I'll second that.

Here here Red! I am with ya!

Good Morning Feisty: No editorial comments this morning. No time to think. But I do agree with your opening comments. Have a good day.

Hi Feisty,

It is only Thursday morning and he have another block on the Unemployment Bill. They added spoiled to the previous terms of Hobo's and Lazy to described the Unemployed. Jim Demented has entered an objection into the Commission that President Obama has set up for the Oil Reform basically stripping out their subpoena power. What more proof do we need that the Repugs are Big-Oil. They not only support it, they are it. Research 2000 has been caught cooking the Polls. Remember how I keep saying these polls are designed to secure a certain point of view. Now we have more proof. Fox had an interview where they want to tax the poor (people making under 19,000 per year) See the Keith O. report on this one. The Bone Head calls the financial disaster an Ant. Tell that to the millions who have lost their Pensions, 401K's, houses etc., etc. These people just keep sinking lower and lower. It is not so much a difference of opinion but absolutely a mission to stop President Obama in his tracks and then call him a failure in 2012. Sen. Brown got all the special deals he wanted and now is no longer supporting the Financial Reform Bill that he did support previously. Harry wake up, the repugs are not our friends. We have seen this before and again.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

It is only Thursday morning and he have another block on the Unemployment Bill. They added spoiled to the previous terms of Hobo's and Lazy to described the Unemployed. Jim Demented has entered an objection into the Commission that President Obama has set up for the Oil Reform basically stripping out their subpoena power. What more proof do we need that the Repugs are Big-Oil.

Interesting thing about Obama and commissions. Obama mocked John McCain during the campaign for suggesting that an Economic Commission be appointed to look into the economic problems. To quote Obama:

Here is what then candidate Barack Hussein Obama said about commisions:

On September 18, 2008, not long after the economic collapse Obama said this about McCain: "Senator McCain's first answer to this economic crisis was - get ready for it - a commission. That's Washington-speak for 'we'll get back to you later.'"
"Folks, we don't need a commission to spend a few years and a lot of taxpayer money to tell us what's going on in our economy," he continued. "We don't need a commission to tell us gas prices are high or that you can't pay your bills. We don't need a commission to tell us you're losing your jobs. We don't need a commission to study this crisis, we need a President who will solve it - and that's the kind of President I intend to be.

In 17 months, Obama has appointed 4 commissions. I guess that's the kind of President he has become.

Thanks All!

Nothings more despicable than the party of male - stale & pale!

Amen, Feisty.

JoAnnaSmith,

Do you stay up late at night thinking up this dribble. Bottom line, you and your party have done nothing for this country over the last 10 years except to put us into financial woes as the party of Big Business, No Ideas, No Morals. Your own people said they sole goal was to say no to this President and try everthing within their power to make him fail. You bring no ideas to the table, just dribble. Put your bib back on, the orderly will be around to change your diapper soon.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

JoAnnaSmith,

Do you stay up late at night thinking up this dribble. Bottom line, you and your party have done nothing for this country over the last 10 years except to put us into financial woes as the party of Big Business, No Ideas, No Morals. Your own people said they sole goal was to say no to this President and try everthing within their power to make him fail. You bring no ideas to the table, just dribble. Put your bib back on, the orderly will be around to change your diapper soon

We don't need to "do everything in our power" to make Obama fail. He's doing a great job of that all by himself.

Short and sweet....and spot on Feisty!

OMG JoAnna are you ever dense (stupid also). We pass bills that have something for everybody, most of them incorporate the ideas of your repug brothers to have the Senate stall them with a MINORITY VOTE. Look at the Unemployment Bill that had 57 yes votes in the Senate just be be filibustered by the repugs. It even included tax cuts for small business and individual Americans. This is something you gus get pounding as part of your philosophy. It make no difference who has a majority anymore when it takes only one to bring everything to a halt. President Obama is not failing here, he is being stonewalled by a bunch of dishonest, morally corrupt, greedy politicians that are more concerned about themselves than the American People. Until rules change, money taken out of the system, things will continue on their downward spiral, and yes, the majority of the blame has to go to the Repugs, you know people like YOU!!!!!

I know, Feisty......just like the proverbial lefty battle cry of "well Bush did it" gets worn out. I thought Obama promised to be different than Bush.

US Navy,

Don't give JoAnna credit for thinking this up by herself. I heard this comment about Obama and commissions on NPR. NPR was bringing up the apparent hypocricy. NPR even used the quote from Obama's campaign about "I'll get back to your later."

I bet you JoAnna got this from NPR. No harm no foul I guess. Maybe JoAnna you can say something like "I heard on NPR and I agree".

NPR stated that the latest commission was to study what went wrong at the deepwater Horizon. What is wrong with finding out how to stop a catastrophe like this? You mentioned Obama has authorized four commissions. Another commission was announced during Obama's state of the union speech to suggest ways to curb spending. Not sure what the other two were about but both of these seem logical and well called for.

Yellowdog - Mark,

Thank you for the update, much appreciated. Have a great 4th and keep on posting.

Morning Feisty, you got my vote. Lets look forward not backwards like the teabagging republicans want.

As usual Red, you are short and to the point and spot on!

After only being absent for a couple of weeks I wouldn't think the right wing trolls could get any dumber. Then joanna and klm prove they do get dumber with age in the very first article. The more things change, the dumber the rethugliklan trolls become.

Hard to believe I didn't miss their sorry @sses one bit.

It's good to see my progressive friends keeping them under the bridge. Although, after a little catch up reading, it appears that they are able to find several levels below dumber after 5pm in the evenings. Some of the stupidity they spout is mind numbing.

I swear, Joanna is the lady that I keep hearing on Hannity's radio program. Yesterday, some idiot called in and said "the enviromental extremeists want to destroy civilization". Honest to God- the exvironmental people want to PRESERVE our environment so civilization can die out? WTF?? And of course, squaky Hannity says nothing to counter her. I'm probably wrong about JoAnna, but she soulds just as bright and up to speed as this ding-bat that called Hannity.

Hey, JoAnna- try this original, never-before heard line: "I konw you are, but what am I" when cutting on Obama, 'K?

How is legalizing 20 million illegals going to effect the current unemployed? If there are a whole bunch more folks competing for the few available jobs, that a bad thing. And we know that there are not any available jobs because we have to extend unemployment out for over two years.

What is the cost of adding the 20 million to the new health care plan? Where is the CBO estimate for that?

Let's face it, we are a country of ever shrinking resources. Adding 20 million is not going to make that better. And I can remember all the way back to 1986. That was "comprehensive immigration." We were promised increased border security if we just legalized the 2.5 million currently in. It didn't work out so well. We legalized 2.5, but now just 16 years later there are 20 mllion more. So if we legalize the 20 million now there will be many more later.

Spanky

Those 20M illegals are ALREADY HERE and most of them have jobs, very low paying ones, which makes profit for the crowd that is hiring them. Legalizing them will mean that they will no longer have to duck INS/ICE and will therefore be able to report the slave like conditions that most of them work in to the proper authorities without the fear of deportation. This would actually help us raise the wages of MOST workers since there would no longer be this ability to have undocumented slave labor, which is what is going on now. This slave labor like condition harms the rest of us because the companies will let go higher paid, legal citizens since these undocumented illegals will work for dirt cheap since it is still more money than they can get in their home countries. Eliminating the extremely low pay problem will force the companies to give everybody decent pay instead of allowing them to say "If you do not accept these lower wages we will let you go, there is a line of illegals waiting for your job and I can hire two of them for what I am paying you, heck, maybe even three." If you do not think that this happens you are delusional. Blame the banks, the uber rich, and large, right wing corporations for not hiring while they sit on their HUGE piles of money and say NO to small business loans and hiring another shift to relieve the two shifts that are working 12 hr days now, and stiffing people on their overtime because if the workers don't accept it, away they go. It happens, all the time, and dealing with the immigration problem would go a long ways towards helping to fix worker security in this nation.

We pay for their health care as it is, since they are able to get coverage from many of the states that they are in, since the law says that they must. Adding them to the health care program is going to be a null point, just transferring them to a different account is all, and having them covered will mean less impact on the hospitals which have been having to absorb the costs of them showing up in the emergency rooms when their health problems balloon out of control.

Personally, I do not like the fact that they are here illegally, BUT, they ARE, and they have to be dealt with in a sane manner, something that the GOBP is rather short on. Remember, they are people too, and they came to this land of "Great Opportunity for All!" But we have turned it into "A Great Opportunity for the Rich to get Even Richer and Richer Yet."

B. Honest,

Thank you very much for being willing to state what I was thinking when I read Spanky's post. Why is it that some people are so willing to allow their distrust of those that are different blind them to the reality of what happens right before their eyes? I know it feels good and validates your MINORITY views, but simply having an on-air personality state the same MINORITY views as you do does NOT make you correct and does NOT mean you are anything other than a MINORITY of the American public.

The MAJORITY of Americans will look at ALL sides of an issue, evaluate the varying viewpoints, consider the available information, and make a reasoned decision on the issues or candidates. Those in the MINORITY are much more likely to listen to a very LIMITED scope of news, information, and differing viewpoints and will allow themselves to be fed their positions and views on all manner of topics.

I will see you at the polls in November...

You keep saying "Slave labor". Seriously, is that what you think? I bet if you went back to, oh let's say 1835, you wouldn't find slaves making any money for their work. Let's go farther back to lets say 25BC, you wouldn't see any of the slaves of the Roman Empire on the payroll either.... Lets go a little farther back to around 1200 BC, nope the Egyptians didn't pay their slaves either....

I guess my point is that no one is forcing these people to cross the border illegally to come here and work for "Slave wages" (Oxymoron if there ever was one). They come here because they chose to. They know it's wrong, and they know it's illegal, but they do it anyway. Why? Because they are doing what is best for them. Because those "slave wages" are more than they can earn back home. So they come here, work, send their money home, until they afford to bring their families here, so that they can send their kids to free public schools, which are now having to cater to primarily Spanish speaking students (At least in CA), and try to stay here because they have been here for X number of years.

granting illegal immigrants citizenship is not the answer, it is rewarding people for breaking the law. How about instead of putting armed robbers in prison, we give them the bank? No that doesn't make sense either does it?

They are here, illegally. Strictly speaking of the view of the majority of america - it doesn't want them here, plain and simple. SB 1070 is overwhelmingly supported.

Illegals use valuable resources. Just go to any public school or hospital in California or Arizona.

Do you really believe the majority of american are for illegal immjigration. Just why is it that these folks 1. couldn't come in legally, and 2. they should now get a preference. Giving a preference to law brakers is probably nbot the way to go. They came here, they can go back and get in line.All that needs to be done is to have any employer caught hiring even one illegal to immediately lose their business license. No more hiring, and they'd all have to go home.

Or we could go with "I don't like drug dealers, but they selling so we have to accomodate them" No we do not. You cannot reward people who knowingly disregard the law and have a just society.

Brutus and Spanky,

You both raise some valid points and I cannot refute them. Where I can and WILL push back is to state a couple of things that should be obvious but that are apparently not.

1) As stated above, these illegal aliens are already here and already working. They are not legal, but still earn money working here and they spend the money they earn HERE. They buy the same goods and products with the SAME dollars you and I spend.

2) I concede we need to do a much better job of securing the border. I know you do not want to hear this and that you will certainly not acknowledge (let alone agree) that the President has ordered a large increase in the number of troops to the border.

