Jon Stewart rips Obama a new one on debt deal

[FPAlpha]

Tea Party usually go away when their points can't the compete with the facts. But when it comes to Obama-bashers who happens to be a liberal/progressive, they usually don't care about that.

Oh, I don't know. I am a supporter of Obama, and even I can see the point of many of his "bashers" on the liberal/left. For one, Obama ran his election on a progressive platform of "change". Yet, he hasn't provided much but continue the policies set forth by GWB.

Regarding his leadership during the debt crisis, I personally think he made a big mistake in being far too compromising. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but it feels like Obama is a closet Republican. He's clearly right/center, especially in his economic views - which is why my mind boggles when people call him a socialist/communist.

As much as I despise Bush Jr., at least he would have approached the debt "crisis" the way I wish Obama would have. He would have stuck to his guns and insisted on getting most of what he wants. He would not have insisted on being a negotiator or on giving the other side 99% of what they want.

Right now, progressives need that sort of leader. Not one who will let the Republicans steamroll him at every turn.

While i agree that Obama needs to be tougher on the GOP in this case he was against the wall with no time for power politics or stubborness because of what's at stake. He needed a deal fast to avoid default because in this weakened state the US might actually sink and take world economics with it (again). So he had no choice but take any deal possible because i believe he's really wanting to do what's best for the country and not only for the Democrats while the GOP, or rather its controlling element now called Tea Party, would rather sink the US just so they could pin it on Obama and the Dems.

It starts to really worry me personally that a group so hateful has become so powerful and influental to hold an entire nation hostage because of their vindictiveness.

 

[Amaris]

Tea Party usually go away when their points can't the compete with the facts. But when it comes to Obama-bashers who happens to be a liberal/progressive, they usually don't care about that.

Oh, I don't know. I am a supporter of Obama, and even I can see the point of many of his "bashers" on the liberal/left. For one, Obama ran his election on a progressive platform of "change". Yet, he hasn't provided much but continue the policies set forth by GWB.

Regarding his leadership during the debt crisis, I personally think he made a big mistake in being far too compromising. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but it feels like Obama is a closet Republican. He's clearly right/center, especially in his economic views - which is why my mind boggles when people call him a socialist/communist.

As much as I despise Bush Jr., at least he would have approached the debt "crisis" the way I wish Obama would have. He would have stuck to his guns and insisted on getting most of what he wants. He would not have insisted on being a negotiator or on giving the other side 99% of what they want.

Right now, progressives need that sort of leader. Not one who will let the Republicans steamroll him at every turn.

While i agree that Obama needs to be tougher on the GOP in this case he was against the wall with no time for power politics or stubborness because of what's at stake. He needed a deal fast to avoid default because in this weakened state the US might actually sink and take world economics with it (again). So he had no choice but take any deal possible because i believe he's really wanting to do what's best for the country and not only for the Democrats while the GOP, or rather its controlling element now called Tea Party, would rather sink the US just so they could pin it on Obama and the Dems.

It starts to really worry me personally that a group so hateful has become so powerful and influental to hold an entire nation hostage because of their vindictiveness.

What's worse is that they can tap into the blatant racism at the root of so much of this "indignation" about taxes, and can build support from there. Fear is a very powerful weapon, and the GOP/Tea Party know how to wield it most effectively.

 

[suarezguy]

*Multiple past Republican Presidents have raised the ceiling with ilttle or no fuss from their own party.

But not without serious opposition from the party out of power, which said that level of spending and deficit was unsustainable rather than going along with it as routine.

While that quote certainly doesn't look good for him in the present context, I think it's a mistake to criticize politicians too heavily for (gasp) changing their mind. That sort of mentality is precisely what leads to extremism and no-compromise politics.

He should at least acknowledge his change more often. Not dong so conveys that both sides think their spending is vital and the others' the whole problem, and thus causes voters to think neither is serious.

I love that people have been led down the "government is evil" road so easily

It's not evil but always does have its costs, which sometimes are outweighed by its benefits and sometimes aren't. We therefore shouldn't treat current government programs as sacrosanct, and we definitely shouldn't add new ones lightly.

and they're being led there by people who took advantage of government (Michele Bachmann) to get where they are.

And many in the Democratic Party want to keep giving her unnecessary, unfair subsidies.

we are in such debt because of 8 years of two wars and many other factors. Shrub turned a trillion-plus surplus into the biggest deficit in history.

The wars, the Medicare expansion and generally the housing bubble were approved by most in both parties while the surplus coincided with a conservative Republican Congress and moderate Democratic president.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

I think President Obama's problem is that he simply hasn't had the experience to temper him. He was given the presidency way too soon. He didn't have years of fighting in the Senate to make him a harder fighter. He might have learned how to deal with both sides more effectively while looking strong for the voters.
I don't think he's a dumb man; I think he simply didn't have enough experience.

