The Obama Presidency - 2008 & 2012

[Edward64]

Market up +59 just before Obama's 1:30 speech. Hope its not irrational exuberance.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Market up +59 just before Obama's 1:30 speech. Hope its not irrational exuberance.

It probably is. They are saying he is not announcing a deal.

[GrantDawg]

Btw, I hope he has tell someone to shut up again. Maybe make them stand in the corner this time.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Btw, I hope he has tell someone to shut up again. Maybe make them stand in the corner this time.

That was a riot.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by rowech

That was a riot.

I saw that! Did they ever identify who it was?

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Dutch

I seriously doubt they are listening to anything you say unless you have been identified/flagged for some reason. Like making phone calls to England. (I kid, I kid.)

In all seriousness, we would need thousands of trained intel analysts to do that and I don't recall us hiring a bunch of those to handle that sort of workload.

Some of the Eastern bloc nations in the 80's and China seem to be good examples of it going past just ease dropping on the "bad guys" but of course that will never happen in America. I was born here so it must be the greatest country in the world with only good intentions of catching bad guys.

[Jas_lov]

Looks like they'll get a smaller deal through. It will be interesting to see how House Republicans vote. Not sure if Boehner will be able to get half of them to vote for it if it's just the tax increases on incomes over $400k and the spending cuts are just kicked down the road 6-12 months.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

Looks like they'll get a smaller deal through. It will be interesting to see how House Republicans vote. Not sure if Boehner will be able to get half of them to vote for it if it's just the tax increases on incomes over $400k and the spending cuts are just kicked down the road 6-12 months.

My guess is that the whole agreement with Boehner is that he'll allow the vote, and just enough Republicans will vote yay to get it passed. That way, as many Republicans in the House as possible will be safe from being primaried on this vote alone.

[Edward64]

McCain PO'd at the cheap shots that Obama took. I agree with him, seemed very unprofessional and unnecessary to "tease" the GOP.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Edward64

McCain PO'd at the cheap shots that Obama took. I agree with him, seemed very unprofessional and unnecessary to "tease" the GOP.

And the Republican's always speak with such reverence about the President.

[Kodos]

Is there anything that doesn't PO McCain these days?

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

And the Republican's always speak with such reverence about the President.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

And the Republican's always speak with such reverence about the President.

Out of character for him unlike the GOP ... an unnecessarily antagonistic.

[SirFozzie]

The Republicans are outraged that Obama won't stand still and let them use him as a punching bag :P

[RainMaker]

I'm kind of surprised that the Republicans are fighting so hard over the income level for which tax cuts should expire. Most wealthy people are making it through capital gains, not ordinary income. Just seems like a silly thing to to tie your ship to. Unless they're using it as a bargaining chip to get something they really want.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

The Republicans are outraged that Obama won't stand still and let them use him as a punching bag :P

He was way out of line today. He turned that into a pep rally campaign event.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by rowech

He was way out of line today. He turned that into a pep rally campaign event.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

And the Republican's always speak with such reverence about the President.

How quaint. That went out the door 30 years ago. Or are you just being defensive on this particular president and don't care/remember about the animosities during Reagan/Bush1/Clinton/Bush2 terms?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

There is some strange and interesting drama here about Hillary's collapse and now hospitalization. The National Enquire the day before she was hospitalized said that she had brain cancer and would need to secretly have a battery of tests to confirm the diagnosis. Now, her reps say she has a blood clot, and is being treated with blood thinners. The thing is, if she does have a blod clot stemming from a blow to the head, they would not be using blood thinners. Has the National Enquirer stumbled on another actual scoop?

I saw the basic story yesterday & couldn't help but think back to William Casey.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Out of character for him unlike the GOP ... an unnecessarily antagonistic.

You mean they are mad that Obama is finally fighting back rather than caving? Poor dears.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Is there anything that doesn't PO McCain these days?

His prostate?

[stevew]

Hopefully they get the milk thing done as that was going to amount to legislative malpractice if they allowed the government to get ripped off like that.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

How quaint. That went out the door 30 years ago. Or are you just being defensive on this particular president and don't care/remember about the animosities during Reagan/Bush1/Clinton/Bush2 terms?

He's responding to someone wanting the President to be nicer. Are you just being offensive on this particular president?

[JPhillips]

Sounds to me like a few Senators looking for a reason not to support a deal are using Obama's comments, which, by the way, is stupid. If it's good enough to vote for, the President's comments shouldn't matter.

Of course, the current GOP is full of thin-skinned babies.

[Scoobz0202]

We are going over the cliff per CNBC

No Vote in the House Tonight; House Republicans to Caucus at 5pm ET Today: Sources

Sources say there will be no vote in the House tonight, meaning the U.S. could very well go over the "fiscal cliff," when tax increases and spending cuts kick in. Stocks pulled back slightly but the Dow remained up over 100 points following the news.

