Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Barack Obama and the Debt Crisis Debate - #3110 - Is Obama a Pathological Liar? (2) Guy Benson: Report - Obama Rejects Bi-Partisan Debt Deal - Townhall (3) Michael Barone: To Get a Mandate GOP Must Win Another Election - Townhall

*Please call your representatives in Washington - They need to hear from you - House of Representatives Contact List ........  Senate Contact List ........ In Virginia: Robert Hurt - 202-225-4711, Sen. Mark Warner-202-224-2023, Sen. Jim Webb - 202-224-4024.
Articles from Steve Peters:  
Is Obama a Pathological Liar? - In the weird world that is Washington, men and women say things daily, hourly, even minutely, that they know deep down are simply not true. Inside the Beltway, we all call those utterances “rhetoric.” But across the rest of the country, plain ol’ folk call ‘em lies. Bald-faced (even bold-faced) lies. Those folks have a tried-and-true way of determining a lie: If you know what you’re saying is patently false, then it’s a lie. Simple. And lately, the president has been lying so much that his pants could burst into flames at any moment. His late-evening news conference Friday was a tour de force of flat-out, unadulterated mendacity — and we’ve gotten a first-hand insider’s view of the president’s long list of lies. “I wanted to give you an update on the current situation around the debt ceiling,” Mr. Obama said at 6:06 p.m. OK, that wasn’t a lie — but just about everything he said after it was, and he knows it. Read more...... Steve Peters: What negotiation strategy do you use with someone who is in a congenital liar? You ensure that the negotiations are in a public forum for all to witness. You do not let the liar continually walkout through the closed door meetings, telling his version of the truth to the American Voters using the presidential megaphone, which is then spread throughout the country by the lapdog liberal media on his behalf.

Guy Benson: Report - Obama Rejects Bi-Partisan Debt Deal - Townhall - The Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin reports that President Obama nixed a bipartisan debt agreement that was forged by leaders of the House and Senate over the weekend. If Jen's sources are correct, this would be a genuine political jaw-dropper:  A Republican aide e-mails me: “The Speaker, Sen. Reid and Sen. McConnell all agreed on the general framework of a two-part plan. A short-term increase (with cuts greater than the increase), combined with a committee to find long-term savings before the rest of the increase would be considered. Sen. Reid took the bipartisan plan to the White House and the President said no.”  If this is accurate the president is playing with fire. By halting a bipartisan deal he imperils the country’s finances and can rightly be accused of putting partisanship above all else. The ONLY reason to reject a short-term, two-step deal embraced by both the House and Senate is to avoid another approval-killing face-off for President Obama before the election. Next to pulling troops out of Afghanistan to fit the election calendar, this is the most irresponsible and shameful move of his presidency.  According to this account, with the clock ticking down to 0:00, the President of the United States pulled the rug out from under a bipartisan proposal to address the debt crisis. His administration has been arguing -- correctly -- that a partial default and/or credit downgrade could trigger a financial "armageddon" for the country. Why in the world would Obama threaten to veto a solution that averts that fate, and does so with broad cross-party agreement?  Read more.....

Michael Barone: To Get a Mandate GOP Must Win Another Election - Townhall - Those who consider themselves constitutional conservatives should take care to consider not only the powers that the Constitution confers on the different branches of government and reserves to the states and the people, but also the schedule that the Constitution sets up for sharp changes and reversals of public policy.  The entire House of Representatives is elected every two years. The voters in 2010, with unusual clarity, elected a House determined to reverse the Obama Democrats' vast increase in the size and scope of government.  But determination is not enough. Barack Obama, elected in 2008, remains in office, armed with a veto. The friendly mainstream media permit him to use euphemisms to insist on tax increases that were roundly rejected by the voters in 2010.  And the Senate, two-thirds of which was elected in the Democratic years of 2006 and 2008, retains a Democratic majority that, though unable to pass its own budget, can frustrate House Republicans' attempts to deliver on their more recent mandate.  The lesson is that you have to win at least two elections in a row to make the kind of policy changes that the Obama Democrats made in 2009 and 2010 and that House Republicans want to make now.  Read more.........

No comments:

Post a Comment