Obama seeks raise in debt limit, gun legislation
By The Associated Press
This article was published January 14, 2013 at 11:30 a.m.
President Barack Obama speaks about the debt limit in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Monday, Jan. 14, 2013.
- Comments (38)
- aAFont Size
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama demanded Monday that Congress raise the federal debt limit quickly, warning that “Social Security benefits and veterans’ checks will be delayed if they don’t,” and cautioning Republicans not to insist on concessions in exchange.
“They will not collect a ransom in exchange for not crashing the economy,” he said at the final news conference of his first term. “The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip. And they better decide quickly because time is running short.”
“We are not a deadbeat nation,” he declared. The current limit is $16.4 trillion.
The president also said he will soon ask Congress to enact new gun legislation in the wake of the shootings a month ago that left 20 elementary students dead in Newtown, Conn. Facing stiff opposition from the National Rifle Association, he conceded lawmakers may not approve everything he asks for.
Among the proposals under consideration are a ban on assault-style weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. Obama said he would unveil his proposals next week. He was meeting after his news conference with Vice President Joe Biden, his point man in producing gun control measures to present to Congress.
Obama opened his news conference with a statement noting that a vote to increase the debt limit “does not authorize more spending. It simply allows the country to pay for spending that Congress has already agreed to. These are bills we’ve already racked up and we need to pay them.”
Read more in Tuesday's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.
Comments on: Obama seeks raise in debt limit, gun legislation
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.
You must login to make comments.
jetjohn says... January 14, 2013 at 12:12 p.m.
Why does this STUPID president always threaten the American People that if they don't raise the debt ceiling the Social Security Checks and the Veterans checks will be delayed. Why not suspend Congress and the President's check???? He DEMANDED!! He always demands everything that doesn't go his way!!! He wants the U.S. to become a deadbeat nation! He also says the debt limit “does not authorize more spending!!!" That is a JOKE, because that is all this President wants to do is to spend our hard-earned tax dollars!!!!
( permalink | suggest removal )
NONSHEEPLE says... January 14, 2013 at 12:48 p.m.
well stated Jet.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Walter says... January 14, 2013 at 12:51 p.m.
jetjohn, I was just about to post exactly the same thing.
The only thing he hasn't demanded yet is how his crown will be designed.
( permalink | suggest removal )
dman says... January 14, 2013 at 12:56 p.m.
There is more than enough current tax income coming in to pay SS and veterans. This is, as jetjohn says, merely another threat to get his way. Let's hope the House does not give in without getting spending consessions. My prediction is, though, that he will once again make Congress the fall guy.
( permalink | suggest removal )
SUPERDUTY says... January 14, 2013 at 12:58 p.m.
I don't know why the American people cannot see him as what he is.......a tyrant in sheeps' clothing.
( permalink | suggest removal )
MaumelleHog says... January 14, 2013 at 1:17 p.m.
Dear jetjohn,
Like or hate the President, the debt ceiling debate is the STUPID thing. We need to actually CUT SPENDING, not argue about what bills our government should or should not pay, after the government has already incurred the bills. If you want the President's pay cut, ask your Congressmen to propose it. What would you do if your employer told you that they never meant to hire you and have you do your job, so now they aren't going to pay you for the last two weeks' work? It's time to get serious about spending, and the debt ceiling debate is not the right way to go about it, period.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... January 14, 2013 at 1:56 p.m.
Republicans love to go on about responsibility. It is not responsible to not pay your bills when there is a way to do so. The last time they tried to hold us hostage on this issue, it unsettled the markets, lowered our 401k"s and lowered our credit rating. Good going, Tea Party. They are ideological bullies who are crazy and willing to take the country down to uphold their extremist position. Responsible economists say that their shenanigans are not the way to safely lower the debt without going backwards into recession.
When we really did have a stupid president, you all liked him and loved it when he arrogantly said "I'm the decider." Your party also voted for both his unfunded wars without a care in the world. They weren't worried about the cost of anything until there was a Democratic president. Suddenly they all got budget religion, but they want to take it our of the hides of the common people while continuing to give huge breaks to the wealthy.
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... January 14, 2013 at 3:20 p.m.
BHO has no idea of what really makes the economy work and everytime he opens his mouth to speak on an economic issue he just re-emphasizes that fact. jet john is totally correct, BHO so wants the US to be a European Style Scocialist State, he's willing to bankrupt it in order to do so.
