Quantcast
Opinion

Letter: Two important messages from President Barack Obama's news conference

Comments

Return To Article
  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Nov. 16, 2012 12:09 p.m.

    Red Shirt..Congress, and the President have openly admitted, on Fox, on MSNBC, on ABC and every other news outlet that they set up the Sequester as it's formally called to be so onerous that they would have to comprimise to avoid the consequences. So yes I and everyone is in the country who listens believes that this was done intentionally. Secondly, it's not a fiscal "it's more like a fiscal curve. If taxes go up on Jan 1 they aren't due for twelve months giving more time for a fix. Pentagon cuts are on future contracts, again down the road. Thirdly no credible person thinks that this would cause a recession worse than '08. It's not a structural recession. Lastly..yes I think that what we are seeing is more than simple posturing. As an example both sides are now talking about the "need" for more revenues. Very different.

  • wrz Ogden, UT
    Nov. 16, 2012 11:15 a.m.

    @JoeBlow:

    "We have no budget because the GOP house passed a partisan budget and the DEM controlled senate rejected it."

    Are you saying the House should get approval from the Senate before it lifts a finger? That's not the way it's supposed to work.

    @Mike Richards:

    "Obama cannot legislate..."

    Obama has found a very useful tool to 'legislate.' 'Executive Orders.' Take the illegal immigrant amnesty issue. Contrary to immigration law enacted by Congress, Obama granted amnesty to illegals under age 30... with a tacit promise to extend it indefinitely once he is elected president.

    Actually, he didn't use an Executive Order. He just sent a memo to Homeland Security. This guy should be impeached for violating a federal law.

    @Mad Hatter:

    "Maybe it's time that Democrats get both a majority in the House and a super-majority in the Senate."

    Democrats had exactly that situation two years ago. And what did it get us? The very unpopular Obamacare. We don't need anymore of that.

    @J Thompson:

    "Nothing has changed. Obama still can't find the truth, no matter how hard he looks for it."

    Obama's objective was to get reelected... not to tell the truth.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 16, 2012 10:59 a.m.

    To "pragmatistferlife" so lets be clear about what you believe.

    You believe that Obama intentionally set this nation up on a fiscal cliff that has the potential of driving us into another recession, which will be worse than the results of the 2008-2009 recession.

    You also believe that eventhough what he did was wrong, you believe that the ends justify the means. You believe that this will lead to increased talks, and not what we are already seeing, which is more posturing and 2 sides that are even less willing to compromise.

    You believe that since Obama was re-elected that is all the justification needed for a president to play games with the US economy.

  • Grundle West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 16, 2012 10:42 a.m.

    Maybe we could define what being a leader means?

    It seems to some posters that being a leader means being the one selected.

    I believe that a leader is someone who brings together competing interests and steers a positive outcome.

    When President Obama chooses to lead rather than dictate, I will be first in line to praise him.

    We have seen four years of his leadership and I would not characterize him as a leader.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 16, 2012 10:36 a.m.

    "Tell us again how many votes the President got for HIS budget in the Senate. Tell us why the Senate turned him down without a single vote. "

    White, you really don't know the story with that "budget" vote. No, of course you don't. A good beginning might be to learn something about the budget process. But let me just tell you, there never was a vote in the Senate on President Obama's budget.

    Why do you guys insist on being so consistantly uninformed? I think at a point you guys would be embarrassed.

  • wrz Ogden, UT
    Nov. 16, 2012 10:25 a.m.

    @Mike Richards:

    "All budget bills originate in the House. (Article I, Section 7)..."

    Not anymore. It was that way back in the day when the Congress paid heed to the processes outlined in the Constitution. Any bills can originate in either house... differences to be worked out in a joint House/Senate committee.

    Actually the way it works these days is... the president starts the budget process... sometime in the Jan/Feb/Mar time frame, he asks his agencies to identify and compile funding needs for the coming fiscal year which begins 1 Oct. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) collects the data, hands it to the president for review which is then forwarded to the Congress for legislative action. Both the House and the Senate get copies and either agree to the package or make changes. If there is disparities the packages from the House and the Senate go to a joint committee to resolve differences.

