Actually, Richard Nixon was responsible for opening the trade door with China.

Trade with China is a good thing, they are the biggest buyer of american products.

Hey PAUSA, does your Mom know you're on the computer again, time to go back to the basement, your world of warcraft friends await you.

Clinton, who gave us Nafta (how do you like this, unions?), and made sure that Fannie and Freddy paved the way for our housing collapse.

Let's all make sure we listen to this Bozo.

dear skeptic, You are correct in saying that President Clinton got NAFTA passed. This was after President Reagan and President George H.W. Bush tried and failed. The theory accepted by all three presidents was that NAFTA would open new markets to American goods.YIKES ! when you blame Mr. Clinton you should mention that he is not the sole owner of problems that resulted. I'm just saying....

If you want to talk about who really opened the door with China, that honor belongs to President Nixon....... remember? We got pandas, they got Coca Cola

Congress and President Barack Obama, he said, “can't let that happen” – so they must strike a deal on reducing deficits and debt.

Obviously he is thinking of a different Obama and a different Congress than the ones we have.

MY FREAKING GOD. An INDIGNANT SHUT THE HELL UP TO "BOTH SIDES." How does establishing who did what when deal with the issue? We are in the hole because neither sides' politicians are playing honestly with the electorate and the average member of the electorate is either too lazy or intellectually ill-equiped to educate themselves about the economy, the rules guiding our legislative and executive branches, and the VERY basic mathematics involved. You can't fix any of our problems unless there is a will to fix our problems. The issues are simple:

• Our debt is high and growing (We have spent more than we take in and are continuing to do so).
• 75% of our annual expenditures are in Defense, Meidcare, and Social Security. (The electorate needs to be presented with this undeniable truth and given the option to pay more or get less.)
• The interest on our debt is going to go up sharply as the economy improves - this will put a clamp on available capital AND require more revenue to cover.
• The poorest have no discretionary income available - saying they don't pay taxes is stupid.
• The lower half the "middle class" has some, but limited discretionary income - taking too much of that in taxes negatively impacts economic growth due to the number of people we are talking about here.
• The upper half of the middle class has significantly more discretionary income - enough to the point that the Bush Tax cuts classify more as gravy and were ill-advised for this demographic - especially in light of the additional federal funds required to execute two wars.
• The upper class can't fund the needs of 50% of the electorate on its own, but it really can't claim that some of them paying out a lower effective tax rate than the average American makes sense either. (We need to get realistic about deductions, tax shelters, carried interest, etc. - one can't call a tax system progressive if you can buy yourself into extraordinarily reduced tax liabilty via an army of accountants).

None of it gets fixed with finger pointing. Compromise is required. If you care about America then quit the blame game and demand compromise.

NC Yankee...please tell me just what you think romney and the republicxans who created the mess to begin with...I guess for you..a man who tells you.."trust me" I will get it done without any kind of deffinition on just what he will do other than reduce his own taxes more. The republican claim of:" reach across the isle given to democrates amounts to what..do what I say or nothing..that is what has been said for over 2 years by the republicans...oh biy...can hardly wait to see just how far under the bus Romney and Ryan will thrpough this nation.

@Chris @Memphis

Last time I checked, Dems only have full control in less than 4 months. You really need to check your fact first and how is 2 years since GOP took control? We passed the lowest amount of bills in record of 61 and with 2 months vacation now.

When you are up to your ass in alligators, it's hard to remember the main object was to drain the swamp.

All of you saying the Senate has not submitted a budget are correct. However, IAW the Constitution, the Senate does not submit budgets, the HOR does. That is why Obama's budget request got no votes, because it was a meaningless vote, a political stunt by McConnell.

Also, NAFTA is a treaty between the three countries of North America, hence the NA in the name. It has nothing to do with China. Saying that, NAFTA was signed by George H.W. Bush, and ratified by the Senate while he was still President. Clinton only signed it into law, which he really had no choice.

Inflation is inescapable when you print money like Bernanke did with three QE's. The first two were just bad decisions ... the last one was to help Obama and save his own job. Romney will fire Bernanke!

Obama cannot admit there is a problem becaue it would emphasize his inability to get anything through congress. So, after a bunch of republicans write op-ed pieces warning, yet again, of the coming crisis, Clinton, everyone's favorite womanizer, speaks up and admits that a problem is looming. It's so close, you can see it rearing its ugly head over the horizon.

Obama cannot get it done. It must be done before January, same pres or not. Congress, for once in 4 years, man up and do the right thing. There may be nothing for you to be reelected to, so you can pocket more payola from big biz if you don't.

Big biz cannot see past the money in their hands. If the middle class does not make a comeback, the whole country will fail. I point to just about every country in Europe as an example of what will happen if our shyster reps don't DO THE RIGHT THING!

The problem with our debt is even more enhanced in that we pour tons of money into wasteful agencies (Department of Homeland Security and Defense), yet these two organizations are constantly defended by the people who want to cut back so much.

No, let's no focus on investing money into education or things we actually need. Let's continue to pour money into defense contractors (how's that expensive-ass F-35 turning out) or the "Fear Department" (consistently ranks near the top of most wasteful agencies) turning out for you?

Am I saying that other parts of government don't need to be scaled back? Of course not, but the people who are wanting to cut government out of everything still want to keep pouring money into some of our most wasteful bureaucracies. If you think that would change under a Romney administration, think of what that bastard said about spending even MORE on the military, when our military expenditures already total more than China, Russia, and Great Britain's militaries combined!

People don't seem to understand that pouring money into defense =/= helping your average solider. It means giving more money to your average defense contractor. They only high behind the soldiers they patronize so much because it saves face with the American public. They could give two craps about the average fighting man and woman.

*** Romney admits he’s been audited by the IRS: Romney made some other -- call it accidental -- news yesterday in his interview with ABC. He mentioned he had been audited by the IRS. In response to question about his tax returns, the GOP candidate said, “[M]y view is I’ve paid all the taxes required by law. From time to time I’ve been audited, as happens I think to other citizens as well… I don’t pay more than are legally due and frankly if I had paid more than are legally due I don’t think I’d be qualified to become president.” The Romney campaign will not say what year he was audited -- only that he was found to be in compliance and that the audit took place more than 10 years ago. But while being audited isn’t that odd, it only adds to the narrative that his tax returns are so unique that it invites an audit.

elliot-3020456 it be nice if 0bama was as concerned about the economy as the guy who was president 3 terms ago?

Wouldn't it be nice if CONGRESS worked with Obama the same way as the guy who was president 4 terms ago? Wouldn't it be nice didn't give a tax credit for Corporations that moved jobs to other countries?
Wouldn't it be nice if the GOP worked on bills that helped this country instead of marriage, religion, what women can and cannot do with their own bodies.

R$mney has no plan, and Obama remains clearly the right choice for America. Its also TIME for America to demand a balanced budget amendment. BOTH parties need to begin practicing financial responsibility.

I don’t pay more than are legally due and frankly if I had paid more than are legally due I don’t think I’d be qualified to become president.

*ponders* Since for his 2011 taxes his accountants chose not to deduct all of the charitable deduction he was entitled to (I'm guessing to keep his effective tax rate at 14% vs. dropping it down closer to 12%) then is he basically saying he's not qualified to be President?

Congress isn't facing anything of the sort. WE ARE! This is our debt crisis, every man, woman, child, grandchild, great grandchild, great great grandchild, great great great grandchild, (get the point?), is or will be enslaved to this debt. This is CAUSED by congress and the other politicians that cant pass a freaking budget, stop spending and live within our financial means. Sickening is what it is.

If you in the camp that taxing the hell out of the 1% will even make a dent you need your head checked. What does government do with more tax money? The spend it and more!

When there is nothing but debt left and not enough to cover the spending chit is going to hit the fan. And it won't be fun, pretty, nice or tolerable. This could make the Great Depression look like good times.

Anyone care to explain why we see the cliff and just keep running toward it?

You obviously are unaware that the IRS targets high-income taxpayers for audits at a random rate much higher than other earners...

Another "" CRISIS""

Politicians are the crisis.

Either we work for a system or the system works for us? Rich or poor, ugly or ugly on the inside, short or tall.

Just for the record...OBAMA CANNOT FIX THIS--CONGRESS ALLOCATES FUNDS. It says that the Congress faces a fiscal crisis. They don't face ANYTHING. THEY ARE NOT THERE. Remember, they went of vacation or to campaign. Obama is responsible for a lot of stuff, but not this. Congress has to take the responsibilty for not doing their job by protecting America financially. It is just easier and more convenient to find one or two people to point the finger at rather than take on 535 members of Congress that cut and ran.