( permalink | suggest removal )
lazybar says... January 14, 2013 at 3:26 p.m.
omg inquire what are you on?ok lets say you have a maxed credit card that your not making the min payment on,would it be wise for someone to raise your credit limit while knowing your not very wise with your spending?
( permalink | suggest removal )
kingputer6412 says... January 14, 2013 at 3:36 p.m.
People that manage their family budget by "raising their debt limit" will eventually file bankruptcy. Compare that to our government budget. You don't spend what you don't have. There are so many "things" that can be cut without passing congressional law or presidential "executive orders". It is not complicated, just stay within the budget and stop spending. Pork barrel projects used by congress as a tool for getting re-elected must be stopped. Congress passing laws to pad their "royalty status" loaded with perks must be stopped. Purchasing things like "thousand dollar toilets" and giving grants for a study of how many times an owl hoots between midnight and 2 AM must be stopped. This is the first President I have seen that "dictates" to what congress does or in this case what the Republican Congress must do. That is why the government has different branches so that we don't end up having a dictator. The only way to stop this insanity is to get out and vote and make it count. Our forefathers set this government up to have representatives leave their farms for a term of office and then go back to their farms. Our representatives AND this President do not even know how much a loaf of bread or a gallon of milk costs. We are supposed to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people. This government does not listen.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... January 14, 2013 at 4:35 p.m.
Unfortunately the government is listening but just not to you. It's listening to money, big money. After all, Citizens United said that corporations are people and their money is speech and you can't limit it and it is drowning you out.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... January 14, 2013 at 5:28 p.m.
I don't use credit cards.
The economists say what will work is a balanced approach of some stimulus and some spending reduction at the same time. The tea party is trying to use this to hold us hostage and cut social security and medicare, which do not drive the deficit, while continuing to spend like crazy on the military and give huge tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations. A take from the poor and middle class to give to the rich and the military approach. It's not fair and that's why people didn't want the Republicans.
The president does not want the debt ceiling and the spending cuts to be in the same negotiations for this reason and also because last time it upset the markets and got our credit downgraded. The tea party is like a bunch of kids who want to see a bad storm just so they can see what happens. Or a pyromaniac who sets a blaze to watch it burn.
( permalink | suggest removal )
BarichMilhusseinObamaNixonPOTUS says... January 14, 2013 at 6:18 p.m.
In 2006 Obama said we had a leadership issue due to needing to raise the debt ceiling. I guess things have not changed in 7 years. We still have a leadership issue in the WH for 4 more years.
( permalink | suggest removal )
KCSAP says... January 14, 2013 at 7:03 p.m.
The building is burning and Obama is shopping for fire extinguisher. All emotions, no solutions.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 15, 2013 at 7:51 a.m.
We need to make cuts, but neither the Democrats NOR the Republicans want to be the ones to suggest cutting a thing. Actually, Obama is cutting military spending and was the one who put back higher taxes on the rich. The Republicans are keeping quiet about what they want to cut. If they won't make cuts, the debt ceiling must be raised. However, they MUST make cuts. The Republicans have wanted to keep taxes low and not make any cuts so this all can't be blamed on the Democrats.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... January 15, 2013 at 8 a.m.
Republicans desperately want to cut Social Security and Medicare but are scared s*itless to actually say what they want and put it up for a vote. They want Obama to propose the cuts they are demanding so they can blame him for them. Why should he? Cuts to these programs are what Republicans want, let them own them!
( permalink | suggest removal )
JIMBOB47 says... January 15, 2013 at 8:14 a.m.
OK, folks.. it's very simple.. Take out ALL the references to Dem, Rep, Tea Party, etc. It makes no difference, they are ALL in it. King O must be stopped, as stated at least 100 times in as many comments, you can't spend what you don't have.
( permalink | suggest removal )
PaulRevere says... January 15, 2013 at 8:28 a.m.
Elections Have Consequences! We have only begun to feel them.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 15, 2013 at 9:35 a.m.
We need more people in the center. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska, is breaking ranks and agreeing that the debt ceiling must be raised until more cuts are made.
( permalink | suggest removal )
drs01 says... January 15, 2013 at 9:46 a.m.
This president is a bully. Note that his latest comments threatened that Social Security, veteran, and military check might be delayed. DID HE MENTION FOOD STAMPS, WELFARE CHECKS, EBT CARDS, PUBLIC HOUSING, ADC CHECKS, UNEMPLOYMENT CHECKS???? Hell no!!!
