THE LOOMING DEBT CRISIS.

Americans know what the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives John Boehner's bill that has just been passed in the House, is. It is a one sided compromise; a smoke and mirror composition of the same bill, which has come by another name of "Cut, Cap and Balance", only a few days back.

The White House and the Democratic party has rejected it, and they would continue to repudiate it. It was the same or an identical one that Senator Harry Reid, Democratic Majority leader in the Senate has tabled. He himself has prepared another plan that his Democratic colleagues favored.

He has done so for just one reason and one reason only, that a real compromise might be reached within the next few hours, from twenty-four to forty-eight hours. That has become a rare window of opportunity for lawmakers to come together on a bi-partisan basis to remedy the debt ceiling crisis; and they must find a way to make use of it.

Any other avenue would just be a waste of time, as the August 2nd. deadline of default approached stealthily.

Investment companies, banks, financial and business corporations of all kinds have come out almost in one voice to decry the result that would present itself, if America failed to meet its debt obligations by allowing the deadline to pass by. The consequence would create an unbearable atmosphere for them, not only within the country, but also outside the United States.

In other words, it was not just a U.S. economic crisis, but a global one that would affect all financial markets. It would be a worldwide problem, whose outcome would be unfavorable all around. Something must therefore be done forthwith, before that "window" closed.

Congressional procedure would have a joint committee examining the Reid and Boehner plans to find a common ground for an agreement between the two, and then compose a new bill that would pass in the Senate as well as in the House.

President Barack Obama has reiterated the shortness of time for a solution to emerge, as he has personally urged the American public at large to call those who represented the nation in Congress, and asked them to put politics aside in their attempt to stop the financial destruction that would ensue, if America defaulted.

He has also clarified the U.S. position, in no uncertain terms, as being the biggest economic market, and it must do whatever it possibly could to calm the jitters that other markets were experiencing, because of what was taking place locally.

Otherwise, things would get out of hand, as the situations in Greece, Spain and other such places; and that would not be, for that matter, in the best interest of anyone or any country concerned.

America must retain its high trade/credit rating to ensure that capital investments were safe in the country, and that investors must continue to rely on the availability of the vast opportunities that have been made for them to thrive economically in the past.

With such assurances, big corporations and companies would begin to hire people for the dismal unemployment rate of 9.2% to reduce. The economy would bounce back to enable Americans to breathe freely once more.

This must be the time when Congress stood out to defend the nation's reputation, and its resilience to remain a stronghold that world financial markets and institutions have come to depend and count on; and it must do so by passing a bill that could be signed by president Obama into law to resolve the issue.

The looming debt crisis would then be behind the U.S.

DEBT CRISIS AND COMMON SENSE.

Common sense is stitll a rare commodity in Washington D.C.; but that is all the people that are bickering over the debt ceiling need.

One side sees the country falling into a ditch, which is the deadline date of August 2nd., 2011, when America will default on making its debt payments; and so, it must do whatever it takes to avoid such an occurrence; while the other side surmises that it is an opportunity to do away with a government that is too left-wing to the point of it being socialistic.

The Democratic Party wants a compromise to deal with the debt ceiling crisis, but the Republican Party is engaged in finding a solution of bringing the government and its policies down before too long.

Thus, the two factions are not concerned about the same things, or they are more akin to strongly connecting with political ideologies; except that they are in the same forum and talking over each other's head.

The country then becomes a victim of circumstances, because nobody is actually making any serious effort to get it out of trouble; as there are those, who want it (country) to sweat it out, come what may.

President Barack Obama has done all he can to persuade the United States Congress of an impending fiscal calamity, and for it (Congress) to use every means necessary to avert it. The onus to do whatever it can then falls in the hands of the people's representatives, to save the country.

Yet, there are members, who are in the majority and wish that the situation will work in their favor, and force him (Obama) to be on the losing side; with him taking all the blame for the country's economic difficulties, and eventually becoming the fall guy, so to speak.

Presently, it is going to take a miracle for a compromise to be reached; however, it seems so simplistic to realize that, all there is left to do is to have Senate Mojority leader Harry Reid's plan to be laid along side the one being proposed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner, and for a special joint Congressional committee to figure out how the two plans can be merged to resolve the problem.

Time is even running out for that window of opportunity, as die hard right-wing party members, who profess that they had been elected to come to the Capitol to stop the runaway spending of the Obama administration; and that they will choose to be strong headed and partisan, instead of being open minded for the sake of the country's financial future, are permitted to gain the upper hand. They are intentionally showing that they prefer to stick to their guns, and "let the chips fall where they may."

However, to many of us, "Our way, or the highway" attitude of their's must be set aside.

They have every right to stick to their party's policies; but at this critical moment, when all there is to be done is to have a little bit of common sense to prevail; and that, all they need to do is to put country before party, they must at least grant the country a chance to come out from under the current economic recession.

That will give them a breathing space for them to function properly, and be able to deal with other matters that are bound to follow.

The slogan now has to be one that says, "We can work it out" or "We will all win together or we will all perish together, for we are all in it together".

Allowing politics to run amok as usual will be dangerous not only to themselves, but to all Americans.

A DEFAULT.

Congressional Republicans know by now what President Barack Obama will sign into law, and therefore, their efforts to stop the United States from falling into a fiscal abyss, as many leading economists are predicting, if a default occurs by the deadline date of August 2nd. 2011, must be geared to making sure that the new Boehner plan, which is scheduled to be voted on today, receives the accord that the White House is expecting.

It must have a balanced approach by the inclusion of revenues that will help in the deficit reduction, which the whole country is looking forward to seeing; as cutting alone into social programs will not be considered as being fair to the elderly and the needy.

That it (plan) will prevent America from losing its high trade/credit rating, and calm the jitters in the overall global economy, and thereby make for a peaceful conclusion to the nation's financial state, for it to remain a citadel of economic stability that the world wants.

It is true that the plan will not be appreciated by Democrats in the Senate, who have already sent a letter to condemn it; but they also have another plan by Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic majority leader in the Senate, that can be aligned with the Boehner plan for a common ground to be found.

Many believe that a merger of the two plans will lead to a compromise and a solution to the problem at hand; and that is what the United States Congress must aspire to achieve.

However, time is of the essence, and so, lawmakers cannot afford to sit on their hands and continue to stir the current deadlock in the face. That will not help anyone, as it will rather harden the resolve of a few die hard left-wing and right-wing members of both parties and make matters worse than before.

All the polls show that, what the country needs is a compromise to resolve the immediate problem of default. There will be plenty of time to deal with other issues that are also pressing.

Yet, presently, Congress must do what it is supposed to do to relieve the pressure on the country's fragile economy to enable companies and corporations to start hiring again, in order for the stiff unemployment rate to go down.

To get the economy to come out from under the stressful nature of the financial problems the country now finds itself is what industries, investment companies and Wall Street want.

As for the uneasiness in world financial markets, they are relating their source of that (uneasiness) to what is happening in America.

They (markets) are wondering why the U.S. is failing to act positively to avert a disaster that will be felt around the globe. They cannot stand the prevailing uncertainty; and as a result their points and averages are falling, not almost, but daily.

In short, the U.S. must not default; it has never done so before. To allow it to happen now will have a far reaching, negative result; and that is the only reason, Congress needs to function in the best way possible.

OBAMA'S RACE.

The Republican Party's zeal for the United States government to default, by all intents and purposes, seems not just political, but also racial.

Its leaders know that pushing the so called "deadlock" past August 2nd., will cause extensive damage, not only to the country's sluggish economy, but it will destroy the reputation the U.S. has in world financial circles.

It would make the U.S. dollar less valuable, which in effect would bring about inflation and high cost of living; and that would be the lesser part of how foreboding things would look like.

Besides, Wall Street would "sneeze", which would put main street on notice that a downturn of the economy was about to happen; and with it would farther exacerbate the present recession, and make unemployment levels and interest rates to rise; thus increasing the financial hardships for the general public at large.

The public, however, is led to believe that the Republican Party has plans, such as the "Cut, Cap and Balance" to present as a political peace maker to ward off the impending catastrophe that the failure of raising the debt ceiling will bring. Wrong!

Their thoughts are the reverse, for they are earnestly looking forward to seeing America defaulting, and putting the blame on the people who think that anything they (Republicans) have to offer is just a ruse.

The membership has even gone to the extent of denying that "default" would affect anything adversely, and that there was enough money to cover all government expenses, like military payments and Social Security. Therefore all the fear mongering about the outcome of it (default) was false.