While Clinton is wrong about equating consumer interest rates and t-bill rates, he is absolutely right in sounding the alarm.

It is the congress that is the biggest problem and they all delight in the fact we are all so turmoiled over this presidential election that they are going unnoticed. We have all been drinking the Kool-aid that our elected representatives have been giving us and while we complain, nothing gets done. That is exactly what they want. I don't care who you vote for, they have not been part of the solution so they are the problem, vote them ALL out.

"Don't Be A Moron" says it best above in 1.25 - both sides should shut up, face the truth, roll up our sleeves and get to work. This is the hangover after the party...Our politicians are a whiny bunch pointing fingers at each other... "We the people" are doing the same. We could use some real leadership.

Well we do not need to worry because our President is an economic genius and has this all figured out. Without conditions of any kind to include any action of congress the President promised the American People that the 2012 federal deficit will not exceed 229.27 billion dollars. And our President always keeps his promises because after all he is the President of the United States of America. All hail the Chief! To keep his promise the President is going to have to come up with an extra trillion dollars from somewhere before the end of the month. He has yet to reveal how he is going to perform this feat to magic.

I estimate that the money the federal government is borrowing today will end up costing the tax payers more than 10 times the amount borrowed to repay over the next 180 years. That is just my estimate. I want the President to present a plan for repaying all of the money that it owes. The tax payers have a right to know how much all this federal borrowing is going to end up costing them.

The President needs to be reminded of some words of wisdom that were spoken back in March of 2006. The words are as true today as they were then.

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.

And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on.

Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities. Instead,interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans–a debt tax that Washington doesn’t want to talk about. If Washington were serious about honest tax relief in this country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by returning to responsible fiscal policies.

Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

~ Senator B. H. Obama, March 2006

Since we're about to get back to this conversation, here's a quick fact for you.

If we had tied federal spending increases to something reasonable (population increases and inflation rate) from 1970 until now, 97.5% of the US could pay no income tax at all. Only the top 2.5% would pay income tax and we would be running surpluses. Either that or our historical tax rates could have stayed the same and instead of having a $16 trillion debt, we would be sitting on a near $16 trillion excess and increasing that with surpluses nearing a trillion dollars annually. Federal spending would be at $1.6 trillion annually instead of $3.6+ trillion.

People on one side are going to start yelling and screaming about how we need to lower our debt in a "balanced" way. The problem is that we didn't get here in a balanced way. From 1970 until now, per person income extractions (government taxes and fees) have gone up 50% in real dollars. The problem? Spending exploded by over 100% in real dollars on an annual per person basis. In real dollars, we are taxing at 150% rate and spending twice as much per person today as we did in 1970. We got here by taxing and spending. And now they want to tax more so that we can keep spending???

Taxes aren't the problem, runaway spending is.

Mike...Have you seen the budget? Just because they passed one doesn't mean it is worth the paper it is written on. How much pork is in it for the rich and how many middle income people will suffer? So, they passed something. Yahoo. Both sides of the aisle have to get their poop in a group and work until the situation is solved...They have no right to leave until the job is done. It is called malfeasance.

Correction - Obama has a debt crisis. He has nearly doubled it in his 4 years in office...

To H--- with the DO Nothing republicans in the House!

Get Real,

You better follow your name and stop making up numbers. He hasn't come close to what yous say. Yes, there is a lot of spending , but then $4,000,000,000,000 for bush's wars has really added to it wouldn't you say?

Obama doesn't even know how much the debt is much less how to deal with it. Since he can't work with an opposition party to achieve compromise like Clinton did, he is just kicking the can down the road. Letting Clinton out of his box may prove to be a big mistake for Obama because Bill knows, like we all know, that Clinton would be doing a much better job in adddressing the country's current problems than Obama's blame game, spin and denial.

Does anyone find it ironic that a very revered former President is now taking the same tones that Ron Paul has been stating all along? And yet muttonheads picked Romney. Go figure!

Whose running the country? Has Obama turned over the day too day operation of the country to Clinton so he's now a new run the country czar. No wonder we're 5 trillion more in dept. No wonder we can't get the truth on the 9/11 attack in Libya.

instead of Quantative Easing, it should be Quack Economics.... Print another $5Trillion in monopoly money and the stock market will be at 20,000 points! Obama would get re-elected 2 or 3 times at minimum for such genius!

The facts, despite the right wing idiots stupid comments here, it is congress not Obama that does the spending. Congress holds the check book. All Obama can do is suggest a budget, and approve a budget. It is not his fault. With the congress obstructing anything that might benefit this country there isn't much hope of warding off a debt crisis.

Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law but it was a bipartisan effort of congress to get it passed, trade agreements do open markets and in NAFTA's case it half works. If you stand at the Canadian border and count trucks you would understand. Again it is the greedy corporations that moved our jobs to Mexico, not Bill Clinton, nor congress, and not Obama. I threw that in because some teapublicans would try and find a way to blame him for NAFTA like they blame him for the debt run up by the republican presidents that preceded him. Yes, Bill Clinton had it turned around, and had a path to pay down the debt until George W. Bush squandered the budget surplus that Clinton had built. For the slime that blame Obama for Bush's mess, its time to get real and realize that Romney will return us to the failed policy of George W. Bush and will not be in any way good for this country. Vote Obama if you want this country to get well.

John in Battle Creek,

Good to see you are posting more illogical statements. How can you say that we can't blame Obama, but you can blame Bush all day? Which is it? Is it the President or congress at fault, you can't pick and choose the rules because your guy is in the White House. The only one you are fooling is yourself. Last time I checked we have a three branches of the federal government. Obama and congress passed the health care bill and it was upheld by the supreme court. It is proven that this law is the largest form of government spending ever created by the United States. The CBO shows that Obamacare will create major deficit spending, all of which adds to the national debt. Again, how is that Bush's fault?

BTW John in Battle Creek.....

Where is the budget for the past FOUR YEARS ?

Sitting in Mr. Veto Reid's back pocket ?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How Progressives (Liberals) argue:

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGwtG8nVpUU

In 2006 Obama said increasing debt doesn't help. In 2009, he had no problem increasing the debt. It didn't work.

Recently Obama said the debt isn't a problem in the short term only in the long term. This despite 2 credit agencies downgrading our debt rating in the last year alone. Now Clinton warns that our debt is soon to cause our loan servicing to increase if we don't reign in the debt. This is something Clinton does to maintain his credibility in the community.

The question is he also publicly warning Obama to reign in the spending, since Obama doesn't seem to listen to private conversations?

i love how the Teaparty on this vine continue to blame the Democrats for the downgrade.

we have been downgraded again, btw, WITH THE CLARIFICATION that the failure of raising the debt ceiling by the GOP/TP was the issue

the gop created the debt is the problem, and they voted no to increasing the debt ceiling

but to try to explain to GOP/TP geez, EXASPERATING!

There I fixed it for you and now it is Historically correct

Your Welcome

Anybody who blames Obama for this really needs to go over their 5th grade history lessons. Oh, and will someone please remind people the ILLEGAL oath that Grover told people to sign?

Our fearless President has created dozens of new Gov't Dep'ts adding serious cost to the Debt. Our ballooning Gov't is becoming and employment agency for upwards of $100k per employee. It's our future debt he is creating, worse than Greece.

doubt our rich republican repreresent us

StephAce

Anybody who blames Obama for this really needs to go over their 5th grade history lessons. Oh, and will someone please remind people the ILLEGAL oath that Grover told people to sign?

No, it is the American voter with a 5th grade education that continues to vote these fools into office for the last 30 years.

Barry can't be involved in this debate yet..... it's not a full-blown crisis yet................

Unless it is a black professor being arrested for breaking into his own home. Then it is ok for Obama to criticize a white cop.

The incumbent Repuli-Crats don't care about anything except getting re-elected; the nation be damned!

Say what you want about the Tea Party folks, when it comes to fiscal responsibility they are the only ones with a principled position. You can argue about their social policies (yech!) but social positions won't matter when we're broke, when the economy crashes, and the value of our currency is equal to a Greek drachma.

Can anyone be serious about voting for four more years of the same? Really?

So apparently Clinton is taking the Tea Party side of the debt question.

I've heard some say Obama should be campaigning since it is an election year--well chit he has been compaigning since he was elected. If a President were doing a good job and the majority were happy with his performance then why would he need to campaign? Duhhhhh!

