• CLICK HERE To Join Broke Straight Boys & Instantly Get Full Access To Entire Site & 3 FREE bonus sites.

State of the Union Fact Check

Jayman01

BSB Executive Senior Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Posts
4,515
Reaction score
1
Location
USA
I found this to be a fun read today.

FACT CHECK: Obama and his imbalanced ledger
By CALVIN WOODWARD, AP
Wed Jan 26, 3:16 AM EST

The ledger did not appear to be adding up Tuesday night when President Barack Obama urged more spending on one hand and a spending freeze on the other.

Obama spoke ambitiously of putting money into roads, research, education, efficient cars, high-speed rail and other initiatives in his State of the Union speech. He pointed to the transportation and construction projects of the last two years and proposed "we redouble these efforts." He coupled this with a call to "freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years."

But Obama offered far more examples of where he would spend than where he would cut, and some of the areas he identified for savings are not certain to yield much if anything.

For example, he said he wants to eliminate "billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies." Yet he made a similar proposal last year that went nowhere. He sought $36.5 billion in tax increases on oil and gas companies over the next decade, but Congress largely ignored the request, even though Democrats were then in charge of both houses of Congress.

A look at some of Obama's statements Tuesday night and how they compare with the facts:

___

OBAMA: Tackling the deficit "means further reducing health care costs, including programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which are the single biggest contributor to our long-term deficit. Health insurance reform will slow these rising costs, which is part of why nonpartisan economists have said that repealing the health care law would add a quarter of a trillion dollars to our deficit."

THE FACTS: The idea that Obama's health care law saves money for the government is based on some arguable assumptions.

To be sure, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated the law will slightly reduce red ink over 10 years. But the office's analysis assumes that steep cuts in Medicare spending, as called for in the law, will actually take place. Others in the government have concluded it is unrealistic to expect such savings from Medicare.

In recent years, for example, Congress has repeatedly overridden a law that would save the treasury billions by cutting deeply into Medicare pay for doctors. Just last month, the government once again put off the scheduled cuts for another year, at a cost of $19 billion. That money is being taken out of the health care overhaul. Congress has shown itself sensitive to pressure from seniors and their doctors, and there's little reason to think that will change.

___

OBAMA: Vowed to veto any bills sent to him that include "earmarks," pet spending provisions pushed by individual lawmakers. "Both parties in Congress should know this: If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it."

THE FACTS: House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has promised that no bill with earmarks will be sent to Obama in the first place. Republicans have taken the lead in battling earmarks while Obama signed plenty of earmark-laden spending bills when Democrats controlled both houses. As recently as last month, Obama was prepared to sign a catchall spending measure stuffed with earmarks, before it collapsed in the Senate after an outcry from conservatives over the bill's $8 billion-plus in home-state pet projects.

It's a turnabout for the president; in early 2009, Obama sounded like an apologist for the practice: "Done right, earmarks have given legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their districts, and that's why I've opposed their outright elimination," he said then.

___

OBAMA: "I'm willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year: medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits."

THE FACTS: Republicans may be forgiven if this offer makes them feel like Charlie Brown running up to kick the football, only to have it pulled away, again.

Obama has expressed openness before to this prominent Republican proposal, but it has not come to much. It was one of several GOP ideas that were dropped or diminished in the health care law after Obama endorsed them in a televised bipartisan meeting at the height of the debate.

Republicans want federal action to limit jury awards in medical malpractice cases; what Obama appears to be offering, by supporting state efforts, falls short of that. The president has said he agrees that fear of being sued leads to unnecessary tests and procedures that drive up health care costs. So far the administration has provided grants to test ideas aimed at reducing medical mistakes and resolving malpractice cases by negotiation, but has recommended no change in federal law.

Trial lawyers, major political donors to Democratic candidates, are strongly opposed to caps on jury awards. But the administration has been reluctant to support other approaches, such as the creation of specialized courts where expert judges, not juries, would decide malpractice cases. In October 2009 the Congressional Budget Office estimated that government health care programs could save $41 billion over 10 years if nationwide limits on jury awards for pain and suffering and other similar curbs were enacted.

___

OBAMA: "The bipartisan Fiscal Commission I created last year made this crystal clear. I don't agree with all their proposals, but they made important progress. And their conclusion is that the only way to tackle our deficit is to cut excessive spending wherever we find it — in domestic spending, defense spending, health care spending, and spending through tax breaks and loopholes."

