Anna Molly I'm sorry I was innocently trying to wish you good morning and apparently somehow managed to wipe both you and I off the board. As my friend from Ky says sometimes we just don't know what these tube machines are going to do. Hope I don't do it again

The story about the bullfrog reminded me of the old saying, "the more things change, the more they stay the same." This morning, Judd Gregg was explaining to Chuck Todd how regulating the derivatives market would dry up credit on Main Street. And here I thought it was the UN-regulated derivatives market that did that. Huh. Just goes to show, don't it? The whole thing is over my little ol' ignorant liberal head. At least, republicans hope so.

And the punch line was, of course, a not-so-subtle threat that if the financial reform bill passes, the derivatives market will just move overseas, taking all of those high-priced Wall Street jobs with it.

Wait a minute. Was that supposed to be a BAD thing?

LoL IR, as you can see, I noticed and re-grouped, better this time, I hope. So no problem from my side. And good morning to you, too.

IR,

Super, you started my morning with laugh. Funny how a simple agless story really sums up what is going on. This gets a vote, too bad I cannot give you 2. This week should be interesting. Looks like we may have the 60 votes for the financial reform. I hard that Ben Nelson is dragging his feet again. I hope we get the replacement vote for Sen Byrd soon. We may need it. I watched MTP Sunday only because Rachael was on. The republicans just keep on interrupting whoever is speaking and yelling "talking points". Never any ideas and Ms. Reagan was being an idiot. Rachael did not let them get away with much. I also saw a post from another site that ask D. Gregory if they do any fact checking. His response was NO, it is up to the people to figure out fact from fiction. Ok, then what is his function? I guess it is not journalism. And we wonder why we get feed such a bunch of crap from the media.

Terrific analogy IR!

Reminds me of a story my Grampa told me when I was growing up only that one involved a little girl and a snake! ;0)

You are right, IR but I'm afraid the electorate will not see the truth of the parable and will let the scorpions back into office. We saw what it took in 08--motivated, energized Democrats--and I'm not sure we'll have them in November.

Independent Redneck,

Nice metaphor, however, you make it seem like the scorpion (i.e. corporations) has no value at all to the frog (i.e. the general population). You see, while it's true, corporations tend to care more about bottom lines than the individual and we see in the news plenty of times where corporations have put greed above responsibilities, individuals are not just helpless bystanders. Plenty of people now have 401(k)'s or similar IRA accounts, and therefore plenty of people own stock in corporations. This is the beauty of capitalism. I can buy a share in a corporation, and with that share, I will share in the corporation's profits. The more shares I own, the more profit I make. You can argue that it's the greed of the bullfrog that drives these scorpions to sting.

We, as investors just have to make sure that we start investing in the right corporations (I own stock in alternative energy corporations and corporations that have a history of being a responsible corporate citizen (such as McDonald's and Google). Start looking at your investments, and make a commitment to buy such stocks. The scorpions can be tamed to limit their stinging (you will always find one or two that will never change) and we can benefit from corporations profits, there business model, and the money they contribute to our community.

AM,

Saw that this AM as well. Judd made no sense in his responses. Claims that banks will now not lend any money. They are not lending now so WTF. He also said that we are beating up on Wall Street. Where have we heard this before and letting the tax credits expire on the wealthy of the wealthy will hurt the economy as well. Not buying it. The middle class just get smaller and smaller.

Thank you Anna Molly for remembering that to err is human to forgive is divine but when dealing with tube machines backup is the key

You and I aren't buying it, Vet, but Gregg and his friends are counting on the fact that there are plenty of folks who will.

Great comparison, IR. Will voters believe the scorpion GOP and elect them again or will they remember what the GOP scorpions really are?

IR,

Excellent redeux on the old fable.

When I was 16 I went to help my grandparents bring in the hay that year, I had hair below my shoulders, being in the 70's that was fairly standard. Grandma was scandalized, as far as she was concerned "G@dd@mneddirtystinkinglonghairedhippies" was all one word and that was Just The Way It Was, and she refused to hire any longhairs to help bring in the hay. That year, however, Grandpa was totally unable to find Anyone who did not have long hair for haying season, so he ended up hiring some anyway, over Grandma's protests.

So, we all went out bucking bales, me, my uncle and a group of hired 'longhairs'. We all worked our butts off, bringing in the hay, just like normal, one of the guys was from the South, a big guy, hair half way down his back, and as strong enough to be able to toss bales over the top when we got to 14 high, as high as we could safely stack on the trailer, we had to tell him to lighten up because we were having to catch the bales still on the rise lest they plain flew clean over the trailer, which occasioned a few jokes of course.

Three days later the hay was all stacked in the barn and salted down. Grandpa, who was somewhat more liberal than Grandma (but still very staunch Republican) sat there after we were paid, sitting around having beers, and with a twinkle in his eye, surrounded by 'longhairs' asked Grandma about those "G@dd@mneddirtystinkinglonghairedhippies." We all got a great laugh as Grandma sputtered, finally admitting that mebbe them longhairs were not so bad after all, they sure worked as well as anybody she had seen, longhair or not. And after that she was willing to concede that maybe her ideas of people were a tad wrong.

In this climate today of extreme partisanship, it would be a good thing to remember that no matter our political stripe, we are ALL people that are trying to go through life doing what we can as well as we can and that for things to get done, just like bringing in the hay, we all have to work together. Repub, Dem, and the Independent Middle are just like Grandma and those 'hippies' and yes, anyone, even "G@dd@mneddirtystinkinglonghairedliberals" can do the heavy lifting too as long as those with the money get off their mountains of the stuff and start hiring instead of being scared of The Other Guys.