It should be our president sounding the alarm, not Bill Clinton. Thank goodness Clinton is sounding the alarm, (a few years too late but what the heck) because the current crop of politicans, barring a few, are sticking their fingers in their ears while yelling "la, la, la, I can't hear you" and the politics are such that to touch the third rail (like Ryan and the teaparty have done) results in a massive barrage of 'kill granny' attacks and demogoguery.

Those ninnies who want to play the blame game go right ahead. Rather like the couple arguing about taking the garbage out while their house burns down around them. Obama has no clue, all he has done is pander for votes, ditto the democrats and the republicans. Ron Paul has been pointing out the dangers for years now and look how marginalized he is. The two parties and the complicit media don't want the American populace paying attention.

We are worse off than Greece as relates to our GDP and spending. We are only saved by the dollar being the reserve currency, the medium used to by petroleum. If the real facts of how bad our debt really is got out, there'd be panic. Note to those disparaging the Teaparty, it was the teaparty that first raised the alarm about the dangers of the debt and look how they were and still are treated. Kill the messenger who brings the news about the impending disaster. Clinton doesn't have an ax to grind, he's not running for office so it is best that someone like him spread the alarm and don't ever kid yourselves, the impending debt crisis is potentially catastrophic.

mygirl1

That is why we are pressuring Iran. Because they are the fourth largest exporter of oil and recently announced to the world that they would take gold instead of dollars in trade for it.

My investment advisors just drove in from Chicago for a strategy meeting and we discussed what will likely happen to America if Obama is reelected. They are advising increasing the percent of gold in my portfolio and promoting a newer group of non-dollar denominated investments among other strategies.

By mid-2013, it is expected that "Obama’s reckless fiscal policy" will have placed America in exactly the same position as Greece found itself in 2009 with a debt to GDP ratio of 112%!

Anyone with even a scintilla of intellectual acumen need only glimpse at the impact "Obama style socialism" has had in Europe to bear witness to America's future under Obama. On the verge of defaulting on government debts people are living under crushing austerity measures. Countless jobs have been wiped out; the official unemployment rate is 17-25%. Salaries have been cut to the bone. Pensions and health benefits have been slashed. Tourism industry is a
shambles. Tens of thousands of workers have taken to the streets to protest a problem they thought they'd never see in their lifetime! In picturesque plazas, beggars outnumber tourists and protesters outnumber beggars.

In front of Parliament, riot police stand watch to protect big spending socialist lawmakers
from angry mobs. It is this kind of chaos that lies in wait should Obama be reelected!

Obama has added nearly 6 trillion dollars to our national debt in 3 ½ short years. In order to limit the potential for a short tem default on America's massive Obama induced debt, the Federal Reserve has monitized his deficit spending almost trippling our money supply over the last 3 1/2 years. These actions tend to crush the value of the dollar with the dollar now losing over 25% of its value against other currencies. As the dollar falls, this raises the cost of almost everything we buy! However, the US can now repay this debt with more worthless dollars.

Almost $5.5 trillion of Obama’s debt is financed by foreign investors, the largest of which are China and Japan. Under Obama, the S&P has already downgraded the U.S. sovereign debt rating from AAA to AA+. Should Obama be reelected, there could be yet another downgrade as early as 2013. The implications of this are major. The U.S. cannot run its day-to-day operations
without borrowing money. Anything that impacts its ability to borrow money has serious consequences.

China and other nations are likely to reduce or halt extending more and more loans by buying U.S. Treasury securities. Premier Wen Jiabao of China recently expressed concern that the Obama Administration is causing the U.S. to be viewed as “something of a, well, deadbeat. "We have made a huge amount of loans to the United States. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets!” Fearing the fact that Obama’s socialist deficit spending will bring about an economic doomsday in the US, the Chinese have now become a net-seller of Treasuries.

What happens when China and Japan say “Obama’s reckless spending and runaway entitlement programs” create too much risk? Investors become weary and the cost of financing this massive debt drives up rates making it very difficult, if not impossible to pay the interest on this debt creating a looming risk of default.

It is a double edged sword! Federal Reserve is monetizing Obama’s deficit spending while investors are becoming weary of the ever growing debt. The result can be massive inflation where higher interest rates force the rule of 72 in reverse to double the cost of living every 10 years! Wages won't keep up as Obama's policy crushes the middle class!

Americans cannot afford 4 more years of Obama! STOP OBAMA NOW!

First of all, let me make this clear: S&P DID NOT downgrade us because we were spending too much. They downgraded us because we were spending too much AND weren't raising enough revenues over the long haul (I assume they accepted the fact that we are in a slow recovery). Secondly, the blame technically has to go all around, since both sides are at fault, but most of it goes to the Tea Party; had they been open to accepting revenue increases in the Gang of Six deal and/or the Obama/Boehner deal, the deficit would have been dealt with for the medium-term and we would still have an AAA credit rating.

Clinton is right; we need to deal with our debt and deficit. HOWEVER, we must do so in a manner that does not gut crucial investments in areas that are crucial to this country, and we need to raise revenues in the process, as revenues are half of the problem. Frankly, as I don't see the point in extending the Bush tax cuts for ANYONE and I accept the sequester cuts (for the most part), I say let the fiscal cliff be our deficit-reduction package. Personally, I would reduce the cuts to $450 billion for social spending and $650 billion for defense spending, and modify the AMT to account for inflation permanently. Yet I have my own plan, one that reduces the deficit in a way that keeps the economy recovering yet attacks the drivers of our debt (the Bush tax cuts, lackluster economy, and entitlements). Here it is:

I Deficit Reduction

A. Revenues

• End the Bush tax cut entirely=$3.8 trillion.
• Raise top tax rate by 4%=$335.6 billion.
• Raise following two tax rates by 3%=$165.6 billion.
• Raise capital gains tax by 4%=$194 billion.
• Eliminate Mortgage Interest Deduction=$214.6 billion.
• Limit Local and State Tax Deductions to 2% of AGI=$629.3 billion.
• Tax Worldwide Income as it is earned=$114.2 billion.
• Eliminate extraction costs=$10 billion.
• Extend depreciation=$241.4 billion.
• Cut Corporate Tax Rate by 7%=-$704.2 billion.
• Financial institutions fee=$70.9 billion.
• Tax carried interest as earned income=$21.4 billion.
• Eliminate Employer Premium Health Insurance Deduction=$311.5 billion.
• 55% estate tax on estates over $1 million.

B. Mandatory Spending

• Add Public Option=$88 billion.
• Increase Medicare Retirement Age to 67=$124.8 billion.
• Limit Medical Malpractice Torts=$65.6 billion.
• Drug Manufacturing Rebate=$112 billion.
• Increase Medicare Part D Premium to 35%=$241.2 billion.
• Raise Social Security Retirement Age to 67=$119.9 billion.
• Increase Social Security Taxable Maximum to 90% of earnings=$456.7 billion.
• Increase Medicare Payroll Tax by 1.4%=$911.9 billion.

C. Discretionary Spending

• Freeze defense spending at 2011 levels for 10 years=$610.7 billion.
• Reduce nondefense spending to 1% annual growth=$326.7 billion.
• Increase Federal Housing payments=$225.4 billion.
• Reduce Federal Pay across the board=$50.3 billion.

Total Savings=$7.86 trillion over 10 years.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Fresh...

Increase revenue by increasing jobs.

Romney suggests becoming energy independent by 2020. This will create millions of high paying jobs and untold taxes while putting OPEC out of business.

Barrack Obama ...Failed Leadership....

The debt crisis has been brewing for years, the straw that finally broke the camel's back happened under Clinton, it just took awhile for the results to be felt. Greenspan and his merry band of pranksters (most of whom Obama reappointed to key financial positions) refused to regulate the derivatives market, couple that with the liar loans for housing (sponsored by Barney and Dodd, the same duo now 'regulating' the financial markets, essentially to favor the really big banks and lending institutions) and groups like Moody's lying about credit ratings and you had the earmarks for the perfect financial storm.

Google Cloward-Piven for an example of what ideology Obama is pursuing. If you doubt that, then examine his mentors for further proof of his ideological stance and after you examine Cloward-Piven, ask yourself what you see in their agenda that follows Obama's actions. Bankrupting the system, by increasing the debt, getting more and more on welfare (note the current numbers and what Obama has done to increase them) are actions which creates civil and economic collapse.

What purpose does that serve? If you wish to destroy any vestiges of capitalism and replace it with a more 'collectivist' system, what better way to do so? Note that Cloward Piven's adherants succeeded in bankrupting New York and they did it by overwhelming the welfare system. Now, what has Obama done to ameliorate the debt crisis, tangible actions, not class warfare? Please, list them and be factual about them. Try not to make excuses or place blame, just demonstrate what Obama has done to address the debt crisis.