THE FACTS: Obama's fiscal commission did not simply recommend cutting excessive spending; it proposed that the deficit could only be tamed by cutting $3 for every $1 of new revenue raised — in other words, a painful mix of spending cuts and tax increases. Instead, Obama proposed an overhaul of the corporate tax system that would eliminate loopholes and tax breaks but also reduce tax rates. The net effect would be neutral; it would not reduce or raise any revenue. Obama has yet to sign on to any of the ideas, even though he promised when creating the panel that it would not be "one of those Washington gimmicks."

___

OBAMA: "To put us on solid ground, we should also find a bipartisan solution to strengthen Social Security for future generations."

THE FACTS: With that comment, Obama missed another chance to embrace the tough medicine proposed by the commission for bringing down the deficit. For example, he ruled out slashing benefits or partially privatizing the program, and made no reference to raising the retirement age. That left listeners to guess how he plans to do anything to salvage the popular retirement program whose trust funds are expected to run out of money in 2037 without changes.

___

OBAMA: As testament to the fruits of his administration's diplomatic efforts to control the spread of nuclear weapons, he said the Iranian government "faces tougher and tighter sanctions than ever before."

THE FACTS: That is true, and it reflects Obama's promise one year ago that Iran would face "growing consequences" if it failed to heed international demands to constrain its nuclear program. But what Obama didn't say was that U.S. diplomacy has failed to persuade Tehran to negotiate over U.N. demands that it take steps to prove it is not on the path toward a bomb. Preliminary talks with Iran earlier this month broke off after the Iranians demanded U.S. sanctions be lifted.

___

Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, giving the GOP response: "Whether sold as `stimulus' or repackaged as `investment,' their actions show they want a federal government that controls too much, taxes too much and spends too much in order to do too much."

THE FACTS: The economic stimulus package passed by the Democratic-controlled Congress in February 2009 didn't raise taxes. Instead, about a third of the package — nearly $300 billion — was made up of temporary tax cuts. The biggest was Obama's Making Work Pay credit, which provided up $400 to individuals and $800 to married couples. There were dozens of other tax cuts, including a more generous child tax credit, a tax credit for buying a home and a sales tax deduction for buying a car. Many, but not all, of the tax cuts have since expired.

Obama's health care law imposed new taxes, including a penalty for some people who don't get qualified health insurance, starting in 2014. But Obama extended Bush-era tax cuts that were due to expire at the beginning of the year. He also enacted a new one-year cut in the payroll tax for 2011 for just about every wage earner.

___

Associated Press writers Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Jim Drinkard, Erica Werner, Jim Kuhnhenn, Andrew Taylor, Stephen Ohlemacher and Robert Burns contributed to this report.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 
ooh, a controversial post discusses the age-old dilemma of politicians sounding as though they want to do the right thing...but are either part of the entrenched establishment that likes to keep things the same way to benefit the few, or are influenced excessively by lobbyists whose contributions constitute conflict of interest, or are more beholden to constituents and their benefits rather than look at what is best for the country as a whole...

Seems like the only thing that would force change is radical thinking and action...and you know how fond people are of change...
 
The operative word is...

Dearest Jayman,

This fact check is fun to read, as a fictional accounting, rather than factual. Lets just say fact checked up to a point and then it STOPS being FACTUAL. Full of partisan prejudices and pre-conceived biases that cut short of actual full truth, this reminds me of the entire "health care" debate (and I use the word "debate" loosely with only it's snippets of truth, aka half-truths).

Those contributing from the Associated Press do not represent, necessarily, objective truth to its fullest extent as this language got lost long ago before "Latin " became an unspoken native language. Our contributing AP media buddies need to be checked for their "conflicts in interest", too. I feel this is one more example of sour-grapes "spin" and our country has honestly suffered a "coup d'état" when it comes to political speech and truthfulness! You only have to ask yourself, who has profited the most to determine the real victors.

Much like the German Parliament of pre-WWII Germany known for its chaos and inability to get anything accomplished, our own congressional/judicial/executive branches have fallen victim as well to bowing to the "golden cow" of non-voting big business interests(health care/banking and investment, defense manufacturing, drug manufacturing, oil producing, and retail giants[IE: Wal-Mart]) and the voting "people" have been reduced to mere "widgets" in their second class citizen status.