    The problem is, the president has reportedly not sent a budget (request) package to the Congress for several years.

  • wrz Ogden, UT
    Nov. 16, 2012 9:51 a.m.

    @JoeBlow:

    "Even Bill Kristol (hyper conservative) said this week - 'You know what? It won’t kill the country if Republicans raise taxes a little bit on millionaires. It really won’t, I don’t think."

    Republican should allow the Obama tax increase on millionaires so that, when unemployment climbs and the economy tanks again as a result, Republicans will have something to point the finger at for the mid-term elections.

    Also, Republicans must insist that any tax increase must be applied to the obscene national debt... but Democrats will find a way to use it to grow the government instead.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Nov. 16, 2012 7:51 a.m.

    Red Shirt, again it was done on purpose by both the President and the Congress as a tatic to force a compromise in the future..should someone be elected President who uses such a tatic..apparently so, he was..and guess what the tactic seems to be working. Both sides are now talking about posssibilities, wasn't happening before. Oh by the way it looks like the tactic could qualify Obama as a uniter..go figure.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 16, 2012 7:39 a.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" if the political commentators lost the election for Romney, explain why only 2% less people voted for Romney than McCain, yet Obama had 8% less people vote for him this time.

    What that means is that fewer people came out to support Obama this time than 4 years ago.

    Conservatives were able to do a better job keeping their base excited and voting. Meanwhile, Obama kept riding his rockstar image, changing his story to reflect what the audience wanted to hear. For example, on energy, he has cut off more oil producing areas than he has opened up, yet he claims to be pro-oil. Obama's lies and hypocrisy were so outrageous combined with complacancy from the media that you essentially had Benghazi in the political arena. You had 2 seals fighting off the Obama army. What would you expect to happen when there are only a few voices telling the truth in a crowd with a socialist adgenda.

  • Mad Hatter Provo, UT
    Nov. 16, 2012 1:08 a.m.

    Romney has been defeated. He's on a "blame the minorities" tour to shift responsibility away from himself and his campaign as a dodge to divert criticism by the social conservatives who wanted a "genuinely, severely conservative" candidate rather than the one they settled on.

    Many Republican govenors and congressional legislators want him to go away, vamoose, and disappear. George W. Bush is still persona non grata within the Republican Party. Now Mitt Romney will join him in obscurity.

    We'll just have to see how the blood flows with the Republican base and their reactionary enablers wanting to get even more ideologically partisan and others in the leadership lobbying to adapt to the new electorate and avoid irrelevancy.

    Those here writing in defense of the Republican message continue to repeat old, tired talking points and have no worthwhile suggestions going forward. They continue to be angry about losing and would probably like to exclude anyone who voted for Obama from future elections. Many of their simplistic excuses for failing in this election exemplify the alternate universe they inhabit.

  • L White Springville, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 10:33 p.m.

    Mr. KJB1,

    Are you one of the few who thinks that the House is just an extension of the White House? Are you one of the very few who have decided that the President is a legislator? Tell us again how many votes the President got for HIS budget in the Senate. Tell us why the Senate turned him down without a single vote. Was it because they couldn't not stand the man or was it because his budget would bankrupt the country?

    As far as being called a liar, isn't that exactly what the State Department, the military, the CIA and foreign government leaders are telling us about Bengazi? As far as that goes, who's lying about the head of the CIA, the President, who claimed that he had heard nothing or Eric Holder, his attorney general, who knew about the affair in early summer?

    Surely you can see that Mr. Obama and truth are not often seen in the same sentence.

    Just who was it who spent $6 TRILLION more than he took in? He can't blame that on the Republicans.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Nov. 15, 2012 6:33 p.m.

    L. White:

    Even in this year's election, more people have voted for Obama than ever voted for Bush. If Bush was able to boast about his "political capital" after he was re-elected, then why cant' President Obama do the same?