3) Since we can agree that, for now, the border is porous and allows many illegal aliens to enter this nation. As you correctly pointed out above, this is because the wage they can earn here is still more than they are able to earn in their own country. You are correct that this is an inherent financial incentive for these people to make the attempt to get here. In item #4, let's explore why this is shall we?

4) The reason these people want to come here is that they know that IF they DO manage to get past the border and assimilate into the population, there will ALWAYS be businessmen that are more than happy to make use of this labor pool at a deeply discounted hourly rate. If an American wants $10.00 an hour, but an illegal will do the same job for $2.50 an hour, the result is a windfall profit to the business. If these businesses would were unwilling or legally prevented from HIRING these illegal aliens, there would NOT be a strong financial incentive for them to come here because their hourly wage here would be ZERO! If they are not able to find employment here from unscrupulous businessmen, they will stay home since $0.50 per hour is still better than $0.00! If the businessmen are willing to pay them $2.50 IF they can get here, do you really think you are going to convince them not to try?

5) Until you are willing to accept that the ONLY way to REALLY solve this issue is to address the cost of labor issue. The reason the GOP is so conflicted is because they desperately want to preserve the flow of cheap, reliable, and captive labor to keep the profits of big business artificially inflated while they line the pockets of the GOP.

Yes, we need to address the issue on many fronts simultaneously. The reason we never seem to be able to get anything done with regard to this issue in Congress always comes down to the same painful reality. Big Business (ie: GOP) is totally unwilling to stop hiring those illegal aliens that are willing to risk the trip here and are successful. Shut off the jobs, and they will stop coming. We also need to strengthen our borders and address the huge illegal population already here in some sane and reasonable manner. They will not just disappear and we cannot simply round them all up and deport them. Their money still spends and they contribute to society whether your personal views, hatred, racism, or bigotry prevents you from seeing it or not...

Actually, Thomas Jefferson paid his slaves if he had them do work that he thought was beyond their normal day. It is documented in records at Poplar Forest Plantation as well as Monticello. It was unusual but happened.

Oh well then! That's just fantasic, he paid them for overtime when he felt it appropriate. I guess that refutes everything I said doesn't it........

Jael,

Thanks I guess. In two sentences you rendered my entire post above moot with your brilliant and illustrative words. Well done. Thanks for playing.

Actually, by slave labor, I happen to mean that people are, in very many, if not most, cases, Trapped into their jobs. They HAVE to accept the workload and hours per day, days per week, that the company they work for requires of them, at the pay rate that their bosses say they will give them, and do whatever their job requires with very little choice in the matter. It is that No Choice in the Matter that makes it slavery. But they are held by chains that are stronger than if they were shackles on their own legs. Because they are not paid enough to save, most of them live payday to payday, they are literally trapped into Having to come in to work to cover their bills and housing and food costs, with what tiny amount is left over for entertainment is often not enough to actually last the entire pay period. Most are dependent on their employer for their medical care as well, and if they have a family, then the family is dependent upon whatever wages any working age person in the household are able to bring in, for everything.

The employer, to always maximize profits, is going to naturally strive to keep actual costs down, which means he is going to find the lowest possible price for materials, office/shop costs and wages he can, unless he is a responsible employer who pays more than he has to in order for the labor to produce to goods for sale to His orders. Then the employer still has to pay his corporate headquarters, who helped him fund his business in the first place in exchange for a large portion of his newly Incorporated stock. The corporation collects the profits so that they can fund new businesses, do corporate advertising, and then pay themselves generously and leave their shareholders enough of the money that was originally made by the labor of their client businesses and their employees, to satisfy the people who bought the the stock. The employee is economically trapped, just like a slave for whom you had to provide food, shelter and some sort of clothing, and usually keep them generally physically fit, was trapped economically as well as physically. Yet they did not get to see or use the fruits of their labor.

Because the corporate agenda and, for some reason, corporate law happen to dictate that the corporation must maximize profits. This forces the client company to find some way to lower their costs to increase production and therefore increasing the profit. The profit, which might have been used for upgrades in equipment, better workspace, slightly better (and usually cheaper for the company) health insurance, safety equipment, or, God Forbid, increased wages. Again, just as surely, the workers do not receive the fruits of their, often hard, labor nor do they get a say in how they are spent.

It gets increasingly depressing for the employees, who are barely scraping by, unable to find better paying work because the corporations control the ages everywhere, to see the corporate level management flaunting their Billions and not listening to pleas to increase safety, workspace, wages and medical care. Just like slaves in the past had to view their owners.

This is what I refer to when I talk about slavery: wage slavery, people are notionally free, but having to stay with their present employer because he cannot get ahead financially enough to find another job or move to a new location. He is economically trapped and if the whole nation ends up that way we may as well appoint a king, because it will not be a democracy anymore. However, this is what the corporations are doing to America, and by breaking us economically, they forcing us into an economic situation where they control everything, all the wages and all of the pricing and taking more and more of the brunt of their cost cutting measures, and we would still have to go along just to feed our families.

They are very nearly winning, and I can only pray that President Obama is successful with his programs, because he is working to make sure that the corporations actually pay for the things that are needed specifically Because they have been taking outrageous profit away from the people who actually created that wealth in the first place. If they are going to stiff their workers and overcharge their customers so badly that they actually collect hundreds of millions or billions of dollars a quarter, then they need to be heavily taxed at a very high rate.

What this would do is force the companies and corporations to spend their "profits" on the upgrades needed and for a major increase in wages as well as much better medical etc. Possibly lower prices even, but in order to still make a profit yet not incur the higher tax brackets, if they can, with the same income flow as they have now, they would Have to put a lot more of that money back where it started with, the employee. This actually benefits the companies and corporations themselves, and their, now better paid, employees are actually able to afford their products, without resorting to credit (which is another scam I wont get into here). The wealthy would still make money, maybe not as fast, but it will be a more steady flow, and the workers will be much happier leading to a smoother political scene as the government programs wold be fully funded and the deficit being paid down.

Disgusted, Brutus & Spanky,

Here's the real problem. They will continue to keep coming as long as they believe that they can get a job and send money back to their loved ones on the other side of the border. Cracking down on the employer who exploit these people. Disgusted your quite right in saying the employers need to cracke d down. Now to keep Congress from passing a bill w/ so many loopholes that its not worth the paper it printed on. And for Spank & Brutus.

These people come here and do the jobs that you and I woud not do. I freely admit I would not pick fruits and vegetables and be paid by the number of basket you produce, I also would want to wait tables, clean dishes, hotel rooms, bathrooms either. But you need to ask yourselves, would either of you do these jobs as well for what they are paid? Just asking.

The law in Arizona is a result of our men and women in Congress doing nothing because they are afraid of the reprecussions of action. Arizona produced a law like that because the Feds can't get their act together and have members now saying what John Kerry said. " I was for it before I was against it." John McCain and others of his ilk are hypocrites and the hyprocrisy on both sides is truly astonding. I ask both of you, how do we cut through the hyprocrisy w/o being suffocated by it?

You want to live in a country where any damn body can come across the border? Go find it somewhere else. You people are ignorant! Generations of people have come across the right and legal way> Millions have died for OUR freedom. Freedom isn't free, you can't just walk across the border in this country or any other and demand anything! MOVE!

I am,

I do not like the fact that they are illegal immigrants, but they Are here, and their people, largely Native descent with some Spanish and others races tossed into their genetic backgrounds, but largely the Native Tribes that had populated what we call Mexico now and further south. These people had the history of going back and forth across areas for trade, or when crops failed etc, yes there were wars etc, but there were migrations in both directions and has never stopped even with the formation of the States, they are following in the footsteps of History in looking for better opportunities. The fact is, those that are here, are here, you don't have to like it, but that is the truth and trying to remove over 20m people would be like the deportations that the Germans did to some of their "immigrant and undesirable" populace. Not a pretty sight, so we have to find a reasonable way to integrate them, while making sure that the border IS sealed, tight, so that the influx is stopped. Part of the strategy to make sure that they stop coming would be to outlaw any person hiring illegals completely, confiscate the company and turn it over to someone who will run it right, without underpaid illegals. Repubs won't do that, however, because they are beholden to some of those self same corporations that make huge profits because they use illegal laborers, so to cut off the flow, you cut off the access and cut off the money, rather simple really, but the Repubs are not buying it whatsoever.

But to tell someone to go home, it is like Kimosabe telling The Lone Ranger "What do you mean 'We' whiteman?"

Boy do I agree. I am sick of the nasty posts and media. Everyone has known for a long time the only way to fix immigration is the plan that both President Obama and Bush put forward. Our border is too big and employers wanting cheap labour is stopping us. Big business seems to be behind everything, the oil spill, wall street, mining accidents. People better look at who is really taking our freedoms. It certainly is not the President. He is trying to restore our consumer protections. We do need a constitutional amendment baring corporations to be considered corporations with limits on campaign contributions. I bet everyone is tired of this.

You are right, IR--but Jindal makes a better sixty secon sound bite. This is truly scary.

I think there's a whole lot of things we're not being told IR.

My worst case scenario is that one morning we wake up to massive evacuations in the Gulf.

I also believe that the Gulf is NEVER going to fully recover even if they managed to cap the leak today!

Good point,

It is true that the US Navy is on site doing some of the research. There does appear to be a pocket of gas but they have not stated the nature of the gas. Oil field, Methane, seems to go together for me. In any event, the Navy should give us reliable info.

Red that's one reason that I think somebody needs to get a little farther ahead on some of this stuff. Going back to Katrina we know that it would simply be impossible to evacuate the region if we wait to the last minute. At this point I don't think that the gulf will even come close to recovering in my lifetime and We've got at least another month of oil spilling if we're lucky.

IR,

I tried to respond to your post . . . but posted it under Steeler Fan's comment below by mistake . . . lol!

Good Morning IR:

I'm not sure where I read it, but as our resident expert, I'll ask you. In regular underwater drilling operations they replace the oil that is being pumped out with a "mud" in order to keep pressures stable. With all this oil being released from this spill, they are not able to replace the spillage, thus causing an empty space. If the empty space is large enough, the pressure could collapse the ocean floor, causing a sink hole and all the oil could be released. Is there any truth to that thought or is just a rumor that is "out there in cyber space"?

Independent:

I was just thinking to myself last night, how quickly people will forget, except of course those living right on the gulf. Although there is still reporting on the spill note how the news and reporting of the same has dwindled to a degree, even here on this blog. If true, and I hope that people do not forget or put this problem at the back of their minds, it will be a shame.

Last night I saw pictures of a school of dolphins dying in the gulf. One pod of 36 showed that half were already dead (belly up), and the other half in the throes of death. There was also a picture of a sperm whale covered in oil drifting slowly and obviously in distress. It to was in the throes of death. And there is no telling how many of these creatures are dying or have died as a result of the spill because one cannot see those who have languished below the surface.

I was already sickened by this spill but last night I felt the stomach turning and anger rising from the destruction that man's insiatiable quest for oil is doing to this planet and its habitants. Some of the dolphins still alive but close to death were shown in a distessful sideways position with one flipper raised and pointing up as if to say to those flying over the pod, help, and what have you people done to us. I am angry this morning about all this and do not have a very good opinion of the human being. They are the aliens to the natural qualities of this planet and they are like locust feeding on and destroying everything in their path.

So my thoughts on the subject at hand, immigration reform. Screw this issue and screw man's poor attempts at settling cooperatively what is seen as a problem among their own species. First read states that immigration reform this year will not be easy. Well, BS, everyone just needs to use some damn common sense and come to gether to resolve the matter. While we are fighting among ourselves as humans we are also taking down and killing innocent victims, God's creatures, in the gulf of mexico.