As for the TEA Party, so many of them are inexperienced and uneducated. I don't know where to begin...

 

[MacLeod]

Are you saying the Labour government was responsible for the banking crisis?

No, i said it was the final nail in it's coffin, the electorate was gettin tired of the Labour Government, and Brown's coronation didn't help matters after all Blair said he would serve a full third term (of course in the UK a term can be anywhere from a second to five years) so when he stepped down, he should have done what he impliued and called for a general Election.

You could possible make an argument that the Labour Government didn't help matters, with it's spend spend spend policy.

"No More Boom and Bust" or so claimed Brown when he was chancellor, the levels of spending were unsustainable, and it seems as if for all the extra millions/billons spend we saw neglegable improvement.

Goverments from time to time try and bribe us with a tax cut or a spending increase on something like Health/Education just before an election. Far better to say as much as we would like to increase spending/give you a tax cut we can't because of... The electorate isn't stupid if you provide them with the facts without spin they might hate you but you'll at least have there respect. Look back at History, Thatcher was either a liked or hated. But her party was elected 3 times whilst she held the office of PM, she made the tough decisions that the UK need to get out of the mess it was in. OIf course there are still debates over whether or not those polices where right or not.

 

[Sean Aaron]

"No More Boom and Bust" or so claimed Brown when he was chancellor, the levels of spending were unsustainable, and it seems as if for all the extra millions/billons spend we saw neglegable improvement.

Yeah I didn't understand the logic of the non-means tested giveaways like the child tax credits and the kids savings accounts. That shit made no sense whatsoever. I was making £40K with no debts beyond my mortgage and we were getting £300-400/year for our kid - why? Stupid stupid stupid.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

"No More Boom and Bust" or so claimed Brown when he was chancellor, the levels of spending were unsustainable, and it seems as if for all the extra millions/billons spend we saw neglegable improvement.

Yeah I didn't understand the logic of the non-means tested giveaways like the child tax credits and the kids savings accounts. That shit made no sense whatsoever. I was making £40K with no debts beyond my mortgage and we were getting £300-400/year for our kid - why? Stupid stupid stupid.

Not stupid, it's pretty smart. It gives middle class people a reason to vote Labour, they're getting stuff off them, and might help them pay for their child's maintenance while in further education, rather than the child needed the EMA or extra student loans, grants or allowances. That was never the problem. The problem was/is the PFIs.

 

[Sean Aaron]

Not stupid, it's pretty smart. It gives middle class people a reason to vote Labour, they're getting stuff off them, and might help them pay for their child's maintenance while in further education, rather than the child needed the EMA or extra student loans, grants or allowances. That was never the problem. The problem was/is the PFIs.

It seemed like a shameless attempt to buy votes and was a big waste of money - not just the actual cash, but the bureaucracy required to get it paid out. It seemed part-and-parcel of a general squandering of surplus which could have been better spent, or not spent at all.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Not stupid, it's pretty smart. It gives middle class people a reason to vote Labour, they're getting stuff off them, and might help them pay for their child's maintenance while in further education, rather than the child needed the EMA or extra student loans, grants or allowances. That was never the problem. The problem was/is the PFIs.

It seemed like a shameless attempt to buy votes and was a big waste of money - not just the actual cash, but the bureaucracy required to get it paid out. It seemed part-and-parcel of a general squandering of surplus which could have been better spent, or not spent at all.

Oh yeah, certainly true, but it wasn't stupid, it got them 3 terms in office, and very nearly kept the tories out for a 4th. And to be honest I don't think it was necessarily a terrible thing, because it did stop spending in other areas and helped people afford to get back to work from being out of work. Maybe not being means tested was a mistake but the problem with means testing is where do you set the limit and why? £30,000 may be enough for most people to get by but it doesn't necessarily mean it works for everyone in all areas of the country either.

 

[Sean Aaron]

I suppose. I just felt like "why are you giving me this money? It's a paltry sum and I don't need it." At the very least they could have required people to apply for it.

I found it amusing to get the "stimulus" money from George Bush as well, despite living overseas and not spending it in the USA - what's the point of throwing money around blindly like that?

 

[Bob The Skutter]

I suppose. I just felt like "why are you giving me this money? It's a paltry sum and I don't need it." At the very least they could have required people to apply for it.

I found it amusing to get the "stimulus" money from George Bush as well, despite living overseas and not spending it in the USA - what's the point of throwing money around blindly like that?