Then, examine his closest advisor, a woman named Jarrett. Look at her father and what he proposed and then examine how she has insulated him. These are very dangerous times and odd that someone like Bill Clinton is the one currently sounding the alarm. He's not poor, perhaps it is also in his interest to stop the debt crisis.

Freshieee

Just who is going to employee you and the other 760,000 Americans our own OMB expects to be added to the unemployment lines as a result of ending the Bush tax cuts and the massive tax increase brought to bear by ObamaCare? You?

Eliminate Mortgage Interest Deduction??? Great if you want to accelerate a crash in housing prices!

Eliminate Employer Premium Health Insurance Deduction=$311.5 billion. That is really intelligent. Now you are going to force 70% of companies to pay the penalty and drop health insurance for their employees instead of the 10-30% expected to do so as a result of ObamaCare. You better hope American workers don't get their hands on you!

Take your cut and paste economics and your 5th grade education back to the bridge you will be living under!

looks like a no win situation

Freshieee

What a great plan. Obama has been trying to do that but the Republicans will not cooperate.

Why????

Because it will crash the economy!

You can not raise taxes on a bad economy. Just because someone doesn't know or refuses to stop spending money.

When has anyone in the history of mankind spent themselves out of financial problems??

FORWARD?????

It is too late for anyone's empty words to matter as we have done more damage than we can undo at this point.

Is the real message here by Mr. Clinton being overlooked? He's implying that the economy is improving and interest rates will rise as a result. Could it be a message to folks that things are getting better under Barack Obama for getting him reelected?

"Slick Willie" is slick.

old fat guy-1144960

Fresh...

Increase revenue by increasing jobs.

In order to create jobs, you need to SPEND money. I have an economic proposal to fix the economy (both now and over the long-term), but for simplicity's sake I kept it out.

Romney suggests becoming energy independent by 2020. This will create millions of high paying jobs and untold taxes while putting OPEC out of business.

First of all, we will become "energy independent" by 2020 regardless who wins the election, thanks in part to the higher fuel efficiency standards set by Obama and increased oil and natural gas production (along with development of alternative energy). Jobs will be created, but I doubt it will be in the millions, at least not in the short-term. And OPEC will never go out of business; oil is sold on the global market, and even if the U.S. creates most of the energy that it uses OPEC will still control oil prices, which are set ON the global market and will continue to affect the U.S. and the world until we abandon oil as a major fuel resource.

Barrack Obama ...Failed Leadership....

Yeah, you keep thinking that.

ClearVoice2

Freshieee

Just who is going to employee you and the other 760,000 Americans our own OMB expects to be added to the unemployment lines as a result of ending the Bush tax cuts and the massive tax increase brought to bear by ObamaCare? You?

Technically, most of the job losses that will occur because of the fiscal cliff will come from the spending cuts, and we're gonna have to end the Bush tax cuts one way or the other to deal with the deficit. Unless you want every other program cut to the bone or America to turn like Greece (as you righties like to say), we have to bite the bullet. The Bush tax cuts never created any jobs, and so they ought to be eliminated to cut the deficit. If you want anyone to agree on entitlement and spending cuts, you need to tackle the $3.8 trillion Bush tax cuts. And since the jobs lost cost around $500,000 apiece A YEAR, or $5 million over 10 years, are they really worth it???

Eliminate Mortgage Interest Deduction??? Great if you want to accelerate a crash in housing prices!

Oh boo-hoo. We have to deal with that deduction one way or another; besides, we could simply reduce it by about half, lessening whatever impact that removing that deduction will make.

Eliminate Employer Premium Health Insurance Deduction=$311.5 billion. That is really intelligent. Now you are going to force 70% of companies to pay the penalty and drop health insurance for their employees instead of the 10-30% expected to do so as a result of ObamaCare. You better hope American workers don't get their hands on you!

Tell me how the hell it promotes employers to keep their employees on health insurance as costs rise??? Besides, I say institute a single-payer healthcare plan to cover ALL Americans to negate whatever effect repealing that would have.

Take your cut and paste economics and your 5th grade education back to the bridge you will be living under!

So much for "not ducking the tough issues." I come out with an idea, and you guys blow it to hell WITHOUT even countering it with your own ideas??? I thought you "deficit hawks" were willing to take on the tough issues in order to fix the deficit problem??? If you want to criticize my proposal, at least have the guts to propose your own. Until you do that, you are just another idiot railing against a plan without understanding the magnitude of the problem that we are facing.

Frank-739698

Freshieee

What a great plan. Obama has been trying to do that but the Republicans will not cooperate.

Thanks for your support. Finally another serious commentator.

Why????

So much for that....

Because it will crash the economy!

You can not raise taxes on a bad economy. Just because someone doesn't know or refuses to stop spending money.

First of all, you can't have it both ways. Raising taxes in a bad economy does the same to it as cutting spending. Both will hurt the recovery. And 50% of our deficit problem is with revenues; they are way below where they need to be and we need to raise them in order to even have a chance at solving the problem.

When has anyone in the history of mankind spent themselves out of financial problems??

What the-did you even read the damn proposal??? I CUT spending and RAISED taxes; nowhere in there did I increase spending. And even if I did include spending increases, it would be to HELP THE ECONOMY, not fix the debt. You spend money to fix the economy, not the deficit.

FORWARD?????

Yea; it's a helluva lot better than Romney's rehash of the Bush policies....

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

NObama stuck 700 B into jobs... what did it do? nothing.

NObama wants to stick another insane amount, into the same program... results will be the same, those are union jobs, paid by US the taxpayers.

NObama doesnt know how to stimulate the economy any more than.... ya, lets leave it at that shall we?

you cant build an economy by building roads to the unemployment line.

Romney being audited by the IRS, means nothing other than they want to check whats been going on in his money market.

Romney was out of the buisness, and working for the olympics when the company he was running sold out to china, lol.

NObama needs to come up with a better plan, than "gimmie $ for this", because congress doesnt work that way.

NObama had a democratic congress and senate for 2 yrs to get things done and failed miserably.

some people just cant see past the koolaid colored glasses to see the light in front of their faces.

to create jobs, NObama style, means we the people who have a job will be paying for it. i side with congress... if it didnt work the 1st time it most likely will not work the 2nd.

NObama cant get congress to back anything from his fat mouth, cause all that comes out is crap. (it stinks and is a hap-hazzard idea, more than it is an actual plan.

Old Fat Guy,

"Romney suggests becoming energy independent by 2020..." Exactly how? The logistics would require socialization (state run) of the oil/gas industry, otherwise they will continue to sell on the world market. This has been a bogus vision put forth by the energy industry for years, using the time proven trick of stoking nationalized fears, in order to remove all responsible regulation.

Back to the topic at hand: As many have pointed out, the Congress, holds the checkbook. The only budget coming out of the House is so unpopular that even the most ardent GOP supporters do not back it as is shown in every poll conducted. The "Ryan Budget" was nothing but a political trick, devoid of any merits, and what's more, it actually would increase spending over the next several decades.

Cut defense spending in half (at least), or we will never get things under control.

How ironic (or perhaps moronic) that the "Don't blame Bush, that was last POTUS" crowd is very eager to now blame Clinton...

kwilson: Slick Willy has no love for Obama. The economy's improvement is so anemic that it hardly counts as improvement. The problem with rising interest rates and the reason the Fed is keeping them at zero is because the higher the rate, the more money the government will have to pay on the interest on the debt. The only way out of this conundrum, in truth, is to abolish the federal reserve and go back to printing our own money (not borrowed money from the fed) with the treasury, sans Geithner, running the presses.

Sacto: The unfunded/underfunded 'entitlement' programs Social Security and Medicare cost more to fulfil than the entire defense budget. Perhaps you should educate yourself on who created the Community Reinvestment Act (Carter) and who repealed Glass-Steagall and refused to regulate derivatives while promoting the CRA (Clinton) I know you want to blame Bush for everything (and he deserves a lot of blame) however, there were several administrations prior to Bush whose hands were deep in the creation of this debt crisis.

Eric-913730

It's the Romney's of the world that began shipping jobs off to China.

Hmmmm, really Eric? REALLY?

Let’s look at that shall we?

Apple. You know the company, right? Big tech company. Makes Mac’s iPhones, iPad, iPods, etc. etc. It has shipped 230,000 jobs offshore or have been outsourced to China.