CA,

I saw that yesterday and it just rips your heart out. They even showed an infra-red of a whale that was covered in hot spots. They said he/she was being broiled alive. At first I felt frustration as to why we could even allow something so tragic happen. Then I remember the greed, the poloticians supporting Big Oil and wanting to continue with the same insane attitude and then my frustration turns to anger. Rest assured my friend, we will not forget this, just look at the people on this board. This is not going to go away for a long time.

C. A. credit for this post really belongs to you because several posts you have made about this issue put me to researching in this direction. Ron as far as the dome collapsing what little I've been able to find moves away from scenario of the pocket collapsing because we're not replacing material into the area of where Natural gas and methane are pooling and building up pressure to where a catastrophic release is becoming a very real possibility. I'd be really iinterested to see what the Navy is coming up with but I'm sure that's on close hold right now.C A hang tough friend the reasons that you state are why I don't want to get into discussing a bunch of nothing like immigration or who is going to be the Next Supreme cort justice myself. Thank you for stateing it better than I ever could.

The oil reservoir isn't going to collapse!

They only place drilling mud in the casing prior to perforating the well. You see a drilling rig only drills so far to the well and then backs off, at which point the cement the well to so as not have a "Blow out" (an obvious failure at this well) then they lay the final production casing, prime the equipment to begin production, then once everything is in place they perforate the well. The only thing the inject into a production well is steam. And that is to keep the oil hot and wet (So it doesn't thicken and slow down production). And the steam doesn't provide and structural support for the oil reservoir.

Informative post, and thank you for it. I've heard bits and pieces about methane gas but not much attention to it. That's frightening. I agree that it the media would better serve the public by reporting the entire story instead of creating a storyline about Obama's anger.

I don't know specifically about this but there is a lot of concern that the pipe has ruptured the rock and earth where the well is. Evidently there may be leaks coming from the oil basen. That is also why the silly idea of blowing up the well is not going to happen. It could release unimaginable amts of oil. I would not be suprised if what you are saying is true and will research myself. I just hope those relief wells get there before a disaster of a larger magnitude

Fan,

The Republicans do not sleep. They all have coffins that they stand upright and then they just stand in them until the next roll call vote.

Morning Steeler's Fan!

It's easy to sleep like a baby when you're void of a conscience...

Disgusted,

Thanks for my first good laugh of the day.

IR,

I agree wholeheartedly with your post. The media has truly been derelict in their duty on this story. There is so much that we do not know, and folks are still allowed to come on TV and complain and that is presented as "news".

Memo to Anderson Cooper:

Having rightwing parish presidents on to lambast the President is not objective journalism.

The "more skimmers and boom" story line has always been a mirage - their ain't enough skimmers and booms to clean up a still leaking well. Yeah, more is good, but still not enough.

Perhaps, as IR mentions, more attention needs to be paid to what is on the horizon (pun intended) than what is water under the bridge.

The President has taken the "not fast enough, not coordinated enough" hit, whether it was justified or not.

That horse is officially dead now . . . nightly beating of it will not bring it back.

DAV,

I think the only reason the FR admins allow me to stay on this blog is for entertainment value. It is not for my ability to charm and cajole the rabid wing nuts. :)

Steeler fan,

I agree with your sentiment . . . what is really sad is to see so many Americans being lulled to sleep by the lovely conservative lullaby yet again . . . it sounds so good and yet never works . . . take care of the rich and they will take care of you . . . and even though we are still living out the effects of the last time that reality overtook this fantasy . . . 50% of America still wants to believe that as long as they don't need help NOW, they never will . . . it is the politics of "me first" and "too bad for you" and frankly no country can survive if half of the electorate is living in an alternate reality.

Those who don't learn from history are indeed doomed to repeat it . . . although usually it takes a little longer than 24 months before folks forget . . . we are truly reaping the bumper crop of ignorance that has been sown over the past 30 years.

P.S. Sorry I responded to IR's post in your thread.

Disgusted,

Keep those opinions coming. I look for them everyday. It drives the right nuts when they are called out. Rachael Maddow had a great peice on her show last night about how the right cannot function outside of their (right wing media) bubble. It really does explain how some of the junk that appears from the right gets into the mainstream. It is worth a quick look at.

Thanks DAV. :) I saw Rachel last night and I agree, it was rather comical to watch Angele eviscerate herself on camera. I mean, do they even bother to prep their candidates? Actually, I just remembered something. Nevermind. I need to go finish reading "everything they put in front of me" before doing more debate prep.

Nashville_fan:

Memo to Anderson Cooper: Having rightwing parish presidents on to lambast the President is not objective journalism."

Cooper has the same bunch of Republicans on every night to attack the president, with Bobby Jindal playing a starring role once or twice a week. The intent seems to be that every time these people complain that they're not getting what they want, it must be misrepresented as another case of senseless federal bureaucratic red tape stopping the cleanup effort.

There are legitimate reasons, mostly environmental concerns, as to why these whiners don't instantly get what they demand from the Big Government they despise. Whether those reasons justify the delays could be a subject of honest, open discussion that could be enlightening for the viewers. But there's very little real discussion permitted on the Corporate News Network.

Nobody representing the Coast Guard or the administration is ever there to respond to the accusations Coast Guard that Cooper lets go unchallenged. And in some cases he even encourages accusations as last night when he briefly summarized Thad Allen's explanation of why claims that the Jones Act was interfering in the use of foreign equipment were unfounded and then turned to the two Republicans and asked "Do you buy that?" Of course, they didn't buy it and nobody from the Coast Guard was there to respond.

I've been quite offended by the right wing attacks on the Coast Guard. They're doing the best they can to help out in a situation they were never intended to handle. These folks are constantly on patrol to ensure safe operation of vessels, stop smuggling, and they're the ones who go out in heavy seas and near gales to rescue people who get in trouble. They aren't "Paul Bart, Mall Cop", they're longstanding members of the US Military. The same military the Right says they support in undying measure.

John,

The GOP is only willing to support the military when it does not cost anything, does not require them to do anything, and when they need a supportive audience for a President that people wanted to throw shoes at...

Disgusted,

I always thought that the Repubs were more like vending machines standing out in the Lobby, you walk up to them and put cash in the slot, and they go cast a vote....pretty easy eh?? Works for the Lobbyists!

If ever there was a time to call out the Republicans on a filibuster, this would seem to be it--let them tie up the Senate when they want to get away for the holiday and make them actually filibuster over unemployment benefits. I don't understand why the Democrats always cave in to the filibuster threat.

Steeler Fan.

I think the DEMS should forced all out into the open. Make them stand up at the podium and keep talking. Let's see how long they last. We need to really see who these people that are destroying the middle class are. THey hide behind rules, object to bills and do not thave the guts to stand up and make the fight. I have added No Guts to the party of NO.

Sadly, to me the only reason the Dems don't call the Republicans out is that they are thinking ahead to when the Dems are out & might have to filibuster.

Thank you for your service to our country and thanks to all the vets out there and those currently serving as we celebrate Independence Day.

Agreed that the Republicans should be forced to repeatedly filibuster measures that have popular support or help those in need. It's already been done once, worked like a charm. Is there some reason to NOT do what works?

John,

Since you are Mr. High and Mighty and "I am the smartest MF in here", would you say the same BS when the Republicans are in the majority? I think the answer is NO.

You talk a lot of sh!t but have zero answers to anything. You're just like your compadre Mo and Fiesty. The Phukkin 3 Stooges.

Those sorry azz democrats in Congress does not have the guts to do sh!t because they are just as guilty of all of the same stuff Republicans are blamed for.

If Republicans win in November, guess what.....SUBPEONA power. It may not be right but, Issa is going to dish out some payback like we have never seen before. So you see, EVERY POLITICIANS azz...e puts out the stinky stuff.

Happy to get under your skin today, ITM. Would I say it? I JUST DID!! As for being the smartest in here, I've never said that. I'm just a guy who offers his opinion. Apparently it upsets you that you have trouble refuting my opinion.

I've been suggesting answers, you just don't like them. I guess your answer is to use subpeonaes as clubs against the opposition. Just like the guardians of fiscal responsibility to want to repeat a sorry episode in which we spent over $200M to find out that guys would prefer their wives not find out they got a BJ from some other woman.

If ever a government expenditure deserved the late Sen. William Proxmire's "Golden Fleece Award" this would be it.

ITM,

I have to say I am more than a little disappointed in you. We were making such progress. In the future, if you feel like you are backsliding and need to talk, I am here for you...

Juven,

I think Glen Beck could use you right now. He needs another writer for his show. The last one graduated from middle school and there is an opening on his staff. You would be a shoo in.

Lucky for you Juven, that Mom forgot to take the keyboard to work with her again today!

Hey, "IR"- you think Juven's mom came out from under the porch, and bit him on the leg, sending him down to her basement to lick his wounds?

Dammit!!! I thought for sure that shot of thorazine would've put Juven DOWN!!!!!!!

Juven, I'm BEGGING YOU, STOP DRINKING THAT DAMNABLE CONSERVO-KOOL AID!!!!

JuvenBachan

I understand your upset the pace getting this well fixed. But we have Republicans stripping regulations, not hiring enough inspectors, making MMS a hot bed of corruption. Now theres not a lot the Feds can do since this is BP's mess. Even w/ all the lies they have told, its still their mess to fix. Blaming the Dems when it was the Repubs doing, isn't constructive.

Joanne....

Beautifully written!! I really don't know what I can add to that!

I've always said that most of us are a lot more similar than we realize. We all want a better country for ourselves and future generations. Do we have different ideas on how to get there? Absolutely! But in the end, I believe there is a lot of common ground (which sadly politicians never seem to eager to find).

I hope you and everyone else here have a great 4th of July. :-)

Joanne in Pa:

Great post! We will be spending time with our (rather small) family and watching fireworks. I voted.

JoAnne,

That was just amazing. . . thanks so much for taking the time to remind us all of what is really important.

Bravo!

That speech was life changing for me,...thanks so much for the reminder! Happy 4th all,...headed out soon - catch you next week! Thanks FR for making this my home away from home!

To the regulars, I hope you have a happy and safe weekend. To the newbies, welcome aboard and similar well wishes!

Happy Holiday to all the regulars (Yes, even the wing nuts). May you all be happy and healthy and free from fireworks injuries.

And JoAnnaSmith, try to remember that once you light the fuse, you need to throw the firecracker or it will... Yeah, nevermind...

Very Good JoAnne thank you.

Thank You JoAnne from PA, so very true, when I served in the military I served for ALL of us, likewise I expect our Govt. to take care of ALL of us as well. Most of the, sadly, deep divisions in our Nation are media driven as the media is more interested in sensationalism that is easily whipped up along the partisan divide, rather than showing the good things happening as they do not bring in the same level of ratings. The media is driven by the money from ratings and by creating division it allows them to set forth the idea of huge disagreements, which in turn actually then Become major disagreements and thus stories that they can then report.

Americans are much more alike than most will believe, the only Real division we have now is the huge and widening one between the poor/middle class and the extremely wealthy, but instead they fan the flames of racism and partisanship, and guess what: racism and partisan ship makes for good stories with lots of angst and rancor while the Extremely wealthy get a pass (After all, Murdock does not Want you to know how much wealthier he and his friends are than you, you might get upset at HIM instead of the other party or race.)

