Quantcast
U.S. & World

Obama aims to circumvent Congress with mortgage relief, student loans

Comments

Return To Article
  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    Oct. 27, 2011 12:31 p.m.

    Plain and simple, we need one party in control of this nation. Doesn't really matter which one it is... if we went 100% with either plan we would be better off than we are right now with stalemate.

    Our government is broken, it needs to be scrapped. The states should start the call for a new Constitutional Convention so the failings of the current system can be addressed.

  • cindyacre Shelley, ID
    Oct. 27, 2011 9:13 a.m.

    Sure I will help with those mortgages and student loans - they can help me with my yard work, and I will pay them.

    That is how I PAY MY BILLS. IT IS CALLED WORK.

  • sergio Phoenix, AZ
    Oct. 26, 2011 1:36 p.m.

    President Obama is forced to go it alone because enough republicans are willing to sink the American ship to drown the president and gain control for themselves and their special interests. It is sad when our elected officials will not put America first before their party and personal interests.

  • Stackhouse paradise, nv
    Oct. 26, 2011 10:46 a.m.

    President Obama @ Sow those seeds now so you can harvest a cash crop right before the election. If you can show me where in the constitution it says that we are supposed to help people out with morgages and student loans I will personally get out my gloves and shovel and dig with you.

  • KC Mormon Edgerton, KS
    Oct. 26, 2011 9:08 a.m.

    Here are some questions no one is asking:
    1. Of you must be current on your mortgage qualify how exactly does that help with the foreclosure problem?
    A person who is current on their mortgage is not currently under threat of foreclosure.
    2. If the house is already under water( the loan principle is more than the house value) how exactly will this help with that?
    When you refinance a mortgage the principle will likely go up if you have no equity in the home because you likely do not have the money for closing costs.
    3. If this program only reduces the interest rate and not the principle how exactly is that going to get the house out of the under water category?
    The person still can not sell the house for as much as they own.
    4. If the banks are going to be forced to reduce the principle who is going to pay that money to the banks?
    The banks still must make the money they loose or the will not have money to lend per current regulations requiring a minimum cash on hand.

  • Badger55 Nibley, Ut
    Oct. 26, 2011 8:07 a.m.

    been listening,

    What facts did I get wrong?

  • Christy Beaverton, OR
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:09 p.m.

    morganh | 8:58 a.m. Oct. 25, 2011
    Orem, Utah

    President Obama continually says that the GOP refuses to do anything to help the economy and is the reason for gridlock. Republican Sen. Rand Paul has a bill that will create jobs by lowering corporate tax rate, requiring a balance budget and getting rid of "Obamacare" which is more Gov't spending.

    ============

    What's less than zero? Because that's what huge corporations like BofA, GE, and Exxon Mobile pay in corporate income tax.

    How will repealing 'Obamacare' create jobs? Do you know how many jobs were lost before Obama became president? What did 'Obamacare' have to do with that?

    Did Massachusetts experience high job loss when Romneycare was passed?

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:51 p.m.

    Don't you just long for the day - the hour - the minute - when you can say "former president Obama"!!! Almost 1 year and counting.....

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 5:57 p.m.

    @MormonDem
    If you want more information about the plan, go research it yourself. That wasn't my point, though.

    I find it funny that you left out "Reversing President Obama's Offshore Moratorium Act" from your list. There is a paragraph about reversing this at the Natural Resources Committee in the House that says:

    "Failure to develop our offshore energy resources is costing American jobs, hurting our economy and denying American taxpayers revenue to help pay down the national debt. According to the American Energy Alliance, permanently lifting the offshore moratoria would result in 1.2 million U.S. jobs, $8 trillion in additional economic output (GDP), $2.2 trillion in total tax receipts, and $70 billion in additional wages each year."

    I also find it interesting that you are now concerned about how much a bill costs. A report from the CBO came out today that estimated in the 4th quarter of 2011, jobs created from the stimulus cost $412,500 each.

    President Obama said a few months ago he wished he could bypass Congress and Jay Carney said yesterday to expect more executive orders. I'm sure this will continue, although it may be with consequences.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 5:24 p.m.

    the sad but predictable thing here is that ANY money Obama manages to extract from tax payers or the Chinese will most certainly be directed right into his big union bosses pockets - that was the plan all along. This is all about paying off anyone and everything for his re-election bid. This man will stoop to ANY level to retain power - remember that he is from Chicago after all.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Oct. 25, 2011 5:09 p.m.

    @Mountanman:

    The government should take from the rich millionaires and give it to us. I don't know how, but they cheated. Obama would'nt lead us in the wrong direction.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 25, 2011 4:58 p.m.

    If I purchase a home that I can not afford, whose fault is that and why should other people bail me out?
    Be responsible for YOURSELF and stop demanding the government rescue you from your bad choices!
    There isn't enough money in the world to do otherwise in the long run! Proof of that truth is our every escalating national debt! The world does not owe any of us a living!

  • sid 6.7 Holladay, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 4:49 p.m.

    Best comment yet "It's time to start thinking impeachment!. That wouldnt be a waste of tax payer money or any thing. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

    It's so funny reading the comments in here and how so often the regulars contradict them selves. Obama is taxing us to death yet you want to spend millions to impeach the man. Filibusters, one right after another. I wonder how much money each one of those filibusters cost the county in wasted man hours and resources. Do you think they are doing it for the good of the country or are they doing it to regain power?

    You want Rouge Government folks? Youre going to get it. This President is not afraid of your threats nor is he afraid of your fear based ranting. You don't like it? Contact your Republican leaders.