    As I recall, Obama isn't the one sending a sham bill called President Obama's Budget to the Senate just so Democrats can vote it down. He's not the one shouting, "You lie!" on the floor of Congress. He's not the one claiming that Republicans faked their birth certificates. That would be your side.

    You have a choice: You can either try to learn from last week's defeat or you can keep throwing tantrums and go on losing elections. Your choice...

  • L White Springville, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 5:04 p.m.

    Don't we have an interesting turn of events. Mr. Obama lost 9,000,000 voters but some of his followers here think that he has a mandate and that he should have the right to boss the House around. Why doesn't he start with the Democrats in the Senate? Why doesn't he boss them into voting for his budget? They kicked him out, empty handed those two times that he thought that he could boss them around. They'll kick him out again. So, like most bullies, he decided to pick another target instead of realizing that HE is the problem. He's throwing his weight around, but it's not working. The House has already seen that he is unable to do anything except fume and threaten. They're not stupid. They won't let him pin his failings on them.

    Nothing has changed. Obama has no plan. He still knows nothing about business. He still knows nothing about the economy. He still thinks that yelling and calling names will get the job done.

    He's got a lot to learn and very little time to learn it.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 3:55 p.m.

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah

    Democrats have never had to wipe off the chalk dust from the classroom. [Teachers and Academia tend to be Liberal – aka, mostly Democrat]

    They've removed themselves so far from reality that they actually admire Obama and his policies.
    [as opposed to close to reality Republican policies such as;
    Conspiracy Theories, Birthers, GlobalWarming denialism, tobacco doesn’t cause cancer, the earth is only 6,000 years old, and God intended legitimate rapes…]

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

    Face it -
    Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and all the other ultra-far-right-wingers lost this election for the Republicans.

    Take some personal responsibility for it.

    For the life of me --
    I can't tell which is worse --
    Your saying Obama blamed everything on Bush --
    or
    your hypocracy blaming everyone and eveything else but yourselves for your own loss.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 3:47 p.m.

    To "pragmatistferlife" please go back and read my post. The question is for the liberals to decide. Is Obama incompetent or did he do it on purpose. Either way, should a person like that be supported and be the President?

  • Ford DeTreese Provo, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 3:44 p.m.

    Mike,

    "Democrats find it easier to ask 'academics' how to solve our budget problems instead of asking businessmen how they balance a budget."

    One among many problems with this simplistic statement is that the businessmen want to have their taxes cut, minimize labor costs by shipping jobs off to China or making many jobs unnecessary by increasing productivity, and by funneling as much wealth to the top 1 percent as possible. But they still expect American consumers to purchase all their products, even those produced in China, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Vietnam (to name a convenient few). This is a primary reason we can't balance the federal budget. Basically, Uncle Sam has become the consumer of last resort. We can fix this, but not by using any proposals put forth by either the Republicans or the Democrats. The problem isn't government, as the conservatives claim to believe. The problem is embedded within our current corporate system. We are asking all the wrong questions.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Nov. 15, 2012 3:34 p.m.

    Red Shirt..apparently you haven't been paying attention. Congress and the White House were instrumental in the fiscal cliff..and it was set up on purpose..it was intentional..it was constructed by design. Done as an incentive..that help?

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 15, 2012 2:28 p.m.

    @ Salsa,

    Nothing has changed, has it? The Democrats still try to use diversion to keep us from questioning Obama about his involvement in any duty that has been assigned to him. The Democrats still tell us that the Republicans are the root of all our problems, even though the Senate and the White House is controlled by Democrats and the budget is either voted down 100 to 0 or totally ignored when it gets to Harry Reid. The Democrats still attack the messenger. They still call names. They still deny any responsibility for the $6 TRILLION is new deficit spending since Obama took office.

    Let's admit it. Democrats find it easier to ask "academics" how to solve our budget problems instead of asking businessmen how they balance a budget. Democrats have never had to wipe off the chalk dust from the classroom. They think that ivory tower solutions actually work. They've removed themselves so far from reality that they actually admire Obama and his policies.

