Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 1228)

President Obama is set to address the nation at 10:30 p.m. EDT. Quite unexpected to say the least. There's no word what the announcement is.

Continue reading …
Paul Ryan blames rowdy town halls on ‘misinformation’

Click here to view this media Outraged constituents have showed up at town hall events across the country to protest a Republican budget plan that would end Medicare as it exists today but Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) says it’s all been a misunderstanding. “The crowds are really getting bigger and people are getting much more anxious about where the country is headed,” Ryan told ABC’s Christiane Amanpour in an interview that aired Sunday. “This is the sign of the times, I think. I think it’s sign of anxiety of the times and sign of misinformation perpetrated out there.” “What do you mean, misinformation?” Amanpour asked. “There are TV, radio and phone calls running, trying to scare seniors. The Democratic National Committee is running phone calls to seniors in my district, TV ads, saying we’re hurting current senior, which in fact that’s not the case,” Ryan explained. But Democrats claim that the Republican plan authored by Ryan would force millions of seniors to pay an extra $2.2 billion next year alone. And they say that for Americans under 55, the plan would effectively eliminate Medicare by replacing it with a voucher system. The Congressional Budget Office has predicted that in ten years, the new Medicare system would cost each senior about $6,500 extra per year. “Put these reforms in now, they don’t take effect for ten years to give people time to prepare,” Ryan told constituents at one town hall last week. “If we keep kicking the can down the road and keep going trillions of dollars deeper in the hole, then the reforms will be sudden, urgent, severe and immediate, and then it will catch people by surprise.”

Continue reading …
Bob Schieffer Asks McCain: ‘Do You Think Trump is Playing the Race Card on Obama?’

CBS's Bob Schieffer made some headlines Wednesday when he said Donald Trump was a racist for wanting to see President Obama's college grades. The “Face the Nation” host pushed this matter further Sunday when he asked Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), “Do you think [Trump's] trying to play a race card here, suggesting we ought to check Barack Obama’s college grades, that maybe he got into Harvard because he was black?” (video follows with transcript and commentary): BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST: Let me ask you about the thing that all of Washington is buzzing about, especially since last night. (LAUGHTER) And that is, do you somehow sense that the president may be trying to make Donald Trump the face of your party, the Republican Party? And what would be the result of that? SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R-ARIZONA): I think he may try to, but I don’t think that’s going to happen. I think Mr. Trump is having a lot of fun and it’s pretty clear he enjoys the limelight. We have very serious candidates. And I think that, if Mr. Trump wants to run, he’s welcome to run. SCHIEFFER: Do you think he’s trying to play a race card here, suggesting we ought to check Barack Obama’s college grades, that maybe he got into Harvard because he was black? MCCAIN: I wouldn’t accuse him of that. But all of this is so unnecessary. With unemployment where it is, with the challenges we face, let’s not have a national conversation about that. In the ensuing segment, likely imagining he'd get a more satisfactory answer, Schieffer pressed this issue further with Georgetown University sociology professor Michael Eric Dyson: SCHIEFFER: I want to talk to the — to the more serious side of this because, after this whole birther thing, the president put out his birth certificate this week. Then Donald Trump held this news conference up in New Hampshire and brings up the question of President Obama’s grades when he was going to college. Let’s listen to this. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, CHAIRMAN AND CEO, TRUMP ORGANIZATION: The word is — you know, you’d think he’d want to release it, actually, because the word is he wasn’t a good student and he ended up getting into Columbia and Harvard. And I’d like to know… QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) TRUMP: I’d like to know — well, this is what I read written by some of the people in this room. I’d like to know how does he get into Harvard; how does he get into Columbia if he isn’t a good student? It’s an interesting thing. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHIEFFER: Michael Eric Dyson, what — what was Donald Trump saying there? MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: Well, this is racism by inference. The implication is that Obama is not up to snuff. You know, skepticism about black intelligence and suspicion about black humanity have gone hand in hand, Bob, throughout the history of this country in feeding the perception that black people don’t quite measure up. Thomas Jefferson, in “Notes on Virginia,” was skeptical about the rational capacity of black people. I’m not equating Thomas Jefferson and Donald Trump. (LAUGHTER) We don’t have to fear that Donald Trump is the face of the Republican party. Maybe another part of the anatomy might be more correct. (LAUGHTER) The problem is that this — this invidious bigotry — he’s part of a bigotocracy — this bigotocrat out there promoting conspiracy theories, half-hearted truths, factual errors. Barack Obama is a magna cum laude graduate of the Harvard Law School. Here he is the editor of the Law Review, unimpeachable intellectual credentials. Now we have a retroactive bigotry that tries to question his very bonafides. I think this is just shameful and it’s sad. And unfortunately, Donald Trump has commandeered the bully pulpit. If he is indeed the voice of Republicans, they ought to say so. But if not, they ought to distance themselves from him and suggest that this obsession with the birth of Barack Obama has to be put aside to deal with more serious and sustained issues. But make no mistake; this is part of a racist trajectory. Having gotten the answer he surely was looking for, Schieffer should have rested his case. Instead, he mistakenly took this issue up with former George W. Bush speechwriter and current Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson who gave a far more reasonable response: MICHAEL GERSON, WASHINGTON POST: I do think that’s the sub-context here because race is the sub-context of American history. But I would only add to that that the last three presidents have these kinds of conspiracy theories used against them. Bill Clinton was accused of complicity in murder. You know, up to 50% of the Democratic Party, you know, members believed that George Bush was complicit in 9/11. There is a percentage of the population out there that is so highly polarized that they will believe anything about a president that they disagree with. That’s deeply dangerous. It’s a questioning the legitimacy, not policies. And we’ve seen more and more of this in the last few decades not just in this circumstance. Indeed , but that's not going to stop Schieffer and his ilk from doing everything in their power to position this as prejudice rather than differing political views thereby making it they that are playing the race card.