Yet, the whole world knew that if the U.S. failed to honor its debt payments just for once, it would have a devastating economic effect on all monetary markets around the globe. It would be the first time that the one currency, which came next in value to gold, has been deliberately allowed to sink, all by itself.

With all that going on, President Barack Obama would personally be blamed, and his government would be condemned for policies unbecoming of the U.S.

The truth would be that his detractors have planned all along that whatever slight chance that came their way, they would use it to derail the Obama administration. That went to show that the animosity toward the president went beyond the ordinary, as having a problem with a person, but also his race must be considered as part of it (problem).

Therefore, the best avenue to use to get rid of him was to place stumbling blocks in his path. For the first time around, America has defaulted under an administration, which happened to have an African American at its head. Nevertheless, would not that be surprising to notice that such happenstance would not be permitted to occur under any other president?

The Republicans really did not want Obama to succeed; and they would organize, as well as muster every effort in the vein, to disgrace him, because of his race. They would do so, and "let the chips fall where they may" for the whole country. In all that, their charlatan attitude toward the debt crisis could not be overlooked or even be underestimated.

It may be a wild speculation; however, is Obama's race in question? Think about it.

THE PRESIDENT Vs THE SPEAKER.

Americans had the opportunity to hear the two depositions by their political leaders on the controversial debate over the federal debt ceiling and its ramifications.

One was to pay off the current debts out right and be able to retain the International trade/credit rating, so as to calm the jitters that were being felt in world financial circles, and the other was to do so on installment basis, which would put it (rating) in jeopardy.

Many would agree that President Barack Obama won the argument hands down, with a stern approach that would remove any doubts in the minds of world financial institutions that America was more serious in meeting its financial obligations without any qualms; whereas the plan by Mr. John Boehner, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, to alleviate the same problem, and to give the world markets the assurance that the nation would remain staunch in keeping its credit status was, at best, lukewarm.

The two approaches were both directed toward the same objective, and that was to avoid default, which was the real issue or focal point to which the two men must strenuously address before a national television audience; and although Speaker Boehner presented his views in accordance with his political ideology, while the president managed to corral public opinion in making his case.

Both men made it clear that default was not an option, and that the debts must be paid on time; therefore the argument that the president was asking for "a blank check" was not exactly true.

The debts have already been racked up by the Congress of the United States, and every member of the appropriations committees in the House, as well as those in the Senate knew about the due amount; therefore to insinuate that the president was requesting anything other than what he should ask for was wrong.

He stressed that both parties should put politics aside and convince their members that the country's financial future was at stake; and that something which went beyond political aspirations was required of all concerned to straighten the situation out.

In other words, he tried to unite the country behind a plan that would be fair to every citizen; equally sharing the common responsibility to handle a huge deficit, which was hanging over everybody's head, in a very practical and simple way.

Speaker Boehner also made the effort to sound convincing, but there was the obvious strings of a group of just elected Tea Party members being attached to every statement he made. They had influenced his decisions from day one; and if so, it would be hard for him to disassociate from their advise, whether good or bad.

However, in the best interest of the nation, he should come around and agree to merge his plan with the one being proposed by Senator Reid, Majority leader in the Senate, to reach a compromise. It happened to be a one shot plan to resolve the matter once and for all, instead of handling it in two or three stages.

To do so, he has to ask the Republican Party Congressional entourage to put the country first in their deliberations.

As for last night, a great majority of Americans agreed that the president won the debate.

OBAMA'S NEXT MOVE.

Whatever comes out of the Debt ceiling and the deficit reduction talks cannot overshadow the fact that Mr. Barack Obama is still the president of the United States, and like other pressing national issues, the ultimate responsibility in resolving them rest squarely on his shoulders.

He must do all he can to sustain and maintain America's AAA trade/credit rating status in the financial world by avoiding a default on paying the government's International debts that are currently due. August 2nd, 2011, is the scheduled deadline for payments to be made, and he must not miss that date for the sake of America's economic future.

Anything short of that will destroy the country's already fragile economy that he has been working so hard to improve. Interest rates will rise, and unemployment levels will get out of hand for the worse.

A default, as it has been predicted by several high ranking economists and intellectuals, will make the stock market to become frantic; a kind of financial turmoil that will put Wall Street in a mode of uncertainty. The country will be left in financial ruins that will be hard to repair for many years to come. That, unfortunately, will be nobody's fault but his, as president.

Everybody knows that those he is having talks with are adamant and dogmatic; and they will never be on the same page as he. Fortunately, he is aware of their political agenda, and that they will not give him the slightest wiggle room to maneuver and be successful in any way, shape or form, in whatever he chooses to do.

Their strategy is to have him politically stranded, and people will say that they are hearing him no differently today as from yesterday. No matter what he says or does, he will be spinning his wheels in the rut of the mushiness that has been left behind in the form of a budget crisis, since the great depression of the 1930s, by his predecessor. That will firmly be to his enemies' advantage; and that is exactly where they want him.

They have made it clear to him in plain and simple language on so many occasions that they want him to be a ONE TERM president. That being their objective, there is nothing he can do to satisfy them; let alone for him to say anything to please them.

The country can go to blazes as far as they are concerned, so long as he is president. Their opportune time is now, on the campaign trail to next year's general election, and they are not going to let it slip through their fingers. To put it bluntly, they are not going to sit around and wait for him to get cocky and be too confident in his attitude toward his re-election ambition in 2012. In fact, any minor thing that speaks well of him will be an anathema to their cause and that of their supporters.

In recent weeks, he has been attacking them and asking that they should contribute their fair share through revenues that are needed to reduce the nation's enormous fiscal deficit. If after such vehement attacks, he thinks that they are going to listen to him, he has another thing coming.

The Republican Party wants him out; and they and their friends are plotting day and night to get rid of him. So, it is actually a waste of time for him to be calling them to the White House and trying to reason with them. That will not work.

In other words, they have put him on notice that his days are numbered in the Oval Office; and they will never be at ease until that happens. Therefore, to invite the same kinds of people and drink tea with them does not make any sense at all. Their mind is made up.

What he must now do is to find a way around them and come up with a plan that will save his administration, as well as the nation from degradation. America has never failed to honor its financial obligations, and he has only one chance to avert such a morose end.

The United States Constitution gives him the right to pay any and all debts the country owes; and therefore, he must concentrate on that provision and prepare to use it.

America needs his leadership to pull it through a dismal economic recession; and his next move must be one that will indicate to his detractors that he has the instrument, given him as mandated by the authority of the U.S. Constitution, to deal with all matters, fiscal and/or otherwise, that are pertaining to the United States; and nobody can stop him from exercising that authority.

Those whom he trusted to come up with a solution have already withdrawn from the talks. Or at best, they seem less interested in talking. Let them stay away, or take a lackluster approach to the talks.

Now, it is your turn to show them that no amount of bullying can deter you from doing your duty as the President of the United States.

Mr. President, forget about the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, the Wall Street Journal, Steve Wynn, whose wife has just divorced him, and people of his caliber; they are all in the same camp, and they are doing everything in their power to undermine you.

What is left for you to do is to get the backing of the American people behind you; nothing can be more important than that. You have already started to do just what they "the people" want you to do by telling it like it is, that the elderly, the poor and the needy cannot bear the brunt of the deficit reduction alone. Others must come in to help; and that is the truth.

No more meetings, as they will lead to nowhere; their outcomes will create more confusion in the minds of members of the public. Hammer on your message and make it to resonate as clear as possible that you are capable of handling America's financial problems, come rain or high water. All you need is to have public opinion on your side. It (public) has already started to rally behind you, Mr. President.

So, keep on doing what you think is right for the nation.


P.S. The bottom part of the blog sounds like a letter to President Obama; and it is.

P.P.S. Mr. Wynn's divorce, as reported by New York Times. (Steve Wynn, the billionaire chief executive of casino operator Wynn Resorts, is officially divorced for the second time from his wife, Elaine.
January 14, 2010).

P.P.P.S. He (Wynn) lives in a glass house, and so he must stop throwing stones.

A G.O.P. BREAK-UP?

The GOP is on the brink of a break-up, as many news reports are pointing to this morning, solely because its lower rank that consists of the Tea Party members, who have been recently elected to Congress in the last lame duck session period in November 2010, plus the ultra right-wing of the party, on one side, versus those who are more experienced veterans in Congressional procedures, on the other, are vying for nothing less than power to determine the party's future.

