Comments on: Obama Can Talk, But Can He Walk?

Declan McCullagh Wonders If Obama Can Live Up To His Rhetoric On The Economy

[Marie Zarankevich]

Regarding Economic Adjustments: -- Remember, we may be moving from an economy where Big Business was stealing every nickle they could grab, to an Global, Fair Market Economy, where the very rich are not treated better than the small business person. -- This is likely to be a somewhat bumpy ride, and probably will not be an entirely smooth transition. -- As more truth comes out, the Biggies are running in fear, and trying to hide from view. -- Wonder why?

[flolake]

Declan McCullagh:

Methinks your gall has overloaded the skill(s) you thought you might have had...

[standlee5]

Obama Can Talk, But Can He Walk?


who knows, he''s never had to.

[tibu987]

Just where is all the money coming from to sustain all of Obama''s promises?

Here are some figures you might want to keep and check them again in 2 and 4 years.

Obama should be held responsible if these figures go up to support all the promises he made. NO more selling of America to pay today''s debts.

More foreign debt?

Like so many politicians that borrow to pay today''s
debts and leave the problem of repayment to their successors, i.e., the U.S. taxpayer, Obama seems to be falling into that trap.

Obama has the opportunity to become a great president,
yet, I foresee the U.S. becoming more indebted to foreign nations to fulfill all the promises he has made.

Our debt to foreign countries (Fall, 2008):
Japan, $585.9 billion
China, $541 billion
England, $307.4 billion
OPEC Nations*, $179.8
Caribbean banking centers**, $147.7 billion.

*Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E., Venezuela.

**Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Netherlands Antilles, Panama, British Virgin Islands.

[noloyalisti]

The problem is that the conservatives as represented by the Republican Party touted a completely failed financial system championed by Reagan, now only the 2nd worst president of all time and perfected by the disgraceful Bushoccio administration.

Their "system" put us so deeply in the hole that we can''t even see the light (believe me, what you hear from the corporate media is just 1984 Newspeak). Daddy Obama can''t bail us out of this fiasco by himself. The rich must pay their fair share or maybe even more than that. Conservatives want another daddy Hitler to save them.

[nomoredems]

racism in its prime condoned by BHO
1/20/09
Lowery also brought a smile to the president with a recitation he''s used before, asking God to
... help us work for that day when black will not be asked to give back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right."

[oldschool561]

I have been hearing alot about the moneys that this swearing in cost. Why wasn''t something said beforehand? Don''t try to tell me that nobody knew what it was going to cost. People are so quick to complain after the fact, but they do not check into things beforehand and stop them. Are people becoming that complacent?

[ken1dall]

Would you look at the head on that man!! I''ve seen better heads on a nail!

[ubrew12]

declanm said: "Unrelated bills should get an up-or-down vote, not glued together, and our elected representatives should insist on it. This really should be common-sense."

Agreed. And there should be a balanced budget amendment (or NOW there should be a budget amendment that mandates surpluses of 10% until the debt is gone). If Congress wants a chicken in every pot, it''ll have to pay for it or make them smaller chickens. Its my hope that after the Obama stimulus package, he comes up with a combination of tax increases/smaller government that performs this function. They really need to pass a balanced budget amendment: I just feel that after Repubs double the nat''l debt on tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans, its a little unfair to impose one now.

"As for your tax point, the top 5 percent of taxpayers pay over half of federal income taxes, and the Tax Foundation estimates that under Candidate Obama''s plan, almost half the country would pay no income taxes. How to jibe that with...shared sacrifice "

The top 5% easily own 50% of the country, the bottom 50% easily own none of the country. If ownership begets responsibility, then a progressive tax code is ''fair''. But, there needn''t be anything fair about the tax code. Sending jobs overseas isn''t ''fair'', but they''ve been doing it for decades.

"I really think you''re trying to pick a fight when there''s no real need for one." Sorry. And thanks for the responses. Gotta go.

[declanm-2009]

ubrew12: Yes, the moral and principled thing to do is vote against bills larded up with items to which you have significant moral and principled objections. Would you have voted for the Real ID Act, which was part of an "emergency" spending and tsunami relief bill? Would you have voted for a Treasury Department spending bill that included practically-mandatory library filtering (opposed by the ACLU and the American Library Association)? How about restrictions on Internet gambling done by adults, part of a "port security" bill?

Unrelated bills should get an up-or-down vote, not glued together, and our elected representatives should insist on it. This really should be common-sense.

As for your tax point, the top 5 percent of taxpayers pay over half of federal income taxes, and the Tax Foundation estimates that under Candidate Obama''s plan, almost half the country would pay no income taxes. How to jibe that with the "responsibility" and shared sacrifice that President Obama mentioned yesterday?

You''re correct that Republicans over the last decade have talked a good line about small government but done the opposite once elected. That''s why I wrote in my column in November that they deserved to lose. I really think you''re trying to pick a fight when there''s no real need for one.