    By the way, I would like to know how when you give your church tithe it becomes the Lords money but when you pay taxes it's still your money even though the Government has possession of it. Doesnt the Lord ask us to live the "Laws of the Land"? Just wondering how that works?

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Oct. 25, 2011 4:31 p.m.

    Umm! What's more important? Taking American tax payer money and giving hundreds of billions to Finland and Brazil, or helping our people with morgages or student loans? ummm? I thought we're broke? Yet our prez is flying around being santa clause. What part of sacrifice and tightening your belts does he not understand? Yes, over five hundred billion went to Finland for car manufacturing. Do we want another four years? Is this Bushes fault?

    Obama administration to support offshore drilling in Brazil

    Posted by Steve M on August 18, 2009 at 12:47 pm | Share via e-mail

    The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazils state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazils Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazils planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 4:27 p.m.

    @Pagan
    And you want to see what happens when Pres. Obama presents a budget?

    Voted down 97-0. He was actually able to produce bipartisanship in Congress.

    The Republicans aren't the only ones who filibuster, either. This was from the Washington Times on Dec. 28, 2004:

    "Democrats have successfully filibustered 10 of the 45 circuit court nominations by President Bush that have made it to the Senate floor. Thats more than 20 percent. It is a campaign that has been as unprecedented as it has been outrageous."

    Maybe this article will also interest you:
    "Democrat Abuses Spurred GOP Filibusters"--Peter Roff, US News & World Report.

    Funny how the Democrats talked about changing the filibuster rules once they lost their filibuster-proof majority earlier this year.

    Republicans paid for their behavior in 2008. But, I'm pretty sure that the shellacking (Obama's word) the Dems took in 2010 was a pretty loud message that most in the country want to stop Obama's leftist agenda.

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 4:19 p.m.

    lost: "Lane Myer,
    George Washington is called the father of the country, but James Madison was the father of the constitution. It's Madison's work that many claim BO is ignoring. BO IS ignoring Washington's desire for non-partisan politics with his shrill political rantings."

    --------------

    I do remember that Geo Washington presided over the whole constitutional convention. I think he knew what was in it, don't you?

    I think many people on this board are ignoring Washington's desire and are full partisan shrills. I belong to neither party, but am thinking that I need to sign up for the Republicans, after all, I live in Utah. You do not have a voice if you are a democrat or independent.

  • Beenlistening CENTRAL, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 3:57 p.m.

    Badger55--

    In 2008, I watched Bush on TV begging and almost crying for congress to pass the bank bailout because our entire economy was going to fail if they did not pass it.

    Yes, Dems voted for it too, because they had to in order to get it passed to save our country.

    Why don't you repubs get your facts right before you totally ruin this country.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 3:53 p.m.

    Joe Blow,
    just because repubs saw the folly of the mandate and cap and tax and the dems did not see that folly, we're all supposed to embrace it now? So you're saying you're a closet repub?

    I haven't bothered with the hillary plan and repub response or the repubs' reputed cap and tax to know how closely they compare to what BO has put forward - one through legislation and the other through dictate - to know how closely they compare.

    MormonDem
    just because you don't LIKE the repubs' proposals, don't repeat BO's lie and say they have done nothing. And since there are 2.1 million fewer jobs now than when BO took over, we know his porkulus FAILED!

    Pagan,
    continuing to try and blame bush is getting old - and does nothing to correct the problem. Guess what? bush is no longer president! BO's had almost three years! That was HIS OWN timetable. face facts, he's failed!

    Lane Myer,
    George Washington is called the father of the country, but James Madison was the father of the constitution. It's Madison's work that many claim BO is ignoring. BO IS ignoring Washington's desire for non-partisan politics with his shrill political rantings.

  • Danish American Payson, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 3:44 p.m.

    The Republican controlled House has passed 22 bills this year designed to help create jobs and the economy. The Democrat Senate controlled by Harry Reid has refused to debate or vote on any of them. So how disingenuous is it of Obama to claim the Congress won't do anything and he can by-pass them and the law by executive fiat.

  • the longview North Salt Lake, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 3:41 p.m.

    if a default happens, who is hurt? Many more people are hurt than the one particular family that defaults: the entire neighborhood suffers. If we can avoid defaults we should -- it is actually a wise investment for the government to try to help families avoid these situations so surrounding homeowners aren't caught in the downward spiral of falling home prices and a glut of under-priced supply.

    The right will always hate O'Bama, but what about the big fat middle/ swing vote? We'll see how this plays out...

  • Badger55 Nibley, Ut
    Oct. 25, 2011 3:16 p.m.

    Lane Myer
    According to the national archives bush had 291 executive orders in 8 years(roughly 3 per month) Obama to date has 95(roughly 2.5 per month) not much difference there.

    Mormon Dem
    Repubs are saying the same thing about Dems "solutions", only with different arguments. The assumption made was that Repubs are doing nothing. Love life showed that they are. You should look up the sponsor and co sponsors on the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (aka bank Bailout). And while you are at it look up which party apposed it and which voted for it. Bush did sign it but it wasn't his party's proposal.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Oct. 25, 2011 2:20 p.m.

    It's not fair, this rich millionaire is not paying off some of these morgages. He just just holds on to his money while others are suffering. Can't he pay aliitle more?

  • ClarkKent Bountiful, Utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 1:58 p.m.

    Some of you posters read a headline and get all shook up over it! You argue about the President shredding the Constitution when it is obvious by your OWN WORDS that you have absolutely no idea what powers the President legally has. What a joke.