This has been seen to be long coming during the debate over the limit of borrowing by the United States Government, which has to be raised in order to allow it (government) to deal with its financial obligations, and to be able to cover all expenditures that have been incurred over a certain span of time.

President Barack Obama has said that the exercise, which was known as "raising the debt ceiling", must be initiated ahead of a deadline date of August 2nd. 2011, or else his administration would default in making its payments that were due. That would indicate America's failure to meet its fiscal essentials for the first time in history.

The national debt itself is gauged by how much the government owes to its International debtors, like China and Japan, which is presently standing at a whopping $14 + Trillion dollars; yet, it has to go up by another hefty $2 1/2 Trillion dollars more for payments to be made to those debtors.

It has become a problem for both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party for a compromise to be reached between the two on how the situation must be handled, so that it would not jeopardize an economy that has been struggling to come out of a recession, since the transfer of power to the Obama administration from the latest Bush government.

The Republican Party has maintained that the run away spending of President Obama was standing in the way of raising the debt ceiling, and therefore cuts must be made to reduce the spending.

The Democratic Party has also insisted that if any cuts were made, they should not affect entitlement programs, like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, to the extent of weakening them. Elderly citizens and the poor happened to be the recipients of those programs, and that they would find themselves at the end of the stick, if drastic measures were directed against them (programs).

The Obama administration therefore suggested that revenues should also be raised in the form of taxes on wealthy citizens, to make up for the differences that the deficit reduction would bring about. Without that, it would be seen as making only the elderly, the sick and the poor paying for balancing the deficit reduction; and that would seem unfair.

The Republicans would not want taxes on the wealthy in a recession, or permit the government to close some loopholes in the tax system that favored corporations and other businesses. They asserted that raising taxes would cause the unemployment rate to increase.

The debate over the two topics, "deficit reduction and the raising of the debt ceiling" has been going on for several months between the White House and Congress; until last night, when it was rumored that the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Mr. John Boehner, has decided to withdraw from the debate.

What might have happened was that there has been a rift within the Republican Party, with its leadership wanting a compromise to be reached in the impasse that has developed between the White House and the Republican Party. The quintessential Tea Party element was making matters worse for both sides, as the talks progressed, with a dogma to stand firm and to push off any ideas by the government.

From all vicissitudes, they (the Tea Party members) have come on the Congressional scene, on the premise that they should oppose the Obama administration on any proposal, whether good or bad; and especially, when it came to government spending, they should not budge an inch.

They were therefore sticking to their guns, instead of allowing a breakthrough to find a common ground on every issue the country was facing; but they would say "NO" to any solution, because it was stated by the government to be an optional exit. That was some kind of attitude to take on their part.

Presently, all the president could do, would be to find another way out of the nation's predicament; as a default would farther exacerbate the dire straits the fragile economy found itself in. He has to act in the interest of the United States as a whole; and who could blame him; for he was assigned to do so under any circumstance, when he was elected president.

As for the GOP, it has a whole lifetime to settle its squabbles; but who could tell what the outcome would be; however, they should not do so at the expense of the nation. Look at all the time they have wasted, to arrive at the decision to withdraw from important talks that would put the country first and resolve its problems. As civil servants, have they failed in their responsibility to the United States? You decide.

P.S. Read "TEA PARTY'S DILEMMA", from yesterday, July 22nd. 2011.

TEA PARTY'S DILEMMA.

"Cut, Cap and Balance" plan by Republican members of the United States House of Representatives has no chance of becoming law, as it cannot pass the Senate, because the plan's objective is to obliterate parts of the traditional safety net programs, like Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security.

The support that the plan had has suffered so much, because most of the members of the Tea Party people outside Congress were no more in agreement with the lawmakers they voted for last fall to give the Republicans a majority in the House.

They have realized that "Cut, Cap and Balance" proposal was to needle the poor and the elderly. The idea to reduce government spending was inexplicable at the time of last November vote that swept the Republican Party to power, and so to take over the House.

If the Tea Party members were told that behind the Republican deficit reduction plan, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security would be drastically cut, to make up for the revenue that would come from the closing of tax loopholes, and also getting back on the Bush tax breaks for the rich, they would not have voted the way they did. The resultant would have been different, in that the Democrats would still have had a majority in the House.

Therefore, the Cut, Cap and Balance plan has become only a shell without the oyster. The pearl, which its originators were banking on, was the support of the Tea Party membership as a whole.

However, that is not the case anymore; and one will wonder why the Tea Party members in the House must be vociferous of Cut, Cap and Balance as being the plan of all plans to resolve the Debt controversy.

That goes to show that the Republican Party is only using its new plan "to throw a wrench in the works"; for, although, they do see the need to raise the debt ceiling, but they will not acquiesce, because of political reasons.

There has never been a time, when the United States Government has been prevented by Congress from paying its bills; so, why now?

If a deal is not reached to get the government to honor its obligations by August 2nd, 2011, President Barack Obama will be in the clear, and the Republican Party leadership will be assigned the blame for a default; and that will not go down well with voters.

The outcome of the crisis will definitely influence their (voters) reaction, in terms of casting their vote against those who have instigated that the government must be stopped from paying its bills before the set deadline, in the first place.

Tea Party members have been duped by the Congressmen and women they put their trust into, to do the right things for them, like reducing a runaway government spending; but they did not expect that by so doing, social entitlement programs would be victimized.

In other words, the backing they (Congressmen and women) had from the Tea Party for those members of Congress to be elected has evaporated.

That is where matters stand right now, for the U.S. government to come out of a fiscal gridlock, and to have the economy moving forward once again, except for the foolhardiness of a few Republican Congressional members, whose intention is just to score political points; and furthermore, to defeat President Obama in his re-election bid.

The issue could be dealt with in the safest way possible; however, Republicans would not want to see the president back in office, for another four years; and so, they would not relent in their opposition to raising the debt ceiling.

They would, however, have done a great, great disservice to the nation, for allowing the deadline that would farther plunge America into a more serious economic blunder to go by. They would have failed to raise their little finger to help their fellow Americans in time of financial need to save the country from a disastrous situation.

In view of that, the Republican Party has become the Tea Party's dilemma; or was it the other way around? They did not actually know what to do, in regard to where either of them stood politically; of course.

DEBT CEILING AND YOU.

The ordinary person does not know the workings of the government; professional politicians do. Therefore, 65% of almost all the polls will put people on the side of the government "not raising the debt ceiling".

Nobody wants to have a debt hovering over his or her head; and borrowing is not a common occurrence for everyone. So, when people are told about more borrowing, they are forced to assume that more debt is being piled up on them.

Now, in all honesty, who wants that?

In government, as in normal business operations, borrowing, in nine cases out of ten, is for expansion or growth; it is a means of wriggling out of a bad situation, and making ready to remedy the causes of that situation. It is a chance that businesses take each and every single day.

Moreover, politicians know for a fact that the debt ceiling must be raised to give any government ample room to manage its current fiscal responsibilities by having enough funds to be set aside in readiness to resolve immediate or "nagging" problems.

Therefore, the high poll numbers for not raising the debt ceiling become quite understandable; because, under normal circumstances, people do not want to incur debt.

However, if they are told that raising of the debt ceiling is just a stop-gap measure that any government takes to come out of emergencies, then they tend to oblige to that rational.

That is the position in which President Barack Obama's government finds itself, and in that sense, raising the debt ceiling becomes necessary, not only for his administration, but for the country as a whole.

People are saying that the current recession is bad enough, but if they have to wait for the deadline set for August 2nd, 2011 to go by, the government will have to find another way to meet its financial obligations. It will be in default for not being able to pay all its debts; but If it does cover most of them, it (government) will be alright.

However, the aftermath of a default for the man in the street will be different. Gas and food prices will go up, rent and mortgages will have to be topped up, businesses of all kinds will have to pay high interest rates to remain operational; and all that will go to boost the high unemployment rate, and of course, jack up even more an exorbitant cost of living for everyone.

That will be the scenario at the lowest level of society. Yet, on the high level, Wall Street, which happens to be the gauge of the economy, will be having a hard time rearranging or recouping from mortified transactions. America's AAA trading position will be downgraded; and the whole financial world will be turned upside down.

Is that what people like you and me want? They will blame the Obama government, but it will be too late; and those who want the president's downfall will have succeeded. However, the whole country will be the loser.

The Democratic Party members of Congress are saying that the debt ceiling must be raised to get America out of trouble; but the Republican members (and some may have good intentions) are arguing that to be a state of degradation must be the only option that the nation must choose. Many people will disagree with those Republicans; and the question is, whether their choice is fair or acceptable to all Americans?