[SirFozzie]

Yup. Boehner can't get anything to pass his crazies in the GOP, so they're going to take their ball and go home. Blame's squarely on them.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Yup. Boehner can't get anything to pass his crazies in the GOP, so they're going to take their ball and go home. Blame's squarely on them.

Yeah can't believe those crazies would walk away from an agreement to cut zero spending because the voters all can agree there isn't anything we can cut that the federal government spends money on.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

It probably is. They are saying he is not announcing a deal.

Market up 166+.

After hours is up 250+ (as of 4:15pm ET).
24 Hour Stock Market and Forex Data - After-Hours Trading - CNNMoney.com

I must be missing something.

[stevew]

They won't cut spending on shit like SS and Medicare, so any kind of realistic savings is virtually impossible.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by panerd

Yeah can't believe those crazies would walk away from an agreement to cut zero spending because the voters all can agree there isn't anything we can cut that the federal government spends money on.

They've actually had two opportunities to lock in entitlement cuts and balked both times.

[Edward64]

Breaking news. It'll be fun to see how the House reacts to it.

Obama, Senate Republicans near agreement on ‘fiscal cliff’ - The Washington Post

President Obama and Senate Republicans reached a sweeping deal late Monday that would let income taxes rise significantly for the first time in more than two decades, fulfilling Obama’s promise to raise taxes on the rich and averting the worst effects of the “fiscal cliff.”

Vice President Biden arrived at the Capitol just after 9 p.m. to explain the details of the pact he negotiated with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). A Senate vote on the package could be held by 10:30 p.m., beating a midnight deadline, Democratic aides said. The Republican-controlled House will begin considering the bill on Tuesday, with a final vote expected in the next day or two.

[Scoobz0202]

Two months sequester extension. Obama blinked.

[JPhillips]

Thank God he never helped buy me a car.

Less in tax increases than if he had done nothing and the two month extension lines up with the debt ceiling. The GOP is going to go 2011 times infinity on this debt ceiling vote and Obama's threats to not negotiate are as hollow as can be. He just conceded on taxes while also giving away the only leverage he had in the debt ceiling talks.

[Scoobz0202]

Two months from now the social programs will be back on the block. Medicare for sure.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Scoobz0202

Two months from now the social programs will be back on the block. Medicare for sure.

As they should be (along with Defense).

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Thank God he never helped buy me a car.

Less in tax increases than if he had done nothing and the two month extension lines up with the debt ceiling. The GOP is going to go 2011 times infinity on this debt ceiling vote and Obama's threats to not negotiate are as hollow as can be. He just conceded on taxes while also giving away the only leverage he had in the debt ceiling talks.

Obama's a shit negotiator.

[molson]

It's meaningless, but CNN and other media outlets say this deal will "define who's rich" - i.e, a household income of $450,000 or greater. I don't know what this deal has to do at all with determinations of "rich", but this is what the media's going with. It's interesting to me how its so undesirable to be deemed "rich". I was reading this random article in national geographic traveler magazine about some family who took their kids on a extended world vacation for "education" - they said it cost them $150,000, but they insisted they're not a wealthy family. Why the shame in admitting it? I think if you take your kids on a vacation that costs $1,000 you're fucking loaded on a global scale, and if it's $5,000 you're probably fucking loaded on a U.S scale. $150k - you're clearly at or right near the infamous "1%"(though FWIW, the couple in question was Canadian). But there's so much shame in acknowledging as much. There's weird personal financial dynamics going on. It's not cool to be successful.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Lemme see here ... delay spending cuts & raise taxes. And people are bitching about Obama?

I realize that McConnell isn't negotiating from a position of strength so, while I'm unhappy with the terms, I'm not ready to strangle him just yet.

If the House goes along with this crap however, those who approve it (at least the version I've seen in the AP itemized summary) can go hang.

[stevew]

To be fair, it's the 2nd worst deal negotiated in Washington this year. I thought Ariza and Okafor were still viable.

[Edward64]

Maybe I missed it, but did they identify the target or total $ in spending cuts with details in 2 months?

[Qrusher14242]

So does it matter if this gets passed in a couple days? what happens then?
I guess they struck a deal but the House left??

[stevew]

Theoretically it could be passed in 3 years and backdated tbh. People wouldn't pay more immediately for certain until their quarterly/yearly taxes are due for 2013. Obviously the sequester crap is different. Withholding might change on your paycheck, but you can just change your withholding if you need money in the short term.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by molson

It's meaningless, but CNN and other media outlets say this deal will "define who's rich" - i.e, a household income of $450,000 or greater. I don't know what this deal has to do at all with determinations of "rich", but this is what the media's going with. It's interesting to me how its so undesirable to be deemed "rich". I was reading this random article in national geographic traveler magazine about some family who took their kids on a extended world vacation for "education" - they said it cost them $150,000, but they insisted they're not a wealthy family. Why the shame in admitting it? I think if you take your kids on a vacation that costs $1,000 you're fucking loaded on a global scale, and if it's $5,000 you're probably fucking loaded on a U.S scale. $150k - you're clearly at or right near the infamous "1%"(though FWIW, the couple in question was Canadian). But there's so much shame in acknowledging as much. There's weird personal financial dynamics going on. It's not cool to be successful.

