caused today's problem
b. WMD
c. yellowcake
d. national surveillance administration
e. a homeland security bill that proved worthless
f- first responders and emerg. mgmt. never funded properly at all levels.

2) Raise taxes -
a. covered in Bush's first 45 days (see above)
b. don't forget God Greenspan and the interest rates and subprime debacle

3) Erect trade barriers - CAFTA

4) Talk about fear and crisis a lot
a. repulsives cover this one by all voting no on the stimulus--as in "country might be in hell, but we won't do anything about it but get on t.v. & the press and downgrade the new President"
b. Osama and the Dr are alive and well -- for any instilling of fear you may need. I think it was that President of the past 8 years that NEVER CAUGHT THEM.

5) Ruin the military-Bush did that by declaring 2 wars. One for 9-11 and one for his Dad.
6) ignore impending sneak attack--Bush, Rice, Cheney NEVER knew planes could be used as weapons/missiles flying into buildings--until it happened. Thanks Pres and all others!!

Elect liberals to run things - i'll tell ya one thing - i prospered much more in the 90's under Clinton/Gore than I ever did under Bush/Cheney.

remember king---
THE POWER OF OBAMA COMPELLS YOU !!!


Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

And every time you open your mouth, zookie, we all get a good laugh at the foolish things you say.

And even better than that, we get to laugh at you for the next eight years!

Your mom's bound to kick you out of her basement by then!

Posted by: jasperanselm | February 23, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

The Rhamster says you have to take advantage of a good crisis. Echoed by Washington and the compliant media.

Despots always use desperation to make their move. We are going to join Germany turning to the Nazi party and the Cubans turning to Castro as our country is dismantled by the socialists in just a few weeks.

Posted by: leapin | February 23, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Indeed. Every time he opens his mouth and reveals how utterly clueless he is, the market gets the picture and prices in additional failure.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Posted by Zouk: "Mine doesn't cause the markets to crash."

Neither do his. The markets are priced on expectations that this is going to get worse. You. P/E ratios and all that. I that Republicans were supposed to be good at that. Oh wait. That's pre-2008.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 23, 2009 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Simple lib recipe for turning a recession into a depression:

Spend like crazy on government waste
Raise taxes
Erect trade barriers
Talk about fear and crisis a lot
Ruin the military, ignore impending sneak attack
Elect liberals to run things

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

"Don't forget that half the population is of below average intelligence. In this case - the liberal half."

Considering the Liberals are winning elections, at least some must be above average.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

"Looked out the window", zookie?

You didn't bother to look out the window for eight years while the bushies trashed the country! Why start now!

Oh, that's right, your room in mom's basement doesn't have windows!

Posted by: jasperanselm | February 23, 2009 4:51 PM | Report abuse

The partisan's keep chiming in from both sides. Look, I wrote last week that this would happen. it's going to continue and you're going to see a horrendous and sudden collapse sometime in March or April when the DOW blows below 6500 or lower. (Likely a 500 to 1000 point drop in one day.) Now, the economic model looks at many trend lines, but one that closely parallels what we are seeing is job outsourcing and free trade and and inverse relationship between those and the "stimulus" programs being implemented. This isn't Obama's fault, either. He is just doing what his "experts" tell him is the right thing to do. Romney, McCain, Clinton, every last one of them would be doing precisely the same thing... and blowing it big time. Those experts are blithering idiots, incompetent hacks, and literally everything they advocate has been detrimental so far. They are seeking to somehow save "free trade", blindly believing that the global economy will rescue us, when the overwhelming evidence is that the global economy is the root CAUSE of our problem. The Geithners and Summers, the clueless Wall Street insiders, wont ever admit this and Obama will stick with them until it is too late, so just shut up and sit back and watch history being made as a once great country explodes and ceases to exist right before your eyes.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | February 23, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

The head lemming is being praised for his leadership by the other lemmings. Watch as the plummet off the cliff.

It is nausiating to see them sit around and praise themselves. Have they looked out the window lately?