    There are no acceptable excuses for Obama's actions. His policies are fully in effect. We're reaping the destruction caused by his ideas and from his lack of leadership.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 2:28 p.m.

    Thompson, enjoy your irrelevancy.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Nov. 15, 2012 2:27 p.m.

    "What happened to Obama's gray hair? Is he so vain that he has it colored, or did he have it colored to make him look "wiser" in the debates?"

    This sums up a large part of the GOP problem.

    People worry about things like this. Or birth certificates. Or Mrs Obamas sleeveless dresses.

    Credibility = totally gone. Grow up.

    (sometimes I do vote Republican, but am too embarrassed to admit it. This is why)

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 1:57 p.m.

    What happened to Obama's gray hair? Is he so vain that he has it colored, or did he have it colored to make him look "wiser" in the debates?

    Why wasn't General Petraeus an issue before the election? Are we really to believe that Eric Holder didn't tell Obama anything about Petraeus for five months?

    Why did the unemployment rate jump by 100,000 people in the week following the election? Does anyone really think that 100,000 people lost their jobs in one week when unemployment was "supposedly" going down?

    Nothing has changed. Obama still can't find the truth, no matter how hard he looks for it. His supporters still tell us that he is telling the truth and that the CIA, the State Department, the FBI and foreign leaders are the ones lying about Benghazi. They're telling us that Obama is kept out of the loop when we're under attack. They're telling us that Obama is shielded from important information by Eric Holder. They're implying that the government is total disarray because nobody in the administration trusts Obama enough to inform him of anything except his "Tee Time".

  • George Bronx, NY
    Nov. 15, 2012 1:45 p.m.

    @lost
    interesting now you are the one claiming it was everyone but bush's fault that the economy tanked. my my my. Its clintons fault it barney's fault its the terrorist fault, its the spaghetti monster in the skies fault." So I will ask you the same question that you always ask. who was president when the recession began, whose tax policies where in place? yu always claim democrats want to blame everyone else but then when its time to man up and admit bush failed you do the same thing.

  • Salsa Libre Provo, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 1:37 p.m.

    @Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah

    At this moment in time, it looks like the Republican Party is dying of self-inflicted wounds. The message of movement conservatives is dead. The appeal to rich white guys and angry, old, white guys is restricted by demographics and reality. Mitt Romney refuses to go away and continues to blame his failure on the very people who's votes he needed to win the election. And the angry, old, white guys (AOWG) writing in this thread keep saying the same old, tired thing ad naseum.

    It will take some time for the AOWG to adjust and move on. There are problems which need a solution. However, it is clear from many AOWG can't find it within themselves to give it up. They have too much on the table to leave their anger behind and adapt to the times.

  • Mad Hatter Provo, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 1:18 p.m.

    All that can be said is that the election did not slow the inflammatory rhetoric. The nonsensical whining just keeps coming and coming. Maybe it's time that Democrats get both a majority in the House and a super-majority in the Senate. There can then be a true dialog between liberals and conservatives without the obstructionism of the wingnut fringe controlling the Republican Party.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 1:17 p.m.

    To the liberals out there, please explain your blind following of Obama. Either he is grossly incompetent or else intentionally set up the fiscal cliff.

    Look at what Obama did. In 2010, Obama extended the Bush Tax cuts, and had also set up all sorts of automatic tax increases and spending cuts to take effect all at the same time. So, you have to ask yourself, is Obama so incompetent that he set up the fiscal cliff, or did he intentionally set up the fiscal cliff?

    To "Kent C. DeForrest" if more people were working, even if they don't bring in enough to end the deficit, they will impact the budget because they will cut the amount of social welfare spending. Think of it as a free spending cut.

    To "JoeBlow" the House has passed a budget last year, while the Democrats in the Senate wouldn't even vote on one.

    To "LDS Liberal" During the 1956 Presidential campaign, Norman Thomas, on national television, announced, "The Socialist Party will no longer be running a candidate for president. The Democratic Party is leading this country to Socialism much faster than we could ever hope to."