Now let’s look at GE. You know the company, right? Big manufacturing company. The CEO is Jeff Immelt, the same man who is the chairman of the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, Barrack Husseins “Job Czar”. GE has also recently closed more than 20 factories, shifted avionics and radiology businesses to China according to Reuters, and pushed for public policies that will allow them to continue that course. GE is self-identifying "core" manufacturing interests, as though its other manufacturing interests simply vanished from the books. The truth is, they closed many of those plants here in America. According to GE's own records and statements, it had 125,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs in 2000 compared to 50,000 in 2010.

So Eric, tell me exactly how many jobs has Romney outsourced and/or offshored?

The destruction of the middle class is due to trickle down economics.

Now here I’ll agree with you.

Barrack Husseins trickle-down has failed miserably. He poured the $863 billion $timulu$ into the top of our government and expected it to trickle-down to all those “shovel-ready” jobs. Remember? Those jobs that Barrack Hussein and Jeff Immelt laughed in your face about and said, "Shovel-ready was not as ... uh .. shovel-ready as we expected."

So far we have allegedly created 4.5 million jobs. This means it has cost us about $200,000 per job. Not a very good return on investment is it? We would have been better off to have just given $50,000 to each company in America and made them use it to create a job, we would have created 17 million jobs.

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012 for real Americans

Of course, no one will read all the way down to here, but I would love someone to explain to me why we have a financial system where the government has to borrow money from a private bank (the Federal Reserve) and pay the interest that bank charges. Whose side is that bank on? Surely we could keep our own books and borrow (i.e. print money) when we need it and pay it back (to ourselves) without cranking up monster interest debt.

Just unbelievable that the world central banks have their countries by the balls. I think they're the enemy and we don't even seem to realise it.

Both sides are to blame, just the Repubicans a little more. Think about this all you one percenters. When it hits the fan, and it will, it's just a matter of time, and when it happens we'll probably have a situation here like you had in Germany after WW1 where it took a wheelbarrel full of money to buy a loaf of bread. Then you one percenters will be down in the pits with the rest of us--then your money won't be worth squat. You can't keep printing up money because sooner or later inflation will have to kick in. AND of course you can't continue to start needless wars and that is why I blame the Republicans a little more than I blame the Dems since there was no reason for us to go into Iraq. Now both sides are going to have to step up. Hopefully if Obama gets re-elected it won't be another case of the Republicans being the party of NO.

"If interest rates were the same today as they were when I was president, the payment on the debt, that is, what the taxpayers have to pay every year, the financial debt (payments) would go from $250 billion to $650 billion a year,"

Under Clinton, the average Debt was $5.147 Trillion, and the average annual interest was $227 Billion, for an average interest rate of 4.41%.

Our current Debt is $16.016 Trillion (as of yesterday), and at 4.41%, that equals $706 Billion per year.

Interestingly, the average Debt under Bush was $7.672 Trillion, less than half what it is now, and the average annual interest under Bush was only $199 Billion per year - even less than under Clinton because Bush managed to keep interest rates low.

That potential increase of over $500 Billion per year ($796 Billion for Obama vs $199 Billion for Bush) could have devastating consequences - That would equal over $5 Trillion of increased interest costs alone over 10 years - assuming that the Debt does not increase at all - which is highly unlikely.

Congratulations on that "Change we can Believe in" that you voted for. And now people want to do it again? Amazing.

It will take both spending cuts and revenue increases to even begin to address this problem, but Obama doesn't want to cut spending (it could hurt the economy), and the Republicans don't want tax increases (it could hurt the economy).

If Obama is re-elected, we'll have 4 more years of stalemate - perhaps if Romney is elected he could get both the spending cuts and the revenues increases we need. If not, it's "Full steam ahead" towards that fiscal cliff and the blame game will be endless.

PS - If people want to 'Blame Bush' for whatever happened when he was President (even though he had to deal with a Democratic Congress), then fairness dictates that Obama take responsibility for what happens while he's President.

'the Treasury “now has a preponderance of its debt issued in very short-term durations, to take advantage of low short-term interest rates. It must frequently refinance this debt which, when added to the current deficit, means Treasury must raise $4 trillion this year alone.” '

The Treasury Department is crazy for not locking in long term debt at these historic low rates. Keeping it in short term debt is penny wise and pound foolish - as we will quickly see when interest rates begin to soar.

Freshieee:

I commend you on posting your debt reduction plan. I do not agree with all of it, but I applaud you for submitting it. I have been visiting this site since the first of the year (or longer) and 98% of the comments/posts are without any thought or open for debate. I am a die hard Capitalist, a Fiscal Conservative, and an owner of several businesses. Do not let anyone here stop your from thinking and/or making logical proposals.

Allocating blame never solves anything. The USA federal government has run a national debt for over 100 years and we had just a few balance budgets in that time (none under W J Clinton). The country was founded on debt from Europe by the funding raising of John Adams. George Washington loan the Colonies money for the War against the King of England.

FYI, there has been 76 increases in the USA national debt limit since 1960. Each sitting president MUST submit a written request to the House asking for the increase. Most do not do it because they want to, but they must to keep the federal government operating.

Again good post.

All I hear from the right wing feaks is how one-sided the "Elite Media" is and that NBC is a lefty, socialist news media. YET! Here they all are! What's the matter? No one on the Fox site worth talking to? Doesn't Fox provide news aritcles? Maybe it's because on the Fox site, no one other than right wing freaks write anything. Haven't you right wing freaks gotten it through your obtuse skulls!? No one here gives a rats behind about your twisted mentalities, your made up stories, or your doom-n-gloom predictions. Go play Who's the biggest bigot back on Fox.

Wait, what.... A liberal is talking about paying off the debt before we we get destroyed by interest. But.... That makes sense. Nooooo, Mr. Clinton. Stick to the liberal rhetoric of "Blame the republicans while our horrendous policies destroy the nation." Someone get this guy a liberal play book. If he's not careful he might make Pres. Obama look like a failure. Go back to what your good at. Lying! Before you ruin Pres. Obama's re-election campaign.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE65G56x8eM

This video is actually very relevant.

Clinton’s timing is perfect, just on the eve of an election that will make or break the back of our nation. Perhaps he is trying to save the President’s hide. Or perhaps he is reminding us to be careful with our vote in November.

Whatever the reason, it is a shame that he has to remind the President / Congress of the impending financial disaster, should we continue on our current path.

C’mon, and we are suppose to trust this administration with another 4 years?

Whether you like Bill Clinton or not, on this point you should listen to him...as interest rates go up (and they will) the total interest on our staggering debt will be huge...and that is not something you can cut...it has to be paid!

Think of it like this, our debt burden is like is like a train speeding down the track towards a bridge that is no longer there...and instead of slowing down we are speeding up (more and more debt is being added each year). Left alone as things are, it will reach a point of no return...and no matter what we do...it will be too late!

We're told that the Social Security Trust Fund holds $2,6 trillion in reserves...so don't worry. Do you know what those reserves are invested in? Do you??? They are invested in U.S. Treasury Bonds, there is no pile of cash....it is all IOU's from the Federal Government, a government which is spending $1.3 trillion more than it takes in every year!!! Those bonds are repaid using the proceeds from the sale of new bonds!! We are borrowing from Peter to pay Paul!

As long as we are able to pay the interest (debt service) we get by, but when we can no longer do that EXTREME CUTS will have to be made...this is what Bill Clinton is warning everyone about.

A word to the wise is sufficient, to everyone else...it's a waste of time.

Kenn the Dem:

This is nothing new. The Republican Party has been yelling this for decades and they only get laughs from the Democrats.

Social Security Trust Fund? There is not any such thing in the USA. There are SSA accounts, but zero trust fund. Why? The USA Constitution does NOT allow for any trust funds to be held by the USA government.

Had it not been for the Republican House, the national debt would be about three (3) trillion dollars more.

John in Battle Creek, Clinton surplus. LOL! That myth has been bust so many times, I can't believe anyone is foolish enough to try and use it in intelligent conversation.

(Note the bleeding heart liberal news source.)

“The Democrats rely on their great myth: Bill Clinton made the hard choices, cutting spending and raising taxes. This led not only to a balanced budget, but to large surpluses. As former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers said, he had the privilege as Treasury Secretary to be buying back federal debt. In this story, the economy was rewarded with strong growth, low unemployment, and a declining national debt, all by virtue of President Clinton's courage in reducing the budget deficit.

It's a nice story, but it's long past time that we put this fairy tale to rest. …..