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Tell me that this isn't a Government Job!

Posted by: newbeeboy | February 23, 2009 4:32 PM | Report abuse

king_of_clueless must have got his unemployment check today since he's doing so much posting on CC's blog.

Posted by: jasperanselm | February 23, 2009 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Simple Simon. Don't forget that half the population is of below average intelligence. In this case - the liberal half.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

We must have watched different Meet the Press. Jindal came across as partisan and a future Presidential candidate. At least Crist was honest. Jinal also stated as fact things that are not true - for instance - extended unemployment that he said states would have to come up with in later years - not true it's for two years only.

Posted by: rlj1 | February 23, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

At an average drop of 250 points a day the stock market will reach
neo-Marxist socialist utopia in 28 days. We will be all government workers, wards of the state like most of the elite posters on this site.

Posted by: leapin | February 23, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

"The ineptitude. The misery. The fecklessness."

And these guys beat you guys, soundly. Two elections in a row. Oh, how that must chafe.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

king_of_zouk -

You forget one more piece of absurdity. Princess Hillary on her knees before the Chinese begging them to buy BHO's colossal debt.

Posted by: leapin | February 23, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Lib result- in 30 days a report on what was discussed will be released.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Maybe he should have had the fiscal responsibility conference before the giant splurge.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 4:05 PM | Report abuse

"Too bad Jindahl did not push his bid to mark to market which would effectively bankrupt 4 of the 5 largest banks in the country."

Mark to market cannot bankrupt any bank. It can only expose the fact that a bank is already bankrupt, instead of hiding that fact from its shareholder-owners.

Posted by: sacandaga | February 23, 2009 4:00 PM | Report abuse

the Dow is down to Clinton era levels. The libs have gotten us into a time warp headed back to the carter days. The ineptitude. The misery. The fecklessness. The talk talk. The surrender to Iran. I an not surprised. Only impressed in the rapid failure. Socialism must clearly be rejected or else

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

"First, instead of crafting a stimulus bill himself -- or even actively participating in it -- Obama let the Pelosi Democrats run off with it."
Yes, fellow citizens, it was the height of irresponsibility to allow Congress to actually write legislation. Obama should be impeached for permitting it.

Posted by: sacandaga | February 23, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

"koolkat_1960 - Most people in Germany, actually most people in the world, were not aware of Hitler's hatred for Jews and other minorities and the depth to which he would descend in exterminating them."

I might agree with the last part of that sentence but you are mistaken about how well known Hitler's feelings about Jews were. Germans just chose to ignore the clear warning signals because things were so bad in their country.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | February 23, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

"As such, I think the rest of us - the gainfully employed - are obliged to properly fund the program in order to maintain the program's status as a safety net."

That's the problem, the Pyramid scheme is collapsing under the weight of baby boom demographic time bomb. When SS dwindles down to 3 or ever 2 workers per retiree the tax rates on those 2 or 3 workers will have to be astronomical to support the SS system at its current levels. With those kind of tax rates I think you'll be looking at generational warfare as younger workers pay more and more of their wages into a system that probably won't exist for them. You're talking the largested generational transfer of wealth ever seen in this country's history. President Bush was trying to come up with a system that would pay out as much if not more than the current system without the massive tax increases. The only other alternative is benefit cuts. You could do both, benefit cuts and tax increases, but the cuts are going to have to be in there too or all hell will break loos.