I don't think so; how about you?

DEBT CEILING DEADLINE.

It will be an understatement to say that Americans know that they are facing an enormous fiscal problem, whose outcome will determine how the nation's future finances will be handled to keep it in the "black", and permit it to stay economically afloat for, at least, the next ten years.

It has been in the "red", with an exceeding $14 trillion debt that no single person in the country is happy about.

It has become a situation of making a blunder by any serious investment organization to invest its guarded resources in a country that is swimming in so much debt. The question investors are confronted with is, if the United States is no longer a safe haven for major capital investments, then where else can they go?

A blueprint is required to pull the American economy off the cliff within the next few days, with the deadline set for August 2nd, 2011. Meaning that if nothing is done by that time to overcome the present predicament, the nation will be forced to default on its debt payments.

If that is allowed to happen, it will mean that the dollar will decline in value, interest rates will rise, and the adverse specter of unemployment will raise its ugly head even farther up; making it extremely difficult for everyone to have a normal life.

In other words, the financial landscape will change so much, with Wall Street being in disarray, and corporations cannot plan ahead for fear of more recessions or even a complete stagnation.

Businesses will close, as banks and many financial institutions will begin to spin their wheels in perpetual agony, because they cannot make loans that will place them in good stead. To continue operating under normal circumstances will be impossible for them.

The prevention of a default will be to raise the debt ceiling from where it is now, to empower the government to deal with the diabolical economic quagmire that will ensue after the deadline, if nothing substantial is done, as we speak. Anything else will be "throwing water on an oil fire".

The "Cut, Cap and Balance" proposal by Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives seems to have had a clear majority vote yesterday; but it does not fit into a balanced approach that Democrats in the House, as well as in the Senate, can support to make it work.

President Barack Obama has his eyes on "the Gang of Six", a bipartisan group, whose aim is to figure out a set of ideas that will be satisfactory to lawmakers, to enable them to pass them (ideas) into law, which he will sign, in order to avoid default.

Let us hope that Washington will seize the opportunity and come together to find a solution to a dead-end situation. They must get to grips with themselves, despite political leanings, and make every effort to enable them to waive off the dismal, financial calamity that is hanging over the heads of all Americans.

They have the backing of all citizens of goodwill to arrive at a sensible conclusion; one which will be in the best interest of the country as a whole.

DEBT CEILING AND DEFICIT REDUCTION.

The debt ceiling and the deficit reduction combined controversy continues to invade the privacy of all Americans.

President Barack Obama has devoted most of his time in meetings after meetings to get lawmakers to work with him in resolving the problem that the country faces; hoping that his efforts will be rewarded in the end.

Several plans have been put out, the latest being "Cut, Cap and Balance", which has been sponsored by the House Republican majority and will be ready to receive a vote today, Tuesday 19th, 2011.

However, its chances of passing through the Senate is so slim, it is predicted to suffer a DOA (Dead-On-Arrival) outcome in the upper chamber; or it is slated for a presidential veto.

Yet, other plans are being considered for America to refrain from defaulting on its debts for the first time in history; an event that will be froth in widespread economic tragedy.

Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) has the boldest one of all, which he names as "Back to Black", and centers on making deeper cuts to achieve its objectives.

"The senator is unveiling a plan to reduce deficit spending by a whopping $9 trillion, shrink government by some 20 percent and balance the budget, all within 10 years.". "It's specific, it's detailed, it makes hard choices," Coburn said. "And it's rough, but it's necessary.", he is quoted to have added.

The good news is that the attention of a whole nation has been drawn toward a single goal of getting America to be economically sound again; and even though there are varied plans, they are all designed to nurture America's fiscal condition back to good health once more.

No matter which side one finds himself or herself, failure by the United States to default on its financial obligations must not be an option. It will disastrous.

It will be like going to your local bank to get some of your own money out and finding no one there, although the doors are still open for business. You will meet thousands of others who are waiting to do the same thing; and imagine the bedlam that can cause. If that does not send a cold, chilling feeling down your spine; there is nothing that can do so.

At the present moment, there seems to be an underlying factor of confusion on Capitol Hill. Some may even say that Congress itself is dysfunctional; and therefore the odds are in favor of failure to meet the deadline set for August 2nd, but the stakes, however, are too high for such an occurrence. Sleeplessness has set in for many Americans, and they must find a common ground to compromise on the present state of affairs.

It may well seem that the motivation of some members on the Republican side is to see that President Obama fails in the first African American national administration. However, what will be the point? Presidents come and go all the time; but a nation is purported to be there for as long as possible. A national catastrophe is about to happen; and is that not what they are in Congress to prevent?

People with such sinister ideas will not be hurting just the person they hate, but the future of many others, who will come thereafter. Posterity is what we must gear our attention to, in order not for it to suffer from the mistakes by present day generation.

For their sake, a solution must be found to combat the enormous debt the U.S. has incurred over the years; and that will make life better for them, as a result.

The debt ceiling and the cutting back on runaway spending vibrations are resonating all around us; the feeling is rather uncomfortable, so let Congress do something dramatic to stop those bad vibes.

THE DEFICIT REDUCTION AND THE DEBT CEILING.

Deficit reduction and Debt ceiling are two difficult issues facing the United States presently; however, they must both be dealt with strenuously enough for the country to come out of the present recession.

More than that, they can cause so much economic calamity of extensive proportions that will affect the dollar dramatically. Its value will decline, and that will cause the price of everything to go up. Financial transactions of all kinds will cost more. Business and car loans, credit card and student loans, all seem to be in jeopardy.

The stock market and other financial institutions will all be impacted in all sorts of negative ways, and it will take several months, if not a number of years for them to fully recover.

The economy will be damaged without doubt, as almost all economists are predicting, and the outcome will not be pleasant for every person in the country. Unemployment will remain high or it will even begin to soar higher, as businesses start to close in large numbers. The cost of living will rise and thus plunge the fragile economy that the nation is now experiencing into a tailspin.

The deficit can be reduced by using careful planning, and taking measures that will make the nation capable of living within its means; however, it will take a great number of positive and vibrant steps for that to happen. Yet, America is at a point, where it has to be able to pay its bills and remain a safe haven for investors; their capital is needed to grow the economy once again. The crunch comes, when it must find a way to avoid default; hence, it must raise its debt ceiling.

The two issues are two hard nuts to crack, but if politicians will put their heads together and stop being critical of each other's ideological leanings, they will be able to do so. They are rather fighting among themselves, and that will be pushing America into a state of emergency, whose outcome is extremely terrifying.

A deadline of August 2nd, 2011, has been set for the nations debts to be paid in full; and if an agreement between the Democratic Party government and the Republican Party opposition is not in place before that date, all hell will break lose.

The country's financial woes will become insurmountable from then on; and for what? Because a few intransigent politicians have decided to turn a deaf ear to the pleas of the citizens of the United States; and all they (politicians) are interested in is to score political points and nothing else. Why and again, for what? You may be asking.

DEBT CEILING AND THE TEA PARTY.

If anyone misunderstood the debt ceiling issue being discussed in Washington D.C. presently, it would be the Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann, who did not want the debt ceiling to be raised, no matter what; however, she has a hidden agenda to stop it from happening. Coming very close to her would be the Tea Party people, who were just gullible.

First, they have been made to know what "government spending" was, that it comprised of the overall budget of government expenditure covering from the vast military expenses that the country required for protection all the way through to Medicaid, which supported the poor and the needy.

In between were a myriad of programs that have been put in place, from time immemorial, to support the smooth running of the government; consisting of activities meant for the survival of all citizens, and without which, there would be no country, in the right sense of the word.

Now, they have also been made to know that the raising of the debt ceiling was a monetary device that allowed any government to have ample resources to meet its fiscal responsibility in an adequate manner to avoid financial overburden.

It was used in emergency situations, as it was applied on several occasions during the Bush era, when the 9/11 attacks took place, sparking off two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, simultaneously.

To use the private economic sector for example, when a company needed start up money, it would borrow from any number of financial institutions and used the proceeds to cover its capital expenditure. Then the company's return on its investments, which was its profits, would be used to pay off any outstanding debts.

In the present financial situation of the United States Government, the general analysis by so many economists was that, if the debt ceiling was not raised, it (government) would be in default against its internal and external obligations.

If that became a reality, there would be such an enormous upheaval that could cause a setback for the fragile economy that the nation was experiencing right now, bringing with it difficult times for every single American.