Joanne PA,

Great words. This gets a vote and I have reprinted it to refer to when I need that extra inspiration. Really really a very nice post. There is hope out there. We just have to look a little harder these days, but it is there. Your post proves it. Have a great and safe 4th. My daghter is coming in for a quick visit. She is a 3 generation Navy and an officier and keeps remining this enlisted old sailor needs to salute her. Hope all the vets here have a great and safe July 4 as well. I thank you all for your service.

Very nice. JoAnne PA. Scrolling through the replies to your post I was feeling all warm and fuzzy, until I saw JoAnna Smith's post saying everything is Obama's fault.

JoAnne in Pa---Amen, sister--great post and words we should all reflect on today. Well said.

Hard to take your point seriously joanne, when you follow it up with the horsehockey you post below.

That being said....I don't take you seriously and think you are full of the crap you spout here regularly.

Have a safe and great 4th fellow lefties!

Hey, thanks all! Here’s the happiness I’ll be pursuing myself for the next few days – a close friend’s daughter, son-in-law and two grand-daughters are coming here from Washington state for a few days on their way to a Girl Scout function in Washington, D.C. Our sort of ambitious itinerary includes the standard Philadelphia attractions – Independence Hall, Liberty Bell, Constitution Center, Betsy Ross House, Valley Forge, etc. (with hopefully a cheesesteak or two and an introduction to scrapple thrown in there somewhere!) – then a drive through Amish farm country on the way out to Gettysburg, then a day of pure fun in Hershey before they head off to D.C. on Wednesday with a stop along the way at Fort McHenry. I’m already tired!

Oh, a bit of back-story. My friend and I go back over 35 years. Our friendship started back in the dark ages before e-mail and Facebook and blogs, as what back then were referred to as “pen pals”. We eventually met in person for the trip of a lifetime to Alaska, followed by several more visits back and forth. Sadly, my finances and her health have prevented us from getting together again the last several years, but I’m really looking forward to finally meeting “the girlies” who are her pride and joy.

Oh, yeah…..we originally hooked up over professional sports. Over the years we’ve shared interests in everything from Les Miserables to Buffy the Vampire Slayer and from the Dallas Cowboys to Henry V. Today she haunts the conservative blogs and is a fan on Sarah Palin’s Facebook page. I hang out here and campaigned for Barack Obama. We’re still and always will be the best of friends.

Hmmm, could there be a message in there somewhere?

Again, Happy 4^th to ALL!

Chris, as I posted below, JoAnne from PA is VASTLY different than JoAnna Smith...the first is Left, the second somewhere-off-the-chart far right.

Apologies might be in order!

B. Honest - Thanks for the clarification, though I suspect even JoAnna and I have at least one thing in common, namely that people have been misspelling our names our whole lives. And I'll bet she had at least one teacher at some point who insisted on calling her "Joan", too - my college advisor did it for four years!

Ooooops........Thanks for the heads up B. I'm so used to whacking a troll I don't even look anymore. Still, no excuse for slamming a fellow progressive.

JoAnne in PA, my sincerest apologies. I've been out of the loop for a couple of weeks and I guess I was too enthusiastic about whacking a troll. I'll try to pay closer attention now that I'm back in the "cage".

Chris - No problem. Of course, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention again that my original point was that maybe we could take a few days off from the troll-whacking and lib-bashing to remember that we all love the same country. Both JoAnne and JoAnna.

Have a great holiday and make sure you keep that enthusiasm going till November!

Joanne, Thank you for posting this most memorable speech made by our President. I listened that night, when finished I jumped out of my seat and shouted to nobody in particular as I was alone, this guy will be president. I am glad he is our President.

We will do well to remember these words and stop snipping at one and other, sometimes over the most petty incidents and situations.

I am late coming to the board today, I voted for this anyway.

Wonderful post.

Thanks, Gingerbread - I remember doing the exact same thing - I wanted to run out in the street and start knocking on doors right then and there!

JoAnne in PA

Okay, I need the recipe for the Scrapple as I haven't had it in 35+ years but remember it from childhood - a step aunt along the way made it for us on Thanksgiving Morning when I was 7 or so,...with hot maple syrup. Do share! and thanks for the speech reminder - it was a Life Altering moment for many of us!

So now Obama wants to tell us about his wonderful economy. Well, wonderful except his administration said unemployment would never go over 8% if Congress approved his more then $800 billion for his various stimulus programs

Do you really think if you repeat that lie often enough it will magically become true?

JoAnna:

The President never said that unemployment would not go over 8% if the stimulus passed, even though our uninformed and deliberately obtuse media continues to repeat this lie and allow others to repeat it.

Below are excerpts of a diary I wrote on this very topic:

"I keep hearing members of the media saying: "President Obama said that if the economic stimulus bill was passed, unemployment would not go over 8%." There is one small problem with this statement . . . it is simply NOT TRUE. . .

As a public service, and since the media seems incapable of using "the Google", I have done some RESEARCH to see WHAT is fueling this - here is what I found:

In a report issued by his economic advisors on January 10, 2009 (BEFORE Barack Obama was even sworn in as President), economic advisors Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein issued a report titled "The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan". The VERY FIRST WORDS in the report are these:

"A key goal enunciated by the President-Elect concerning the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan is that it should save or create at least 3 million jobs by the end of 2010. For this reason, we have undertaken a preliminary analysis of the jobs effects of some of the prototypical recovery packages being discussed. Our analysis will surely evolve as we and other economists work further on this topic. The results will also change as the actual package parameters are determined in cooperation with the Congress."

http://otrans.3cdn.net/45593e8ecbd339d074_l3m6bt1te.pdf

Got that? The report is a PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS of a PROTOTYPICAL PACKAGE which will EVOLVE. Could it be stated any more clearly than that?

. . .

The unemployment rate in January 2009 was 7.6%, so CLEARLY nobody in there RIGHT MIND thought that the Stimulus package was going to be able to hold it under 8%. The stimulus bill wasn’t signed into law until mid February . . . the unemployment rate then was ALREADY 8.1%"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/7/26/758135/-Debunking-the-Obama-said-unemployment-wouldnt-go-over-8-LIE

*****************

Why should I believe anything the media says when they are so casual and cavalier with the trutH?

I ask the same question about the Republican Party - if you cannot make your case using the truth, what more really is there to say?

Why all the misinformation and lies? Why do so may not challenge the daily lies that they are fed?

What was that!? You try to lull us into a sense of peace, love and brotherhood and then ...this crap!

Look, Bush screwed us so royally that the damage we suffered is incalcuable. Then, when the president tried to fix it, that package got sliced and diced so badly trying vainly to get a couple repub votes that it is barely doing the job.

And stop with that silly "they said the unemployment rate wouldn't go above 8%". The only fault there is that they didn't have a full understanding of just how bad the economy the Bush left them was.

The Bush admin ransacked my house. Obama is trying to rebuild it. It IS Bush's fault and by extension the Republican's fault. You may consider it a tired line. But it is TRUE.

Rick

There is JoAnne in PA and she is a different person than JoAnna Smith....VERY different people, so no, it was not one person giving us the peace and brotherhood message, which is so badly needed, and then saying crap. JoAnne of Pa is a regular who has good ideas and is a true Patriot, JoAnna Smith is also a regular here that spews the standard Faux Neuz line and does not seem to have a clear grasp on reality, sadly enough. I keep hoping that she will become educated with the facts we present here, but am certainly NOT holding my breath for it.

Nashville:

Everyone and their momma heard Obama statements about unemployment not going over 8%. You may choose to balnk it out but it is a fact. It has actually been played over and over again to the point it is old news.

Do you think a diary YOU WROTE is proof of anything. Who are YOU? I'm not trying to call you out because I don't have any issues with you but, I think you are looking at things through a partisan window and it is very foggy. If you wipe it off, you will be amazed at everything you couldn't see.

InTheMiddle:

If you heard President Obama say it, then post the link . . . I have been asking for the link for 18 months and it hasn't been posted yet . . . because it doesn't exist.

I provide links to back up what I say - you provide . . . *crickets*

Nice talking with you.

Joanna please tell all us uninformed heathens what McCain/Palin, or for that matter anyone could have done that would have put us in any better shape at this point economically or unemployment wise, do tell, we await your wisdom to wash over us freeing us from the jaws of ignorance.

Joanna :

Don't forget about those two wars President Obama started.

Oh yeah... and the economy tanked on January 21st 2009.

You righties really think people are stupid if you want us to believe that Barack Obama created this nightmare we are living!

Get over yourselves. The scary Black man in the White House won the election.

Thank God for the small favors because McCain/Palin would have been disastrous!

Nicely done Nash. I see there's attempt to refute your points, just a repetition of the initial claim. Not even an acknowledgement that the claim is absurd on its face since the unemployment rate was ALREADY higher than "he said it would get." Also no acknowledgement that the plan didn't come through intact since the Republicans insisted on numerous changes, many of which reduced the effectiveness of the eventual plan.

Correct and to the point Nash! The trolls wouldn't know the truth if it hit them head on at 100mph.

Please inthemiddle give us a link that shows President Obama himself, not any of his staff or the media saying it. I'd wager you can't.

Nash – I admire your persistence on this point, truly I do. But I will be equally persistent in documenting that the Obama administration did take the position that passage of the stimulus bill was necessary to hold unemployment around 8%.

On February 26, 2009 Christina Romer, the Chair of Obama's Council of Economic Advisors made this statement:

"Now, even with the comprehensive recovery package, the unemployment rate is forecast to rise in the first half of 2009, just simply because output is continuing to fall. We anticipate that it will average just over 8 percent for 2009 as a whole."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Press-Briefing-by-OMB-Director-Peter-Orszag-and-CEA-Chair-Christina-Romer/

As for the news media repeating the alleged inaccuracy of this position, even the NYT (not exactly a bastion of Obama bashers) saw this as news that was fit to print:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/business/01leonhardt.html

Finally, on the point as to whether President Obama personally made a statement to the effect that unemployment would not rise above 8%, my goodness that is a distinction without a difference. Senior advisors speak for the president, always have always will. And unless the president publicly repudiates their remarks, then the presumption is the president agrees with that remark. I don't recall Obama taking Romer to the woodshed on this point. Therefore it is fair to conclude that the position of the Obama administration was that unemployment would, in Romer's words, "average just over 8 percent for 2009 as a whole."

Bill,

I also admire your tenacity at posting the link above again . . . and again I will point out that in that very same statement, only 4 sentences later, Ms. Romer states:

"Now, as the professional forecasters at my own agency, the Council of Economic Advisers; Peter's, the Office of Management and Budget; and the Treasury, who contributed to the forecast, frequently remind me, we are economists and not soothsayers. And all forecasts are subject to a substantial margin of error. And surely in a severe downturn like the current one, which is the result of a once-in-a-century confluence of macroeconomic shocks, usual patterns surely provide less guidance than in more ordinary times. But we have attempted to base the budget projections on our best estimate of what lies ahead."

What I cannot understand is why folks choose to ignore the "substantial margin of error" part and pretend like the President himself made a stone cold lock guarantee that unemployment wouldn't go over 8%, when it was alreadly OVER 8% when the stimulus was passed?!?!

That, Bill, is a lie. And I don't care who says it, Democrat or Republican.

And that point about anyone in President Obama's administration saying something being the same as him saying something is laughable as well.

Ask General McChrystal.

Very well said Bill.

They will still say Obama didn't say it.