Posted by: RobT1 | February 23, 2009 3:32 PM | Report abuse

chris:
i've got it.
put headphones on mommy's tummy and blast 'JIMI HENDRIX'. Crosstown Traffic.
That baby will be born.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960 - Most people in Germany, actually most people in the world, were not aware of Hitler's hatred for Jews and other minorities and the depth to which he would descend in exterminating them. My point is that free trade has landed us in the current economic mess. Our "leaders" have done the bidding of the Wall Street and corporate crowd for so long that they actually have deluded themselves into thinking that business as usual will be allowed to continue. I am merely posing a warning to them and for us, that the people of this country will not take kindly to starving, to watching their children die from entirely preventable diseases, to loosing their homes, be condemned to an old age lived in a cardboard box. We have reached the breaking point and people will willingly follow another Hitler, if that is what it takes, to end the reign of terror inflicted on them by banks, credit card companies, their employers, and government. Listening to the news, over this past weekend, where another candy maker was closing down shop and moving 300 jobs to Mexico, hearing news of yet another Ponzi Scheme, has become something that inundates us. But we are not used to it. People are getting FURIOUS, angry enough to call for the execution of the worst offenders. Now, you and I both know that this stimulus is going to fall flat on its face. I wish, I really do, that it were otherwise. I like President Obama. But he has already taken the wrong path, the path trod by Bush and the NeoCon's and Wall Street junkies, and we are all going to pay h*ll for his being to accommodating, so weak, as to give in to the robber barrens. Another Hitler is in our future... and God help us all.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | February 23, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Who else but a pathetic madman would spend his whole life on a message board?

Posted by: drindl


Ummmmm, you? But I contradict myself.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

“When we remember that we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.”

No zouk, sorry, it's just you that's mad -- and that's why you're on here all day, every day, posting the sorry ignorance, hallucination and delusion that constitute your down-the-rabbit-hole world.

Who else but a pathetic madman would spend his whole life on a message board?

Posted by: drindl | February 23, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Obama has failed twice and there is little reason to believe his leadership will improve. His political character isn’t built on leadership skills. In the first two tests he hasn’t demonstrated it.

First, instead of crafting a stimulus bill himself -- or even actively participating in it -- Obama let the Pelosi Democrats run off with it. And their product was so bad -- so full of pork and costly liberal nostrums that pass enormous fiscal burdens to the states -- that several Democrats joined the unified House Republicans in voting against it. Now Obama is facing off with almost a dozen state governments that want to reject the money because of the strings attached.

The second failure was in building expectations about the new bank bailout plan that was announced last week by serial tax evader and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. Before Geithner unveiled the plan, Obama said, “He’s going to be terrific.” Again and again, Obama raised expectations, saying Geithner would be “clear and specific.”

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

“When we remember that we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.” Mark Twain’s comment helps me understand the absolute contradictions presented as truth, sense and reality. Consider just a short list.


Warming is causing global cooling.
The sun has virtually nothing to do with global temperature change.
Carbon dioxide, a harmless gas essential to life on Earth is labeled a toxic substance and a pollutant and must be reduced.
Rewarding failures will reduce the number of failures.
Punishing success will encourage more success.
You can have more freedom by letting the government control more of your life.
You get out of debt by going further into debt.
The best people to get you out of trouble are the ones who got you there.

The list of absolute contradictions about environment and economies gets longer every day as we drift further from logic and reason.

The frustration and madness is that many of the contradictions only apply to government thinking and worse their actions. These are far removed from reality and all infused with the hypocrisy of, “Do as I say not as I do”.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 2:31 PM | Report abuse

"Where Hitler went wrong, was *after* saving the German economy, he was put in the position of not being able to do any wrong, and his pathologies came out... military conquest, hatred of Jews and Slavs and Gypsies and homosexuals, his racial theories, and all of the rest of the horrors."

His "pathologies" were quite clear long before he had any power. When do you think Mein Kampf was published?

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | February 23, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Is there some part of Jindahl's Dubya created more jobs and affluence than anyone that was missed by the writer. Is with us or against us a party doctrine of the Republican party or do free thinkers have no place. Too bad Jindahl did not push his bid to mark to market which would effectively bankrupt 4 of the 5 largest banks in the country. Do you think his state could use the waterways money his fellow Republican Collins put in the stimulus bill? Yes some Republicans can see the forest and are not blinded by the trees.

Posted by: jameschirico | February 23, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Isn't Steny Hoyer the House Majority Leader, not House Majority Whip?