Just screw those that are and have made a contribution to this country!!!!
( permalink | suggest removal )
NoCrossNoCrown says... January 15, 2013 at 10:07 a.m.
why don't these stoopid people understand the difference between paying the bills congress authorized amd legtislated tax money be spent on already and any new spending that they might authorize or legislate. They have raised the debt limit numerous times under both parties leadership. Where were all these "new found patoriots" when the past congress' were spending all the money but not allocating how to pay for that spending??
( permalink | suggest removal )
Chigger2008 says... January 15, 2013 at 10:19 a.m.
The president is not threatening social security and veterans' checks. He is simply pointing out the result if the Republicans sabotage the debt ceiling deadline again. It is the Republican leadership that is holding the country hostage so that they can try to get their way.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 15, 2013 at 10:49 a.m.
Both parties are making little progress on cuts. RonalFos is correct in that the Republicans make vague statements about cutting, but no serious proposals. At least Obama is trying to cut back on the military and has a smaller inauguration planned. They all need to get with it! Cut everything, everywhere (except funding for education and student loans and healthcare).
( permalink | suggest removal )
Packman says... January 15, 2013 at 11:49 a.m.
Hey Populist - You say we need to make cuts to the deficit. Why? And if your reason is of utmost importance, what's wrong with cutting the federal budget in ALL directions? And refresh my memory, but are we talking actual cuts from previous year's budget or cuts to budget increases caused by the baseline budgeting process? If we're talking cuts to scheduled increases, why are we even having this debate????? But please explain why any cuts at all are necessary. Looking forward to your response.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... January 15, 2013 at 12:12 p.m.
MY GOD! Everyone should know by now that democrats are going to do nothing - NOTHING - that will endanger their relationship with the fast breeding vote-whores.
~
Same for the republicans and the robber barron military-industrial complex.
( permalink | suggest removal )
cdawg says... January 15, 2013 at 1:04 p.m.
There's something about Republicans stewing themselves that really gives off an aroma only a wingnut can appreciate while helping them stir the stew:
.
"63% of GOP Voters Think Republicans in Congress Out of Touch"
.
Most GOP voters continue to believe that congressional Republicans are out of touch with the party base, while Democrats are happier than ever with how their team is performing in Washington, DC.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 30% of Likely Republican Voters believe Republicans in Congress have done a good job representing their party’s values over the past several years. Sixty-three percent (63%) of GOP voters think congressional Republicans have lost touch with the party’s base throughout the nation.
--Rasmussen Reports, today.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 15, 2013 at 1:31 p.m.
Packman,
I've always been a proponent of cutting the deficit. You just can't keep running the thing up for future generations to pay. While I realized that you cannot make drastic cuts during a recession without catapulting us into a depression, you can make responsible inroads into our deficit problem. I've always consistently supported a combination of increases on taxes on the wealthy and cuts to government and certain programs to start moving the budget toward more balance. (Remember, I used to be a Republican and still am considered a moderate.) While the Democrats, for the most part, are willing to cut the military, the Republicans say that they want to cut "entitlements", but have not offered any specific plan. Nobody wants to admit that they want to cut everything. The Medicaid voucher system was just a fraud. Telling people that a voucher is as good as a guarantee was just a lie.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Packman says... January 15, 2013 at 3 p.m.
Hey Populist - With all due respect, you didn't answer the question. Why do we need to cut federal spending? Why can't we just keep running it up for future generations to pay? Why do we need to cut federal spending?
With double all due respect, you are no moderate. You, my lady, are a textbook liberal. You voted for the most liberal POTUS in America's history. You support Roe v Wade. You feel Ruth Ginsburg is an outstanding member of SCOTUS. You support a ban on military platform rifles, and blindly use the term "assault weapon". You support additional federal control of the nation's education system. You support the move toward socialized medicine. You hate rednecks, unless you need a flat fixed or a tree cut. You, ma'am, are a liberal. There are worse things to admit in life, like receiving a "hummer" in the White House from an intern or that you had to pass Obamacare to know what was in it. Or saying you're a fan of Bill Clinton and Nancy Pelosi........
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 15, 2013 at 4:47 p.m.