Besides, there would be physical, financial chaos, as the country has never seen before. It would not be able to come out of the fiscal doldrums of the past, created by the same reasons given above (9/11 & two wars).

The Republican Party leadership was aware of the big picture; and that it would bear no goodwill to the American economy; as there would be hardships for the business sector, and Wall Street in particular, to grapple with, and thus creating an economic "Armageddon"; which would bring about so many difficulties for millions of individuals, who were already fighting to make ends meet.

High interest rates would be the order of the day, bringing in its train a new increase in the cost of living; and unemployment would even soar to unpredictable heights.

The outcome would be pretty awful economically for everyone; but the answer to it would be what President Barack Obama has been emphasizing all along, that taxes must be raised on those who have benefited from the economy in the past, on one hand; and he was even ready to skew on some entitlement programs, like Medicare and Social Security, on the other hand, in order to get the Republicans to come to an agreement or a compromise on the debt ceiling.

The Tea Party came about on government spending, which they thought was lavish and extravagant; and all America's financial problems have developed from the irrational way the government has handled its finances. However, there was no evidence of that accusation on the part of the Obama administration. None whatsoever.

Therefore, the raising of the debt ceiling was for a good cause; if so, why should the Tea Party hold it as hostage against the president and prevent him from doing what was right for the country? After all it was his duty to do just that; the RIGHT thing.

As for Michele Bachmann, she was opposed to the raising of the debt ceiling; and for a very sinister reason at that too. It was her idea to use the Tea Party, which was also opposed to the issue, only for her own political gains, and nothing else.

A BRIGHTER FUTURE.

It was former Prime Minister Winston Churchill who made the comment below many, many years ago in the White House,

"His words are quoted as “It is ‘better to jaw-jaw than to war-war,’” in the sub-heading on p. 1 of The New York Times, June 27, 1954, and as “To jaw-jaw always is better than to war-war” on p. 3." (http://www.bartleby.com/73/1914.html).

For talks about the debt ceiling was still going on, with both sides in an agreement that there should be no default on the part of the United States government, when the deadline prescribed by all kinds of economic experts was reached.

Tempers were frayed at a previous meeting that caused President Barack Obama to leave abruptly (Wednesday), but then the talks continued until today, when another meeting was in the offing. That alone was a good omen.

Lawmakers have all kinds of plans to deal with the issue at hand; as onlookers have observed lately. Some were good and some were not so pleasant; yet the talks went on. To them (onlookers), the talks should continue until a compromise was accomplished.

Members of Congress were doing the work that the country gave them to do; a duty, unlike any other they have done before, that must be performed to resolve a problem of profound proportions, to get the nation's finances in order, for the good of all Americans. They must therefore be encouraged in their efforts to do all they could to handle it with care and with the seriousness it deserved.

Otherwise, the financial woes of the nation would go from worse to worst; and that would not be in anyone's favor, be he or she a Democrat or a Republican; or for that matter, an independent.

August 2nd. is fast approaching, and the U.S. Congress must have a bill ready, and long before that date, for the president to sign into law; and to put the world on notice that America will never relinquish its responsibility to meet its financial obligations.

When that is done, the economy will bounce back, the budget deficit gap will be at an acceptable point, where it will be near to closing it completely, unemployment will subside, financial markets will be stabilized, cost of living will not soar to unimaginable levels, where ordinary folks, such as Senior Citizens, cannot cope; and everything will almost return to normal.

Americans will then have a sense of assurance that Congress is doing what it is meant to do; and that is, to put the needs of the country first. Its members must not be too partisan and so fail to find a way to bridge their differences. They must always do what they regard as being in the best interest of the country; and when they do, they will always have the backing of a grateful nation.

We must all wish them well in resolving a financial crisis that will spell nothing, but doom to the U.S.; the raising of the debt ceiling will give the economy a fresh start, and Americans can then look forward to a brighter future from now on.

Keep on talking in Washington D.C.

MEETING CLOSED.

President Barack Obama left the White House meeting abruptly last night, because the Republicans were getting on his nerves with the repetitiveness of their worn out idea that they wanted to reach an agreement in piece meal fashion; thus 60 days, 90 days, 180 days, or any type of periodic authorization by the United States Congress to resolve the debt ceiling crisis.

The president had previously reiterated that such an arrangement would not be possible, with the same issue coming up periodically to interrupt government business. "If things are not working out now, wait till 60 days or 90 days later, when we return to the same talks; they (things) will become worse,", he had said at one point.

Besides, he has made it quite clear that, if any partial agreement was contained in any legislation passed into law by the U.S. Congress, he would veto it.

Obviously, there were two different approaches to reduce the deficit, and to allow the debt ceiling meetings to move forward; one was to cut or to prune (down) the budget through Medicare and Social Security. The other was to impose tax hikes on millionaires and corporate executives to boost the country's revenue, however very little.

The first was a non starter for the president, and particularly, for the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. It would interfere with programs that were traditionally beneficial to the elderly and the poor. It would even destroy some of those programs, vital in some cases, to the detriment of those they were designed to serve.

The second was what the Congressional Republicans were defending, that taxes must not or could not be imposed on the rich in the middle of a recession. Instead, tax breaks must be given to businesses in order for them to create jobs.

There was a third element, which could be used to eliminate the tax loopholes in the present tax system to enable the government to collect more revenues, and thus close the budget gap considerably.

That was supposed to be the common ground being sought by the president and a great majority of the nation; but the Republicans would not have anything to do with that.

They were now seeking a constitutional budget amendment to be factored into any arrangement in the present talks for them to agree on a final piece of legislation that would pass both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

That was where the impasse came to life, because to many Democrats, a budget reform did not need a constitutional amendment, which would take several years for the 50 States to ratify.

Moreover, there was a "clear and present danger" of the Obama government defaulting on August 2nd., if its debt dealings were not met, both within and outside the country, on that date.

Thus, there was an urgent need to resolve the issue of raising the debt ceiling by a specific deadline, in order for the government to physically cover some elements in the overall debt crisis before too late; and then other plans could be worked out to tackle the huge deficit hole, brought about by two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (remember?); plus other financial obligations that the U.S. government had both at home and abroad.

The U.S. has the responsibility to put its financial house in order, of course; however, in the interim, it must be able to get certain payments out of the way, to avoid an imminent internal fiscal catastrophe being forecast by almost all eminent economists in America. Also it must be able to maintain its high AAA rating in the International monetary world; and if that was amiss, it would cause even a greater havoc around the world; hence, the purpose of raising the debt ceiling.

It (raising of the debt ceiling) has never been in question; and it has never been denied by any U.S. legislature before; so why should it be denied to the Obama government?

That alone could compel President Barack Obama to walk out on any meeting of stubborn political ideologues, who did not want him to succeed. So, he had every right and every good reason to close the meeting abruptly.

In all the goings on in the country, many people felt sorry for the Tea Party movement, because most of its members did not understand the issue of government spending. They thought that the government was wasting tax payer money on trivial things.

They now should learn more about how the Obama government spent the country's money; for it did so very wisely. They (Tea-partiers) have been fooled by other politicians.

DEBT CEILING TALKS.

Now, we all know that, if the debt ceiling is not raised in time to avoid default, the whole country will suffer.

Therefore, it is not a joke that negotiators on both sides of the issue are still pussyfooting and calling the talks to be moved from day to day. Every second that goes by brings uneasiness to many Americans. They are urging Democrats and Republicans to agree on a compromise that will not push the economy into a way that will be more destructive beyond repair.

That is, if the debt ceiling controversy is not dealt with sufficiently enough, the mighty dollar will decline, interest rates will go up, unemployment will stay high, if not increase. The uncertainty surrounding the whole thing will drive investors away, causing the stock market and other financial institutions to falter and become disoriented and unmanageable. The deficit will become enlarged in the end, and that will make matters even worse for the United States.

However, the effects will not stop at its borders, but they will impact the larger global economy in so many negative ways, and thus finally destroy America's reputation as a reliant trading concern and partner.

The omens are pretty awful to compel business associations to send a letter to negotiators, asking them to put aside "hard-line partisan positions" and come to a compromise.

"Our political leaders must agree to a plan to substantially reduce our long-term budget deficits with a goal of at least stabilizing our nation's debt as a percentage of GDP (gross domestic product) -- which will entail difficult choices," said the letter from the Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, the Financial Services Forum, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Partnership for New York City. (CNN Report, 7/13/11).