Continue reading …
Bachmann claims NATO killed 30,000 civilians in Libya

Click here to view this media Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) got her facts confused Sunday while objecting to President Barack Obama’s decision to participate in the military action against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. The Minnesota congresswoman told Fox News’ Chris Wallace that NATO airstrikes had killed up to 30,000 civilians in the country. “People should be outraged at the foolishness of the president’s decision,” she said. “He said he wanted to go in for humanitarian purposes and overnight we are hearing that potentially 10 to 30,000 people could have been killed in the strike. Those are some of the reports.” “The NATO strikes killed 10,000 to 30,000 people?” an incredulous Wallace asked. “A report that came out last night from the Tripoli ambassador said that potentially there could be 10,000 to 30,000,” Bachmann insisted. “You mean the Libyans?” Wallace pressed. “Yes,” Bachmann replied. “You think Muammar Gaddafi is a reliable person?” Wallace wondered. “I don’t think anyone thinks that. President Obama, his doctrine was to enter in Libya for humanitarian purposes. The point of what I’m saying is that we are see many, many lives lost. Including innocent civilians’ lives. What will be the ultimate objective and gain? I don’t see it. I think it was a foolish decision to have gotten involved,” Bachmann said. In fact, the tea party-backed lawmaker seemed to be referring to a statement made by U.S. Ambassador to Libya Gene Cretz last week. Cretz had said that U.S. officials believed that 10,000 to 30,000 had been killed by fighting between Gaddafi forces and the rebels, not NATO airstrikes. To his credit, Wallace corrected Bachmann in a later segment. “I just want to clear up, because we looked into what Michele Bachmann had been saying. She quoted the U.S. ambassador to Libya saying 30,000 people had been killed in the NATO strike so far. In fact, what Ambassador Gene Cretz said is that he estimated that 30,000 people had been killed by all sides in the entire conflict. That includes the rebels and the Gaddafi forces. So big difference,” he said.

Continue reading …
Buffet shrugs off ‘brush with scandal’