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 12:47 p.m.

    Blue,
    When was the last time harry reid let a budget through, or even allowed a vote? Uh, that would be – NEVER! unless you count the vote on BO’s budget that not even a dem voted for.

    This is a budget showdown that harry reid and congressional dems along with BO overwhelmingly approved.

    Old man
    It’s not hard to see who wants to keep the common man dependent and therefore in bondage to the government – hint, it’s not the GOP

    LDS lib,
    The approval rating you quote is literally unchanged from before the election when the repubs retained control of the house.

    Tolstoy,
    The tax cuts DID work. Slick willey’s inverted yield curve in 2000 led to the 2001 recession that was heightened by 9/11. Bush had the unemployment rate in the 5% range until the barney-frank induced housing bubble collapsed and brought our economy down with it. if they didn't, why did BO's OWN people tell him not to raise taxes in late 2010 because of the damage it would do to employment and the economy?

    Joe blow
    Yep, the senate dems

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 12:34 p.m.

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah

    11:56 a.m. Nov. 15, 2012

    =========

    Boy,
    It's going to be a ver VERY long 4 years for you Mike.

    Good Luck with that.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 15, 2012 11:56 a.m.

    Who stopped the pipeline, Congress or Obama?

    Who stopped oil production in Utah, Wyoming and Colorado, Congress or Obama?

    Who stopped oil drilling in the Gulf, Congress or Obama?

    Who imposed regulations on the coal industry, Congress or Obama?

    Who guaranteed "loans" to bankrupt "clean engery" companies, Congress or Obama?

    Obama cannot legislate, but he can cripple business. He has crippled business. He will continue to cripple business. His "business plan" is to make government supreme in all facits of our lives. Private business is his competitor. His plan is to cripple private business. If you can't see that, you haven't been looking very hard.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Nov. 15, 2012 11:34 a.m.

    Newwest,

    Yes, that is the way it is. I know how politics works.

    Here is an accurate portrayal of reality.

    The house is controlled by the GOP. They initiate a budget. They have put forth very partisan budget. The Ryan Budget had ZERO democrat votes. But, it passes because the GOP controls the house.

    Since the Dems control the senate, the budget does not pass. And the GOP house knew it would not pass the senate when they passed it.

    Bottom line. We have no budget because the GOP house passed a partisan budget and the DEM controlled senate rejected it.

    Do you really feel that the sole blame is on the Senate and the Dems?

  • newwest Ferron, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 10:57 a.m.

    JoeBlow,
    The House has passed a budget. Every year. The Republican Vice Presidential candidate had a lot to do with the budget process, which is one reason he was chosen as a Presidential running mate.
    The Democratic-controlled Senate has not acted on the budgets they've been given. As a result, our country has not had a budget for the past two years.
    That's the way it is.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 10:41 a.m.

    It seems, judging by the comments on this board, and by those signing petitions to secede from the union, that Jindal's advice is not going to be heeded by the Republicans.

    Sorry, GOP, you hitched your wagon to them, you are going to have a very, very hard time switching horses midstream.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 10:40 a.m.

    Well, he did win. So why shouldn't he exert his legitimate power?

  • George Bronx, NY
    Nov. 15, 2012 10:33 a.m.

    ladies and gentleman the new professional victims formally known as the GOP.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 10:26 a.m.

    "Providing incentives for businessmen to hire more workers is the lowest cost path to increasing revenues",is a lie.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Nov. 15, 2012 10:24 a.m.

    " All budget bills originate in the House. ..." The Senate has no Constitutional authority to force the House to do anything with the budget."

    "The House has a majority of Republicans. Republicans are clearly in charge, not Obama."

    And yet, you constantly blame Obama for not passing a budget.

    Which way is it Mike. Consistency. Thats all I ask for.

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 9:57 a.m.

    @Mike Richards
    In one sentence you say Congress is in charge, the next sentence you are saying Obama crippled business, how is this possible in your scenario?

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 9:49 a.m.