  • JoeBlow Miami Area, Fl
    Oct. 25, 2011 1:51 p.m.

    Lost in DC

    The biggest issue with Obamacare is the Insurance mandate.

    Fyi, this type of mandate was first introduced by the GOP in response to Hillarycare in the 90's. It was touted as a free market alternative to her plan.

    "Cap and tax" as you put it, was another GOP introduced concept (under GHW Bush) to bring Free market forces to the environmental concerns.

    Both of my statements are easily substantiated on the web if you so desire.

    While you are at it, look at who signed off on low flow toilets and CFL light bulbs.

    Sad how GOP ideas become so less palatable when they are supported by a Democrat.

  • MormonDem Provo, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 1:48 p.m.

    LoveLife:

    How many jobs are these bills estimated to create, and at what cost? This is just a right-wing Christmas list masquerading as jobs bills.

    "The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act." Would loosen regulations on using commercial pesticides near waterways.
    "The Energy Tax Prevention Act." A blatant attempt to weaken the EPA's regulations on air quality.
    "Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act." Would bypass environmental regulations for offshore drilling by multinationals. (Didn't we recently see what happens when you do that?)
    "Cement Sector Regulatory Relief Act." Would ease environmental regulations for the country's 3rd-largest cause of mercury pollution.
    "Consumer Financial Protection & Soundness Improvement Act." A giveaway to big banks, easing regulations that are in place to prevent abuse and dishonest loan practices. (Didn't we recently see what happens when you do that?)

    And so on and so on.

    Now, maybe these bills would produce enough jobs that it would be worth it to put pesticides in our rivers, give our kids asthma, and let banks run amok again.

    But I can't really make that judgment until you tell me how many jobs these bills will create.

    This is Republican opportunism, plain and simple.

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 1:22 p.m.

    L White

    Who was the president in 1789? George Washington, one of the founding fathers - in fact, THE father of our country.

    I do believe he had something to do with writing the constitution. Do you really think he would do something against it?

    Do you think he knew what the founders intent was?

    I am not worried about executive orders. They are legal.

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 1:14 p.m.

    Homebrew,
    Your 11:25am post is a complete and utter lie.

    In May, The GOP introduced the "House Republican Plan for America's Job Creators".

    The House Republicans have passed all pieces of the bill. However, the following are stuck in the Senate:

    The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act
    The Energy Tax Prevention Act
    Disapproval of FCC's Net Neutrality Regulations
    The Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act
    Consumer Financial Protection & Soundness Improvement Act
    Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act
    Transparency In Regulatory Analysis Of Impacts On The Nation
    Cement Sector Regulatory Relief Act
    EPA Regulatory Relief Act
    Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act
    Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act
    Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act
    Reversing President Obamas Offshore Moratorium Act
    The Jobs and Energy Permitting Act of 2011
    North American-Made Energy Security Act

    Also included is the Budget for Fiscal Year 2012

    Obama has been in office for almost three years and he's finally getting around to the economy and jobs (bad poll numbers can do that). The Republicans took control of the House in January and had a plan out in May.

    I think you are backwards on who you say has done nothing.

  • L White Springville, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 1:08 p.m.

    Well Ms. Meyer, it seems that you are giving us the "lemming" argument. Just because presidents have been "jumping off the bridge" since 1789 does not mean that we have given President Obama that "right".

    Some people think that "legal precedent" is more important than the Constitution. I do not. I think that the Constitution is the foundation of our laws and that all of our laws must be judged against the Constitution. Some courts have clearly ruled against Constitutional principles. That does not mean that those courts and their ruling are superior to the Supreme Law of the Land. It only means that the Supreme Court has not yet thrown out those rulings.

    President Obama is counting on us doing nothing. He is counting on Congress doing nothing. He is counting on the Supreme Court doing nothing.

    If we do nothing, then he will continue to ignore Congress and law and us.

    Mike Richards is correct. It is time to start talking impeachment. Just the threat of starting impeachment hearings should be enough to stop him from ignoring his duty to protect and defend the Constitution.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 12:42 p.m.

    Homebrew,
    you say at least BO is doing something? and that's a good thing?

    Was it a good thing when his doctor BLED George Washington?

    Obamacare, cap and tax through EPA regulations, failed porkulus, etc. EVERYTHING BO has done has been a failure - it's BETTER for him to do nothing.

    You say the repubs have done nothing? untrue - the first thing the house did last winter was vote to repeal obamacare, which would have helped the economy; harry reid and the dems wouldn't even allow a vote in the senate.

    you say the repubs are responsible for the mess? you mean the dems who passed the CARD act, restricting credit to consumers and further stiffling the economy were repubs? you mean barney frank's a repub? you mean larry summers and arthur levin, who in 1997 REFUSED to regulate derivatives are repubs? nope, sorry. there's plenty of blame for the repubs, but just as much, if not more, for the dems.

  • Hawkeye79 Iowa City, IA
    Oct. 25, 2011 12:26 p.m.

    One of the most intelligent moves that the founders made was in designing a government that moves slowly unless there is widespread agreement. It lends itself to preventing the nation's affairs from being directed whimsically.

  • jrgl CEDAR CITY, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 12:24 p.m.

    I am hearing from college students who have graduated (or not) with student loans, that the student loan payments are more than their mortgage or rent payment. How could you carry such a debt load? The students also report that colleges overstated future earnings in their careers. Therefore, they planned to make what the colleges forecast future earnings to be & borrowed accordingly. Sadly, many make much less or have no job at all.

  • no fit in SG St.George, Utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 11:59 a.m.