Investment guru has tried to brush off the share trading scandal that marred Berkshire Hathaway’s annual shareholder rally Investment guru Warren Buffett has tried to brush off the share trading scandal that marred his investment firm Berkshire Hathaway’s annual shareholder rally, telling reporters, “I don’t think it will change a record of 80 years.” David Sokol, a former heir apparent to Buffett’s chief executive position, accused the investment guru of scapegoating him over the weekend. Sokol said he is “deeply saddened” by Buffett’s decision to publicly “disparage” him over a controversial share deal. In a statement, Sokol’s lawyers said the executive had considered Buffett a “friend and mentor”. Sokol resigned earlier last month after Berkshire disclosed he had invested $10m (£6m) in Lubrizol, a chemicals company he later advised Buffett to buy. Sokol made $3m profit on the deal. Speaking this weekend, Buffett, one of the world’s richest men, called Sokol’s behaviour “inexcusable and incomprehensible”. He said he had collected “pretty damning evidence” against Sokol and given it to the financial regulator the Securities and Exchange Commission. Buffett said the authorities had asked him about other trades Sokol may have made, but he knew of no others. He said they were not investigating any other directors. Buffett’s business partner, Charlie Munger, said the firm had had “a brush with scandal” but its record was “pretty damn good”. Munger said: “We are not looking under every rock and anticipating more to come.” The Sokol affair cast a shadow over Berkshire’s meeting in Omaha, which attracts 40,000 people. Many shareholders questioned Buffett about his initial statement on Sokol’s resignation. At the time he had said: “Neither Dave nor I feel his Lubrizol purchases were in any way unlawful.” Buffett had also described Sokol’s contribution to the company as “extraordinary” and said the resignation had been a “total surprise”. Sokol had run several Berkshire subsidiaries, including MidAmerican Energy and NetJets, which sells part-ownerships of private jets. At his annual meeting, Buffett said he had made a “big mistake” in not quizzing Sokol about the controversial share deal. He said he had paid him $24m last year; Sokol is believed to be worth more than $100m. Buffett said Sokol once volunteered to give $12.5m of a bonus to Greg Abel, his colleague in Berkshire-owned energy firm MidAmerican, because he thought the money should be shared. Last year Sokol was a hit with shareholders, who wanted their photo taken with a man tipped to be Buffett’s successor. Through his lawyers Sokol said: “It is alarming that Mr Buffett would be advised to so completely flip-flop and resort to transparent scapegoatism. After 11 years of dedicated and hugely successful service to various Berkshire Hathaway subsidiaries, Mr Sokol would have expected to be treated fairly. That would have been in Berkshire’s interest.” At a press conference, Buffett said his lawyers had attempted to talk to Sokol and calls had not been returned. Buffett spoke at length about the US and European economies. He believes another banking crisis is unlikely in the near future in the US but expressed concern about the fragility of the European Union. Buffett said European banks could have problems if their nations are unable to resolve their debt problems and said it was hard to say whether EU countries would be willing to stay tied to a single currency if they have to keep bailing out other nations. Munger said: “I think Europe has a hell of a problem.” He described recent attempts to solve Europe’s issues as “a Band-Aid on a cancer.” The pair said it was too early to tell whether the UK’s austerity measures would rescue Britain’s economy. “Three years from now you’ll read some fascinating accounts of what’s happening in Britain and in Europe,” said Buffett. “I just don’t know what the final chapter is yet.” Berkshire owns shares in Tesco, a company he said was “clearly a very good business”, although Buffett refused to be drawn on whether it would buy more. But Munger commented on Tesco’s problems with its US chain, Fresh & Easy, saying it should really be called “Fresh & Hard”. Buffett’s most fancied successor is now Ajit Jain, head of Berkshire’s reinsurance businesses. “To an extraordinary degree, he thinks about Berkshire first,” Buffett told shareholders. The investment guru has said he has a list of potential successors and intends to split his job, appointing a chief executive and a chief investment officer. He said his successor would come from within Berkshire but was unlikely to have the same management style as Munger and Buffett, whose annual shareholder meeting is a jamboree, with investors from all over the world flying in to hear the duo talk about their lives as much as their share picks. Buffett makes comedy films and plays music at the event. He said they were not looking on Broadway for a replacement. “I don’t think they will be looking for someone who plays the ukulele,” Buffett said. Warren Buffett Dominic Rushe guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