There was a lot of sh!t Bush didn't personally say or DO but he gets blamed for it.

When you are the POTUS and you send those people out there with diarrhea mouth, then you suck it up when the do-do comes out.

InTheMiddle:

I will take your comments as an admission that you were mistaken in your previous post when you stated that "Everyone and their momma heard Obama statements about unemployment not going over 8%."

Apparently you didn't hear anything.

Now you want to backtrack and say "Bush was blamed for stuff he didn't say too."

Uh huh.

Back in the good old days, folks would just say "I stand corrected."

P.S. Thanks for the kind words John B. and Chris.

Nash - you got more patience than me with G.I. Joe!

You'll NEVER get a correction out of our resident anger management drop out!

Nash -- a fair and balanced exchange, let the readers decide.

BTW I voted for you on the grounds of persistence. Sort of like a kid in school getting an A cuz they tried real hard :)

BTW2 I think the 'lie' stuff is a bit too harsh. Folks around here could be more circumspect in using that term

BTW3 how can you equate McCrystal's criticism of Obama with Romer's articulation of Obama's position?

BTW4 presidents always trot out their senior people to go befeore the media and sell an administration's position. There's nothing laughable about that practice, it's a common way of doing business.

BTW5 sorry I got carried away, I was supposed to let the reaers decide.

Nashville_Fan:

"I keep hearing members of the media saying: "President Obama said that if the economic stimulus bill was passed, unemployment would not go over 8%." There is one small problem with this statement . . . it is simply NOT TRUE. .

Apparently you have trouble reading. The statement said:

Well, wonderful except his administration said unemployment would never go over 8% if Congress approved his more then $800 billion for his various stimulus programs.

Note the "administration" part of the quote. Obama administration pushed the notion of the 8% unemployment. Obama's economic team member Christina Romer said the following in an interview that occurred 4 months ago.

Is she (Romer) predicting continued high unemployment through 2011 out of political caution, after the administration got hit for saying its stimulus package would keep unemployment at 8 percent? "We were completely off" on the earlier prediction, Romer admitted, because there was a breakdown in the usual relationship between GDP growth and unemployment. She said the latest forecast is the best possible based on available information and there was "no attempt to shade one way or another."

Complete interview at: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/02/12/christina-romer-on-putting-workers-on-sale-and-why-we-dont-ne/

So please, stop with the nonsense that Obama wasn't pushing his Stimulus bill by saying it would keep unemployment at or below 8%. His administration did so and admits to it.

I swear, liberals are so dense, you can put something right in front of their faces and explain it 10 ways to Sunday, and they still don't get it.

Festery Deadhead Roselle, IL

Nash - you got more patience than me with G.I. Joe!

You'll NEVER get a correction out of our resident anger management drop out!

Festery, there is an intelligent conversation going on here with complicated ideas and concepts being discussed, so you aren't qualify to be a part of it. Maybe see if CA or disgusted is around, you can play with them out back in the sandbox.

JoAnna:

Please find the definition of the phrase "margin of error" and get back to me. 8% was NEVER presented as a hard and fast number . . . and the actual figure used was 8.8% which if you are familiar with the concept of rounding is closer to 9%.

And your little ending of "libruls are so dense" is rich coming from someone who thinks an estimate of job performance numbers is equivalent to a prophecy.

Bill:

Lie is a harsh word I agree, but I think it is warranted in this case - the talking point that is presented daily is "President Obama said that unemployment wouldn't go over 8% if the stimulus passed." . . . both John Boehner and Michael Steele said it just yesterday and I heard Joe Scarborough say it this morning.

That statement is a lie, based on a literal reading or a reading of intent.

The standard you presented was that the word of a senior advisor was equivalent to the word of the President. I simply presented a very recent example where that was not true.

I do not dispute that the forecasts were made and presented, what I dispute is the notion that these numbers were presented as a promise to the American people. The weren't.

P.S. I don't think you got carried away at all - pitch perfect I think! :o)

JoAnna Smith

Festery, there is an intelligent conversation going on here with complicated ideas and concepts being discussed, so you aren't qualify to be a part of it. Maybe see if CA or disgusted is around, you can play with them out back in the sandbox.

_________________

Intelligent conversation you say JoAnna? Nah... can't be because you're here... And I'll take playing in a sand box with CA or Disgusted anyday over playing in a litter box as you & the rest of the right wing nuts do...

Hi Feisty!

Some folks just can't handle the unvarnished truth from an unapologetic red head I guess! :o)

Nashville_fan

JoAnna:

Please find the definition of the phrase "margin of error" and get back to me. 8% was NEVER presented as a hard and fast number . . . and the actual figure used was 8.8% which if you are familiar with the concept of rounding is closer to 9%.

Well now, that's progress. Good to see that you now admit the Obama administration did in fact say unemployment would not go above 8% with their trillion dollar boondoggle. Now we're talking about something called "margin of error" are we? My, that is progress. So what's Obama's "margin of error" in the gulf oil spill? I guess one, or two, or maybe three spills is acceptable from his administrations lack of oversight of the rigs in the gulf? How about Obama's margin of error in his ObamaCare? Apparently Obama said it would cost a trillion dollars, but now we see that number creeping up, and up, and up. So what's the "margin of error" on that number, 10%, 20%, 50%, 200%.

How much slack are you going to cut Obama?

JoAnna,

I am only asking that you interpret the information as it was presented, and not cherrypick out the parts you like and pretend like the other parts were not presented when they were.

Ironic that you want to lay the oil spill caused by a lax regulatory structure championed by conservatives and a "do anything for a buck" mentality demonstrated by a foreign-owned, private company at the feet of "Obama". So much for "personal responsibility".

Yet another demonstration of your "have my cake and eat it too mentality".

I am not going to cut President Obama any slack - he doesn't need any. . . and that is the same amount of slack I have alloted for you as well.

Good day.

Nash,

Why don't you just accept Obama is a POLITICIAN. Plain and simple. If you can get that concept then maybe your Blood Pressure would go down.

I can't stand some Liberal ideas and I let everyone know it but I do not get my pressure up behind what someone says on a blog or T.V.

Politics in general is probably one of the most boring subjects on the planet and it is something people will never agree upon. Most people just like to argue period. There is nothing anyone in HERE can say or do that will change the world. As you can see, the same people day after day conversating with the same people. Some I like, some I don't.

itm, did'nt Bush and his administration tell us the war in Iraq would only cost approximately 200b? 200b, 2 trillion, deficits don't matter? Now they are all deficit hawks. Go figure.

JoannaSmith

We we're shedding 750000 jobs a month under your esteemed lil shrub. This man comes in, albeit naive, trying to fix this mess. And what does he get, " the man needs to take a valium before he talks to us" The Repubs never planned on working w/ him, they've even said so. And now you wonder why nothing is getting fixed. The Banks got bailed out, Bush's plan from the beginning, something that has left a bad taste in all of our mouths, and they still won't lend. They compensation hasn't dropped and they feel they did nothing wrong by putting this economy in the toilet. And will do so again unless they are stopped. But who's holding up the Bank reform bill? Repubs that who. They get what they want, and still give you a golden shower. I know you blame Obama for this spill as well, you probably believe he swam a mile under water and did something to the well. And I bet Glenn Beck even saw him do it right? Because everything that nutbag says is the gospel until its disproven and even then, the teabaggers still proclaim its true. Fema concentration camps right? Remember that one?

Please stop drinking the kool aid and get some facts for once. You know Glenn Beck hate Black people right

dangerfield

If our esteemed lawmakers would eschew the omnibus bill for one that ONLY pertains to unemployment benefits, the republicans would have no cover for their opposition. The practice of making every bill an omnibus, with several, often competing and disparate discrete parts, is one of the reasons why bills become so contentious, and bloated.

Make it a simple extension of benefits for the unemployed, and then the republicans will know that they have no excuse, no "cover" to vote no. Then they would be seen for the heartless bastards they are, by their own unemployed constituents

DF, take a look at Greece, all the rioting, all the infighting over the government cutting the Peoples benefits, because the county ran out of money. Look at Spain, where the metro transportation workers are on strike because the government is cutting their pay and benefits because Spain too is out of money. Look at the just concluded G-20 summit in Toronto where the European leaders told Obama that they can no longer continue their massive deficit spending because they are out of money. Now unemployment benefits cannot be extended here in the US because we are out of money. See a trend?

Where did you study economics? You are confusing politics with economics. Perhaps you should read "Lords of Finance", or Ken Rogoff's "This time it's different" for some perspective. We are not Greece, nor are we little European countries the size (and population) of a single state here. Republicans touted debt as a % of GDP when they were spending like there was no tomorrow, for the first SIX years of the Bush administration. When FDR imposed "austerity" in 1933-34, it resulted in DEEPENING the depression, and we didn't get out for another DECADE.

Extending unemployment benefits will strengthen the economy, whereas failing to do so in this horrible job market will result in depressing consumer spending (the unemployed will be putting every dollar they receive back into the local economy) which will cause more unemployment.

We are talking about your fellow Americans who are facing the abyss with no where else to turn, and an economy that is reliant on consumer spending to survive. I don't know any economic theory that would support the denial of this extension, but perhaps you do. I would certainly like to know how that works.

Every Nation facing austerity measures now are there because the Banks and Corporations plain robbed the till, the financial meltdown was NOT caused by the social safety nets, it was caused by the fraudulent packaging and sale of bad debt that the banks bet against while peddling it to others as a good moneymaker that was backed up by their ratings agencies. We all got robbed and that money, some 600 TRILLION dollars worth, went into Corporate Bank and their cronies' pockets.

Dangerfield, IMO that should be standard practice in all legislative bodies. The IA legislature has a "germane language rule". It states that all bills are required to have only one subject and that the subject of the bill be stated clearly in its title. The nature of legislators being what it is there are regular attempts to stretch the limits of the rule, but it's a good thing. We just passed a ban on texting while driving. With the rule in place there was no opportunity to also change qualifications for foster parents, any of the other such nonsense that routinely occurs in Washington.

dangerfield

Extending unemployment benefits will strengthen the economy, whereas failing to do so in this horrible job market will result in depressing consumer spending (the unemployed will be putting every dollar they receive back into the local economy) which will cause more unemployment.

Right out of Keynesian Economics 101. If this were true, then we would have seen evidence of a rising economy. Instead, we have an economy heading for another recession.

If you pay people to not be productive, how in the world do expect that productivity, and jobs, will be a byproduct of such action? It cannot happen.

You have to wonder when you read something like this, wonder what these people are thinking.

We are thinking that other people, who are unemployed, may like to be able to feed their families.

Sorry newday, you aren't going to get through. "Compassionate" and "Conservative" have been officially divorced with the departure of GWB from the WH and will never again be allowed to consort.

Thanks for the reminder John B: I keep hoping that underneath all that bluster, there is a heart somewhere.

newdayDawning10,

Not likely, luckily, the 2 Maine Senators had enough of the BS and voted for the benefits, but w/o the 60 vote, people are going to hungry and perhaps homeless. The Repubs have lately started bashing the Unemployment benefits calling people who collect them Hobos, lazy not interested in getting a job. Or like Rand Paul said, " You can get a job that pays less that the benefits, buts its stilla job" Can you see where this is going. Its class warfare in its truest sense.

It is the callousness that gets me Philip. As if people are not trying to find work. No one wants to live on unemployment, and for the middle management people who have been "downsized" out of jobs, I can imagine what that is like. Their mortgage doesn't go down, food expenses don't go down, but Paul and his ilk make it sound like they won the golden ticket to paradise.

