*
Bedford Ramblings
Steve Mills

Anyone care to comment about the debt ceiling?

Posted Wednesday, August 3, 2011, at 6:50 AM
Comments
View 15 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Somehow I just knew you would be first to comment Unique-Lies. Thanks for starting it off.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Wed, Aug 3, 2011, at 10:29 AM
  • Democrats debt, hummmmm good thing Bush had everything paid for when he left office, that he did not run up any debt, after all he was handed a near balanced budget to start with one would hate to think was idiot enough to squander it on anything stupid like wars over oil and freebees for the rich now would we? If he would have done any of that we may have to ask any intelligent republican out there to share the blame for the expenses of this country.

    Whew wouldn't want them to think republicans had any blame in this budget.

    Now as to my opinion on the who cap thing, I wish they would have left it as a single issue and passed it like they have for every other president in history, then addressed any issues on how to handle future shortages to prevent getting into this mess again rather than use it to black male their way into God knows what they will use it for now. I am embarrassed by the weakness Obama has shown standing up up to the radical traitor right wing goons and their bully tactics. America was once a proud strong honorable country now we have the tea party scumbags running rampant making us out to be now better than the third world countries we try to help. I am basically disgusted all around with how the whole thing has played out - both sides need a swift kick in the backside to bring them back to the reality that they are there to represent the people not to stab us in the back and rob us blind.

    -- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Aug 3, 2011, at 1:13 PM
  • "The Congress CUT billions of dollars in FAA expenses and TAXES, but at the same time laid off 70,000 airport construction workers and prevented the airlines from forwarding taxes to the FAA they collected from passengers."

    Make up your mind, You want smaller government, Low taxes, and liberty. Right? But you are complaining about this? Anything you whine and cry about is always what Your President did to damage the country. Your typing here isn't helping or educating anyone because no matter what you say, contradicts a pending or previous statement you have made. Reminds me of Fox News.

    -- Posted by Evil Monkey on Wed, Aug 3, 2011, at 8:42 PM
  • Common sense would dictate that when you max out your debt, the solution to the problem isn't increasing the debt limit, it's cutting spending and paying down the debt. Does ANYONE, regardless of party honestly believe that when you max out your credit card, the solution is getting another card?

    By the way, absolutely none of Obama's spending plans to boost the economy have worked!

    -- Posted by Tim Lokey on Thu, Aug 4, 2011, at 6:05 AM
  • Iowa's GOP Governor Vetoes Tax Break For The Poor Because It Didn't Lower Corporate Taxes

    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/08.

    This mind set says it all!!!!! Trickle down to the little guy -yea right

    The corporations just got their Bush tax breaks extended, at our sacrifice and expense mind you and now they extend their greed even further - will they ever stop or will they once they get every last penny from main street demand our blood also?

    -- Posted by wonderwhy on Thu, Aug 4, 2011, at 10:31 AM
  • Things are getting out of control. We have them calling for follow the constitution while they seem to be destroying it. This article was interesting, brought up some good points about how they do not back their talking pints. This is just the beginning of the demise of our constitution. The way I understand it they have now given the power to do what ever they want to 12 people who they choose and will no doubt be servant to the lobbyist (the unions of the rich). How many more nails will the main streets coffin be able to take before there is no hope for their survival left?

    What makes any think the 6 super republicans will be any more willing to work to come up with a plan both sides are in agreement on when a stale mate would better serve the massive cuts they want. Bouhner already said he will not appoint anyone who has disagreed with him and voted against what he wanted.He does not want anyone in there who will try to find a compromise. He will do everything he can to get the 100% of what he wants. Anyone who thinks that they will appoint people who will not be their puppets is a fool. How far do the powers of this so called super congress go? Does it stop at the budget or will it have power to attack and do what ever it wants across the board? Will it be a mini dictatorship? Once they eliminate all our ability to stand up for ourselves will it also be down sized to say just one - like Hitler perhaps? What a mess for the citizens of this country - I fear we have been completely sold out - there will be no more for the people by the people (what little there actually was anyway)

    Is the new "Super Congress" Constitutional? | Print |

    Written by Thomas R. Eddlem

    Thursday, 04 August 2011 00:00

    1

    Judge NapolitanoA number of constitutionalists have warned that the new "Super Congress" -- technically a joint committee of Congress -- may be unconstitutional. The new entity will be created out of the Obama-Boehner debt limit deal. "It smells," Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas) told Fox News August 1. "I just don't understand why Congress is so willing to give up its responsibilities to 12 people.... It's a reflection that they don't have answers."