Packman,
The fact that you think that I am a liberal shows just how far right you are. I abhor abortion of healthy fetuses on moral ground. I support adoption and birth control over abortion and I am against the legality of abortions after 12 weeks except under limited circumstances. I was more a fan of Sandra Day O'Connor and David Souter than Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Most moderates in this country support the ban on assault weapons. I don't hate rednecks. My father was one and I loved him dearly. (My Dad drove an el camino, lived in Jacksonville, had steer horns in the living room, and wore cowboy boots and a bolero. He loved to drink beer and shoot pool at the Green Door which unfortunately has been closed down and was one of Jacksonville's finest treasures.) I guess you are confusing the term "redneck" with closed minded bigot. My Dad was a redneck, but not closeminded and bigoted. In fact, he came from a Democratic family and did not appreciate my foray into Republican politics. My Dad landed on Omaha Beach at D-Day, and later in life, saved at least one person's life by wrestling a gunman to the ground. No, I don't hate rednecks. In fact my father had a fair amount in common with Obama's grandfather who raised him. Both enlisted to fight for this country--as did many other rednecks. The people whom I don't like are the rich elitists who take everything this country has given them for granted and seek to give nothing back. So, yes, I did not vote for the draft dodging, tax evading, Romney who wanted to protect the superwealthy and polluters at the expense of the little people. Many Republicans and former Republicans agree with me about the direction of the party.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 15, 2013 at 5:27 p.m.
Packman,
On the deficit... While debt or a deficit is not always a bad thing if kept to a reasonable amount, a large deficit requires debt to be financed and when your debt gets too big, it threatens your financial stability. In other words, your capacity to repay becomes iffy and your interest rates go up. Actually, the federal government owns a great deal of propert with which it could pay off the deficit. We should sell some.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Packman says... January 15, 2013 at 8:22 p.m.
Hey Populist - Hmmm, you admit you voted for the most liberal POTUS ever. You do not deny that you support Roe v Wade. You do not deny you speak in terms of "assault weapons" instead of military platform rifles and bans. You do not deny you like Bill Clinton (he of "Hummer in the White House" fame) and Nancy "Gotta Read the Bill First" Pelosi. You do not deny your approval of Ruthie Ginsburg on SCOTUS. You do not deny your support of increased federal government interference in public education. Based on the facts, you are a liberal. As to your love of rednecks, your dad seems like the kind of man who could have gutted a deer with his eyes closed. He sounds bona-fide.
Thanks for answering the deficit question, or at least in part. At what point does a country's debt threaten financial stability?
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 16, 2013 at 6:29 a.m.
Packman,
I'm not a fan of Pelosi or other Democrats who refuse to make the difficult decisions necessary to govern this country. If I had my hands on the budget, I could make sweeping cuts in numerous areas and I could whittle down others. While I respect Obama, I do not worship him and do not think that he has done everything correctly. However, he wisely listened to those economists who told him that it was more important to deal with the impending depression than to deal with the deficit. The Cantor austerity solutions simply have backfired in Greece. The deficit must be attacked in a deliberate fashion--spreading the pain broadly and without cuts so severe as to cause more problems.
On the issue of education, I don't believe in a large Department of Education. Federal bureaucrats are not the answer. However, I do believe in small class sizes, long school years, long class days, a rigorous curriculum, and classes tailored to meet the demands of a more technological world. Our country now has a falling birth rate. Those who are spitting out the babies are often the ones most ill-prepared to raise children. The women who used to think that raising children was a life well spent are abandoning that job for other opportunities. Many families are having just one child or none at all. Part of that is caused by societal pressures. Some people look at my decision to stay at home for a while (9 years now) with disdain. Democratic women tend to be more judgmental on this point than Republicans. Many people do not understand that healthy, well adjusted adults often were not "perfect" children, but are the result of years of tutoring, carpooling, doctors visits, and unconditional love.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 16, 2013 at 8:07 a.m.
Packman,
Dad's hunting and golfing buddy died when I was 4, and Dad never hunted or played golf again. Dad actually was quite a gentle man who enjoyed tending roses in his yard. I don't think that he took pleasure in killing things. Dad also was extremely manly; as a former professional football player who was popular with the ladies, he could tend roses without anybody ever questioning his masculinity.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... January 16, 2013 at 10:58 a.m.
Populist, this is one Democratic woman who fully respects your decision.