Congrats Larry!

You win the most the most offensive post of the day!

Which is quite an honor because there's some stiff competition around here!

So does this mean I touched a nerve with you Feisty? I hope I did..... Its people like you and your progressive friends that are destroying this country

Under normal circumstances I would understand your post, even if not agreeing with it completely. (the bible also said it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God) However during the worst economic recession since the great depression, I just don't think this is the case. There simply aren't enough jobs to be had, and you can't tell me the extra 6 or 7 percent of those that make up the added unemployment enjoy the free ride too much to go find work. I think most Americans have too much pride to accept that. Employers won't start hiring again until they have the steady revenues where they feel safe taking on extra payroll. They won't have steady revenues until people start spending money. People can't start spending money if they don't have jobs. It's a cycle that can only be broken by government engaging in defecit spending just long enough for the economy to jump start itself, at which point you would hope the government would cut back on it's spending and repay the loans it just incurred. (i understand this last part is wishful thinking)

Oh and Feisty dear one other thing....before you call me a Repug or a Bush supporter....... Bush was a progressive as well...... in my opinion on some things.... I disagreed with his passage of the first stimulus

Good Post Larry.

The Obama azz....ers will attempt to cut you down in 3, 2, 1.

Feisty, what do you want to bet that Larry sits in church every Sunday? And Larry, the right wingers are responsible for taking this country off the tracks. Turn off Rush, and read a book. I keep recommending TR by Brands, since he left the Republican party over the same issues. Oh, TR is Theodore Roosevelt. I keep forgetting that I cannot assume you right wingers know about your country and its traditions.

NewDay,

I will give Larry credit for at least putting down in words how the right wing nuts think! Classic example of the I got mine FU mentality!

Why is it - it's always about ME first? Like quoting Limpballs would give him more credibility! LMAO

Maybe Larry or a friend or family member should try to live off unemployment benefits?

Very revealing..

Larry,

Why does personal responsibility not apply to corporations?

Why are they not responsible for the things that they do that negatively effect our country?

Nobody is begrudging rich folks their money . . . the problem is when they use it to pay off regulators to not regulate, and then throw caution to the wind, and then pretend like they had nothing to do with the predictable collapse of our economy and energy infrastructure.

I don't want to hear about "personal responsibility" when it is time for unemployment benefits while simultaneously you got Republican governors yelling for a hand out from BP and the federal government to "make them whole".

It's just hypocrisy, pure and simple.

Why are the victims of BP more special than the vicitms of AIG?

You wanna create this fictional character of the poor abused rich person and I call bullsh!t.

"Indeed, in 2006, the top 10 percent earned 50 percent of national income, a higher share than even in 1928, the peak year of the "roaring twenties" stock market bubble."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/

They seem to be getting by just fine, despite your erroneous claim that the big, bad libruls want to take away their teddy bear.

And about Rush Limbaugh? At least you have sense enough to know that you SHOULD be ashamed to be getting your "deep thoughts' from him . . . but hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.

nEWDAY--

So you are saying that I should look to Roosevelt (one of the original Progressives along with Wilson) for inspiration????? Thank you but Ill pass.... Ill look to the only right giver their is and His Word (the Bible) and Ill look tothe Founders for my inspiration regarding this country.

As far as going to church yes I attend regularly..... I also believe if we as a country actually looked to God and His Word we would be a lot better off....

And Feisty...... I have a niece who is pregnant and neither she or her boyfriend are employed..... but instead of getting unemployment our family is helping her out..... so that kind of shoots down you theory doesnt it?

Nashville.... and again I ask....why should the rich be REQUIRED to take care of the poor by the government? Why does Big Brother need to have his hands in the pot at all?

I agree wit hte poster yesterday who said we should have a flat tax (whatever the %) that way EVERYONE pays their fair share -- the "rich and greedy" that yall are after and he low income that dont pay any taxes either.

Larry,

You're niece is very lucky to have the help from family members... but she does not represent the 10 MILLION unemployed workers...

Maybe if they were looking for work and not playing 'slap & tickle' she wouldn't have ended up pregnant!

Hey Larry,

In all of those Sundays spent in a pew, did the Pastor ever preach about the poor and how we should all treat them? Or in your church do they not follow God's word? I am still struggling with how you "good Christians" can basically tell the poor to "get off my property and go eat dirt!" when I know that this is NOT what Jesus would have done.

I am sure there are more than just myself that would dearly love to hear you reconcile your political positions with those of your faith.

Larry,

So, if the only people that ever lose a job are related to rich people like you that CAN afford to help them out, we can solve the problem of unemployment insurance! Why isn't CNBC proclaiming this at the bottom of the screen all day, every day?

Damn, Larry, you just solved the nation's unemployment problems! Bravo!

Larry,

I did not ask you to take care of the poor - I asked you why conservatives don't think that personal responsibility replies to corporations?

Having a conversation requires one to actually respond to what is said, not just repeat talking points.

Larry, Minot, N.D. "..... I also believe if we as a country actually looked to God and His Word we would be a lot better off...."

Don't the Taliban and Al Qaeda look to God and His word for guidance? My point is not to associate you and your beliefs with these groups. My point is that not everyone reads the same Holy Book, and even if they do they may not interpret it the same way you do.

I guess what I'm saying is be careful what you ask for.

Larry:

How did Unemployment Insurance become "Obama Money"?

It is this kind of sh!t that makes me crazy!

Unemployment Insurance has been around for decades and now all of a sudden it is a dirty word and "Obama" created it for lazy, shifless ner'er do wells (read Negroes).

wtf!

Bingo! What did I tell you Feisty? Our Larry is a church goer. It is sad to realize that Larry also does not understand that the Founding Fathers were progressives. What they did was the bravest thing in the world at that time, they took the ideas of Aristotle, Locke and made themselves a brand new country. But, people who listen to LImbaugh are like that, they don't get that the Founders took revolutionary ideas and made them work. They were not conservatives. You can almost bet that people of this ilk sit in church every Sunday, but they manage to bastardize the message. Christ enjoined us to help each other. He did not enjoin us to helping the rich only, to the detriment of the poor. So, I say again, Larry read a book. Really. And maybe what you should read is anything about Jefferson.

fIRST OFF

fEISTY.... GOOD TO SEE THAT YOU GO TO YOUR STANDARD PERSONAL ATTACKS WHEN YOU CANT FIGHT A FIGHT.

Secondly Disqusted in PA...

I am hardly what you would call rich. Combined my wife and I make about $50,000 a year. We just believe that we should give to those who arent as well off as us.

Now on to your comments about my faith. Yes the Pastor has talked about helping those less fortunate. But that is a PERSONAL desicion not one thatthe government has any business in. I dont need the government taking money out of my wallet to give to those who choose not to work.

What I think you are missing about my POV is this: I have absolutely no problem helping those who legitamately cant help themselves..... be it because of injury or disability. What I have a problem with is the fact that there are a lot of people on public assistance that have no business being on it but would rather get free "Obama money" than actually earn a living. Or the people that decide to have way too many kids and then expect my tax dollars to pay for them. While I have no right to say how many kids a person should have if that person decides to have 10 kids and cant support them then that is ON THAT PERSON and should lose their kids.

I also have no problem with my tax dollars temporarily going to a person who is down on their luck....but 99 months? Seriously?

The Bible says "IF a man does not work he does not eat". So what does that mean? To me it means if someone is not willing to help themselves up then why should I continue throwing money at them?

Im a Deacon at my church and one of the rules I had implemented is that if a person comes to us for financial assistance more than one time they have to sign up for (free) financial counseling through the church. Because the old addage "give a man a fish he eats for a day, TEACH a man to fish he eats for a lifetime" has never been more true.

Back to my Rush Limbaugh quote..... that true compassion is not how many people we help but how many people dont need help any more. Isnt that the goal we all have? Or is the goal to get everyone to a point to where we need government to take care of everything? Arent we Americans? Last time I checked America isnt a part of Europe.

And I could also go into the Healthcare bill (as I have actually taken the time to read it...unlike Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid (and just about all the other senators -- because you know we had to pass it to find out what was in it) and ask why is it that now the government will be able to come in to my house and see how Im raising my children? Or why do I need to be allowed to carry my children until they are 26? Last time I checked a child stopped being a child at 18.

Newday,

I doubt seriously that Larry will read anything that we might recommend to him. I suggest that he actually go back and READ the Bible (or at least pay a bit more attention during sermons) and try to find the passages where Jesus proclaims that "The Kingdom of God is the Kingdom of the Rich, Powerful, and The Corporations. The poor be damned!"

If he is truly a man of faith, he has to know that the bloviating that passes for talk radio on some stations is really nothing more than heretical and sacrilegious. Larry, do you think Rush, Beck, and Hannity are in Church every Sunday?

Sheila--

Sometime google "Obama money lady" and listen to her talk about how she has no idea where the government money she is getting is coming from all she knows is that Obama is giving it to her and thats why she voted for him...... sad really

New day-- if they were "progressives" by todays terms why was the constitution written so that it limited (severely) the power the federal Government has and granted most rights to the states? Isnt that a conservative ideology? If they were "progressives" wouldnt they have made a huge federal government?

Charles--

Theres a very big difference between YAHWEH (The one and only true God) and Allah!

Someday take sometime to truly learn about the Muslim religion. Youll be surprised what you learn. Did you know that the ONLY guarenteed way into their version of heaven is Jihad (which is the killing of those who wont conform to Islam)?

The other thing progressives want to make us forget is that we ARE A CHRISTIAN nation. When Winthrop came across from England he even stated "We wish to create a CITY ON A HILL" and the Founders stated many times that all rights come from GOD ALONE not the government

Hey Larry, I am on my holidays in Las Vegas, and although I have lived here many years ago, I am very surprised by the changes that I see. For those of you that have ever visited Las Vegas, part of the fun of Vegas is to go to a casino where you can get change from a REAL PERSON, as well as drinks from a REAL PERSON while you are gambling.

Well, to my surprise, ALL of the change people have been replaced by a machine. There is not one casino out here that as ONE change person. I remember when there were 10-15 change people on the casino floor you could go to, chat with, and get change when you need it.

I bring this up because this is in line with the narrative from Larry, Minot, ND. Nevada now has a 14% unemployment rate. Although my survey is NOT scientific, a LOT of jobs have been plain eliminated in the casio industry. Change people- gone. coin people - gone. The slots - when you cash out, all of them issue a ticket. Gone is the sound of people getting paid in coin.

The bottom line is this - there have been a lot of cost cutting measures, and the casualty is the American worker. It seems to be true that American business IS becoming more productive WITHOUT a lot of workers.

So, Larry, I do think that American workers are being squeezed out. We have been paying into a social safety net that is doing what it is designed to - help people out when they need it. However, parts of that net are being frayed as it is NOT designed to handle the magnitude of people for the length they have been out of work. If my little narrative on what I have seen in Nevada - the place where you could have ALWAYS gotten a job - is anything like what the rest of America is like, then we have a serious issue that may LOOK like what Larry, Minot, ND is seeing but is something completely different.

I'll finish up by saying this - it is a DAMN shame what the GOP is doing by blocking unemployment benefits. We can find the money to blow stuff up overseas, but we cannot find the money to help out fellow Americans. Where is the PERSONAL REPSONSIBILITY of our lawmakers?

Larry, thanks for your post ,but I disagree with your conclusions.