    Former New Jersey Superior Court Judge Andrew Napolitano told Fox News August 1 that he thinks the law may be unconstitutional:

    "Members of the Senate and members of the House have the opportunity under the Constitution to debate items that are sent to them and to modify items that are sent to them. To force them to vote just yes or know with no debate, not to follow the rules of the House, which permits amendments, not to follow the rules of the Senate, which permits a filibuster, is such a substantial removal of the authority the Constitution gave them that this legislation is treading in waters that might not be constitutional."

    One might agree with Napolitano that these points make the Super Congress unwise without agreeing that these particular points may make the Super Congress unconstitutional as well. After all, the U.S. Constitution provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its Proceedings" (Art. I, Sec. 5) and choose its own officers (Art. I, Sec. 2 and 3). These powers of Congress in the U.S. Constitution are plenary; there are no limitations on them. And Congress has long chosen to fast-track (allow no amendments) most treaties and trade agreements that have been negotiated over many months, in order to avoid sending negotiators abroad again to renegotiate the agreements.

    However, Napolitano raised another -- and unassailable -- objection to the legislation. Napolitano noted: "This is this Congress binding itself and all future Congresses to a simple up-or-down vote." In that sense, the new "Super Congress" joint committee is truly revolutionary, and unquestionably unconstitutional. Under the Constitution, no Congress can bind a subsequent Congress with rules of procedure, which is why one of the first acts of every new Congress after an election is for the House and Senate to separately approve new rules. One of the new rules the post-Tea Party Republican House adopted in January (and broken with adoption of the debt deal) included a rule pledging to post the full text of bills on-line at least 72 hours before a floor vote.

    Back on Ron Paul's presidential website, the self-styled "Southern Avenger" Jack Hunter quipped that the "Super Congress' is not super. It's not even Congress." He quoted a disgusted Ron Paul saying that it is "nothing more than a way to disenfranchise the majority of Congress by denying them the chance for meaningful participation."

    With the great leap of power assumed by this Congress over all future Congresses, it's hard to disagree with them.

    -- Posted by wonderwhy on Sat, Aug 6, 2011, at 9:27 AM
  • While I am not an Obama supporter, he had plenty of help from Congress and not just the ones in office.

    I myself have trouble telling my family know and have not done a good job in the past, but instead of Yes we can, it should have been no we can't continue to spend on money we do not have, no we can't continue to support illegal aliens with numerous social programs, no we can't continue to send money abroad when our debts are not paid, no.....(fill in the blank)

    -- Posted by stevemills on Sun, Aug 7, 2011, at 7:45 AM
  • You are absolutly right Steve he does need to apply the word NO in order to achieve the YES we can. No we can not continue as we have, Yes we do need a responsible budget. He needs to tell the right NO when they throw main street in the gutter to protect the wealthy. They say even a family has to follow a budget, and that is right however that it is in their next breath they lose credibility ( the right) Families know that a budget sets the most basic needs of survival on the top of the list - food and shelter, followed by the necessities to provide for those needs,like transportation,safety, education and health. Then debt elimination and emergency funds. Those are all at the TOP of a families budget priorities. It is only after those expenses are met and a sound foundation is created that that luxuries and generous gifts come into play. Tax cuts for the rich are a mighty fancy gift to fund with cuts to the very basic budget items. Breaks for privet jets at the expense of food and shelter while trying to take away health care programs people have paid into all their lives tells you where their loyalties are. They say the tax cuts are for "job creation" thus are essential to insure that. Well it has not worked has it? I say the solution to that is to only extend those tax breaks to ACTUAL MONEY that is provided for job creation, and let all other money be considered what it is -income. Motivate job creation by making the breaks dependent on actual jobs created rather than give money in hopes of them creating jobs, give the breaks in response to jobs that have been made.

    Obama needs to learn to stand firm and stop allowing them to bully him into plans that are leading us to our demise. It makes me sick to hear Boehner bragging about getting 98% of what HE wanted, and his buddy admitting that they held us hostage for ransom. If another country were to hold us for ransom we would send in the troops to destroy them as they would be considered the enemy yet our so called representatives are bragging about doing it to us. Whats wrong with that picture? Why is it not being treated as the crime and treason that it is against our country?

    Now it is being reported that Boehner will only appoint those who WILL NOT compromise to the Super Congress Committee - so why have it if he will not work with the other side? It does not matter to them if no agreement is made because the fall out of that - broad cuts across the board - is what they want any way. So they get what they want and can spin it into Obama's fault. DIRTY POLITICS and games, and Obama still acting like they will do the right thing. What a mess, and we the people will be the ones who are destroyed when all is said and done. It's is fumy in a sick way that these teabaggers don't have a clue that no matter how much they bow down and worship their leaders, that those very leaders will crush them like ugly weeds when they are done with them. They are basically handing their demise to their leaders on a silver platter and taking themselves down as they attempt to crush the rest of us.