Grampy “Bomb, bomb, bomb…” McSame is at it again : Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sunday criticized President Obama for taking a “backseat role” in Libya, and said it was time for the United States to get “back in the fight.” In an appearance on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” McCain argued that Mr. Obama had “withdrawn” from NATO in its actions against Libya, and that NATO forces were subsequently weakened and inadequately supplied. “I would like to remind you that NATO is an organization of 28 countries,” McCain told CBS’ Bob Schieffer. “With Italy there’s now seven of them actually in the fight. They don’t have the assets that the United States of America does. …the United States is NATO. So the British and the French – God bless them and others – they don’t have the assets. They are running out of some of their munitions. “We need to get back into the fight,” McCain urged. “We should be leading. We should not be following.” McCain warned against allowing the conflict to end in a stalemate, an outcome he characterized as “very bad,” and which he said would “open the door to al Qaeda.” “It’s events on the ground that will drive Qaddafi’s desire to leave or not to leave,” McCain said. “Right now in many respects he’s not doing too badly for a third-rate military power.”And while the senator emphasized his opposition to employing ground troops in the Libyan conflict, McCain said the U.S. had to “get its assets back into the air fight” and elsewhere. *Sigh* Notwithstanding my deep, deep disgust that Mr. Perpetual Guest is given another chance to parade his sour grapes undermining of the president on the Sunday show circuit, the question that begs to be posed is if there is any conflict that he wouldn’t break out the pom poms for? Sweet flying spaghetti monster, when deficit spending is on the tongue of every member of the GOP and their enabling buddies in the media, what we need to now is add yet another front in the Middle East to prove our unapologetic imperialism? Of course, the cynic in me thinks that had Obama chose the path McCain advocates (even though it’s a violation of international law, something McCain is frightfully ignorant of–a trait you don’t want to see in the almost POTUS), that he would find himself doing a 180 flip flop to complain about Obama’s imperialism. What is interesting to me is the inconsistency McCain applies to dealing with Syria. He raises the great fear-mongering bogeyman of al Qaeda in Lebanon to justify increased military air presence (despite that pesky Shia/Sunni/Hezbollah conflict making it doubtful), but ignores that Syria has become, by all intelligence reports, a true haven for al Qaeda . Of course, host Bob Schieffer sees no point in asking such questions on consistency and lawfulness.

Continue reading …
Trumped-Up Laughs: White House Correspondents’ Dinner Roasts The Donald

President Obama may have edged out Seth Meyers in laughs Saturday night as both funnymen ripped on the issues of the past year – and especially the past week. Noted funnyman Seth Meyers – and the surprisingly hilarious President Obama – took center stage at Saturday’s self-proclaimed Nerd Prom. Pundits and journalists flocked to D.C.

Continue reading …
Clive James has leukaemia

The Australian, 71, treated at Addenbrooke’s hospital in Cambridge after being diagnosed in 2010 Clive James, the Australian television presenter and critic, has leukaemia, it has emerged. James, 71, was diagnosed with the illness in January 2010. His wife, Prue Shaw, an academic, said her husband was being treated at Addenbrooke’s hospital in Cambridge. Luke Slattery, editor of the Australian Literary Review, said James had been forced to ration his time to work on several book projects, including a second volume of Cultural Amnesia. James, who has two daughters, has lived in England since leaving Sydney in 1961 and has worked as columnist for The Observer, as well as television critic. Clive James Cancer Health Damien Pearse guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
New York aims to be great again