    Finally realize why all the financial kings and fat cats are hoarding their money!
    Like Mitt said......... Let's let the foreclosures continue, then investors and financiers can come in, buy up all the real estate, and rent it back to the people who used to own these homes, businesses, and land.

    Wow, Mitt, what a swell idea! You shall garner many votes from the common man now! You have stated that, " I am one of the unemployed"! Is this one of your many plans for repairing the economy?
    Should be a landslide vote in your favor!

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 11:47 a.m.

    Mike,

    Executive orders have been used since 1789. This is nothing new. The only thing different about this one is that it is being used by someone you do not like - maybe hate.

    How sad...and you cannot see this.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 11:32 a.m.

    No good done in IRAQ? Tell that to the 25,000,000 people who are free from the rapes and murders systematically conducted by Hussein and his sons. Tell that to the relatives and friends of the 200,000 "fellow citizens" gassed by Hussein.

    Freedom comes at a price. Our freedom was not free, yet too many seem to think that some magic words can be uttered by a popular president and everyone will drop their weapons of war.

    What nonsense.

    We have laws to protect us FROM the government. Mr. Obama is not only ignoring our laws, he openly rejects them and prefers to rule by dictate. Ruling by dictate is NOT within his authority. We have NOT delegated that power to him. He openly rejects the Constitution, which defines his role and the limits that we have put on him. His oath of office REQUIRES him to honor and protect the Constitution that he openly defies. That rejection of the Supreme Law of the Land is grounds enough to remove him from office.

  • homebrew South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 11:25 a.m.

    At least Obama is trying to do something, Anything to help the american people and the economy. The GOP has to date done NOTHING. They arte responsible for the mess, but refuse to do anything to fix it. The GOP is obstructing everything. They have NO answers. Only the word NO. I for one am sick and tired of the clowns in the GOP. They need to help Obama fix the nations problems, but they refuse to do anything. VOTE the entire GOP out in 2012, so Obama, who will be re-elected and the democrats can get on with fixing the mess created by Bush and the GOP. Remember what Bush walked into in 2001, And what Obama walked into in 2009. The contrasts, are obvious to all americans. Who's policies do you trust? The democrats or the GOP. Vote Democrat.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 11:18 a.m.

    Just the radical tea party that want to destroy the economy for political power.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 11:02 a.m.

    Mike Richards | 10:51 a.m. Oct. 25, 2011,

    Your post is misguided.

    As 1) You do not seem to care for the 4,000 American men and women who died in Iraq.

    2) You admit Bush added to the debt and use that as JUSTIFICATION for Obama impeachment...

    when George W. Bush was elected TWICE into office.

    3) How, exactly, is Obama supposed to 'do' anything, with a Republican House that continues to vote 'no', on anything....

    like the entire US defense Budget?

    *'Senate Republicans Block Defense Bill, 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' Repeal' - By MATTHEW JAFFE and DEVIN DWYER - ABC News - 09/21/10

    So, to review, you A: Nullify Obama's ability to pass said legislation, B: Blame Obama for the very thing George W. Bush was elected FOR and C:

    Hold ZERO accountability for the war in Iraq that gained American, nothing.

    Lane Myer | 10:42 a.m. gives evidence that Bush did more than DOUBLE the very same thing this newspaper criticizes Obama for.

    And when conservatives do it, say nothing.

    And how was Obama supposed to 'stop' spending...

    when he had a $10 trillion dollar national debt he had when he ENTERED office??

  • MormonDem Provo, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:59 a.m.

    Mike Richards: with all due respect, I don't believe you are in a position to sermonize about treating government with contempt.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:51 a.m.

    @ Pagan,

    You're concerned about $8.7 billion?

    Is that reason enough for you to have had Mr. Bush impeached? Then you should have no problem with having Mr. Obama impeached. He has authorized of adding (spending) $4 billion PER DAY to the deficit. Each month, he adds over $100 BILLION to the deficit. Each year he adds over $1,500 BILLION to the deficit.

    Keep track of the "zeros". Too many people have no idea what $1.5 trillion PER year looks like: $1,500,000,000,000.

    His plan to "tax the rich" would generate $60,000,000,000 per year. Count the zeros. How long would it take to repay $1,500,000,000,000 with an annual revenue of $60,000,000,000? It would take TWENTY-FIVE years!

    He knows that, but he continues to add over $1.5 trillion PER YEAR to the deficit. If spending were frozen, it would take 100 YEARS for his mythical "rich guy" to pay for his excess spending while in office!

    Any CEO doing that with company funds would be fired or prosecuted. Why should Mr. Obama be exempt. He treats us and our government with contempt.

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:42 a.m.

    Executive orders issued:

    Ford = 3
    Carter = 3
    Reagan = 5
    Bush 1 = 2
    Clinton = 14
    Bush 2 = 289
    Obama = 74

    FYI

  • MormonDem Provo, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:41 a.m.

    Also, shame on you, Deseret News, for the sensationalistically editorializing, partisan headline.

    Your headline reads "Obama aims to circumvent Congress with mortgage relief, student loans." And the abbreviated headline on the "Most Recent" links says simply "Obama to Circumvent Congress?"

    Since this article was an AP feed, I went to see what headline the article bore in other newspapers:

    "Obama Offers Housing Relief" -Albany Times Union
    "Obama offers mortgage relief on Western trip" - The Herald News, Plainfield, IL
    "Obama offers mortgage relief on Western trip" - Newsday

    You get the picture. Deseret News, I know you have an editorial slant, but you can at shuffle and deal the cards fairly. By headlining the "circumventing congress" part instead of the "housing relief" part, you're stoking unfounded fears of Constitutional malfeasance--in a state where already there is far too much of a paranoid bunker mentality.