Indications from every angle point to the fact that the country is headed for more financial backlog that will take many years to dissipate or to be cleared up; and it will have left the already fragile economy in a bad state than before the beginning of the negotiations.

All because of the obstinate pride of a handful of politicians, who do not want the Obama administration to succeed.

Some media pundits are also playing a foolish game on the sidelines, calling President Barack Obama's position a bluff; and that there is enough money to meet all important government obligations, but just a few that can wait. What?

Fox News Special Report is guilty of presenting folks, who think that they are smarter and more conversant with the government's dealings than the government itself. That must stop instantly, as the negotiations have reached a point where the stakes are high; and as a result, tensions are also very high. Any such stupid comments on the part of these pundits and News Contributors will not help at all.

The stalemate must be broken to allow the nation to breathe freely once again. Besides, the talks have nothing to do with "dancing", as a senior Republican participant is quoted to say. Suggesting anything as trivial is unrealistic; they (talks) are more serious than that.

"Senator Graham said if the debt ceiling is not raised, it would be “a disaster.”". (ABC News, 7/13/11).

People must put that in their pipes and smoke it.

CALLOUSNESS.

The debt negotiations bring out the callousness of many people on Capitol Hill, where all of them have no direct connection with entitlement programs, because there is no way that they will ever be recipients.

They will never receive Social Security benefit checks, for it is below their dignity to do so; and they also have better insurance plans that make a mockery of Medicare.

Those first class insurance plans are there for themselves and their families, and they will always have them (plans), come rain or shine.

Very little do they know about some Senior Citizens fighting so hard to stay alive on their meager benefits, whose part becomes co-payment expenses for prescription drugs and other services. They even starve to get their medications refilled, if it comes to that.

To focus on Social Security and Medicare as being part of government spending, and therefore their costs are to be slashed to fill the nation's deficit gap, shows how wicked some people are, when it comes to deciding as to what happens to others, if they have no means to live on.

Supposing the Obama government agrees for those entitlement programs to be cut, there will be some Seniors, who will have no money for anything at all. No food, no clothing, no shoes; and of course paying for services like electricity and telephone will become an enormous problem.

There might be other subsidies that they can apply to help in their daily living expenses, but most of them (subsidies) do not factor in the rising cost of living; and so these seniors have no where else to turn.

Benefits have had a big reduction only a year or so ago, and those that were receiving, for example, $1000 dollars a month, were now getting about 3/4th of that amount. They would suffer drastically if a new wave of reduction came their way. If Social Security was cut once more, they would not know what to do.

The word "dying" does not cross the minds of those lawmakers who are insisting that Social Security is part of the problem, and therefore it has to be farther cut to make up for the deficit.

However, when that happens, it will be like passing the death sentence on those seniors, who will not be able to cope with their own financial crises that will come about as a result.

So, why does it have to matter so much to those politicians, who want Social Security to be completely terminated? Because they do not get many votes from Senior Citizens; and that is the main or sole reason for them to foster the idea of Social Security being placed on the chopping block, instead of, for example, Payroll tax reduction that will be good for workers.

Also to them, tax increase for the wealthy is a misnomer; and the closing of the loopholes in the present tax system does not occur to them at all as something they need to seriously consider. If they decide to look into them (loopholes), they will offend other citizens who are rich; and who happen to be their campaign contributors.

In all their dealings, they forget that the human factor is the most important thing of all. Even in physical wars, there are rules to protect the elderly, the very young and the invalid; but here in America, where monetary problems have become almost physical, there is no defense for the old, the very young and the sick.

How callous; how stoic can some people become.

A CLASS WARFARE.

It would not be a mistake to indicate that the huge economic deficit confronting the Obama administration has sparked off a class war in American politics, if not in America itself.

The administration has made it quite clear that entitlement programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, must not have any significant reductions, because they were there to protect Senior Citizens, who were in the main poor. A great majority of the Democratic Party members in Congress agreed wholeheartedly with that idea.

Senior Citizens and the weak in society, comprising of families of working class and middle class people, were being pitted against the wealthy and powerful individuals, as well as businesses, companies and corporations, who would hold against any tax burdens meted out to them to close the budget gap. They have the backing of most Congressional Republicans, who have made "no tax increases" their battle cry.

If that scenario, of Democrats clashing with Republicans, over how the nation's fiscal problems should be resolved, did not suggest that a class warfare was taking place in America today, then no one could ever be convinced that anything else would. It was as clear as daylight that there were acute differences among the political leadership in this country.

However, let us assume that, on the one hand, the solution could come from cutting entitlement programs, which would leave a whole lot of people to suffer for lack if medical attention, and that could result in death, in some cases, or insufficient amount of food, in the form of three meals, that would not last through the day; while on the other hand, taxes were raised on those who could afford them, as well as other tax loopholes, which needed to be closed were closed, for those who took advantage of them (loopholes), to pay their fair share to bring about a healthy economy the country deserved; which would be better?

Which side would the average American prefer to be on, or would want to support, in terms of using any one of those two methods to fix the present financial crisis? Most would choose the latter rather than the former.

It takes David Gergen, a senior political analyst for CNN, to give the impression that the die is cast; and to make fun of the serious negotiations going on in Washington, as he predicts, "that Obama will cajole his party into big-time compromises."; as he will agree to any deals that will bring the issue to an amicable conclusion, just to avoid a lengthy controversy.

From his tone of voice, (and everybody knows where he belongs); it is within his purview that a class warfare is evolving, as if it has not already started to evolve as we all know, where the Republicans are siding with the rich, (of which he is one, remember), and the Obama administration is caving in to their demands; to create a situation that will leave a large number of Senior Citizens in the cold, so to speak.

He goes on to say; "But that possibility is exactly why so many liberal Democrats are angry. They worry Obama is once again surrendering before he has even begun to fight." (CNN report, Sunday, July 10th, 2011).

He was obviously referring to another set of talks that took place in previous months, when Obama allowed the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to gain the upper hand. However, that should be an old story.

President Barack Obama has recently said that if the debt ceiling was raised for the U.S. to meet its financial obligations both at home and abroad, business confidence would return for investors to start investing in America again, and that would go a long way to bring the high unemployment level of 9.2% down.

That would be an ideal occurrence. The economy would be taken care of, and more companies would begin to hire more workers again. The financial markets would become more stable than they have ever been in a long time for a change. That should be what people must look forward to. A brighter future for all Americans.

Yet, some politicians were making the budget talks to slash the deficit and bring the overall spending down, a barrier for that to happen. They were inadvertently waging a class warfare, which would probably stop or farther slow down the already fragile economic growth many Americans were experiencing lately in its tracks; and that would not be in the best interest of the nation.

According to Gergen's article, the battle lines have been drawn, and there was no going back for both sides; and if that was the case, then it would be for ordinary people to decide on which side they empathized with.

Nevertheless, should there be a necessity for a class warfare; and if so, who really needed it, or who would benefit from it? That should be a moot point; shouldn't it?

When a nation was in a financial crisis, its leaders should set aside their political ideologies and fight together to resolve that problem; and not to fight against each other to make a bad situation even worse. For the sake of peace and unity, they were more likely to show leadership instead. That was what most Americans would like to see happening.

Voters would continue to watch as events unfold themselves in Washington D.C., in order to know how or whom to vote for in the 2012 general election.

THE DEBT CEILING DEBATE.

The debt ceiling talks have become critical, not just for the Obama government, but for the nation as a whole.

There are those in Congress, who are of the opinion that if the deadline of August 2nd, 2011 is allowed to go by without an agreement on raising the debt ceiling, government will continue to function normally. Most of them happen to be Republicans.

However, others maintain that if a compromise fails before that date, the government will be in serious trouble. The deficit gap will widen as the days go by, amounting in millions of dollars being added to it each single day.

"if Congress fails to pass a budget amendment in time for that early August deadline?", the result will be financially foreboding, says former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker on ABC's Top Line.

"The answer: a $4 billion-a-day gap in revenues coming in and expenditures going out, according to former U.S. Comptroller General, David Walker."; the program confirms him adding, among other things.

President Barack Obama has been doing a whole lot of hard work recently in holding meetings in the White House between himself and Congressional Republican leaders, who are in opposition to raising of the debt ceiling. For him, a common ground must be found to resolve the differences on both sides, in regard to closing the huge deficit gap that is being debated right now, so that the issue of raising the debt ceiling can be settled to avert a pending disaster.