Mayor Michael Bloomberg announces three-year plan to spend £215m reclaiming 520 miles of shoreline for the people The view from pier six on the Brooklyn side of the East river is breathtaking: the majestic skyline of downtown Manhattan boasts its latest addition, a new residential tower designed by Frank Gehry . In the distance to the right, the spires of the Empire State and the Chrysler buildings reflect the sunlight as if dipped in molten gold. But the pier itself is not such a happy sight. A wasteland of concrete, rusty steel frames, rotting blocks of wood and mounds of gravel, it is testament to the decline of this stretch of Brooklyn, as well as to the neglect that for many years has defined New York’s relationship with its waterfront. There are few cities in the world that can compete with New York for the extent and diversity of its water. It has 520 miles of shoreline – more than Chicago, Portland, San Francisco and Seattle combined. The city is embraced by two powerful tidal rivers, the Hudson and the East river, and two major bays, Long Island Sound and the Atlantic, affording New Yorkers the pleasures of 16 miles of beaches. Yet, until recently, you would hardly have noticed it. New York City looked inward to its famous buildings and Central Park, away from the gift of its waterways. As the mayor, Michael Bloomberg, has said: “At some point in our history, we literally and figuratively turned our back on the waterfront.” Now Bloomberg and his team have declared that they are determined the waste will be brought to an end, that New York will be reconnected with its water. Bloomberg has announced a $360m (£215m) three-year action plan that aims to bring the shoreline back into the heart of the community. “The water is the connective tissue of this place – we see it as our sixth borough,” said Amanda Burden, the city’s chief planner. “The ambition is to make New York City once again one of the world’s great harbour cities and to reclaim the water as a part of New Yorkers’ everyday lives.” That is not an insignificant goal. Julia Vitullo-Martin, an expert on cities at the Regional Plan Association , said that making the most of rivers, lakes and seas had become an economic imperative. “When you think of any successful modern city – London, Paris, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Sydney – they are all making great use of their waterfronts.” Under the new plan, 130 projects have been funded including 14 new greenways and esplanades and 20 hectares (50 acres) of new waterfront parks. New Yorkers will be encouraged not just to go to the water, but to go on to it. Within three years, there will be 60 launching pads around the city for those who want to go canoeing or sailing. From this summer, a high-speed ferry service will run every 20 minutes between Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens, which Burden says will help blur the boundaries of the five boroughs and integrate the city. Economic incentives will be used to revitalise the port, which remains the largest on the US east coast, providing $6.8bn in business revenues. The paradox is that New York became the powerhouse that it is today largely because of the water, both in terms of its population, which swelled with the arrival of European immigrants landing at Ellis Island, and economically, with the triangle trade in cotton and slaves between Africa and the American Deep South. “It’s incredible given its origins that the waterfront has become such a dead loss to New York,” said Lisa Keller, a historian at the State University of New York and executive editor of the Encyclopedia of New York City. The trouble began, Keller explained, in the 1840s when railway lines were laid along the shoreline, cutting off New Yorkers from their rivers. That was accentuated in the early 20th century when the main roads through Manhattan, the East River Drive (opened 1929) and the West Side Highway (1931), were carved in concrete swaths all the way along the respective perimeters of the island. “You have just two arteries in Manhattan – only two – and they put them both on the water. That was crazy!” said Keller. When low-cost housing was built after the second world war, that too was put on the water. Industrial decline in turn took its toll, leaving large stretches in the Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn derelict and dangerous to the public. Since he entered City Hall nine years ago, Bloomberg has tried to tackle this sad anomaly. The city has bought up 151 hectares of shoreline and turned it into parks and recreation areas, and there are already 20 miles of accessible waterfront paths, such as the greenway along Manhattan’s West Side, which has become a favourite haunt of joggers and cyclists. Burden said that the aim of the three-year plan was to build on what had already been done and knit it together so that New York really began to feel like a water city once more. There are still daunting hurdles ahead. The major highways and housing projects that created the problem in the first place cannot be removed without massive expense, which New York cannot afford, and much of the waterfront remains in the hands of private owners who may resist public access. But the change is palpable, and spreading steadily across the city. In June, on the Manhattan side of the East river, a new Waterfront Park will open within walking distance of Wall Street. And within a year or so pier six on the other side of the river will no longer be the concrete wasteland it is today. Work has begun that will transform it into a park where Brooklynites will be able to watch open-air films on balmy summer nights or stroll up to Brooklyn Bridge, where the waterfront has already been converted into glorious green public space. That stunning view of the Manhattan skyline will then be there for everyone to celebrate, not behind the ugly wire fence that encloses the pier but from the water’s edge with the powerful East river lapping at your feet. New York Water transport United States Ed Pilkington guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Republicans Attack the President for Rising Gas Prices in Weekly Address