Posted by: Kirkaldy1 | February 23, 2009 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Another day of Zouk posting blibber blabber...

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

Mine doesn't cause the markets to crash. It seems the messiah's speeches have gone as far as their emptiness will permit. did anyone tell him the election is over and he won??? He should consider ending the false promises and taking some beneficial action.

Still waiting for the first dog to be vetted. those poor little girls are finding out what a liar their father is, just like the rest of us. does anyone know of a dog who has paid their taxes on time that needs a home?

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

"Former president George W. Bush is only the latest president to learn this hard lesson, watching as his pledge to spend "political capital" earned following the 2004 election to reform Social Security was met with unified Democratic opposition that doomed the bill from the start."

Just as well, since if the Bush plan had been adopted, social security would have just been wiped out in the market crash.

Posted by: kevrobb | February 23, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

"I believe you underestimate the coming problems with the unfunded SS obligation. "

I don't think I estimated what the size of the problem is; I did predict what I think will be proposed to push off the date of when SS changes from producing surpluses to deficits. I definitely do not agree with the idea of SS privatization. SS should not be seen as a retirement plan. SS is intended to keep people from being destitute when they can no longer work. SS is a safety net, nothing more. As such, I think the rest of us - the gainfully employed - are obliged to properly fund the program in order to maintain the program's status as a safety net. I think allowing the privatization of SS contributions destroys the point of the program as a safety net and turns it into a retirement plan, which it clearly is not (as you note, people who have never contributed are eligible for benefits).

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

bsimon1, what President Bush proposed was an interim step to total control of all your SS dollars at some point in the future. He realized that the current system had to stay in place for current and near future retirees. Democrats have made a lot of electoral hay over SS fearmongering and they are not likely to give up that weapon without a fight. I believe you underestimate the coming problems with the unfunded SS obligation. Studies have been done that show that raising the SS retirement age barely affects the point of no return and to get the inlays and outlays of SS dollars after 2018 in line will require big tax increases and big benefit cuts. Social Security retirement age was set at 65 because average life expectancy was only 63. Average life expectancy is now almost 80 with a retirement age of 67. Hence the problem. We went from most people dying before they receive SS to most people living for over a decade after receiving their first SS check. And remember SS was fairly bare bones when it was created. Now there it's a lot more generous and other groups draw from it besides retirees. Lastly, the Pyramid scheme aspect of SS is collapsing with the baby boomer retirement. When enacted back in the '30s SS had a huge base of workers to support a small pyramid tip of retirees. Now the pyramid is looking more like a square with fewer workers supporting more and more retirees. The baby boomers will push it over the edge.

Posted by: RobT1 | February 23, 2009 1:45 PM | Report abuse

lowercaselarry writes
"A phony "crisis" is being ginned up by financial types who want to get their hands on Social Security, and force everyone to privatize their futures."

Newsflash for you Larry: They already got their hands on social security & it has been spent. The 'lockbox' into which SS contributions have been kept is full of IOUs. RobT1 is correct: the gov't has been spending more than it collects in revenue & has used SS dollars to offset significant amounts of this spending. The so-called public debt refers to T-bills held by non-government entities like private & offshore investors (like China, the Saudis, etc). There is also a huge pile of T-bills that the SS trust holds - but that's not 'public' debt because the treasury owes the SS trust fund. Its an intra-government debt that is nominally 'off the books'. In theory when SS revenue stops meeting SS outlays (projected for 2018), they just start spending out of this trust. The problem we face is that the treasury has to make up that shortfall - which means Joe Taxpayer, or keep issuing debt, assuming buyers can be found.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Since I work for the government and read Scrivener's posts, that technically makes me part of the government surveillance operation. How Orwellian

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 23, 2009 1:31 PM | Report abuse

RobT1-
You mix some selective reporting in with your facts. You're correct about the nearness of the problem when SS stops running a surplus. However you overstate the former president's proposed 'solution' to SS. For instance, so far as I know, he never proposed to actually address the pending budget shortage triggered by the boomers' retirements. He only proposed that new contributions would be under private control - that instead of going into the bucket, individuals would be able to choose an investment portfolio & have some control over the performance of their retirement dollars.