  • Trooper55 Williams, AZ
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:31 a.m.

    It's time that Obama stop putting us in debt anymore and stop committing to spending taxpayer's money. The taxpayers didn't make these people get in over their head leave them find their own way out.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:19 a.m.

    'He is involved with gun running in "fast and furious". He is involved with giving "loans" of over $450 million to his friends at Solyndra, which led to the loss of over 1,200 jobs.' - Mike Richards | 10:09 a.m. Oct. 25, 2011

    We care about scandals...

    now?

    *'Audit: US can't account for $8.7B in Iraqi funds' - By Tarek El-tablawy - AP - Published by DSNews - 07/27/10

    'The funds are separate from the $53 billion allocated by Congress for rebuilding Iraq.'

    8 billion dollars.

    Better question: Why are we IN Iraq?

    "The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons.' - George W. Bush - Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

    'US gives up search for Iraq WMD' - BBC News - 01/12/05

    'Mr Duelfer reported last year that Iraq had no stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons at the time of the US-led invasion nearly two years ago.'

    The war that cost us, so so much.

    *'U.S. Military deaths in Iraq war at 4,473 - AP - Published by the DSNews - 08/02/2011

  • MormonDem Provo, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:18 a.m.

    What articles of the constitution are being violated by this plan? Is anyone prepared to say? It seems that Obama-hate has gotten so irrational in Utah that "unconstitutional" has become synonymous with "policies I don't like."

    Before you go off the rails in your blind hate, why don't you actually find out what the proposal is and how it will be paid for?

    And would it change your mind to hear that Mitt Romney's economic advisor thinks it's a pretty good idea?

    NOTHING Obama could do would make you people happy. You constantly change your mind in order to think the opposite of him.

    This president who pulled this country back from the brink of ruin, ended healthcare discrimination against children with preexisting conditions, is ending the war in Iraq, ordered the mission that killed Osama, ordered the mission that killed Al-Awlaki, and got rid of Qaddafi in 6 months with no U.S. casualties, and is now doing something about the economy. And now we have people on these boards--people who I bet you voted for Bush TWICE--having the gall to call Obama the worst president ever? Ignorance, plain and simple.

  • Petra Sanpete County, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:17 a.m.

    I thought these were supposed to be "thoughtful" comments. Instead there's a plethora of cliches and catch-phrases, peppered with such nonsensical, meaningless words like "communist!" "socialism!" and whatever anti-Obama rhetoric the far right has come up with and insisted its followers use.

    This is a topic worthy of intelligent discussion. President Bush began using "executive orders," and, oddly enough, no one on the far right complained then. It was worth discussing then, just as it is worth discussing now that Obama is apparently using a similar tactic.

    It is especially important that any discussion include the fact that a president is virtually paralysed when the sole intent of certain segments of Congress is to "see that the president doesn't get re-elected." If we are going to have any government whatsoever, it is vital that all elected parties do what they were voted to do - represent the people. With an approval rating in the teens, it is obvious Congress is not even contemplating fulfilling that responsibility.

    If we are to have a government at all, our citizens need to be educated - partisan propaganda is undermining democracy. And our elected representatives MUST listen to the citizens.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:09 a.m.

    @furry,

    ". . . the constitutional meaning of the words "high Crimes and Misdemeanors . . . which over a period of centuries evolved into the English standard of impeachable conduct -- has a special historical meaning different from the ordinary meaning of the terms "crimes" and "misdemeanors." "High misdemeanors," referred to a category of offenses that subverted the system of government. Since the fourteenth century the phrase "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" had been used in English impeachment cases to charge officials with a wide range of criminal and non-criminal offenses against the institutions and fundamental principles of English government."

    ----

    Read carefully the phrase, "subverted the system of government". Besides subverting the system of government, Mr. Obama has refused to allow prosecution of certain criminal cases. He is involved with gun running in "fast and furious". He is involved with giving "loans" of over $450 million to his friends at Solyndra, which led to the loss of over 1,200 jobs.

    He refuses to acknowledge that his job is to enforce the laws passed by Congress; that he has no authority to legislate; and that he has no authority to give away government assets.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 10:01 a.m.

    'When Democrats reclaimed the Senate majority in the 2006 midterm elections, cloture filings shot up from 68 in 2005-2006 (From Dems) to a record 139 in 2007-2008.' (From Republicans)

    *'The Rise Of Cloture: How GOP Filibuster Threats Have Changed The Senate' - Ben Frumin and Jason Reif - Talking Points Memo - 01/27/10

    With over 139 filibusters factually preventing over 139 peices of legislation...

    can you really BLAME Obama?

    Majority of Americans agree, the Congress is broken and cannot accomplish anything...

    when one party, the Republican party, makes it a point to say 'no' on any peice of legislation.

    *'Senate Republicans Block Defense Bill, 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' Repeal' - By MATTHEW JAFFE and DEVIN DWYER - ABC News - 09/21/10

    *Shocker: Fox host calls out Republicans who blocked 9/11 responders bill By David Edwards The Raw Story 12/21/2010

    *Republicans block small business lending bill' - By Stephen Ohlemacher - AP - Published by DSNews - 07/29/10

    *'Republicans bail on budget talks, blame Democrats' - By David Espo - AP - Published by DSNews - 06/23/11

  • Californian Santa Ana, CA
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:59 a.m.