I think many believe the rich got us into this mess, they got bailed out, then they got richer. Doesn't sit well with people. Somebody making 500k is not one of those people but some how the rich have suddenly become anybody making more than you.

[Edward64]

Waiting for the deeper analysis but hey, thanks Reid, McConnell and Biden.

Glad the AMT got fixed. I'm always worried about it when I boot up TurboTax.

Why don't the Senate take the first pass at the Debt reduction and have the House rubber stamp it.

Senate passes package to avert fiscal cliff; House votes next - CNN.com

A full two hours after a midnight deadline, the Senate overwhelmingly passed a deal Tuesday to avert the feared fiscal cliff on an 89-8 vote.
:
The measure now goes to the House where it faces an uncertain future in the Republican-controlled body.

Under the Senate package:

-- Taxes would stay the same for most Americans. But it will rise for individuals making more than $400,000 and couples making more than $450,000. For them, it will go from the current 35% to the Clinton-era rate of 39.6%.

-- Itemized deductions would be capped for those making $250,000 and for married couples making $300,000.

-- Taxes on inherited estates will go up to 40% from 35%.

-- Unemployment insurance would be extended for a year for 2 million people.

-- The alternative minimum tax -- a perennial issue -- would be permanently adjusted for inflation.

-- Child care, tuition and research and development tax credits would be renewed.

-- The "Doc Fix" -- reimbursements for doctors who take Medicare patients -- will continue, but it won't be paid for out of the Obama administration's signature health care law.

-- Prevents a spike in milk prices. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said milk prices would have doubled to $7 a gallon because a separate agriculture bill had expired.

What's not addressed

While the package provides some short-term certainty, it leaves a range of big issues unaddressed.

It doesn't mention the debt ceiling, and temporarily puts off for two months the so-called sequester -- a series of automatic cuts in federal spending that would have taken effect Wednesday. It would have reduced the budgets of most agencies and programs by 8% to 10%.

This means that, come late February, Congress will have to tackle both those thorny issues.

[Thomkal]

anyone have a list of who voted no? Just curious to see who voted against it and why

[mauchow]

Five Republicans and three Democrats voted against the bill: Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Richard Shelby (R-Ala.).

Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) missed the vote.

[Dutch]

Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) missed the vote.

Don't we pay them $200,000 a year for life not to miss votes like this?

[panerd]

Originally Posted by mauchow

Five Republicans and three Democrats voted against the bill: Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Richard Shelby (R-Ala.).

Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) missed the vote.

My inclination whenever I see a landslide 95-5 or 98-2 vote is to hear what the smaller numbers reasons are because generally when the d/r machine is all on board it is bad news. Can't wait until Feb for the same nonsense and midnight negotiations that (after twenty pages of on FOFC) will kick the can down the road again. Obviously the no shows are trying to avoid having a vote on the record which is even worse than those who voted for the bill.

[Edward64]

A little more insight into the +1 year extension into unemployment benefits. If the economy continues to hum I think this should be it.

Unemployment Insurance To Be Extended, $30 Billion Cost Won't Be Offset

WASHINGTON -- One of the remaining sticking points holding up a fiscal cliff deal appears to have been resolved, as negotiators have decided to extend unemployment benefits without offsetting the cost.

A source familiar with negotiations told The Huffington Post that lawmakers would treat the provision as "an emergency measure that shouldn't be paid for." A Senate Democratic and Republican source each confirmed the plan.

What that means is that the $30 billion pricetag for a year-long extension will simply be added to the deficit. Republicans have in the past objected to reauthorizing federal unemployment compensation because of its impact on the deficit, though in recessions since World War II Congress has generally added extra weeks of benefits without paying for them.

Over the past several days, lawmakers had tried to find ways to offset the cost of unemployment benefits. They remained at an impasse as recently as Monday morning. Republicans have said little publicly about unemployment insurance during negotiations to avert the fiscal cliff, the nickname for steep spending cuts and tax hikes scheduled to take effect at midnight on Monday.

Getting unemployment insurance extended for a year without the offsets represents a major victory for the administration, which has long touted the stimulative impact and moral necessity of the policy. The Congressional Budget Office says keeping the benefits through next year buys some 300,000 jobs and increases economic growth.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Don't we pay them $200,000 a year for life not to miss votes like this?

Thats 3 people out of several hundred - statistical odds are that at least one of them is ill, there could also be severe family issues etc. involved.

(ie. I've never understood people railing with the 'but we pay them to do this' angst .... they're humans ffs and I'm sure understood that was an important vote - if they weren't present then chances are there was a good reason)