It will be interesting to see what proposals the new administration makes for maintaining SS solvency. My guess is a combination of the easy quick fixes: 1) increasing the age of benefits eligibility; 2) increasing the amount of income that is subject to SS taxes; 3) changing the benefits formula to slow the growth rate.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Chris, repeat five times: "There is NO Social Security crisis." A phony "crisis" is being ginned up by financial types who want to get their hands on Social Security, and force everyone to privatize their futures. "There is NO Social Security crisis." There is a problem with Medicare, but only because the private sector has inflated costs beyond all economic reason. Fix the health care system in this country by adopting the policies ALL other industrialized countries follow, and the Medicare problem will be solved.

Posted by: lowercaselarry | February 23, 2009 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Those who argue that Social Security should be left alone or that its not in as bad a shape as those filthy Republicans keep saying should do a little research before they start giving out opinions on something they don't know a whole lot about. But that would mean actually thinking for themselves instead of just parroting the Obama/Democrat/Media line. In 2018 SS will stop running a surplus. That's only 9 years from now. In 2042, which is the date Democrats love to use, the so called SS trust fund will be exhausted. But, hate to tell you, there is no trust fund. The feds have been spending the SS surplus and then some all the way along. The trust fund consists of goverment IOU's that will have to be repaid out of the Fderal Governments general fund which by the way typically runs in deficit even with the SS surplus. So the date you should really worry about is 9 years from now when the feds start having to pay out more than SS takes in and that number will consume more and more of the federal budget as time goes on and more and more baby boomers retire and start drawing from the system. It's a demographic train wreck and the giant pyramid scheme know as Social Security is unlikely to survive in its current form. President Bush tried to do something about it 4 years ago but the Democrats couldn't stand the thought of anything that reduced the elderly's dependence on the goverment. That might cut into their voters. But now here we are 4 more years closer to disaster rehashing the same old same old with the options getting more and more painful by the day.

Posted by: RobT1 | February 23, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse


WaPo was probably getting sick of the entries taking up so much space....

social security....what a topic, uh?
do you know the first installation of the Iraq war for Shock & Awe (March 20 & 21st of 2003) was paid for with SS money.
to a tune of 186 billion.

guess that's why i never hear the press story about SS running out by 2037 anymore. Press ran THAT story 24/7 for 2 years. What happened?

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Another day of Zouk posting blibber blabber...

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade

QFT

Posted by: theobserver4 | February 23, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

"ATTEMPTED POSTS TO 'THE FIX' CONCERNING RADIATION WEAPONRY -- INTENDED FOR THE NATION'S GOVERNORS -- APPARENTLY ARE BEING WITHHELD/CENSORED BY A GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE OPERATION."


Typical government incompetence. Somehow the rest of your posts are still getting through.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 12:49 PM | Report abuse

"Another day of Zouk posting blibber blabber..."

The recommendation to eat mexican food was helpful.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Another day of Zouk posting blibber blabber...

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 23, 2009 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Social security is largely dependent upon the contributions made by middle class wage earners. When this segment of our society shrinks due to a shortage of jobs, so too will the amount of money which goes into supporting the social security system.

Seems like the survival of this system has to also be linked to creating and sustaining good jobs that grows a strong middle class. Social security can't be sustained by minimum wage jobs.

The medicare problem is an entirely different issue which is linked to problems with our health care system. It would seem that heath care reform and Medicare reform go hand in hand.