Yet, according to reports, Congress has become totally dysfunctional, and its members are choosing to play politics, instead of honing in on a problem that will cause havoc to world financial markets, and so make the stock market at home to go haywire and interest rates to rise.

The United States Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner and many leading economists are warning lawmakers that it is a bad idea "to flirt with the deadline,"; and that they cannot afford to take a risk in making a political tug-of-war out of such an important issue. Besides, there is no precedence in American history, of the debt ceiling not being raised; for it is only done as a precaution or as a necessity to benefit the nation in an emergency situation.

Well, there are other meetings in the offing; one is set for this Sunday, July 10th, 2011 in the White House. Therefore, in the interest of all concerned, both opposing parties must seize the opportunity to reach an agreement, before it becomes too late for an "Armageddon-like" consequence to come to light, as it is being predicted.

The whole country wishes all its leaders well.

THE OBAMA GOVERNMENT CUTS.

Budget cuts to help the deficit reduction discussions going on in Washington D.C. must not be done in a manner that will put the burden on just one section of society, or in such a way that only one faction must be made to bear the brunt of the United States' current financial problems.

Lawmakers, however incessantly they want and need to shave off costs to bring government spending under control, are liable to ensure that fairness is the driving influence behind their actions.

If seniors are picked on, through Medicare and Social Security, to carry a bigger load to achieve a balanced budget, then their efforts to enable the country to maintain a strong economy in the past, and throughout their working years, will be in vain.

At the present moment, that is what the cuts are aiming to do, and that is to reduce Medicare and Social Security spending in order to accomplish the objective of Congressional Republicans, who are always protecting the more secure citizens, by saying that raising taxes on them is likely to make the economy worse.

They argue that if taxes are raised on the more affluent people, and particularly the rich, unemployment will rise even higher, because they are the ones helping the economy to get better by their investments in industries and businesses.

The Obama administration is making it abundantly clear that there are some excesses through tax loopholes that the rich are taking advantage of, and they (tax loopholes) must be closed, if there is going to be any type of fairness in solving the country's financial woes.

Both sides have identified where the cuts are supposed to come from, as well as where there is a need to raise taxes to help the revenue to increase.

Now, it must be realized that spending by the government is in itself not a bad thing, because it allows the government to pay our military and security forces who are working day and night to protect the nation's interests at home and abroad.

Two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan must be paid for; and the expenditure of maintaining embassies and consulates all around the globe must be handled efficiently.

It is not that President Barack Obama is giving money away to African Americans, as many of the so called Tea Party people think or assume. No such thing has ever happened; or will it ever happen.

All the monies in any government's expenditure are spent reasonably; it is done with so much rational as the Republican opposition members fully know. Yet, they have a fixation that many Americans are born stupid, and they will embrace anything you tell them. Ask these members where the spending is going, and they will never give a direct or true answer; but because of the negative thoughts they have about the Obama administration, they will find many excuses to justify their behavior.

They are always ready to find fault of some kind; and give the impression that the president is "a big spender".

Again, many Americans are saying that, if the cuts are going to be on the backs of seniors alone, then there will not be fairness on the part of those who are insisting that no responsibility must be extended to the rich and well to do, to contribute their fair share to stabilizing the slow economy that we are all seeing today.

The correction of the economy, and the responsibility of paying off the huge debt the country is laboring under, must be borne on all shoulders; and that must include the middle class, the working class and all citizens of the United States alike.

CAYLEE ANTHONY.

The verdict of the Casey Anthony's trial for killing her daughter Caylee, leaves much to be desired. It has caused a tumultuous public backlash, and has brought back memories of the O.J. Simpson murder trial.

However, in Casey Anthony's case, there was no "murder" or any proof of it. There was a host of evidence that overwhelmed the court and caused the judge, Belvin Perry, to interrupt at certain unscheduled interludes, to bring some semblance of decorum to the proceedings. That was his job, and he handled it perfectly well.

He, Judge Belvin Perry, called the attorneys in the case to the bench, at least three or four times, to admonish them; and though, that scenario was not unusual, they gave the people in the courtroom, and particularly the Jurors, a sinister impression for them to speculate if a "game" of superiority was going on between the defense team and the prosecution.

For example, Casey's lawyer, Jose Baez, thought he was being ridiculed enough to make him call the court's attention to the behavior of one of the prosecution lawyers. That made the judge to interject the proceedings with the words "Gentlemen, gentlemen.....," and asked the attorneys to approach the bench, for a much needed consultation, from time to time, to make the case (to) run smoothly.

Meanwhile, the media were feeding on the drama taking place, thinking that the more evidence being heaped on Casey Anthony made her look like a killer; which was, to their dismay later on, a foolish assumption.

While the media foray was going on, lawyer Jose Baez was waiting his turn to refute all those charges that were being brought to bear on his client.

He was able to indicate that Caylee Anthony's death was not a killing or murder, but a pure accident that could occur to any child who happened to be playing around a swimming pool without anyone paying a much closer attention to him or her. There was no adult supervision; and in this particular case, a parental one.

Therefore, when the media frenzy pointed to Caylee's mother as a criminal, and deliberately making her child to die, the majority of the jurors were having different thoughts. She (Casey) was still a suspect and not a murderer yet, "until proven guilty." They (jurors) were not confused, for they had noticed that Casey Anthony was being victimized by the prosecution, through sheer lack of evidence, most of which was circumstantial.

"What is the cause of death?" "Where is the reason to compel a loving mother to act that way?" "Was she capable of such a fiendish act?" Those were some of the questions that members of the jury were asking themselves.

The prosecution had lavished itself with the idea that public opinion was on its side; and that Casey Anthony would be convicted of the "crime" that they, the prosecutors, had said all along that she had committed. That was jumping to the wrong conclusion, if there ever was one.

So, when the verdict came out it (prosecution) was shocked. It was not what its lawyers expected. A person was "innocent until proven guilty" was the farthest thing from their minds. They had forgotten that in the United States legal system, the accused was always innocent until there was ample proof to pass a guilty verdict on him or her, and not the other way around (as the French did.).

Nevertheless, as Jose Baez said after the verdict, "there are no winners in this case,"; except that a young child, Caylee Anthony, has lost her life, and for what, that was anybody's guess. That should leave a sour taste in the mouths of all concerned; and that should include the general public, of course.

MS. CASEY ANTHONY.

I had written a good article yesterday, but somehow I lost it, owing to a computer glitch or something.

I could not describe how I felt the whole day long for not being able to publish a blog. I was miserable.

Yet, that was yesterday; and I have to put that behind me.

With the verdict in the Casey Anthony's trial, many people were miffed with how the jury arrived at its decision; but the fact remained that murder must be committed with a large amount of evidence presented to offset any kind of doubt that would pinpoint the accused to be found guilty.

Whatever interfered with the guilt of a person, on one hand, and giving that same person or the accused the benefit of the doubt, on the other, should not be permissible. The correct evidence presented to a judge, should convict a person, and not illusions framed as charges.

Harping on the doubt by the defense lawyer created a vacuum in the minds of the jury; and from then on, any chance to get his client to go free was what he hammered on. He was not going to think of a guilty plea for which he would have to apologize to the judge and the jury on behalf of his client, Casey Anthony. He (lawyer) realized that was not the way to go, right from the start.

He threw all the forensic evidence in the face of the prosecutors, saying that none of it was cause for her to be incarcerated. All the evidence that remained after that was one that supported the accidental drowning of the little girl, Caylee. Everybody around her panicked, and they were biding their time to find a way out of a very bad situation.

If there must be a conviction, there must be an enormous amount of evidence to be presented by the prosecution to prove beyond the shadow of doubt that the victim was made to suffer death through malice; but there was no evidence of that. Therefore, to convict a mother for killing her own child became impossible.

Throughout the proceedings of the trial, Casey Anthony was shown to be a loving mother in almost all the videos the court allowed the media to put out for viewers to analyse the case.

They were angry with the little girl, Caylee Anthony, dying at the hands of her mother and under circumstances that should not have permitted that to happen. In other words, people were cross about a loving mother killing her own child; and that was something they found it hard to imagine.

The evidence that she killed her to have a "free life" was not convincing enough; and the fact of the matter was that the grandparents were also present in the household to stop her from doing any harm to the child, to the point of reporting her to the authorities for child abuse. None of that happened.

The rest of the evidence produced was circumstantial, and it could not be used to pronounce a guilty verdict on a mother, who has lost a child through an accidental death. Besides, the counts on which the jury found her guilty were all misdemeanors. She just made up stories to law enforcement officers to cover herself.