Disqusted.... have you bothered to read a word Ive typed? I said that we should help those who need help..... what I also said is that I dont need the government being involved in how or to whom I donate my time money and expertise. That choice is between me and God alone.

This is just plain funny. Larry, you would get much more traction here if you did not repeat the trite talking points from Windbag. Here is something for you to think about: You say you and your wife make about $50,000 per year. Does it occur to you that if Windbag can get you to agree with him that the rich are punished by paying taxes, they should not have to pay but a minimum, they enslave you to pay a greater per cent of your income to taxes? Windbag is laughing at people like you all the way to the bank. As to the rest of it: I am more than a little tired of the "tea baggers" claiming that they are the only ones that have read the Health Reform bill. That bill was debated daily on the floor, and for you to perpetuate the myth that Congress did not know what was in the bill when they voted is just willful ignorance. You would have to agree that any previous bill under any President was not read either. You can't have this both ways. I have no idea what myth you are buying into when you claim that the govt. can come into your house to see how you are raising your children. But, I imagine that is a myth being promoted by Limbaugh to inflame the sensibilities of the naive. What you are doing, Larry, is taking the word of a man who cannot keep a marriage together, who had a drug problem and broke the law, and someone who did not have the determination to educate himself by staying in college. Now, my personal income is a great deal more than yours. There is a need for unemployment insurance, I don't resent it in the least. But, I do have an aversion to little children being homeless.

Some of you may be interested to know that North Dakota has largely been insulated from the recession to due the energy industry and agriculture. It is also important to note that North Dakota is a right to work state. The wages are low, but the cost of living is not that high in comparison to other states. If you have the great misfortune to go to Minot, you can see the end of the world from there.

Ummm, Larry? Perhaps you've been fortunate enough to never be on unemployment. I've been on both sides of the transaction, as an unemployed person and as an employer paying unemployment to others. Maybe in Minot you get to sit around and collect your government check, but virtually everywhere else you have to actually apply for work every single week to collect. You have to tell the state where you applied and when. Walking into a place that isn't hiring and walking right back out doesn't work, either. As for being uncomfortable, do you think there ISN'T anything uncomfortable about suddenly living on a fraction of your former income? Do you think it's EASY to decide between keeping your house or paying 1/4 or more of you unemployment benefits for COBRA insurance? Knowing that if you get very sick without insurance you'll be in bankruptcy for sure? Hoping they have one of those free dental clinics nearby so you can sleep in the parking lot overnight to get a tooth filled, because there's no money to pay the regular dentist?

As far as your church-going, believe whatever you want but I'm sick to death of people salving their consciences with a little donation every Sunday so they don't have to take responsibility for doing the real heavy lifting of making society better. I'm a Christian too, with regular attendance, an Elder and board member. God tells me to work for a just society. Prosperity Theology is a false prophet.

Contrary to what Glenn Beck tells you that doesn't mean I want everyone to be "equal", except in rights. Foremost among those rights is to have equal opportunity. That's hard to achieve in a nation where all the chips are stacked in favor of the wealthy. It isn't just a matter of "Social Justice", either, though I'd be willing to bet you believe that's some sort of Progressive code word for stealing your money. Society is better off if EVERYONE is free to achieve to the highest level of his/her ability. It's no coincidence that the vast numbers of people educated under the GI Bill gave us the most prosperous area in history. Now even education is under attack because science tells us things that someone standing in a pulpit doesn't want us to hear.

Larry,

For someone that considers himself to be a "man of God" you sure seem to have a limited sense of what faith is about.

First off, your claim that Yahweh is the ONLY God, that may well be what YOUR faith leads you to believe is absolute fact, but that does NOT give you the right to belittle all other religions or to elevate you and those that share your personal beliefs. I am quite sure that if you asked a Buddhist, he would tell you that Buddha is the ONLY God. I am sure Muslims believe that Allah is the only God.

The point is, we are in America and we are ALL afforded the freedom to believe and practice the way we see fit. If a Buddhist were to be elected President, would you be ok with the Country adopting Buddhism as the model to base all policy decisions after? Of course not! That is the wisdom of the Founding Fathers. They knew just how divisive and controlling religion can be and that it had NO place in the political forum. We cannot be guided as a Nation by what ONE religion believes is right to the exclusion of all other thoughts, positions, or beliefs.

I know I will step directly on another hot button here, but what the heck... It is the same thing about abortion arguments. I will die defending a woman's right to do what SHE and HER belief system guide her to do REGARDLESS of MY personal feelings or beliefs. I find abortion to be reprehensible and something that needs to be rendered unnecessary. The problem is, the same people (much like YOU Larry) that believe that the USA is a "INSERT ANY RELIGION HERE" country and that this somehow gives you and your followers the right to MANDATE what ALL Americans are able (or not able) to access based on PERSONAL beliefs is something to be resisted with the full might and force of this nation's people.

If you truly believe that you should be able to legislate based on YOUR religious beliefs, I suggest you move to a country where Theocracy IS the rule of the land. In MY USA, we do NOT play that game.

The Bible (as wonderful a work as it is) should be cherished and relished for what it is. An artifact of the early times of civilization that WAS WRITTEN BY MAN! God did not pen the Bible. Man did. Man took the stories of the day and organized, presented, and EDITED the manuscript over thousands of years until we have what we have today. For anyone to proclaim that this book contains divine guidance and direction is disingenuous at best UNLESS you happen to subscribe to the tenets therein. You have no more right to use The Holy Bible as your roadmap to government as those that would use The Koran or any other Holy Book.

It is when people like you begin to feel that you are somehow better than others or that YOUR religion is better than any other or is the only TRUE religion that we really need to worry about the future of this nation. Who is to say who is right and who is not? God is the ONLY one that can make that judgment and NONE of that inhabit THIS plane of existence will EVER know until we leave this plane and see what (if anything) is TRULY awaiting us. Until/unless someone makes that trip to the other side and RETURNS (and ALSO brings compelling documentary evidence of what is there) we are forced to BELIEVE in our FAITH and we pray that we ARE correct (without ever really knowing).

Ok, I am sure I will now quickly resemble a pin cushion from all the barbs and arrows from the zealots that are no-doubt going to follow shortly after this hits the wires. I guess I should go get some lunch and figure out how I can avoid aiding those less fortunate than me and still be able to rectify that with my personal belief system.

Larry PUTZ - I hope you will be helping out with the soup lines. Because that will be happening. I know a lot of people that have lost their jobs in the past couple of years - they would accept lesser jobs like flipping hamburgers at McDonald's but they won't hire them because they know once a better job is found than adios!

There are NO JOBS - doesn't that compute in your tiny head?

I know exactly what type you are - I work for them and hear this bullsh!t everyday. They walk by the homeless and yell "Get a job" the homeless say "Are you hiring?" The only thing I can think of that would make someone like you so callous is that you are the top percent of the wealthy that will soon be taxed and you are pissed.

I will put Islam aside for the moment as not to distract from my intended point.

My understanding is that roughly 3/4 or the country is Christian. Within that, about 1/4 of the country is Catholic and most of the rest are various Protestant groups. So the largest single cohesive religious group in this country are the Catholics.

I'm guessing that you, and probably your church, have very different political views than the Catholics. Take immigration for example. So do you think we would all be better off if we as a country actually looked to God and His Word in a Catholic interpretation with respect to immigration?

Newday

Also you may want to put in your post that we are one of very few states in the country with a budget surplus year in and year out. Our state taxes are one of the lowest in the country as well..... isnt it funny how you guys scream for higher taxes but if you look at this state the lower taxes idea actually works.....

oh and also take a look and research John Hoeven he is our Republican Governor who is going to be elected to the Senate...... He is going to finally bring some common sense to the fed. gov't

Larry: And your property taxes make up for it. And no, Hoeven is the great "me too". He would wait til ND Congressional delegation did something, and then show up to take credit for it. He will be elected, because ND largely votes for people that they have heard of. Not the best reason to vote. Also, Larry, if you think that Hoeven is going to Washington so show them how it is done, you will be sorely disappointed. Remember, Hoeven only supports things that are in his own best interest. Which is why he switched from the Democratic Party to Republican. He knew the times were such that he could get elected. It is first, last and always about Hoeven.

I think my response to Larry's philosophy about the Founders being Conservatives got lost, and it is an important point. Larry, I can tell that you salivate at the radio when Windbag is on, that is his facile definition of the Founders and you (and our College dropout Windbag) are just wrong. The Founder's intent was to answer Aristotle's famous question "Can Free Man rule Free Men". That they answered "yes" and set about proving it was the most Liberal idea of its day.

Oh, Larry, geeze. Your talking about personal responsibility? Taking care of ones self without depending on others? Helping others, without having the government involved while doing so? And you're religious to boot? You just set yourself up to be hated by the leftwing nut jobs that reside around here, and looking through their responses, they haven't disappointed. They hate that someone can take care of their own business without the government being involved. They hate religion. They hate people that can function without the government telling them what to do. You don't have to go far in the responses to see the vacant stares they give a person like you, followed of course by personal attacks, because these liberals fear what they don't understand, and they fear a lot!

Ah yes, the Queen of personal attacks telling the rest of us how we think. These things are only in your pathetic mind, poor little Joanna. It might interest you to know that North Dakota gets about $1.70 for every dollar they pay into the Fed. This puts them in the top ten of states getting a pretty good bang for its buck. I wonder if you (wait, I know YOU won't get this) or Larry understand that North Dakota would not have the budget surplus that it has without taking money from everyone in the nation. Do you propose, poor Joanna or Larry that North Dakota refuse the money? That would definitely get the Federal Govt off the back of at least one state.

"...Another good point is something I heard from Rush (an yes I know Im going to get roasted for this and that is fine) He said: Compassion is not how many people we help..... compassion is how many people no longer need help.... Think about that...."

And we can all see how well this works thanks to 'W'. I mean LOOK around, look how many people NO LONGER NEED HELP?

Doh, okay - perhaps that's a bad example?

Newday and Disgusted in PA - well stated/played - For the life of me I want to see the looks on faces in the line to the hereafter and see exactly how G-d interpreted the "Christian Deeds of the Day". I am guessing there will be some surprise and even OUTRAGE at G-d's distortion of their 'intent'.

PS. I really wonder what G-d thinks about our "Christian" leaders who massacred the Native Americans and stole their lands,...that little gem is probably not going to pass 'unnoticed'. Just a hunch.

JoAnna:

I see you're trying. That is good. I will say that at least you are offering some points in your comments for people to discuss and/or to debunk. As for your intial post this morning I will only say caution to placing blame on the economic crises on one person and assuming that one person has the power and authority to somehow make the same go away. Many people, including many on the right, would agree and understand that a President's power and authority to have a major impact on such a crises is limited. This economy is driven, or not driven, by many more influential and powerful conditions, factors and variables than what a President is able to control. Plus you should know by now that if we were to hold every President (past, present and future) to every promise or miscalculated projection they have made or will make none would be acceptable. In this case, even the greatest economic minds in the country and in the world cannot agree on what steps would bring the U.S. and other countries out of this recession. I understand that a President can be strongly criticized for decisions where those decisions have the sole or the major impact on the same with few other factors coming into play as to how that decision turns out. But to criticize a Presdient (Dem or Republican) on this current economic crises where the majority of factors influencing the crises , the length of the crises and those conditions required to end the crises are outside the Presidents's control, is a bit presumptious in my mind. But you can keep trying.