    @mike richards
    the tax cuts that where suppose to lead to more workers has not worked for 11 years why do you think it is magically going to work now? Save your magical thinking for religion.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 9:48 a.m.

    Ummmm

    1. Yes, he is the President, get over it.
    2. Yes, Republicans had better start compromising or they WILL get the blame.

    I might add:
    3. There's another House Congressional election in 2 years. All 435 seats will be up for grabs. Congress only has a 14% approval rating as is -- The GOP only remains in power today due to the gerrymandering of voting disctricts [According to Princeton University, The GOP lost the popular vote in the House last week]. The GOP LOST seats in both the House and the Senate this race -- One more bone-head stalemate this time around will doom the Republican Party for the next 10-12 years.

    Republicans need to "stop being the party of stupid" ~ Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal.

    Loosing the elections and then taking America hostage by pointing a gun at our head is a cowardly fool's way of getting what you want. It won't end pretty is all I can say.

  • Hemlock Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 9:30 a.m.

    The GOP has the tax payers (common man) interest at heart. If higher taxes reduced the deficit and were not wasted by the government, I would gladly pay. We cannot afford more crony wasting like the 38 failing or failed green industries funded at the common man's expense or the General Accounting Office spending more than $900,000 on a Vegas party. Obama won the election buy Romney's 49% of the voted clearly shows that Obama does not have a mandate to be a dictator. Obama has chosen Hugo Chavez as his role model.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 9:23 a.m.

    Mike,

    Reducing unemployment from 7.9 percent to 3 percent would not give us enough revenue. We need to increase revenue substantially, which means closing loopholes AND raising tax rates. A majority of Americans favor increasing taxes. The super rich know they need to pay more, and groups of them have banded together to lobby Congress along these lines. It is only the Republican Party apparatus, which has been hijacked by Grover Norquist, that will fall on its sword to defend the rights of millionaires and billionaires to save 4.6 percent of their taxable income (the result of allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire. Oh, by the way, those tax cuts were intended to be temporary. That's why Congress put an expiration date on them. HELLO.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 9:02 a.m.

    It's not hard to see who has the common man's interests at heart.

    Hint: It's not the GOP.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Nov. 15, 2012 8:37 a.m.

    Obama already compromised with Republicans when he extended all the Bush tax cuts in 2010. Now it is the Republican's turn to step forward and forge a compromise with Obama.

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 8:32 a.m.

    If Obama is serious about reducing the deficit, let him donate $1 million to the treasury today. Let him lead by example. If there is one person in America who could give away $1 million without sacrificing his home, his meals, his transportation, or his entertainment, it would be the President. Everything paid for by the people. He will not be hungry. He will not be homeless. He will not walk around in rags.

    Let him lead by example. Let him get the rich Democrats in Congress to donate their millions to the treasury. Let him get the rich entertainers to donate their millions to the treasury.

    All he is doing is being a miser even as he tells Republicans that they need to raise taxes on others.

    Let him lead by example.

    Let him show us how giving HIS money to the government will help US.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 8:27 a.m.

    Lost in DC: "Granted, it's a stupid way to reduce the deficit, but stupid seems like the only way we can get BO and reid to do anything."

    This is a budget showdown that Republicans overwhelmingly approved. The president is just pointing out that elections have consequences, and if the GOP hopes to get any credit whatsoever for deficit reduction they can only do so by intelligently playing the hand that they dealt themselves.

    But speaking of "stupid," I like this the best.

    AP news story from Tuesday, reporting on Republican governor Bobby Jindal's remarks to the Republican Governors Association:

    "Louisiana's Indian American Governor Bobby Jindal has asked Republicans to "stop being the stupid party" as he forcefully rejected Mitt Romney's claim that President Barack Obama won with "gifts" to minorities and young voters."

    Amazing! A grown-up has dared rear his head in the GOP!

  • Noodlekaboodle Millcreek, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 8:22 a.m.