Posted by: Nevadaandy | February 23, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Another day, another Lib plan to save (aka wreck) the economy, another campaign promise broken, another corrupt pol revealed, another 100 billion misspent, another giant earmark grafted, another 5 % loss in the DOW, another day of the lying weasels in the press covering it all up, another day of the naive ninkompoops called the Lib base forging on in ignorance.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 12:00 PM | Report abuse

TheBabeNemo - Actually, Hitler was a radical and implemented radical economic change that literally saved Germany. Prior to Hitler the big industrialists, banks, investors, commodity speculators, basically our Wall Street sort of conservatives, outsourced jobs, used cheap guest workers, and an the German economy into the ground. Hitler advocated a Germany First economic policy and put an end to that madness. He ended the Depression in Germany with two years of coming to power, four to eight years before the rest of the world. That is why Hitler was such a hero for the average working German. His economic ideas were right on the mark and we need something like them here, right now.

Where Hitler went wrong, was *after* saving the German economy, he was put in the position of not being able to do any wrong, and his pathologies came out... military conquest, hatred of Jews and Slavs and Gypsies and homosexuals, his racial theories, and all of the rest of the horrors. One thing I am convinced of, this country WILL demand the same sort of economic plans that Hitler used to save Germany. We will have to in order to survive. The same conservative class of bankers and corporate swine that have done so much damage here cannot be reigned in by ordinary means. They control our politician's an institutions and it will likely take a strong man, even a dictator, to pry their filthy hands from the lever of power. What's too bad, and a shame about this, is that it marks the end of the U.S. as we know it. We could have kept our democratic institutions intact, but it is now too late.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | February 23, 2009 12:00 PM | Report abuse

ATTEMPTED POSTS TO 'THE FIX' CONCERNING RADIATION WEAPONRY -- INTENDED FOR THE NATION'S GOVERNORS -- APPARENTLY ARE BEING WITHHELD/CENSORED BY A GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE OPERATION.

If this is happening to me, it may very well happen to you next.

Please read about it at this ACLU.org link:


http://blog.aclu.org/2009/01/26/internet-filters-voluntary-ok-not-government-mandate

http://www.NowPublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | February 23, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

ATTEMPTED POSTS TO 'THE FIX' CONCERNING RADIATION WEAPONRY -- INTENDED FOR THE NATION'S GOVERNORS -- APPARENTLY ARE BEING WITHHELD/CENSORED BY A GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE OPERATION.

If this is happening to me, it may very well happen to you next.

Please read about it at this ACLU.org link:


http://blog.aclu.org/2009/01/26/internet-filters-voluntary-ok-not-government-mandate

http://www.NowPublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | February 23, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

i ate a baby once

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

CC - first babies are always late. Ours was over two weeks. Eat Mexican food, that gets them ready to emerge.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 11:41 AM | Report abuse

oh yeah baby...
i'll check up on Rahm's metabolism
any old time......

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 10:50 AM | Report abuse

"stimulated a quarter-century postwar boom -- "

Death is good for the survivors. After the Plague in Europe, just about everyone alive was rich. Kill off enough of your population, and you can be rich too.

Posted by: gary4books | February 23, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Interesting analysis from "icebergslim" in DailyKos today. Excerpt:

"The Republicans can duke it out, but again it is looked on as a regional, southern party. Their continuing to not come to the middle will continue to be their detriment. The question is this though, are those constituents in these southern states going to sit by and take the heat and hit from the decisions that their governors will make by not taking some of the stimulus money? Especially to extend unemployment for constituents in their states? That is a wait and see issue."

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 23, 2009 10:44 AM | Report abuse

bsimon:
hitler retained power.

Conservatism-
1)conservative political principles and policies
a. the principles and practice of conservative politicians or supporters

2). reluctance to accept change
a. unwillingness or slowness to accept change or new ideas

3). right wing political viewpoint
a. a right-of-center political philosophy based on a tendency to support gradual rather than abrupt change and to preserve the status quo

4). desire to preserve current societal structure
a. an ideology that views the existing form of society as worthy of preservation

4 is interesting.

On entitlements: how many entitlements programs do the FEDS offer to states?

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

"both men have VERY high metabolisms (Messina never finishes his lunch) and a tendency to use a panoply of four-letter words in casual conversation .."