Click here to view this media The Republican Party decided to attack President Obama for the cost of rising gas prices in the United States in their response to the White House’s Weekly Address and it basically amounted to more “drill baby drill” nonsense that we know won’t get us off our dependence on foreign oil and deregulate industry in the name of job creation in the wake of what we saw go on in the Gulf of Mexico. Lankford also fully endorsed the Ryan budget here and did a good job of fearmongering about our deficit and debt, but once again made the mistake of thinking that seniors don’t care what happens to their children or grand children. I guess this guy hasn’t been hosting too many town halls of late because Republicans have been getting hammered for supporting the Ryan budget all over the country. If privatizing Medicare and turning it into a voucher system is really what they want to run on the next election cycle, all I can say is good luck to them on that. As was already noted in my post with Lou Dobbs taking up for Exxon Mobil and the oil industry, those industries are making record profits. I really have a lot of trouble believing that either the GOP’s weekly response or the sort of nonsense we heard out of Dobbs defending these oil companies and coming to their defense is going to resonate much with the voters next election. Somehow, leave the poor oil company executives alone doesn’t sound like a very good campaign slogan to me. Transcript via the LA Times : Hello, my name is James Lankford, and I’m a freshman member of Congress, working for the people of Oklahoma’s 5th Congressional District. When I listen to my constituents about the challenges they face, skyrocketing cost of gasoline is at the top of the list. Prices at the pump have nearly doubled since President Obama took office, making everyday life like driving to work, buying groceries, picking up kids at school and visiting family more expensive. Even worse, the rising price of fuel is costing jobs and hurting our economy. Higher energy prices hit virtually every American product and industry, making it more expensive to manufacture products, more expensive to ship goods, and more expensive for farmers and ranchers. In fact, higher energy costs make everything made in the USA more expensive, and send more good-paying jobs overseas. Americans are looking for leadership to tackle the rising gas prices, but President Obama has only offered a tax increase on energy and the prospect of reduced supply. For more than two years, his administration has knowingly increased energy prices by choking off new sources of traditional American energy and smothering our economy in new energy regulations. His latest proposal — hiking taxes by billions of dollars –- will not lower gas prices and would actually make the problem worse. In my state, and in many other states, thousands of people depend directly on American energy production for their paychecks. The president may think he’s punishing CEOs of big companies, but his plan will hurt the everyday consumer of energy and imperil the jobs of millions of hardworking people in American-based companies. There is a better way. Republicans are focused on expanding all American energy production to help lower costs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and create millions of American jobs. Next week, the House of Representatives will begin this process by passing legislation to increase the supply of American energy and create jobs. This legislation is part of our American Energy Initiative –- an ongoing effort to lower costs and allow the private sector to create more American jobs. Quite simply, if the president chooses to punt on real long-term solutions for energy and gas prices, we will take the lead. Two weeks ago, I was proud to cast my vote in the House for a budget that promotes economic growth and job creation by putting us on a path to pay down our debt, and preserve Medicaid and Medicare for current retirees and future generations. Our national debt is worse than most people realize. We must solve our budget problem, not just talk about the crisis. The president’s budget proposal fails to offer a credible plan that meets the nation’s challenges in a serious manner. He considers it radical and extreme to balance the budget by doing what every American business and family does in tough times – they reduce spending. We need to be honest with the American people. Washington should not overspend, then go to the American people and demand a tax increase because we cannot make the tough decisions. And, we cannot ignore the fact that tens of millions of baby boomers are beginning to retire while Medicare is already teetering at the brink of insolvency. We must stabilize, and protect Medicare and Medicaid. Let me be clear: The Republican plan would not affect current Medicare beneficiaries, or any American 55 or older. To address Medicare’s looming insolvency though, we put in place a plan to save Medicare for those under 55. We want them to have access to the same kind of medical retirement options that members of Congress and all federal employees benefit from. The president’s proposal protects the status quo: an unsustainable system that will bankrupt Medicare and lead to future deep, painful benefit cuts for seniors, while continuing to pile trillions of dollars of obligation on the backs of future generations. The world is watching to see how we’ll handle our debt. Everyone wants to know if we’ll just pile up more debt with no plan to ever pay it off, or if we will find a way to permanently work on our national debt. The president wants us to raise the debt limit with no real reforms to stop future Washington spending binges. To let Washington borrow even more money from the Chinese and hand the bill to our kids and grandkids. This would be a stark moment in American history, when a president would intentionally declare: ‘times are tough, I think I’ll make life tougher on my kids and grandkids’ generation to make life easier on me and my generation.’ We have responded differently: The American people will not tolerate an increase in the debt limit unless it comes with meaningful steps to cut Washington spending and start working us out of debt. No more blank checks and huge bills on our children so someone in Washington can retain power. On gas prices, the budget and the debt limit, we will continue to offer real solutions to lower gas prices, create jobs, and ensure the next generation still has a shot at the American dream. Our nation’s been through difficult times before. We can do this if we will work together to solve the problems instead of just talking about them. May God bless our families and our great nation. Thank you for listening.

Continue reading …