    Mr. Brown is completely right about the first point. President Obama is the legally elected president of the United States. Mitt lost. This is how a republic works. Your guy doesn't always win.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Nov. 15, 2012 8:12 a.m.

    So Mr. Brown you missed the part where the President when pressed by Chuck Todd on the tax increases said he wasn't wedded to increasing taxes but was committed to increasing revenues from those making over $250,000. That's not just a wink to the Repbulican leadership it's a gift of epic proportions. So Mr. Brown and Christian 24-7 you're both absolutely wrong about the Presidents attitude and his negotiating skills..but then why would anyone be surprised at that. Republicans demonstrated over the past year that their view of reality is a big illusion.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 15, 2012 8:07 a.m.

    Mr. Obama is the President. He has no legislative authority. All budget bills originate in the House. (Article I, Section 7: "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills. . .")

    Notice that nothing is said that the Senate must agree on the budget; however, the Senate may NOT originate budget bills. Obama has no Constitutional authority in the budget. The Senate has no Constitutional authority to force the House to do anything with the budget.

    The House has a majority of Republicans. Republicans are clearly in charge, not Obama.

    Revenue MUST be increased, but tax rates must NOT be raised. More workers will increase revenues and will decrease government welfare payments. Providing incentives for businessmen to hire more workers is the lowest cost path to increasing revenues.

    Obama opposes hiring workers. He has crippled business. He increased welfare has added to the deficit. He needs to sit back and let businessmen solve the financial mess by hiring more workers who pay income taxes. Taking one million workers off welfare will save $30 billion in welfare payments and it will generate tax revenue.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 8:02 a.m.

    No, even if you do play nice, he STILL won't say anything nice about them.

    Granted, it's a stupid way to reduce the deficit, but stupid seems like the only way we can get BO and reid to do anything.

    The truth is, BO and the dems know how to manipulate the masses, along with their complicit lamestream media.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Nov. 15, 2012 7:46 a.m.

    The survey by the Pew Research Center and the Washington Post found 51 percent of those polled said they don’t think President Barack Obama and Congress will be able to agree on a package of tax increases and spending cuts to replace the automatic reductions in government spending and the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts scheduled for Jan. 1. Thirty-eight percent said they expected Obama and Congress to cut a deal.

    If lawmakers fail to reach a deal, 53 percent said Republicans in Congress will bear responsibility, compared with 29 percent who said Obama will be at fault and 10 percent who chose both sides.
    (Newsmax)

  • Zac Ogden, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 7:24 a.m.

    One thing I took away from the press conference...Obama admitted that he (the White House)sent Susan Rice out, five days after the terrorist attack, to go "forward" (yes, pun intended) with the false narrative of the video.

  • Christian 24-7 Murray, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 6:57 a.m.

    That has been the president's message to congressional republicans since he took office, except for the first 2 years there were no bones offered.

    Well summerized Mr. Brown!

    It would be nice if he took a class in how to negotiate with others for the common good. Making threats and demands will not help this country move forward. But sadly that is what we can expect for 4 more years.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Nov. 15, 2012 6:18 a.m.

    "do as I wish, or I will drive this bus off the cliff and you will get the blame."

    The GOP would get the blame, only because it will be clear to the masses that they would be at fault.

    Even Bill Kristol (hyper conservative) said this week -

    "You know what? It won’t kill the country if Republicans raise taxes a little bit on millionaires. It really won’t, I don’t think.

    I don’t really understand why Republicans don’t take Obama’s offer to freeze taxes for everyone below $250,000. Make it $500,000, make it a million.

    Really? The Republican party is gonna fall on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic, and half of whom live in Hollywood and are hostile to Republicans?

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 1:57 a.m.

    It's about time.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 15, 2012 12:14 a.m.

    Anyone wishing to avoid the "fiscal cliff" needs to acknowledge something: they are in favor of higher deficits. Going over the "cliff" cuts the deficit in half, so all those who claim to be deficit hawks (like me) should be in favor. Granted, it's a stupid way to reduce the deficit, but stupid seems like the only way we can get congress to do anything.