    I will keep contacting my representatives and keep reading the crazy generic unrelated responses. Some do not even address the issue I contacted them about.

    -- Posted by wonderwhy on Sun, Aug 7, 2011, at 1:23 PM
  • Why should they impeach him they went so far as to put McCain and Palin on the ballot to insure he was the one elected and keep the blame of the bush years off the republicans. Heck you don;t actually believe they would have wanted to have to take credit for or fix that toxic mess do you....

    And you got my point exactly they do not respond to the letters or input of the people they hire people to B.S. the public into thinking they care.

    Treason???? "I think some of our members may have thought the default issue was a hostage you might take a chance at shooting," he said. "Most of us didn't think that. What we did learn is this - it's a hostage that's worth ransoming. " what do you call this malarkey ? That is blatant terrorism, and McConnel is proud to brag about it. Willfully attempting to go into default to get "98%" of what he wanted and intentionally risk trashing our country that is treason. And then to stand up an brag about it, well they should be more than just impeached. They intentionally caused the problem of trashy politics that caused the AAA rating to be dropped. I do blame Obama for letting them get away with the trashy politics, same as I blame Bush for ignoring the warnings before 9/11 - he most likely could not have stopped it from happening but we will never know will we he did not try to.The same with Obama, he may not be able to stop the rabid trashy politics the right is playing but by gosh he does not have to bow down and let them do it without a fight !!!!! He needs to stand tall - look them in the eyes - and tell them NO !!! Then back it up with action. HE needs to send the bullies back to play ground until they are will to behave and do the job of representing AMERICANS not hold them hostage for ransom to get their buddies richer or achieve the hate mission against Obama.

    -- Posted by wonderwhy on Sun, Aug 7, 2011, at 4:21 PM
  • Stop and breath Unique...................The republicans have made it clear they would rather see us default that compromise. The do not give one S888t about America only the hate agenda they worship. Just like you they are fueled by their hate for Obama, hate that began the second it was found out that the right lost the election. Sure you can piece together all kinds of fancy words in an order that you hope will cause people to panic enough to blindly run for the red. But the comment I borrowed from someone else is beyond true ----- If Obama were to put the cure for cancer on the table you and your clan would turn it down, there is no way that those you side with will ever tolerate anything good from Obama. That ugly hate , racism, political party hero worship will not allow it. It was the same when Clinton was in office 8 years of republican witch hunting (true at times he made it easy)It has nothing to do with wanting what is best for America - or they wold be working together and looking for feasible solutions for the PEOPLE...... but that is not it. This stupid super Congress is nothing more than a way to fast track away more of our rights, and now they are trying to put in a new back stabber for the people REINS , where the approval of congress certain issues - the catch is it has to be an up or down vote, no discussion and if not approved by both sides or not settled in 70 days will go to the trash heap and not be allowed to be reconsidered ---- so all they have to do is stall what they dislike long enough and it is gone. Now think 70 days, since when does congress work fast enough to settle anything in that amount of time.

    -- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Aug 10, 2011, at 2:52 PM
  • Let's see, the way I figure, the city of Shelbyville's population just grew by 100. One FBI agent, one secret service agent, and ninety-eight provocateurs have just recently taken up permanent residence. Oh well, I guess that is one way to expand the local tax base.

    -- Posted by memyselfi on Thu, Aug 11, 2011, at 2:07 AM
  • memyselfi,

    Huh? email me at dstemper -at- charter dot net.

    -- Posted by Evil Monkey on Thu, Aug 11, 2011, at 10:18 PM
  • Evil Monkey/memyselfi I hope you can discuss that here. I am curious too.

    BUT if the better choice is to keep it private, I will understand.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Fri, Aug 12, 2011, at 7:30 AM
  • LOL! I was only teasing Unique-Lies about the attention that the letters may generate. I am sorry if I appeared completely serious. I forgot how difficult it is to convey playfulness.

    I do not know anything about any agents being in town. I only leave the house when I have to, and even then, I don't socialize much. However, I am quite certain that provocateurs are a reality, and that they seek out discontents in an effort to marginalize their influence and discredit their messages.

    -- Posted by memyselfi on Mon, Aug 15, 2011, at 7:46 AM
  • Haha!

    -- Posted by Evil Monkey on Mon, Aug 15, 2011, at 10:59 AM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: