Obama Fears 'Catastrophic' Debt Fight

Yahoo ^ | 01/05/12 | Mary Bruce

[AtlasStalled]

In his first weekly address of the New Year, President Obama touts the "fiscal cliff" compromise as "one more step in the broader effort to grow our economy and shrink our deficits" but warns that another "manufactured crisis" over the debt ceiling could wreak havoc on the economy.

[AtlasStalled]

I thought His Highness said he wasn't going to debate the debt ceiling. I guess he isn't; he's just demagoguing it.

[BenLurkin]

Hussein is the catastrophe.

[SIDENET]

Obama Fears 'Catastrophic' Debt Fight

BS.

[Paladin2]

No really, 0bama fears that the debt limit “fight” will be catastrophic for the GOPe.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Some liberals are issuing talking points that the president can use the 14th amendment to ignore the debt ceiling and keep on spending. I guess we’ll see what happens if he does that. Apparently the 14th amendment has a clause which states that the debts of the country will be paid, and that would give the president cover to borrow more to pay debts. At least that’s what the liberals say.

[Proud2BeRight]

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.” -Barack Hussein Obama

I agree 100% with Barack Hussein Obama.

[Tublecane]

So the fiscal cliff was real, but the debt ceiling is manufactured? We can borrow whatever we want, but if spending is ever cut or more than 1% of the population asked to pay for it (outiside of hidden taxes like inflation), that’s armageddon.

[AtlasStalled]

Don’t ya just love it when a DemoQuack’s words come back to haunt him?!

[Sarah Barracuda]

The “Catastrophe” already happened..on November 6th when the Communist schmuck was re-elected

[Tublecane]

Not BS. I honestly believe the possibility of spending cuts seems catastrophic to Obama.

[American in Israel]

Perhaps all the Mafia he has been channeling funds to will get pissed at him if he stops.

[Norm Lenhart]

Everyone should use that quote religiously...but not attribute it. Then when the libs spin out about it, remind them who said it. They won’t remember. They don’t even care.

So you use them for the performance.

Alynski had a point or two worth considering.

But the GOP is not going to upset their apple cart.

[Doogle]

the first four years set up the next four, it’s crisis after crisis designed to hide more and more regulations and EO’s.
Every month it will be something new that “he will have to focus on” and can only be dealt with with higher taxes.
Scandal after scandal will follow, but the little boy king will be soooo busy dealing with mounting crisis..*sniff sniff*
Meanwhile he’ll have to take the occasional vacation, after all it’s never been this bad, he’s got soooo much to “deal” with....some are concerned that his health may come into question.....this leading from behind can be..... taxing

[Tublecane]

That was brought up last go-round. It is irrelevant. Everyone knows the government’s primary responsibility is to pay to keep outstanding debt from compounding. In the event we hit the ceiling that will be covered first. Whatever’s less important will be fought over like feral dogs with a soupbone.

Interested parties would have you believe the debt ceiling means default on loans, but that’s only because they’d like to keep buying stuff on credit.

[SIDENET]

Not BS. I honestly believe the possibility of spending cuts seems catastrophic to Obama.

The spineless GOPe losers will get played again. They will "demand" cuts, posture a bit, and then we will get presented with "the deal". Entitlements will be untouched, and the military will get hammered. The stupid-ass GOP will emerge with egg on their faces AGAIN, and manage to be demonized by the left while looking like fools to their own party.

After that debacle, they will fold like a cheap suit on gun control. We've seen this film before.

"What a bunch of fools. They're making this too easy."

[GOYAKLA]

Hussein OBAMA is a “CAT’S- ASS-TROPHY”!

[bmwcyle]

Wait till the fight on guns.

[SIDENET]

No really, 0bama fears that the debt limit “fight” will be catastrophic for the GOPe.

Hey, not to worry, we have our two best men on all over it.

Boehner:

Mitch McConnell:

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

I thought His Highness said he wasn't going to debate the debt ceiling. I guess he isn't; he's just demagoguing it.

It depends what the meaning of is, is.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Not BS. I honestly believe the possibility of spending cuts seems catastrophic to Obama.

Aside from his job at Baskin Robbins, he's never held a real job. So it's possible. He seems to have no understanding of business, whatsoever.

[AtlasStalled]

“It depends what the meaning of is, is.”

Haha . . . I forgot about Slick Willy’s famous word parsing!

[Army Air Corps]

Just for giggles, the House should submit a budget with zero funding for the Office of the President.

[dennisw]

Give this homo the hook

[Sooth2222]

"Not BS. I honestly believe the possibility of spending cuts seems catastrophic to Obama."

He probably believes that the only difference between liberals and conservatives is where they want to waste/spend taxpayer money. "George Bush spent lots of money on the military, therefore all conservatives must want to spend lots of money on the military." The flaw in this logic is that George Bush wasn't too much of a conservative -- although he might appear conservative from Zero's ultra-left perspective.

I think conservatives have enormous leverage. I remain frankly amazed that Zero didn't hold out for linking the sequester and the debt ceiling to the tax cuts as he promised.

[Let_It_Be_So]

Obama: “one more step in the broader effort to grow our economy and shrink our deficits”

So, increasing taxes will “grow our economy”? Yeah, that’s how to grow an economy, let’s just tax the producers, force them to pay higher premiums for health care for their workforce (or pay a hefty fine) and just watch that economy grow! We know that they (the producers) will simply “eat” it and not try to pass the increased costs onto the consumers or reduce their overhead (like labor costs), right?

And we all know that any increase in revenues will not result in any new spending, but will of course be applied to the deficit or reduce the debt burden, right?

sarc/off

The sad (and infuriating) part is that a slight majority of the US population actually agrees with this nonsense.

[Deo volente]

Whatever happened to “Pay as you go”? Isn’t that current law?

OBAMA, February 12, 2010:
“Now in a perfect world, Congress would not have needed a law to act responsibly, to remember that every dollar spent would come from taxpayers today – or our children tomorrow.

But this isn’t a perfect world. This is Washington...

...That is why this rule is necessary. And that is why I am pleased that Congress fulfilled my request to restore it. Last night, I signed the “pay as you go” rule into law. Now, Congress will have to pay for what it spends, just like everybody else.”

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/18/remember-that-pay-as-you-go-law-the-president-wanted-neither-does-he/

[upchuck]

This “manufactured” crisis will be created by Marxists, Inc.

I guess nobama’s too stupid to figure out that if he quit spending like a complete idiot this problem would solve itself.

Oh, that’s right, I forgot, he can’t quit spending. If he does, the country might right itself and no self-respecting Marxist dicktator in waiting can abide that.

[ogen hal]

nobama fears being brought to justice.

[freeangel]

Obama doesn’t fear anything—he just writes an executive order which will be seconded by scotus.

[trebb]

Some liberals are issuing talking points that the president can use the 14th amendment to ignore the debt ceiling and keep on spending.

Other than for bills that have to be paid, the Constitution still requires the Congress to get involved. Even twisting the 14th won't do what he really wants unless he wants to go "all-in" on becoming a Despot.