My parents had to have both their incomes, but taught me that it was better for a family if the woman could be home most of the time. They also taught me that if there wasn't enough money, it was more honorable for the woman to help bring in income than to apply for government aid. Because part of our money came from my mother working, my father was careful what kind of families he gave help to. He wouldn't give to a family that was poor if the woman was able to work and didn't. He thought it would be disrespecting my mother and her contribution to our family.
My husband and I don't have children, but he has still always been the main earner. I worked whenever necessary, but we both preferred life when I was a full time homemaker. There is a graciousness and order to life that way that is harmed when the woman is gone all the time. Someone once said that a home is not a self perpetuating organism. Someone has to make it.
When I was a child, I envied the classmates with mothers who were home all the time, were home room mothers, and kept a perpetually nice house.
I also know, from experience, that people's first question is "what do you do?", and that they often look at you differently when you say you are a full time homemaker. I also know they look at you differently if you say you are working at a blue collar job instead of a white collar one. (I chose my jobs based on which would give me a schedule compatible with my husband's, so we could be together as much as possible. This meant sometimes not working in an office, but at something people apparently thought was "lower class." I did this because I always thought my marriage and my home were my real life. My jobs, although I did them well, were what FUNDED my real life. I tried not to self identify through them.)
( permalink | suggest removal )
Packman says... January 16, 2013 at 11:11 a.m.
Hey Populist - Admit it, you're a liberal. Again, there are worse things to admit in life. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth when you say you support increased federal government spending on education and then say you support things generally brought about by local control that is critically wounded by federal government dollars and all the strings attached. Liberals also love to speak out of both sides of mouth.
I meant what I said about gutting a deer as a compliment - it's something rednecks are good at. So, your dad didn't take pleasure at "killing things". Did he take pleasure with a good T-bone steak from an animal that was killed by someone else, perhaps because he wasn't "manly" enough to kill it himself? I was entirely too slow to remotely consider playing in the NFL, but I played a little college football. What position did your pops play? I was a D-back.
And you still haven't really answered by question about why we need to cut the deficit?
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 16, 2013 at 12:31 p.m.
Packman,
Yes, I answered the question about needing to cut the deficit above.
You are ridiculous to suggest that a man who enlisted in WWII at the age of 17, landed on Omaha Beach on D-Day at the age of 19, took part in the invasion of Okinawa, played a little pro-football (Offensive Lineman), and later in life wrestled an armed gunman to the ground to save the lives of other people is something less of a man because he did not enjoy killing animals for sport. (Dad ate everything including meat. He grew up in Oklahoma during the Depression and there was nothing he would not eat. He always cleaned his plate.) You are just beyond ridiculous.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... January 16, 2013 at 1:50 p.m.
Inquire,
I see we agree on many of these points. While some may view a nice home, good food, a nice garden, and good company as little things which are beneath them, they really are of the utmost importance. While Thomas Jefferson was one of the most brilliant men who ever lived, he spent much of his time concerned with household matters such as cooking and gardening which he considered matters of the utmost importance. Some people are too busy working to really live.
( permalink | suggest removal )
BillSmith says... January 16, 2013 at 8:15 p.m.
fairandbalanced,packman,1934cartoon,.........
Ford, Carter, Reagan Push for Gun Ban
May 05, 1994|WILLIAM J. EATON | TIMES STAFF WRITER
WASHINGTON — Three former presidents endorsed legislation Wednesday to ban the future manufacture, sale and possession of combat-style assault weapons as a closely divided House neared a showdown today on the hotly controversial issue.
Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan sent a letter to all House members expressing their support for the measure, effectively joining President Clinton in urging approval of the ban.
*
Where was all the outrage because these three sent a letter to congress supporting the ban? Do you not understand what this says "RONALD REAGAN"! The "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" guy. What has changed in the republican party, I'll tell you, a black man was elected president, the tea party's rise in the party and the growth of the gun nuts that think they need their Bushmaster to fight US troops when they come to take their guns. By the way the Florida "Tea Party" is changing it's name because of the negative views the current name bestows on them, but a leopard does not change its spots, they still espouse the same policies. Show up a political rallies with a Bushmaster slung over their sholder and Glock on their hip wearing a "Don't Tread on Me" tee shirt. And they wonder why young children write letters to the President in support of gun control. Folks, these young children will be the voters of tomorrow, GOP, you are on the wrong side of this argument as you were on most issues in the last election.
( permalink | suggest removal )
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.