In short, the real story of the balanced budget in the '90s had little to do with Clinton's hard choices. It was attributable on the one hand to an eclectic Fed chairman who was prepared to ignore the orthodoxy within the economics profession and allow the unemployment rate to fall to levels generally thought impossible to attain by economists. On the other hand, it was driven by an unsustainable asset bubble.

This is key part that people want to remember going forward. The prosperity at the end of the Clinton years was unsustainable because it rested on a bubble that was destined to burst. And it did burst exactly as President Clinton was making his plans to leave the White House. The economy did not regain the jobs lost in the 2001 recession until 2005, and even then it was on the back of another unsustainable bubble, this one in the housing market. And we know how that one ended.

So the Democrats' morality tale of hard budget choices and virtuous austerity turns out not to hold water.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dean-baker/budget-bunk-the-old-pox-o_b_1466789.html

Regan worked with the Democrats, including the highly partisan House leader Tip O'Neil, and got bills passed.

Clinton worked with the Republicans, including the highly partisan House leader Tom Delay, and got bills passed.

Obama cannot get bills passed. That my friends is the difference between leaders and a community organizer.

hs321

Obama cannot get bills passed. That my friends is the difference between leaders and a community organizer.

That, my friend, is the result of the Tea Party ideological absolutism.

So our choice is to elect the one having difficultly passing reasonable legislation or elect the one that can pass his extreme ideology easily... although I think the Democrats would stop him anyway.

I'll go for reasonable policies any day.

So the Democrats' morality tale of hard budget choices and virtuous austerity turns out not to hold water.”

So tell us your "true" and "virtuous" tale of a GOP president that came even close to a balanced budget... I know... give us your GW story, would you?

I thought Clinton was supposed to be campaigning FOR Obama's re-election. Clinton didn't do Obama's re-election chances any favors by sounding this alarm. It won't take much of an increase in interest rates, and lenders will likely demand much higher interest rates as the credit risks associated with holding U.S. debt increases, before annual interest payments on the debt reach one trillion dollars per year. That will really help with the economic recovery. Yeah, right.

"That, my friend, is the result of the Tea Party ideological absolutism."

It must be nice being Obama, never having to take any responsibility for anything in your followers eyes. No standards to live up to, because if you fail, there's always an excuse.

It's Congress' fault. It's the Tea Party's fault. It's Bush's fault. It's the moon's fault.

It's one excuse after another with this guy.

"As Clinton sounds interest rate alarm, does Congress think it's for real"?

Is Congress thinking at all?

It cracks me up listening to the teatards whine about jobs in China and blaming it on NAFTA. If ever someone could scream "look at me I'm as stupid as they come" it's the NAFTA, China argument. It also screams "i'm going to whine about NAFTA, I don't know what NAFTA is but I'm going to whine anyway".

The loser voters of only one party would rather have their red faced outrage and no money than be successful. You can see them posting right here on FIRST READ! They prefer not thinking and having a good excuse for being stupid than a country that works. Congradulations Democrat only voters and Republican only voters. When you lose money, keep in mind you deserved it.

WOW!! Never thought this day would come - where I actually agree with Bill Clinton. What's next? Dogs and cats living together? Muslims and Jews breaking bread together?

I have been warning my family and friends of this and my classes (I teach college Micro and Macro Economics) that we are on a dead end road to a United States financial collapse. This is one of the reasons why Ben Bernanke is artificially keeping our interest rates low (by increasing the money supply but damaging our currency at the same time). If interest rates were to go up to even a reasonable number (4% - 6%) our interest on the debt would double or even triple.

But there is a bigger problem on the horizon - with as much money as Bernanke is "printing" one day interest rates could skyrocket similar to what was seen during the Carter administration where interest rates were well over 10%. If THAT were to happen our interest on the debt could exceed $1 Trillion a year. Totally unsustainable AND a total financial collapse of our economy. So you see even if we STOPPED borrowing MORE money today there is STILL a financial cliff on the horizon.

I don't see how this country can survive financially. The FIRST thing we must do is STOP BORROWING!! But that does not solve the problem we still have a SECOND issue of unfunded liabilities in Medicare/Social Security projected over $100 Trillion over the next 50 years. And our THIRD problem already mentioned - if when interest rates rise we can see our interest payments triple or even quadruple. We are on a collision course financially and although I don't think Republicans can FIX it at least they are DISCUSSING it. Obama with his head in the sand and going on The View and David Letterman has no clue as to our impending financial demise. So I guess we are all screwed........

ProBusiness...what I see coming is the U.S. like Germany after WWI.

Inflation, from the government printing money to pay off debts, was so bad that a man had to use a wheel barrow to carry all of his money from his paycheck. He was mugged by two robbers who left the money and took the wheel barrow.

Yep, we're all screwed, big time.

What do think all of your dollars are going to be worth when the economy heats up? Maybe a $milion of them to buy a loaf of bread?

"Our economic structure certainly enjoys unmatched capacity to absorb Credit excess without engendering traditional consumer price inflation. Yet there is indeed a huge problem that no one seems to want to recognize: Our system also has an unprecedented capacity to expand Credit that is backed by little in the way of wealth-creating capacity. Our government literally throws Trillions at the economy – Credit that inflates incomes and sustains consumption and elevates asset prices. The downside of this economic miracle is that, at the end of the day, there's little left to show for the whole exercise except for an ever-expanding mountain of suspect financial claims. Moreover, market values of these claims are sustained only by the unrelenting expansion of additional claims/Credit. This is Minsky's "Ponzi Finance" at a systemic level."

This is a must read site:

http://www.caseyresearch.com/gsd/edition/bart-chilton-silver-market-investigation-statement-coming-soon

That links to this long but very comprehensive data article that hits the nail right on the head:

http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php/creditbubblebulletinview?art_id=10709

how on earth can you reduce the deficit when wars, welfare,infrastructure collapsing, medicaid, foreign aid,bloated bureaucracy ,tax receipts down, no new jobs (except service industry and part time); we out sourced a nation, we destroyed a middle class, we borrowed on social security payroll taxes for the next 30 years; hell you could tax everyone making over 1 million per year 100 % and it would not cover the interest on the debt for a week

Romney doesn't want to reduce the deficit or the national debt either. He wants to give more tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations - which will only increase the rate at which we accumulate debt.

Let's go back to the income tax rates and exemptions current during the Eisenhower administration. There would be none of the b.s. about claiming mortgage interest on a luxury yacht (counts as second home) or claiming 75 grand for a prancing 'therapy' horse. Let's FIRST make the system FAIR and then adjust the rates to both get out of deficit and use the surplus to pay down accumulated DEBT.

The only earmark I favor is that paying down the debt, not some asphalt road to a senator's summer home.

Yes, you would think that debt reduction would be the first thing on the list.

Remember, it was Boehner that walked away from the 4 trillion dollar deal that would have averted the Tea Party downgrade.

Remember, the first thing on Obama's list was the creation of another massive entitlement program. That was before last years debt crisis. It was really responsible to create another massive entitlement program when we were up to our necks in debt already and Medicare and Social Security were already facing insolvency, wasn't it? Yes, lets trust this guy to get us out of this mess. <sarcasm>

I'm not crazy about Romney, but Obama is as reckless as Bush was. The last thing we needed after 8 years of Bush was four years of Obama, and I voted for him, unfortunately. I won't make the same mistake.

Fortunately, Clinton does want Romney to win. He knows that if Hussein wins again, it will be decades before another Democrat will be president, and he'll never have a chance to be FGOTUS.

Eric

Read Bob Woodward's book. Or this NYT article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/magazine/obama-vs-boehner-who-killed-the-debt-deal.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Most people won't read it Slodon. They are too concerned about legitimate rape comments and who Rush called a slut.

Liberals could care less about the truth behind the debt deal Bob Woodward writes about, they are only concerned with who they can blame for political expediency.

Unpatriotic, don't you mean the democrats who forced banks to make bad loans to people who couldn't repay them?

I sure hope you don't teach history.

"That was on "W's" watch" hope you don't teach U.S. history" !!!!!!!!!!

saxon..

Actually taxing the rich at 100% would work for nearly 18 months if we curbed spending.

NO CHANCE

Patriotic American...

I do not care who caused the problem we need someone capable of fixing it. I do not know if Romney can

I am positive OBAMA CAN NOT !

IMO, Bill is setting the stage for Hillary in 2016. He's just itching to be Sec'y of State and be in the bright lights of the world again.

Bush who?

Slodon,

That was a fascinating article. Thanks.

Patriotic American USA,

I got some questions for you.

(sigh)...What party and what president started the CRA? (Carter, Democrats). What party started Fannie and Freddie? (Democrats).