I dunno about the US case, but here it's supposed to be so the vulnerable don't miss out. If you make it applied for and they don't know about it, and are unable to fill in the forms or whatever then they will miss out on money that was meant for cases like theirs especially.
Now what is stupid is making it impossible to refuse. You're comfortably well off, or comfortable at least, and you don't need it, don't need the bus pass offered when you retire, don't need the free TV licence when you're 75 or whatever, yet you can't say "No I don't need it thanks." you have to take it. That is stupid.

 

[Sean Aaron]

Now what is stupid is making it impossible to refuse.

That's how the stimulus worked in the States. I was due the first cheque before leaving the country and I phoned and said "Look, I don't need this money so can you just not cut me a cheque?" and the answer was "no, we have to send you one." So I said "fine" and converted it to £s and took the money out of the country.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Now what is stupid is making it impossible to refuse.

That's how the stimulus worked in the States. I was due the first cheque before leaving the country and I phoned and said "Look, I don't need this money so can you just not cut me a cheque?" and the answer was "no, we have to send you one." So I said "fine" and converted it to £s and took the money out of the country.

Bush's stimulus checks were an incredibly dumb idea that didn't wind up amounting to much. I forget what I spent mine on.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Now what is stupid is making it impossible to refuse.

That's how the stimulus worked in the States. I was due the first cheque before leaving the country and I phoned and said "Look, I don't need this money so can you just not cut me a cheque?" and the answer was "no, we have to send you one." So I said "fine" and converted it to £s and took the money out of the country.

Well this is the whole thing that's stupid about the Tax credit system. The tax system was never meant to work this way, so first the system works badly, people get over paid. Then the system has to claw it back from the people who were the ones who needed it so they end up better off for a while then worse off for a while.
The people who don't need it, well they don't need it, so it goes in the bank or whatever, and then in their case what was the point in taking it off them in tax in the first place if you were just going to turn around and give them it back? absolutely none.
It'd be better done through the benefits system, a system designed to give out money. But then what do I know, I'm not some think tank charging millions for my opinion.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Now what is stupid is making it impossible to refuse.

That's how the stimulus worked in the States. I was due the first cheque before leaving the country and I phoned and said "Look, I don't need this money so can you just not cut me a cheque?" and the answer was "no, we have to send you one." So I said "fine" and converted it to £s and took the money out of the country.

Bush's stimulus checks were an incredibly dumb idea that didn't wind up amounting to much. I forget what I spent mine on.

A back, Sack and Crack? Might as well have been for all the good those cheques seem to have done.

 

[RoJoHen]

Now what is stupid is making it impossible to refuse.

That's how the stimulus worked in the States. I was due the first cheque before leaving the country and I phoned and said "Look, I don't need this money so can you just not cut me a cheque?" and the answer was "no, we have to send you one." So I said "fine" and converted it to £s and took the money out of the country.

Bush's stimulus checks were an incredibly dumb idea that didn't wind up amounting to much. I forget what I spent mine on.

The stimulus check idea probably would have worked better if they were in the form of Best Buy gift cards. That way you HAVE to spend them on things to improve the economy. I think the biggest problem with the stimulus is most people just used it to pay their bills.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

That's how the stimulus worked in the States. I was due the first cheque before leaving the country and I phoned and said "Look, I don't need this money so can you just not cut me a cheque?" and the answer was "no, we have to send you one." So I said "fine" and converted it to £s and took the money out of the country.

Bush's stimulus checks were an incredibly dumb idea that didn't wind up amounting to much. I forget what I spent mine on.

The stimulus check idea probably would have worked better if they were in the form of Best Buy gift cards. That way you HAVE to spend them on things to improve the economy. I think the biggest problem with the stimulus is most people just used it to pay their bills.

Shit, that would've had people screaming "corporate welfare" over and above anything else. But you're right, a lot of people used it just to pay bills, since so many were struggling at the time just to get by.

 

[Sean Aaron]

It'd be better done through the benefits system, a system designed to give out money. But then what do I know, I'm not some think tank charging millions for my opinion.

That's pretty much what I was thinking. The only thing I like about the Tax credits system is it's not a rebate like the States, so I still don't need to file and can continue to keep life simple with PAYE.

 

[datagal]

Now what is stupid is making it impossible to refuse.

That's how the stimulus worked in the States. I was due the first cheque before leaving the country and I phoned and said "Look, I don't need this money so can you just not cut me a cheque?" and the answer was "no, we have to send you one." So I said "fine" and converted it to £s and took the money out of the country.

Bush's stimulus checks were an incredibly dumb idea that didn't wind up amounting to much. I forget what I spent mine on.

I spent mine on paying off my bills.

Yea.

 

[Guartho]

Yep, we paid debt with ours. And we didn't even run it back up that time.