What exactly does this have to do with anything? If a person chooses to be obese that is their own decision and you nor anyone else (especially the government) has any right to tell them how to live their lives.....

And just for full disclosure....Im an overweight person (6'4" and about 285) I weighed 307 about 2 months ago and TOOK IT UPON MYSELF to start losing weight. I dont need you or the government telling me how to live my life thank you very much.

People don't "choose" to be obese.

Danger

While I will agree that some people are genetically built to be bigger (and Im speaking from personal experince here) no one put a gun to my son's head and said "Either you eat McDonalds all the time and dont excercise or Im pulling the trigger...."

Its clled fork control my friend

As someone who made a fortune in the weight-loss business, I feel I may have a (forgive me) broader perspective on the issue. It isn't about some overly simplistic genetic vs. cause and effect (or your lazy and stupid(?) argument, but a multi-layered, myriad of causes. People don't choose to be obese, period.

Anyway, the g'vmt has a stake in your health, as productivity (among many other things)is directly influenced by the general health of the workforce and an obese populace is, statistically, a less healthy and productive work force. Glad you're dropping the pounds...good luck...

Disgusted, you may be right. I keep hoping that pushing books will cause people to read. And Larry, the Rush definition of the Founding Fathers intent is simply wrong. What they were trying to prove is (Aristotle) "Free man can rule Free men.

One more thing about Minot, and then I must proceed to other details on the farm. One of the biggest employers is the Air Force Base, and I think it is safe to say that Minot stays alive because of it. I will expect that Larry be willing to have that Air Base closed in the next round so that the Federal Govt. gets off of Minot's back.

...and we should also discuss the governments culpability in spending these forced savings.

Jody, Social Security funds are not going into "trust". They're been spent over and over by the government. They were to never touch it. Once they did, the barn door was open and they've robbed off it ever since. If this free-spending keeps up, the government will take it all. I'd rather invest it myself!

Jody,

I don't think that anyone is advocating the end of the programs, but it is time for a significant review. Several days ago I was having a discussion with someone here, and the topic was Social Security. I don't expect that the statements I receive annually from Social Security, indicating my "anticipated" payout will be met. No offense, but too many people taking out, and not enough putting in, ends up in a series of changes that are necessary evils, to whit, extended retirement dates, reduced benefits, and, most importantly, means testing. The problem in the current issue, which is unemployment insurance, is that the Democrats want to fund it with debt, regardless of the passing of the Paygo measure, and the Republicans want to use some of the remaining stimulus funds, which if I recall correctly, amount to some $400 Billion dollars that are unspent, or unallocated to specific needs.

The last discussion I recall about privatization was with respect to a portion of your Social Security withholding being allocated at your own discrection into private accounts, with a corresponding reduction in your future benefits from Social Security. I for one would have jumped at that, mostly because I would prefer to be in charge of my own fate. If I screw up on my investments, my bad, but I may be an exception in that regard, that's why I believe it was to be offered as an option. If you didn't want the risk, I think the plan was that you could continue in the standard Social Security plan.

Your point about "entitlements" is well taken with respect to the formative years for these programs, and FDR's impact on the programs. Unfortunately, they are now viewed as "entitlements", not safety nets, and the surest way for a politician to commit political suicide, is to suggest a change (not an increase, a reduction) to the programs. Unemployment in a standard situation is roughly 26 weeks of replacement income, depending upon which state you reside in. Right now, with the extensions, we are at 99 weeks, so, effectively, for two years if you are unable to find work, you will at least have income. Would I be able to live on unemployment? Not on a bet, and I hope I never have to, just as I'm sure the current recipients wish that they didn't have to. But at some point, we as a people have to realize that there is an end to all good things, even unemployment insurance, even Social Security, even Medicare.

Changes have to be made to reflect the reality of the world, it's unreasonable for me to expect Social Security to pay me for approximately 20 years after I retire, so long as I remain in good health. When Social Security was initiated, a persons life expectancy was in the low 60's, now it's roughly 77. The idea was to supplement, not provide for a persons way of life. In the beginning, people were expected to continue to save, continue to work, and be productive throughout their lives. That seems to have been lost at some point, and now, we rely on the government to make us whole. The privatization that you speak of with respect to 401k's, IRA's, 403b, all of these are individual efforts to help people provide for themselves in their retirement years. A means testing for Social Security, which by the way I favor, would punish me for being thrifty, frugal, fill in the blank, (my wife uses cheap, but to each, his or her own), but it's a good idea none the less, and it's an improvement to the program, without a consequent cost, except to me, and others that won't receive as large a benefit as they are technically "entitled" to.

How long do you think it will be until means testing takes place, if ever? Which politician has the guts to stand up and say, "This is an unsustainable program (fill in the blank for whichever program you would like), and we make changes now, or in 2037 (in the case of Social Security) we kill the program entirely"? I don't see anyone in the current crop of Democrats, or Republicans, that will be honest enough to open the debate, they all prefer to promise the world to their constituents, and hope that when the stuff hits the fan, they aren't the ones in office.

I'd be willing to bet he knew all along that permits would be required. He just needed another strawman to knock down.

Juven,

How do you play 'Gulf'?

BTW the MAJORITY of the money the Obama campaign received from BP was personal contributions made by EMPLOYEES...

JUVEN,

First the most of the $77,000+ was money contributed to President Obama by the employees of BP. If you want to talk about big bucks from oil and gas, how about the 1.4M that went into Barton's coffers??? How about the billions of dollars that BP has given the republican party over the years. Sorry, you get a F here. The republicans are the party of Big Oil, h3ll they are Big Oil.

Both parties are covered in oil..money, and it isn't hard to find the numbers.

Top recipients 2009-2010 from opensecrets.org

Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) $329,650

Vitter, David (R-LA) $250,100

Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK) $216,726

White, Bill (D-TX) $182,903

As to our President(s);

Though former oilmen George W. Bush and Dick Cheney occupied the White House for eight years, the oil and gas industry could not win support for repealing bans on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. However, Congress voted in 2008 to lift a ban on offshore drilling. These companies are also wary of cap-and-trade climate change legislation, such as the measure Democratic President Barack Obama supports.

Yet Obama still received $884,000 from the oil and gas industry during the 2008 campaign, more than any other lawmaker except his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). [Read more Background]

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=e01

They are ALL covered in oil. Democrats, Republicans, every one of them...

I don't want to join this argument but in Barton's defense, he has received that amount of money over a 20 yr period. That comes out to about 50 grand a year. If you compare that to Obama's 77,000 in one setting then people have an argument.

That old argument about the Republicans are the party of Big Oil is old. I would expect lawmakers from states with a lot of people employed by the industry to get a lot of contributions. Look at Chuckie Schumer. That sorry SOB gets millions from Wall Street and not a damn thing said but he is not my Senator so I really don't care.

Feisty- I think Juvie ment to say GUFF. You know- like Haley Barbour. Dawn heah in the 'GUFF'......

And, Feisty, you're true to form. Larry expressed his opinion about unemployment. You chastise him. When he responds, you make a nasty remark about his neice. What happened in your life that you feel the need to criticize everybody and everything that might be different than you think and what does it do for you to constantly throw hate at people? Honestly, I feel sorry for people like you and Eric that seem to only get pleasure from hating.

dirt-303814

Why is it considered 'nasty' to point out that someone should be teaching birth control or abstinence and to let natural consequences guide personal responsibility. Will the niece practice 'safe sex' in the future after receiving a big 'family bailout' for this indiscretion? I mean why is it 'nasty' to point this out? What is preventing the niece or boyfriend from finding work? Are there no jobs? Are they continuing their formal education? I remain extremely concerned for the prospects of America's future when the youth aren't incented to stay in school and realize their economic potential. It is noble that the family is able and willing to help - but it seems a touch short sighted to help AFTER the life altering event, rather than letting PREVENTION dictate a different course. I tend to react viscerally to this topic because apparently his niece made some unwise personal choices. And now she still has a lot of options available to her. Imagine for a moment that Larry's niece was a teenage daughter of a single mom who was raped by the mom's boyfriend while mom was out working. And then describe all of the opportunities THAT child now has available to her. Life and choices are all a matter of perspective and for most people - they can't envision the perspective of someone else. But if that makes Feisty nasty - well,....okay; but personally, I think it's a valid point.

leon-1788340

Bravo Leon Bravo for pointing out the obvious hyprocrisy.

Hey Juvenile Delinquent -and you'll need to concentrate all summer long on stopping being such a Braindead Beckerhead. A real shame they don't have a book Reality for Dummies you could learn from about how wrong you are about everything. You'll have to figure out how to spin arizona's facist racist profiling law, Jerky Joe Barton's apology to BP Oil for it's massive private industry preventable oil spill disaster, our Bushwhacked economy that you dopes of nope broke but refuse to fix, Scary Sharry Angle's diarrhea of the mouth and so much more. As always you allow the most mundane garbage to keep you mesmerized, but then what could I expect from a Braindead Beckerhead?

Wow, Eric. I agree with you and you get my vote for once.

Eric, I respectfully disagree. Getting immigration reform now rather than later would be better, but it WILL happen. Righties are in a lather because they see the demographics changing and they're afraid that if they don't get their backward attitudes enshrined in law now the opportunity will be lost. Our society IS becoming more multicultural, and pretending that the only people who matter are still white, male plantation owners won't change that. The generation IS more Liberal and that bodes ill for the Conservative movement. Someone will no doubt be along shortly to say that it'll change because people become more conservative with age, but not to that extent. The late Baby Boomers are as conservative as they are because they always were. They were affected by Wm F Buckley, Barry Goldwater, and a hatred of the Hippies, and are still fighting that battle. The Reagan Revolution was fresh and new when they were young, and they bought in. Today's young adults were molded by seeing how miserably that's worked out in real life.

If the Conservative Movement doesn't win RIGHT NOW it'll die for at least a generation.

John B, it's not about changing demographics. It's about following the LAW! Just listened to Obama play the race card and saying the border is "too vast". BS. Put a lot more drones out there and don't let these people in. did you hear that yesterday from across the border the El Paso courthouse was shot nine times? Did you hear that in OK a couple days ago there was a large drug bust of a Mexican cartel cache. Is that how you want to live, John? Should people, especially on the border, have to continue to live in fear? And, if you really care about these people, how many do you think die while being smuggled in due to conditions? How many do you think are being sold into human trafficking? I say everybody with a valid green card can stay here. Everybody else has got to go and enforce the damn border.

Beverly, you never make any sense and clearly could not comprehend what I was saying.

Let me break it down for you, sister:

1. You say the Roberts Court is "legislating from the bench"

2. I say that is a ridiculous term throw about by both sides when the Court doesn't interpret the Constitution in accordance with their personal beliefs.

3. Then, I ask you whether you agree with the type of judicial activism that found a CONSTITUTIONALA RIGHT to abortion? I also said that I believe that abortion should be LEGAL. Hint: Legality is quite different than finding a constitutional right.

Do YOU understand what I was saying now?

I never addressed anything that Kagan said....this was in response to your comment about legislating from the bench, which was brought up by Senator Franken in Kagan's confirmation hearings.

Seriously, having an intelligent exchange is difficult around here sometimes.

Thank goodness for American Joe yesterday. Beverly, you and some of the others should look to him as an example of discourse.

Bill,

These are interesting ideas . . . but like all interesting ideas . . . I wonder what chance they have to survive in our current "take-no-prisoners, speak no truth" political environment.

But hey, it is nice to hear proposals to solve problems instead of just whining for a change, so you got my vote.