Which president reinvigorated the program? (Clinton). Which party and which president wanted to make home ownership available to the poor unlike Europe? (Clinton, Democrats).

Which party and which president played the race card and discrimination card strongly pressuring banks to eliminate standard lending requirements like down payments and made them lend to NINJAs, no income, no assets, no job? (Clinton, Democrats).

Which party made welfare payments count as income in order to qualify for a home loan? (Democrats).

Which left wing organization threatened banks with discrimination lawsuits if they didn't lend? (ACORN). Which organization started by a progressive Democrat kept interest rates artificially low so banks struggled to make money? (the Fed Reserve).

Which president signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall opening the door for bank-investment bank collusion on the condition Fannie, Freddie and the CRA not be touched? (Clinton).

What member of Clinton's cabinet resigned and went back to work at his former investment bank employer, Goldman Sachs? (Treasury Sec Robert Rubin).

Many CEOs in investment banking and fund managers in investment banking on WALL STREET are what? (Wealthy liberal Democrats). They are friends of whom? (the Democrat Party).

Who came up with the mortgage backed security scheme? (The major investment banks). I'll remind you, they are run by whom for the most part? (Wealthy liberal Democrats).

For YEARS, who were major players in Congress in finance and housing in the house and senate? (Democrats Barney Frank and Chris Dodd). Who were the respective heads of those committees from Jan 2007 to the crash of Oct 2008? (Democrats Barney Frank and Chris Dodd).

Who told us leading up to the crash as late as Aug 2008 (on youtube) that everything was fine with the whole government housing INTERVENTION in the market to provide more poor people who normally couldn't afford homes...homes? (Democrats Barney Frank and Chris Dodd).

Which president on multiple occasion throughout his two terms tried to get Congress to address what he saw as a coming housing and financial crisis but was ignored and called a moron? (George W Bush). Which party didn't have the votes to get anything out of committee to fix it? (Republicans). They were OBSTRUCTED by Frank and Dodd.

I'll repeat. It was largely Democrat government intervention that artificially spiked the housing market from below with all these people who couldn't pay their mortgages. As long as housing prices rose, everything was great.

But this is what happens when government sticks its nose in the market. If we hadn't had these asinine and unrealistic bleeding heart programs along with the dopey Fed low rates, there would have been no reason for banks and investment banks to do what they did.

So this was on a lot of people's watches. Democrats are just as much, if not more, at fault!

Patriotic American (an oxymoron if ever there was one),

For your info, "W" is not running for president. So what does "W"'s record have anything at all to do with "This" election? Try to keep up with current affairs. It does not matter who caused this mess that the US is in, Obama will definately not get us out of it.

@Rich3050148: You're so off base it unbelievable. Romney has proposed eliminating deductions and loopholes for the high end earners($200K+) If you've ever prepared your income taxes, you'd understand that by doing that alot more taxes can be collected by the government from high- end earners. Obama's only plan is to raise taxes on the rich which is NOT going to work as long as they STILL have all the loopholes and deductions to reduce their taxes. Try to understand it.

Romney Invested in Medical-Waste Firm That Disposed of Aborted Fetuses, Government Documents Show

And these documents challenge Romney's claim that he left Bain Capital in early 1999.

Romney doesn't want to reduce the deficit or the national debt either. He wants to give more tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations - which will only increase the rate at which we accumulate debt.

I am so sick of this Obama talking point. Let's beat it to death some more why don't we. America's credit rating has been downgraded twice since Obama has been in office. Bernanke keeps printing money and we are borrowing the rest from China. We are on the road to the collapse of the dollar. The dollar is going to worthless and all these arrogant leaders we elect can do is bicker and make sure the other party does not one up them instead of working together and doing what is right for America.

Romney/Ryan 2012

Well done Enner! I guarantee no liberal will read that however....they're busy skimming these posts for anyone that starts their posts with anything related to Tea-tards or some crap like that. Amazing though that Clinton is warning us of increased interest rates. He must have Barry's ear...Barry just don't care.

You're waisting your breath enner. He, like most libs, do not care about facts. All they know is their blind folloing and the talking points the porpogandus media puts out on behalf of the dems... Its like leading a blind horse to a movie.

"Entitlement Program". I love when that term gets tossed around. So, tell me, if giving people healthcare to you know, be able to survive a curable disease is an "entitlement program", but corporations being considered "people" and trillions in subsidies and tax breaks is called "capitalism"?

TeaTards...

Don't give the Keys back to the Clowns that got us into this mess, Can you say "W" !!!!!!!!!!

It's not like Romney's all that much better. He did just "vow to rebuild NASA" after all.

saxon

how on earth can you reduce the deficit when wars, welfare,infrastructure collapsing, medicaid, foreign aid,bloated bureaucracy ,tax receipts down, no new jobs (except service industry and part time); we out sourced a nation, we destroyed a middle class, we borrowed on social security payroll taxes for the next 30 years; hell you could tax everyone making over 1 million per year 100 % and it would not cover the interest on the debt for a week

First of all, welfare is less than 10% of the budget, and probably less. Secondly, foreign aid is less than 3%. Thirdly, the main reason taxes are down is because of the recession (which will eventually end). But even then, the best we can expect is revenues to be at around 15-17% of GDP, far below its 18-19% historical range because of the Bush tax cuts. I am all for deficit reduction; hell, in my plan I cut entitlements AND social spending. But we need more revenues, and that requires TAX INCREASES, particularly on the rich. Now, on this issue I differ with many liberals because I oppose the Bush tax cuts in their entirety and frankly don't care about being called a tax hiker. Personally, I would favor a 12 bracket system with a top tax rate of 76% on those making over $15 million and a low rate of 8%. I'd end the Employer Health Insurance deduction, the Mortgage Interest deduction, and limit the deduction for local and state taxes, to name a few. My target for revenues is around 21%, and spending would be around 21-22%. I would also freeze defense spending at 2011 levels for a decade, limit annual growth of nondefense spending to 1% a year, and make cuts and reforms to entitlements. Something I did not state was that I would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices and change their payment structure to a fee-for-quality system instead of a fee-for-service system, and I would organize a commission to find waste in the Medicare and Medicaid systems and potential savings.

Georgie937

Romney doesn't want to reduce the deficit or the national debt either. He wants to give more tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations - which will only increase the rate at which we accumulate debt.

I am so sick of this Obama talking point. Let's beat it to death some more why don't we. America's credit rating has been downgraded twice since Obama has been in office. Bernanke keeps printing money and we are borrowing the rest from China. We are on the road to the collapse of the dollar. The dollar is going to worthless and all these arrogant leaders we elect can do is bicker and make sure the other party does not one up them instead of working together and doing what is right for America.

Romney/Ryan 2012

What you fail to understand is that Romney's tax plan, at best, does not balance the budget. At worst, it drastically increases it by at least $3-4 trillion. Assuming that his tax plan costs $3.5 trillion, and that he would increase defense spending by $800 billion over 10 years, he would increase the deficit to well over $12 trillion, or nearly a third of the entire budget over 10 years. If he proposes to to pay for his tax plan, he would have to raise taxes on the middle class to pay for the tax cuts for the rich (which would still be a net tax cut even after removing all deductions). If you want to reduce the deficit in a significant way, you need to let the Bush tax cuts expire, preferably for everyone but at least for the top 2-3 brackets. You also need to raise revenues and stop all tax cuts; no more tax cuts for ANYONE. If Romney offered to let the Bush tax cuts expire, I would agree with him on that; but he's doubling down on the EXACT fiscal policies that took us from a surplus and financial solvency to the brink of fiscal collapse.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Patriotic American U.S.A.

Glad your here. It gives us all someone to laugh at.

The mess we are in was started by the CRA Lawsuit. This forced banks into making bad loans.

Bill Clinton compounded the problem by ordering Fannie and Freddie to buy any loan from any lender without revenue.

This did give the banks an out from the CRA Lawsuit, so even before the ink was dry on millions of mortgages they were sold to Fannie or Freddie.

Fannie and Freddie knew these loans were toxic so as fast as they could they "bundled" them and sold them off to investors. AIG etc

In 2007 the democrats took control of congress. They then set out on the biggest spending spree in history. Republicans warned there was a mortgage problem looming but the democrats were to busy spending money to listen.

Then 2 things happened.

1 China began buying all the oil they could at any price. Remember when you were being told the prices were going up because you were bad for driving an SUV?? Sorry it wasn't your fault China forced the prices through the roof.

Fuel prices go up and people begin to lose their jobs. Then number 2 happened.