We will see how well they do, but I don't want to be around them. Where do these people come from?

Posted by: gary4books | February 23, 2009 10:41 AM | Report abuse

If you are going to have this discussion you cannot lump all 'entitlements' together because they function very differently. Social Security is running a surplus and will for some time to come. Medicare is another issue which depends heavily on general funds. The way to address that is universal health care with a heavy reliance on efficiency and cost savings which is entirely lacking in the wildly expenisve hodge-podge we have today.

"The overall bottom line? The economy we bequeath to our children has everything to do with getting growth back on track and almost nothing to do with imagined future deficits.

History provides a parallel. At the end of World War II, the public debt was about 120 percent of GDP -- about three times today's ratio. Yet the heavily indebted wartime economy stimulated a quarter-century postwar boom -- because all that debt went to recapitalize American industry, advance science and technology, retrain our unemployed and put them to work.

We need to increase public spending and debt now to restore economic growth and then gradually reduce the debt ratio once recovery comes. Social Security has little to do with this challenge. Nor does Medicare, if we reform our overall health system.

Since the early 1980s, Peter G. Peterson has been warning that future entitlement deficits would crash the economy. Yet when the crash came, the cause was not deficits but wild speculation on Wall Street.

Now, with 401(k) plans swooning and health benefits being cut, Social Security and Medicare are the two bedrock programs that keep tens of millions of elderly Americans from destitution. Why perversely cut these programs to pay for the sins of Wall Street? The attack on social insurance is really an ideological assault, dressed up as fiscal high-mindedness."

Posted by: drindl | February 23, 2009 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Don't beleive the BIG LIE. Don't you read your own paper, CC?

"What's wrong with the story of entitlements wrecking the economy? Plenty.

For starters, the $56 trillion "unfunded liability" figure relies on creative accounting. Only about $6.36 trillion is the actual public debt, according to the U.S. Treasury. Most of the number Peterson cites is a combination of the 75-year worst-case projections for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

These three programs face very different challenges and remedies. Social Security's accounts are actually near long-term balance. The Congressional Budget Office puts the 75-year shortfall at only about one-third of 1 percent of projected gross domestic product.

Social Security is financed by taxes on wages -- and since the mid-1970s, wage growth has stagnated. If median wages rose with productivity growth, as they did during the first three decades after World War II, Social Security would enjoy a big surplus. Even without a raise for working America, Social Security needs only minor adjustments.."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/22/AR2009022202003.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Posted by: drindl | February 23, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

linda_521 asks
"Why does fiscal responsibility... start with entitlement spending."

Because the rate of growth in entitelment spending (SS/Medicare) is growing faster than inflation or the economy. If the growth rate of entitlement spending matched the growth rate of the economy, funding would be a bit easier: set it to a percentage of the economy, or fed budget, and you're done. Because entitlement spending is growing faster, we keep running out of money. If fed revenue is constant as a percent of the economy, we'd have to keep cutting other programs in order to accomodate the entitlement spending growth.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 10:28 AM | Report abuse

The BIG LIE is back -- funded by the super wealthy like Peter Peterson, who is spent millions trying to destroy Social Security:

"With the enactment of a large economic stimulus package, fiscal conservatives are using the temporary deficit increase to attack a perennial target -- Social Security and Medicare. The private-equity investor Peter G. Peterson, who launched a billion-dollar foundation last year to warn that America faces $56.4 trillion in "unfunded liabilities," is a case in point. Supposedly, these costs will depress economic growth and crowd out other needed outlays, such as investments in the young. The remedy: big cuts in programs for the elderly."

Posted by: drindl | February 23, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

"what are the principles are conservatism?"

Whatever it takes [to retain/regain power].

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 23, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Christ was much better than Jindal. Christ seemed like he had legitimate moral cause to help the country rise from the ashes of the Bush years. Jindal seemed like he was grandstanding in the hope that we continue to fail long enough for the GOP to rise.