    What is egregious about this aid ONLY through Freddie Mac and Sallie Mae loans is that those two organizations have not yet returned their "bailout" monies to the government. While the big banks..B of A, JP Morgan/Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo have long ago returned the bailouts with interest, these government sponsored loan factories are still in arrears to 'we the people.' Do you think they should be handing out discounts (that's what lowering the interest is). It is not good business for the nation...it is a political play by Obama to look good. And circumventing Congress smacks of a dictatorship.

  • KC Mormon Edgerton, KS
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:57 a.m.

    Furry1993
    The same one the Dems all used for Bush! That being non as the Constitutions lists
    "... Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"
    What their complaint is however is that article one section one is being thrown out by Obama. That section clearly states
    "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
    They are not vested in Congress only when the President gets what he wants. The point of this section was to prevent one man from having too much power.
    Perhaps the solution to this gridlock would be a repeal of the 17th Amendment section on and restoring the original way of choosing Senators, that being according to the Constitution Article 1 section 3 paragraph 1
    "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote."
    This would cause the Senate to once again vote the will of the State they represent rather than party will.

  • CougarKeith Roy, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:35 a.m.

    How can Obama DARE to blame "Republican Gridlock" when the first year and a half of his PRESIDENCY he had a monopoly on Congress. Republicans could have went on vacation, they could have boycotted Washington, and it wouldn't have made any difference, The Democrats had enough seats to do ANYTHING THEY WANTED, and they couldn't work with the White House! I think Obama has amnesia except when it comes to BLAMING BUSH! I also find it odd that a week after the GOP Presidential Debate in Vegas where the Foreclosure Rate was brought to the FOREFRONT, Obama now takes the POLITICAL OPORTUNITY to be a "Savior" again? Where was he 2 weeks ago, 2 years ago or even 3 or 6 months ago? Oh... Golfing, Martha's Vinyard, or some other vacation! He's a busy man vacationing from all his vacations! After all, he didn't pick the winner on his bracket in March and he is still recovering from that debockle! Mark my words, He will suddenly become the "Man Of Action" in the white house, I can't guarentee it will be the right action, but he will become Mr. Appeaser ASAP, Election is only a YEAR AWAY!!! Good Grief!

  • KC Mormon Edgerton, KS
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:31 a.m.

    JoeBlow
    The legislative push (both R and D going back to the 70's) was to put minorities and poor in houses. The only way that could be done was no money down, ARM's, interest only, no documentation, ect. What about the responsibility of the borrower to THINK if rates are at an all time low what are the odds they will stay here? What of the responsibility of the borrower to think about how much can I actually afford? What about the responsibility of the borrower to think what is the likely hood that this home that traditionally sells for $125,000 will stay valued at $250,000? Yes the banks pushed their products just as EVERY other business does however they were forced to create new products or push certain products more to fulfill government demands.
    Now to fix one problem the government steps in and says now you must have X amount of cash on hand restricting what they can lend then tells them to lend more.
    Obama now wants to bypass Congress while what Bush did was wrong he at least went through Congress as the constitution demands.

  • justaguy Out There in, WI
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:27 a.m.

    Maybe I'm just over-reacting to a sensationalistic headline, but as I see this tendancy of Obama's to try to make the Executive Branch the prime source of action, looking for ways to get around the other two branches of government, I get nervous. Our's is a system of checks and balances and I'm really hoping it holds until this guy is out of office. It needs to be sooner rather than later. The less damage he does the better.

  • Furry1993 Clearfield, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:25 a.m.

    I'd be curious to know what specific articles of the Constitution the impeachment advocates believe President Obama violated.

  • IndependentLiberal Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:23 a.m.

    It's an old addage, Obama said to Congress, Lead, Follow, or Get out of the way! Good for him!

  • Harry Case CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:20 a.m.

    We're broke, 14 trillion dollars in debt, have a federal deficit that exceeds one trillion per year and the president wants to spend more. I'm beginning to agree with Glen Beck. This guy is trying to destroy our system so he can replace it with a new one called socialism or worse, maybe Marxism.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:09 a.m.

    Mike said: It's time to start talking - impeachment.

    Are the republicans going to suggest this now every time they lose the presidential election?

    They spent 100 million investigating Clinton, and he still managed to get a lot done.

    Why don't the republicans focus some of the energy they put into trying to defeat Obama at every turn, into helping America get back on it's feet after they nearly destroyed it with their last guy as president?

  • georgeman Kearns, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:08 a.m.

    Why do we insist on creating programs that assist the greedy?

    If you buy a home for $500,000. in Las Vegas then you should be prepared to pay the mortgage on that home, even if it depreciates in value to $200,000.

    Buyers drove the housing market up, now let them suffer with the consequences of their own greed and desire to have the best.

    Utah is in the same boat, just not as deeply as Vegas. The young kids who just get out of college or even high school and get married, who now want that big house in the best neighborhood, are filled with unrealistic visions.

    They should pay for thier own mistakes so they can learn from it. What do they learn if they get a bailout every time they screw up?

    Our parents earned their wealth over many years, and that has been what has kept this economy stable. It is the greed of youth that is fueling this recession.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 9:02 a.m.

    "I'm here to say that we can't wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job" ...

    Translation: Since I don't have a super majority in congress anymore as I did the first two years and therefore I can't ram through anything and everything I want ... I am going to just skip congress. checks and balances... who needs em. Negotiate ? Never done it and never will.

    Wow, why am I not surprised by this arrogant, ideology .

  • morganh Orem, Utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:58 a.m.