Simply stated..."The (Super-)rich still continue to get richer, while the poor (everyone excluding the Super-rich) continue to get poorer!" I fear Fascism knocking at the door, just like the "Tea Party movement" will gain new and undeserved prominence in our perilous political future! The "business class" in Europe prior to WWII found the rise in unexpected and newly re-found economic prominence Germany experienced in the 1930's to be most admirable and among Fascism's biggest supporters, without adequately considering the Hitler/Nazi baggage that came along with it.

Point in case: My French Grandfather, an accountant, was so blinded as an admirer of Germany's vibrant economic recovery machine (and not the Nazi regime nor inhumane genocidal designs), that is, until France was actually invaded by Hitler's troops and it was too late as the French government, so weakened, had to capitulate to the Nazis. (Thank God for those D-Day combined forces (my father being one of them); the self-sacrificing and tirelessly resourceful members of "La Résistance française"; and the sole voice of reason in France and our ally, General Charles DeGaulle, filling much the same role as Winston Churchill and FDR with DeGaulle's radio broadcasts to the newly humbled and subjugated loyal French people.)

This should be a warning to us all today, as Business is not, nor should it ever be, the power that should rule our country. They are not actual official voting citizens with citizen rights. Civics 101 teaches us it is the voters them-self that should rule any country that claims to be a Democracy, not business, nor defense, nor banking interests, nor investment firms, nor major retailers, nor oil & gas interests, nor special interests, nor religious factions, nor political interests, nor the media, nor any of their hired talking heads.

Just remember the operative word is LIMITED ONLY TO "V O T E R S"! The extent they choose to be "INFORMED" and "EDUCATED" is where our destiny as a prosperous nation resides!

Truly Heartfelt,


Stimpy
 
Cumrag you are right on so many levels, I think the press takes advantage of the people who have busy lives and little time to watch and do research into their findings. I only read this because I did not have the time to watch the President personally. I figured I would catch the web video at a later point when I had more time to watch it. For some reason watching two guys fuck and suck on a porn site offers a lot more relaxation when I am trying to wind down. Who wants to watch politics right before bed? Yuck, that is a true recipe for nightmares. It is bad enough I have to go to bed reminded that the SS Stimpy Aura Glow class is out there on the high seas glistening in the sun light blinding all those who happen by. LMAO... (Sorry, I couldn't resist that.) Anyway, I never believe anything I hear and only half of what I see. I figured by posting it someone would read it and point out any misconceptions and perhaps help narrow my span of research focus. Hey, I am dyslexic. I have found that the Forum holds a wealth of informed knowledge in the area of politics. One thing I learned in school and in life is to work smarter not necessarily harder.:thumbup:
 
ooh, a controversial post discusses the age-old dilemma of politicians sounding as though they want to do the right thing...but are either part of the entrenched establishment that likes to keep things the same way to benefit the few, or are influenced excessively by lobbyists whose contributions constitute conflict of interest, or are more beholden to constituents and their benefits rather than look at what is best for the country as a whole...

Seems like the only thing that would force change is radical thinking and action...and you know how fond people are of change...

Yes, I do all to well. I think sometime they would prefer a dentist to be drilling than accept change. :thumbup:
 
Cumrag you are right on so many levels, I think the press takes advantage of the people who have busy lives and little time to watch and do research into their findings. I only read this because I did not have the time to watch the President personally. I figured I would catch the web video at a later point when I had more time to watch it. For some reason watching two guys fuck and suck on a porn site offers a lot more relaxation when I am trying to wind down. Who wants to watch politics right before bed? Yuck, that is a true recipe for nightmares. It is bad enough I have to go to bed reminded that the SS Stimpy Aura Glow class is out there on the high seas glistening in the sun light blinding all those who happen by. LMAO... (Sorry, I couldn't resist that.) Anyway, I never believe anything I hear and only half of what I see. I figured by posting it someone would read it and point out any misconceptions and perhaps help narrow my span of research focus. Hey, I am dyslexic. I have found that the Forum holds a wealth of informed knowledge in the area of politics. One thing I learned in school and in life is to work smarter not necessarily harder.:thumbup:

Dearest Jayman,

I just received the latest report on the SS Stimpy! Please turn your dial immediately to the Thread entitled "WOULD YOU RATHER...? for the latest updates of her fate!


Captain Ophelia Cumrag
 
Top