Posted by: havok26 | February 23, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

"And of course, the Obamaphile media already have their long knives out for Governor Jindal... paint him as a wack-job, an eccentric, and just too far-right for American voters."
____________

Isn't alleged involvement in exorcism and alleged support for prisoner mutilation kinda "eccentric"? Isn't turning down federal unemployment funds for a state where unemployment is off the charts a little "far-right"?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 23, 2009 10:09 AM | Report abuse

what are the principles are conservatism?

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

they can leave Kyl out of the summit.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | February 23, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

It seems every empty promise now has a very short shelf life. The lies are only good for two or three days now.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | February 23, 2009 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Social security - Old Age and Survivors Benefits - is easier to resolve than either Medicare or Medicaid. I suggest the working group come to that conclusion and separate the problems.

Medicaid is a federal-state partnership and subject to different variables than Medicare.
I suggest the working group come to that conclusion and separate these issues, as well.

Entitlements is not a single runaway freight, but three trains moving in different directions at different speeds.
All are eventually headed for derailment without repair of their tracks or time-out on a siding. But one solution does not fit the three problems.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 23, 2009 9:01 AM | Report abuse

One of the most outrageous, and there are many, policies now in place is to be able to find the ratings of doctors without it costing $$$$$$.

My husband is due to have a malignent tumor removed from his Kidney. My family MD referred Surgeon at Benedictine Hosp., Kingston, NY.

I have not been able to find one blessed fact about this Surgeon, except that he is a General Surgeon.

How can we be certain, without specific unbiased information about the credibility of this Dr. Without having to pay
for this information can the average person know the status and medical knowledge of a Surgeon or Dr. This should not be a guessing game for people. We should be entitled to this info., before and not after the fact.

Posted by: LOONYBIN2000 | February 23, 2009 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Regarding the GOP's recent setbacks at the polls, Bobby Jindal has said:

"People need to look at the history of Ronald Reagan when he lost his first attempt at the Presidency (in 1976). He didn’t go back and say, ‘Let’s water down the conservatism. Let’s dilute what we’re saying. He made it even stronger.... he made it EVEN sharper. There’s a lesson there for potential candidates"

"We need to be principled in our conservatism. We need to be unabashed, unafraid. We won’t always be popular with editorial writers and a lot of the members of the national media... and that’s OK. At the end of the day, it’s more important that we stick to our principles."

And of course, the Obamaphile media already have their long knives out for Governor Jindal... in a similar approach to the one used on Palin: paint him as a wack-job, an eccentric, and just too far-right for American voters. Outfits such as the Huffington Post are already trying to nip Jindal's ascension in the bud.

But they are right about one thing; they DO have reason to fear the electoral appeal and success of Bobby Jindal. This accomplished conservative doer is the very antithesis to the Democrat's unaccomplished, liberal talker now in the White House.

Jindal oozes competence, and is a gifted communicator, with a trademark rapid-fire delivery. His story as the son of Indian immigrants is truly a fulfillment of the American dream. Simply put, Jindal embodies a GOP ideal; America offers a chance to those who want it take it and run with it, rather than entitlement to those who simply have the "audacity" to come here and demand it, based on some entitlement.

So go get 'em, Bobby... you're a good man, and perhaps someday a great one.

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2008/11/palinjindal-2012.html

Posted by: ReaganiteRepublican | February 23, 2009 8:41 AM | Report abuse

I'd say Obama is in a pretty goo position. His numbers are still high, his stimulus is gaining in popularity, the Republicans are backpedaling on said stimulus in a most embarrassing way...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | February 23, 2009 8:24 AM | Report abuse

Why does fiscal responsibility, cutting the deficit, butget reform, and solvency need to be focused, start with entitlement spending. I got a better idea, start with defense spending, foreign aid, then, if there is any problem left, come back to the government of the people, by the people, for the people.

Posted by: linda_521 | February 23, 2009 7:20 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company