Number 2 China began buying all the scrap metal they could get their hands on at any price. The price of raw steel went through the roof and when added to shipping costs and wages companies began shutting down and millions of people lost their jobs.

So now we have a turned down economy and millions of toxic mortgages that the CRA Lawsuit created.

Let the foreclosures begin. But what about the companies holding all these loans. Who's going to save them??

Enters Barack Obama our savior. He quickly sent billions of dollars to these giant CORPORATIONS and saved their ass. Not so for the little people being thrown out into the street. You know who they are Obama's 47% that he cares so much about.....

Moral of this story is look up who was behind the CRA Lawsuit.

Thats the guy that caused millions of people to become homeless and crashed the economy while saving his big corporate friends!

Obama was a lawyer for ACORN back then, ACORN et al. were the ones insisting that minorities, be given home loans. Obama led the lawsuit against the banks who stankered at the idea of making loans for people who couldn't afford them.

To be fair here, it was Bush who first pushed for the bailouts, Obama enlarged them and 'saved' the auto industry by destroying stockholders and investors to favor unions, to boot.

What you fail to understand is that Romney's tax plan, at best, does not balance the budget. At worst, it drastically increases it by at least $3-4 trillion. Assuming that his tax plan costs $3.5 trillion, and that he would increase defense spending by $800 billion over 10 years, he would increase the deficit to well over $12 trillion, or nearly a third of the entire budget over 10 years.

I don't believe your BS Freeshie. First of all Romney is a businessman, and he is a SUCCESSFUL businessman. I don't think you know what you are talking about. Under Obama the Muslim/Socialist has increased our debt by over 5 trillion dollars....can you count that high????? Obama has no business being president of the free world. America has had many Islamic terrorist attacks now since he took office. He calls Mohammed, The Prophet Mohamed. Who would say that unless he was a Muslim? He HATES America and what she stands for. Our energy costs have skyrocketed under Obama. Our gas prices, our food prices and just wait until he passes Cap and Trade. He is having the EPA attack the coal plants. What do you think will happen when he manages to get more than half of them closed? Our electricity will go through the roof. The middle class is being destroyed little by little under this dictator we now have in the White House. Sorry to say this you Obama loving Zombies, but he is nothing but a mongrel. His pedigree and lineage is so trashy and low class and this piece of garbage is running the greatest country on earth! Did you know this bought off HO is buying a 35 million dollar home on the shore of Kauai, Hawaii? And that one of his rich supporters from Chicago is paying for it? Oh the poor rich millionaire Obama. No wonder he released all his tax returns....he has
all his rich 'friends' paying for everything.

Romney/Ryan 2012

Those in the know are aware of a fiscal cliff approaching. Both party's better start working together to find an equitable solution or there will be some more suffering.

Those that want to play partisan politics should be wanting the other party to be in office when the fiscal cliff comes. Its not going to be fun for those in office.

Since the Federal Reserve works like it does Clinton might be right, which I cannot understand why we would pay interest to a bank. It does not make any F***ING sense at all other then to link the "value" of nations currencies for trade. The idea of a bank owning a country like America is scary due to the size and strength of our military.

Please all you great right wing thinkers explain to me how high interest rates do not force us to print money? Where does that money come from to pay back that interest? The only reason there is inflation in the first place is due to interest rates and people wanting something for nothing. "But I am risking money" money that you really do not need. How else did you save it? How often to you make a friend or neighbor pay interest on stuff they borrow from you? What is the incentive to loan or let them borrow? Simple basic math states that unless you give back 100% of what you take from a system, that system will be deficient or have less. When you "grow" the economy you are forcing the government to print money eventually, devaluing all the money already in circulation, and forcing everyone to work harder just to keep up. Not only that, but the amount of extra pollution that is produced for useless crap we do not need every time the economy "grows".

How did you get that extra money to invest in the first place? What allowed you to save that much more then everyone else? Could it be how much you pay yourself and how little you pay your workers? This is what needs to be changed, had that rate stayed at 20-30 to 1 like it was in the early 80's then many of those people could HAVE AFFORED TO PAY BACK THOSE LOANS. Instead the income ratio grew so that we have CEOs and investors that make 1000 to 1 versus what their employees make now AND PAY LESS OR THE SAME EFFECTIVE TAX RATE.

What we have is a group of people/countries that have "won" the money game, the gameplay has stopped and we are just sitting around looking at each other. How can we play the game without any chips, marbles, money, etc.? They ALREADY WON, they have all the money, and WANT INTEREST ON IT. What don't you all understand? Take hungry hungry hippos. The game starts with X number of marbles that get dropped in the middle. One hippo ends up with the most marbles and "wins". NOW HOW DO WE PLAY ANOTHER GAME WITHOUT THAT HIPPO GIVING BACK THE MARBLES, WITHOUT INTEREST? We cannot now can we? Either the game stops, that hippo has to give back some marbles, or we get another bag of marbles since the "cry baby" cannot play nice, and we have to devalue the worth of the marbles is all, THERE ARE NO OTHER OUTCOMES. Would you even play that game with that person? I know I would not. What you want a pat on the back, think your special, think it really means something...what, what do you want? To be a king, noble, God, because you are perfect, and better then everybody at every single thing? You won hungry hungry hippos is all, GET OVER YOURSELF.

The economy and money are human creations and should not be life and death. If you do think it should be life and death then at least have the marbles to be merciful, quick, and painless about it. Do not expect your the problems you created to go away. How much did Reagan add to the debt? How much have we spent on the "war on drugs"? Who did we make the wealthiest man in the world? Maybe people have to much money for their own good and taxes are the only way to limit greed and wealth. Seems like both parties will sell themselves to the highest bidder, why do we allow PACs, lobbyists, etc. again?

Unfortunately for you all I do not skim over posts and read a good many, but I am only human and cannot read them all or go back to reread. It is also hard for me to not end up writing a page instead of something nice and short. I wonder how many made it to the bottom of my post, hmm I wonder?

saxon...you've summed it up very good. The mess we're in has been created over decades by Republicans and Democrats alike. No matter who we elect to represent us, they end in representing special interest that line their campaign coffers. The long-term good of the nation is of little significance compared to their political ambitions.

mygirl1

Obama was a lawyer for ACORN back then, ACORN et al. were the ones insisting that minorities, be given home loans. Obama led the lawsuit against the banks who stankered at the idea of making loans for people who couldn't afford them.

Liar, severely misinformed, or mentally challenged... either way, why don;t you at least TRY to get your facts right. Disgusting.

Here's the truth:

Obama, with several other attorneys, had served as local counsel for ACORN in a 1995 voting rights lawsuit joined by the Justice Department and the League of Women Voters.

And ACORN fought against bank discrimination, which was rampant back then. But of course the legislators, the banks, the loan officers, Wall Street, AIG, et al were all victims of such a radical notion of fair lending. Idiot.

It's this kind of lying demonizing that will take the new Republican Party to it's knees. Be proud.

Lmarc: You are remarkably amusing and profoundly confused or else a perfect example of a hypocrite. You call me a liar and then turn around and confirm my statement.

Now, LEGAL COUNSEL is being a lawyer, so Obama was a LAWYER, aka: legal council for ACORN. The only lie is the one you keep believing in and will vote for again.

Your bleeding heart ideology destroyed an economy (housing bubble and collapse conveniently escape your biased worldview?) and your idea of 'fair' lending essentially became extortion. Now, go distort some more history to suit your fairy tale world view, reality seems to be something you cannot grasp

*I used boldface since you seem to have difficulties with comprehension.

mygirl1

Lmarc: You are remarkably amusing and profoundly confused or else a perfect example of a hypocrite. You call me a liar and then turn around and confirm my statement.

I just looked and it still says the same thing I posted. I thought maybe I had made a typo or something, but, no, what I said was correct.

You said: "Obama led the lawsuit against the banks who stankered at the idea of making loans for people who couldn't afford them."

My quote said: "Obama, with several other attorneys, had served as local counsel for ACORN in a 1995 voting rights lawsuit joined by the Justice Department and the League of Women Voters."

Obama was never involved in the loan issue, he was ONLY involved in the voting rights lawsuit. If you don't understand the difference then that explains your misleading post. If you do, then you were lying. You tell me.

Have you ever done any volunteer work? I have. I worked in New Orleans after Katrina. With ACORN. These people were honest, hard working, selfless, and yes, very progressive... they helped anybody and everybody regardless of who you were or where you came from.

The GOP extremists made ACORN demons and forced them out of business. It wasn't the people of ACORN that were the @!$%#s in this story.