Who Is Responsible For The US Debt Crisis AND Why President Obama Can't Solve It: and A Response to an E-mail about a Very Scared Man's (Lou Pritchett) Open Letter To Obama.
(forwarded to me, and many others, on October 17, 2011)
To whom it may concern:
I imagine there have been many letters similar to Mr. Pritchett's, just as there have been many accomplished knowledgeable informative supporters of Obama. One young accomplished supporter happens to be Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, who agrees with Obama that our country's debt is serious and that in order to have a balanced budget, or one with a surplus, we need to raise taxes of the people who earn more 250,000 dollars a year. This would reverse the Bush tax cuts on the extremely wealthy to what they were paying under the Clinton Administration. As you recall, when Clinton left office there was a budget surplus instead of a budged deficit. Getting our country to this state again (maybe not immediately) is the ONLY way to solve the debt problem of the US, which is in the trillions.
Under Bush, our country had yearly budget deficits, adding to the overall debt of our country. One reason for this was that Bush engaged in two simultaneous wars and increased governmental spending at the same time he enacted the "Bush Tax Cuts". This created a huge budget deficit, one we are required to pay sometime in the future. Unfortunately for all of us, the financial crisis of the banks and investment firms such as Goldman Sachs and AIG also occurred at the end of the Bush Administration. The TARP bailout of the Bush Administration was crafted by President Bush's Secretary of Treasury, Paulson, who in crafting the bailout of the financial institutions was granted immunity from prosecution. This passed through congress and Bush of course signed it, after all his Secretary of Treasury drafted it. Obama also supported TARP. You would be hard pressed to claim that TARP was an extortion of the banks, let alone one that was administered by Obama.
There is one important similarity and one distinct difference in the Clinton and Obama Administration. At times in both the Clinton and Obama Administration, the executive branch was run by the Democrats and the House was run by the Republicans. That is the similarity. The difference is that the Republicans and the Democrats compromised and in doing so created a government that produced a budget surplus. At the end of the day, our country's economic problems were solved by political compromise. Our country's problems were solved because at the end of the day the political attitude was Country over Party, not Party over Country.. Our problems did not get solved by one party remaining stubborn and refusing to compromise, wanting our president to fail. This is the current attitude of the Republican Party, openly voiced by the Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. This is why the Republican Party has been labeled as the Party of NO. In the end the budget surplus the Clinton Administration was accomplished by compromise between the Republicans and the Democrats. Both political parties accomplished this feat, it resulted from a combination of tax increases and spending cuts, and not cuts in Social Security. One of the few things that is preventing our country from the dire 1930's Depression at this point is the combination of Unemployment benefits and Social Security. However, we are not out of the woods of a significant depression yet and we certainly could march back into one.
SNOPES confirmed that Mr. Pritchett wrote the letter, NOT that anything within the letter is actually factual, valid, or the truth. In fact, the one thing that I can say about Mr. Pritchett's letter is that he gives a long list of allegations that is short on facts AND he supplies absolutely NO arguments to support his allegations. Why would any newspaper print such a letter. Anyone can write a long list of allegations, have Snopes confirm that they wrote it, and then not have it published by a newspaper. I don't know why any paper would publish a long list of allegations short on facts and without argument. Who knows if he really sent it to the NY Times. Personally, I have never heard of Mr. Pritchett, who unlike Mark Zuckerberg and Warren Buffett, who are household names for a good reason.
There are many responses to Mr. Pritchett's allegations on the internet. Here are some links I found when I googled: response to Mr. Pritchett's letter:
There are things I don't like about Obama. However there are also many things that I don't like about almost all politicians that I have learned about, including the GOP presidential candidates that are allowed to debate. One GOP presidential candidate I do find intriguing is former Louisiana Gov. Buddy Roemer, who has not been allowed in the GOP debates.
Please feel free to forward this email.
BEGINNING OF FORWARDED EMAIL:
On Oct 17, 2011, at 7:45 AM
On Oct 17, 2011, at 7:45 AM