    President Obama continually says that the GOP refuses to do anything to help the economy and is the reason for gridlock. Republican Sen. Rand Paul has a bill that will create jobs by lowering corporate tax rate, requiring a balance budget and getting rid of "Obamacare" which is more Gov't spending. Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor also has a jobs bill, and in a interview on a cable news program he asked Pres. Obama to come to Congress and look at the legistation and work together on this issue. Obama want's it his way or the highway and Sen. Paul's bill probably won't get considered because Democratic Senate President Harry Reid will make sure that the only legislation to consider will be Obama's failed policies.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:50 a.m.

    It's time to start talking - impeachment. If the Constitution means so little to Mr. Obama, it's time that he sees what happens to a President who fails in his duty to fulfill his oath of office:

    "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:42 a.m.

    Have you noticed that both parties have the same methodology. They both know that nothing the federal government does will have a short term (2-3 years) impact on the problem, so they both propose solutions they know the other side won't accept. That way they get to blame the other party when their bills don't get passed.

  • metamoracoug metamora, IL
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:35 a.m.

    President Obama, "I'm here to say that we can't wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job,"

    In other words, he is intent on circumventing Constitutional powers given to Congress in order to gain the vote of those who may lose their homes so that he can stay in power.

    Does anyone besides me find this extremely disconcerting?

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:33 a.m.

    Obama's MO. Offer them anything and hope they forget when you can't deliver.This is nothing more than a political stunt. As explained above not workable. What happened to his original Stimulus(aka slush fund) was it not supposed to bail out these toxic loans? Obama is circumventing the Constitution and the American people. Course he has been doing that all along.

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:25 a.m.

    does this surprise anyone? the guy just can't help himself.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:16 a.m.

    Many say this is another bailout; nope, no taxpayer dollars involved. It changes rules so certain homeowners who are CURRENT can refi at lower rates with fannie and freddie. It WILL reduce their interest income.

    we can't wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job," the president declared - If we cannot wait, why did you wait until almost 3 years into your misadministration to do something about it?

    "no excuse for all the games and the gridlock that we've been seeing in Washington." translation: If I cannot get my way, Ill cry and moan how its all their fault!

    Obama acknowledged (it) will not do all that's not needed to get the housing market back on its feet. and thats the repubs fault?

    This plan does NOTHING for homeowners facing foreclosure, so why does he use the backdrop of a high foreclosure state? Pure politcal posturing.

    Pagan,
    I doubt many of those homeowners are taxpayers, since nearly 50% of us pay NO federal income tax.

    Phranc,
    According the BLS, there are now 2.1 million FEWER jobs than when BO took over

  • FreeMan Heber City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:04 a.m.

    Way to go Obama! Don't let little things like Congress or the Constitution stand in your way.

  • Informed Voter South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 8:01 a.m.

    I am waiting for someone to justify this by saying Bush did it also! In the meantime, consider the Cash for Clunkers fiasco and the green company loans that have gone bad (bankrupt companies) for a combined $1 trillion.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 7:51 a.m.

    So the President is a communist but it's a minus for his mortage plan if he only helps federally guaranteed mortages (no involvment in the private sector). Taxes are a confiscation of your money despite the fact that the constitution specificly calls for taxes, yet the President is circumventing the constitution.

    Socialism doesn't work? Doesn't work how? Barney Frank caused the mortage crisis. What Barney Frank forced banks to securitize mortages, Barney Frank invented credit default swaps?

    The President has circumvented the American people for the past three years. You want him to govern by the polls? Which polls, which week, what if the polls change..?

    People want the government to take away their mortgages..wow I missed out I've re-financed my mortgage a couple of times and I still had to make payments every month. I didn't know that a re-finance program took away your mortgage.

    Etc. Etc. Etc.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 25, 2011 7:41 a.m.

    It was the federal government's meddling in the housing market with sub-prime loans from Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac to people who could not or never intended to make their mortgage payments that caused this debacle and now Obama thinks more government meddling will fix it? Another example of how Obama has no clue about economic realities and his inept leadership!

  • flyboy53 HERRIMAN, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 7:25 a.m.

    The best thing the Federal government can do for the economy is keep its mitts off. There will be short-term pain, but in the long run allowing free markets to run their course is best. Unfortunately, we are probably in too deep to reverse the trend that started with FDR, and Congress and the Pres can't resist the temptation to tamper.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 25, 2011 7:02 a.m.

    This will cause Obama's approval numbers to sink even lower!

  • ronnie sandy, utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 6:29 a.m.

    It is about that some one does something for the people. Congress is comprised of 435 people who have little interest in solving problems.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 6:20 a.m.

    The anti-Obama comments are over the top. The commenters are not concerned one whit about the facts or reality. They seem to think if Congress refuses to do anything that the President should just sit on his hands, then they will complain that the President did not do anything. They are more concerned with partisan sniping than they are addressing the plight of our people. It is just appalling, this conditional patriotism.

  • JoeBlow Miami Area, Fl
    Oct. 25, 2011 5:58 a.m.

    There was no legislative push to allow liar loans. There was no legislative push to have banks do ARM's. This was a banking industry's attempt to make more money.

    Lots of blame to go around, but very difficult to pin this all on the govt.

    We had a housing bubble, and if you do any research at all, you will find many causes. Most causes point to the Banks themselves.

    ------------------------

    You may disagree with Obamas plan for fixing the economy.

    But, you cant say he has no ideas.

    Nor can you blame him when all of his ideas get blocked by congress and then scream that Obama has done nothing to fix the economy.

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    Oct. 25, 2011 12:24 a.m.

    He might as well. He's circumvented the American people for 3 years. Why stop now?