Judge Belvin Perry did an extremely good job, in the light of a family case that has attracted so much attention. He could have had some closed sessions to interrupt normal court proceedings; however, that could have made the case increasingly difficult for the public to analyze it. The case was heard in its entirety by the public; with every bit of the evidence showing what took place.

He was convinced that all of it (evidence) must become available to all interested parties, be they the media or members of the general public. He even got the parents of Casey Anthony to come out with everything they had about their daughter to prove that she was negligent, with respect to Ms. Anthony taking good care of their grand daughter, but in the end, they failed to do so.

Well done, judge.

MR. HERMAN CAIN.

Only a few days ago, Businessman Herman Cain, the Republican Party candidate for president, was asking why so many White House economic experts were resigning their posts.

He attributed that to the Obama government not listening to good advise; hence, the country's economy was in shambles.

Many people, however, know that these experts or specialists come and go; they are in and out of every administration for various reasons, and so, the present scene in the WH is nothing new. They are replaced soon after, or even before they leave, in some cases.

Yet, Mr. Cain was trying to squeeze some political advantage out of the situation, to make the administration look bad. So, the question should be, did he succeed or not? The answer could be anyone's guess.

Now, within the time frame that he was monitoring the affairs taking place in the Obama administration, he was being confronted with similar resignations from his own campaign. It came out a day or so ago that his staffers were leaving him left, right and center. He must have felt giddy about it all.

First, it was Matt Murphy, the New Hampshire State director and Jim Zeiler, the regional director, who flee from Cain's camp; then came Tina Goff, the Iowa organizational director, who quit for lack of interest in the Iowa Straw polls, which also made another official, Kevin Hart, the Straw Poll coordinator, to hang up his hat.

The same type of problems have been plaguing Fmr. Speaker Newt Gingrich, whose top campaign officials resigned en masse a few weeks ago.

There have been so many goings on in the Republican field of presidential candidates; and one could not put a finger on a single incident that would make interesting reading than Mr. Cain calling on President Obama to pay attention to the advise of his financial experts.

Could that be true, or was it that they (experts) have been forced to resign due to their own ineptitude? Or that their reports could have caused the administration to find itself in dire straits? Who could tell?

As for Mr. Cain, one could assume that he was a good listener; and that he took his campaign staff members seriously and put their advise to practical use. If so, why were they quitting? Who could tell; who could tell?

It would be wise for Mr. Cain to stop fantasizing that all was well in his campaign; because it was not.

Also, he should realize that government was about weighing advise and making decisions, and not jumping to conclusions on the smallest of advise, whether it was good or bad.

He could rev up mainstream conservatives, but not mainstream America.

OBAMA'S LEADERSHIP.

Talking about leadership, there is a young man who has demonstrated it in more ways than one; and that person is President Barack Obama. Despite all the criticisms being heaped on him by media pundits of all kinds, he has managed to exemplify himself as a powerful proponent of fairness.

His news conference last Thursday depicted him as not just a strong leader, but also as a knowledgeable one at that.

In those exchanges, he answered all questions in detail, and with the precision of a well versed politician, who was not interested in pleasing his audience with rhetoric, but to bring it (audience) along to see at close hand what was at stake, in terms of the seriousness of the country's problems.

He was driving directly at getting the country to survive the enormous fiscal problems it was facing; yet, there were stumbling blocks that needed to be surmounted. They have been placed in his way to impede any progress he made; but he was not daunted.

On foreign policy, the Libyan crisis has not been characterized as "war"; not by America's European allies or the United Nations. He has gone in to stop a massive bloodshed.

What Congress should do to help resolve the problems confronting the country was not to be ideologically indifferent, nonchalant or closed minded; but it must be flexible, and be able to absorb what was being disseminated around the world, in terms of what was required to bring people of diverse backgrounds together to solve problems. It must also learn to be more cooperative.

He had repeated his ideas markedly using several instances, some of which were just metaphorical.

In addition to that, it (Congress) must refrain from dragging its feet on every issue that the institution has the responsibility to undertake to fulfill its obligations as representing the people. "Let's be realistic in all our deliberations," he seemed to reiterate.

Instead, it has chosen to oppose every statute the Obama administration has tried to implement, such as a universal or comprehensive Healthcare; and the government's insistence on rich citizens paying their fair share of taxes to bolster the dwindling revenue sources caused by two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Congressional Republicans will not include tax hikes on the rich in the talks to raise the debt ceiling, to enable the government to meet its International and other fiscal bill payments; at least not in time to avoid a default; and also in order not to make the fighting off the enormous deficit, which was forcing a fragile economy to teeter on the brink of a situation resembling that of the Great Depression, any easier.

The Obama government is emphasizing that if there is going to be any budget cuts, they must be accompanied by raising taxes as well. Cuts and taxes must be effective enough to include every person in the country. Sacrifices must be made by all; and therefore, the tax loopholes that Corporations and the rich are taking advantage of must be closed, to balance the onslaught on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and other such programs, which will be downgraded in some cases as a result of the cuts.

The budget gap is the most salient factor energizing unemployment levels to remain high; and the cost of living is rising from double digit inflation, due to the upheavals in the overall global economy. Americans are complaining of high gas and food prices; and such unwelcome circumstances affecting their lives are clearly unacceptable, and they must be dealt with, without delay.

All in all, President Obama has been on the forefront in the fight to get the economy to revert to where it has to be, for unemployment to slide farther down to at least 8.2%.

However, has he tackled or grappled with the economic problems, with the determination he needs to overcome them? Has he shown any leadership in his handling of the nation's economic affairs? "No, not at all,"; his assailants are insisting.

In fact, this is what his enemies are saying about his leadership, after his news conference last Thursday, during which he has vehemently chided the opposition for its reactionary behavior,

“He compares us to schoolchildren and then complains about his own workload. He tells us to stay and do the job and then leaves for Philadelphia to raise money. He jeopardizes a deal on his own debt ceiling increase over tax increases during a recession and then says we’re not acting in the best interest of the country,” one senior House GOP aide told Power Play. “This is the opposite of leadership.” (Fox News. July 1, 2011).

Many Americans, however, are of the opinion that he has, and continues to show true leadership in all his responsibilities as president of the United States. Although, still very young, he is "true grit". There is no question about that.

Yet, there is very little or nothing he can do to pacify his detractors.

GEN. DAVID PETRAEUS

Coming out of all the altercations over the debt ceiling in Washington D.C., there is some good news of the Senate voting to confirm Gen. David Petraeus to be the nation's next CIA director.

Gen. Petraeus has come into prominence during the Iraq War in 2007, when President George W. Bush chose him to direct the surge of troops there. His military expertise was needed to usher in a more effective strategy to lessen hostilities, and to reduce the high volume of American casualties.

The move was to bolster the number of U.S. troops, which would put the Iraqi insurgents in check and on the defensive; and it would also enable troop replacements at the war front for those who have been there for any unreasonable amount of time to get the rest they deserved or to come home.

Baghdad has remained a hot bed of military activities, and the number of casualties on the U.S. side went up from day to day. The insurgents were using roadside bombs or IEDs and other terrorist methods to hit American convoys and to decimate road blocks; and they seemed to be succeeding in demoralising the U.S. war effort.

In fact, the insurgency had gained a slight upper hand at a certain point; hence, "the surge" of troop increase to deal with the issue. Having an adequate number of troops on hand, Gen. Patraeus was able to turn the situation around with enormous precision.

Almost at the same time, a similar occurrence was developing in Afghanistan; and after the Gen. Stanley McChrystal's entanglements, with respect to an article in Rolling Stone that caused him (Gen. McChrystal) to resign, Gen. Patraeus was called in by President Barack Obama to handle it.

"The year 2010 is shaping up to be the worst year, by far, for the number of wounded American troops in Afghanistan." (Unknown source).

There too he displayed a crescendo of military tactics to avert farther tragedy for the troops; and also, his excellence in warfare maneuverings baffled the Taliban, the warmongering group.

His war medals are too numerous to count. He has done his job extremely well in every respect, to curtail American casualties and to put plans in place that would help to bring the war in Afghanistan under control.

"As I've said before, Gen. Petraeus has already established himself as one of the great battle captains in American military history," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said at the Pentagon today. (Fox News).

He is a great soldier and a warrior; and his new appointment as head of the CIA has not come at the most appropriate time, when there is so much confusion in Washington D.C. It is therefore graciously welcome by all Americans.

We wish him well.