    Be interesting what might happen, though, with this one. Pluses and minuses.

    Plus: Helps people who need it instead of having their homes taken from them, leveled, then the land sold for new home building (that's happening a lot).

    Minus: Economic downturn for lenders? Could be, but I'm not sure on that.

    Minus: Only helps those current on payments (way too many in trouble aren't, and not so much their fault).

    Minus: Only helps those with federally guaranteed loans, which many in trouble don't have.

    Plus: Helps a lot of people who need it, without waiting for Congress to get on it.

    Maybe Obama can do a "good" thing here, both in helping Americans and in setting a precedence for future presidents (of both parties, mind you) to bypass Congress on some issues. THAT could be a pandora's box, though.

  • JNA Layton, UT
    Oct. 25, 2011 12:10 a.m.

    Obama is without a doubt the worst President in the history of the United States, in all seriousness, this guy must be gone in the 2012 election. He is dangerous and a complete disgrace to this country and the constitution.

  • Billy Bob Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 24, 2011 11:23 p.m.

    Wait... I thought Obama swore an oath to defend the constitution, not to figuratively tear it in to shreds and dance all over it. Um... Heil Obama?

  • Isthisforeal BLACKFOOT, ID
    Oct. 24, 2011 10:22 p.m.

    Did not the governments involvement with home mortgages cause this problem in the first place? Barney Frank gets a pass on this issue.

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 24, 2011 10:13 p.m.

    Pagan,
    You seem to be under the belief that every Republican out there worships Bush. That if Bush did it then it must be ok for Obama to do it too. The reality is that a VERY large percentage of Republicans were not very happy with much of what Bush did in the last 4 years of his presidency. In particular, his bailout was a complete betrayal to this country. What Obama did was double-down on a really bad bet.

    Also, just because people want the government to take away their problems (mortgages) does not mean that the government has an obligation (or a right) to do so. Romney understands that to get out of a recession you have to go THROUGH the recession. That means to let the economy correct from all the stupid choices we have made. Don't make more stupid choices and make the situation worse.

  • CA. reader Rocklin, CA
    Oct. 24, 2011 9:09 p.m.

    Imagine President Obama referring to Congress as dysfunctional. I guess it takes one to know one.

  • Dog Fur Prather, CA
    Oct. 24, 2011 7:46 p.m.

    Obama not only aims to circumvent congress, but the constitution, the people, and all common sense. Obama is using tax payer money to raise more money for his own campaign. Socialism does not work, and its not right. The plan to have some grand organization force us to do the "right" thing has always been the wrong plan.

    We the people of this world, of this nation need freedom to make our own choices, our own mistakes, our own growth. Governments should protect us but can not and should not try to coddle us and stifle us.

    Hope we can get a president who believes in the constitution and liberty and freedom.

  • Phranc SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 24, 2011 7:44 p.m.

    @rifleman

    So Obama's economic plan has been adding over a 100,000 jobs a for several months now and while we all wish it was a lot more it certainly is better then when we where all suffering under bush and the GOP's economic plan where we were bleeding 140,000 jobs a month, by the way it is the same plan the GOP wants to return to in even greater force if they are able to get the election next year.

  • Vince the boonies, mexico
    Oct. 24, 2011 6:50 p.m.

    Get over it people, the dumb, stupid citizens have entered into agreements that they knew they could not repay! Fantasy vs reality.

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    Oct. 24, 2011 6:48 p.m.

    Hello Communism! Nevermind what the constitution says, I'll do it myself.

  • don17 Temecula, CA
    Oct. 24, 2011 6:38 p.m.

    Soon Obama will be standing at the reviewing stand on Pennsylvania Avenue with a old Soviet Military Uniform on with medals pinned all over it reviewing troops marching by!

    Pagan: Just a note: Before you jump in so whole heartily just because Obama proposed this, remember this: Only Mortgage holders qualify who: 1. Have not been late not one day in the past 12 months on payments. 2. Have been current all along on the mortgage. 3. Are Employed. 4. His last proposal that was passed was approved for 50 billion, but only 2 billion was used, and many have redefaulted! 5. Have a Sallie Mae or Freddie Mac loan only.

    Also regarding Contributions and Charity. When a person gives to a charity it is their decision and their gift to do it! When the government forces us to contribute by confiscation it is coersed since the funds then go to only who the government wants to support. Thanks! By the way you have many great comments from your positions! I appreciate your detailed info!

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 24, 2011 3:33 p.m.

    'Is Obama is offering mortgage relief is he volunteering taxpayers to offer mortgage relief?' - Rifleman | 3:12 p.m. Oct. 24, 2011

    Rifleman, many of those home owners ARE tax payers!

    *Bush signs $700 billion bailout bill AP Published by Denver Post By Tom Raum 10/03/08

    WASHINGTON President Bush quickly signed into law a far-reaching $700 billion bill to bail out the nation's tottering financial industry, calling it "essential to helping America's economy" weather the storm.

    Did CEO's who got bail outs pay as much taxes as the entire nation?

    I seriously doubt it.

    Many contributing to a few is the same principle as charity services. Why the ciritism when it's done by the goverment, instead of a local charity?

    I would think majority of Americans, Republicans or Democrats ESPECIALLY in Nevada...

    would want to keep their homes.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 24, 2011 3:12 p.m.

    Is Obama is offering mortgage relief is he volunteering taxpayers to offer mortgage relief? Obama has a proven track record of failure when it comes to our economy and he comes from a state that is billions of dollars in debt and unable to pay it's creditors.

    No wonder his fellow Democrats are afraid to be seen associating with him.