America would be a much better place if we all got over our fear of The Other and started actually working together, like we used to, before the Media divided our Nation into it's extremely polarized state it is now just so they could boost their ratings and profits.

Grandma got her hay in and the longhairs got paid honest wages for honest work, and that is all anybody is really asking these days: pay us for working, provide those jobs and you will get honest labor for honest pay!

U.S. Navy. David Gregory has revealed the truth about the media--they don't fact check or challenge. Hmmm and, like most people, I thought that was their job--to tell the truth and uncover the lies.

B Honest. Terrific, your comment was exactly right. You would think by now that republicans would have gotten over their "hurt" feelings at losing and started helping fix this mess but no, they would rather see the country fail before they would lift a finger to help Pres Obama.

Sadly, about half of the voters are bullfrogs who are always going to vote for the scorpions that infest the GOP no matter how badly they get stung. If they keep it up, they'll drag the whole country down to the bottom of the pond with them.

Good Morning, B.Honest,

Great post. There is a lot of fear and hate floating around these days. As you indicated, we have to get beyond this and start trusting in each other again. I think we have a lot more in common with each other than we think sometimes. The pundits are using this fear and hate to turn each American against each other. We cannot let this happen and we need to ban together and let this fear and hate mongers know that we as Americans are not going to tolerate this crap anymore. Give us the facts and lets us make our choices.

Jody,

I agree. I always thought these people were journalists and they checked the sources (this is what journalists do) before presenting the crap they throw out there now. We were both wrong and this is sad. Where are we, the People, supposed to get unbiased information so we can make intelligent choices for us Americans. I am tired of these people trying to tell me what i should think and feel

USN DAV (Ret)

Thanks Bro, I try to tell em as I sees em, and some don't like that, but I do keep a trying.

I still laugh when I think about Grandma and her single word fer longhairs, yet if even she could learn (look up the word 'Battleaxe' and you will find a pic of my Grandma) then ANYbody can learn to change.

Ah Cult would that it would be that easy. Sounds so simple doesn't it. The problem with your business model there is the vast majority of us invest our retirement and IRA in programs that don't get into the specific areas that our money is going to be invested in and then Like old Bullfrog set back and look at the quarterly statements without a basic understanding of them and believe the Scorpion that the we're getting our own water wings when we get to old to swim the pond. Thirty years of watching Frogs sink while the Scorpions swim away on somebody elses water wings has built in me a certain distrust of all scorpions although I will admit that I've had a longer time to set on the bank and observe Scorpion behavior than most........B thanks for reviving a good memory .Those old folks sure could be hard on us long haired fellows couldn't they even when the hay needed making.

IR,

For sure they could, LOL, and I happen to be a proud, Longhaired beareded redneck hippy liberal progressive type myself, quite well acquainted with my firearms (in fact D@mned good with em, had to eat somehow at times) and have never been afraid of a good day's hard work, long hair or not.

Having been self-employed for many years, I found that working for yourself is NOT the way for anyone who happens to be lazy: Every time you sit down, your Boss is right there on your azz!!

Right now the GOP are talking out of both sides of their mouths. The GOP wants to cut off unemployment because there are plenty of jobs out there and no one is taking them, but they also say the stimulus didn't work. They can't have it both ways unless the dems sit on their butts and say nothing. Either the stimulus worked and we have jobs everywhere and Americans are lazy, or the stimulus didn't work and Americans need to be drawing unemployment until jobs are created. Which is it?

IR: Fantastic parable. Good to see you on this morning.

Excellent posts, and good morning to all.

There are some things new in history. The most damaging is record use of the filibuster causing the need for 60 votes on all legislation instead of the 51 majority that has been the norm until now. Also record holds and blocks. It isn't just the media causing division, but clear obstructionism by Republicans, even on their own legislation.

I wonder if the American people understand that if Republicans gain more seats there will be complete grid-lock. I wonder if they understand that if Republicans gain a majority that Republicans like John Boehner, who compared the economic meltdown to an "ant," and Joe Barton who apologized to BP will be running congress. Imagine if a few Tea Party candidates like Rand or Angle are added to that scenario.

Sadly people usually have short-term memories, but let's hope they really consider the merit of candidates and his/her track records, and remember why we are having to climb out of this economic mess in the first place.

To Unity – You make a good point about the hypocrisy regarding the deficit. The extension of unemployment represents a very small percent of spending, yet for every dollar in benefits provided, it creates a $1.63 in economic activity.

At the same time Republicans were blocking the extension of benefits for the unemployed, they were working to end the Estate Tax. Formerly known as the death tax, only the top 2% of wealth have enough capital to be affected by this tax. The amount of revenue produced by the Estate Tax is huge. I heard it's enough to make Social Security solvent. And I couldn't believe Jon Kyle's recent babble about how we shouldn't roll back Bush's tax cuts for people making over $250,000. We all know trickle-down economics is voodoo, and the wealthy have enjoyed loopholes enough as it is.

Clearly Republicans lack the Rule of Reason, or aren't serious about reducing the deficit, or both, but neither is acceptable. There are two things—reduce spending and increase revenue. Republicans aren't willing to reduce spending either. Defense spending represents more spending than all other government services combined. But as usual they want this off the table.

And if Republicans become the majority in congress again, why do I suspect they will start another unnecessary war?

To TheSkeptic – The answer to your question about why nothing is getting done is record filibusters by the Republican Party. As for outsourcing, etc. you can thank the pro-Big Business Republicans for that too. And just to be clear, TARP was passed by Bush and Republicans before Obama was elected, and it was a blank check. When the second round of TARP had to be approved, the Dems attached strings to it.

But if you're really interested, you can Google (try Wikipedia) and see that the largest deficit spending has always occurred during Republican administrations (even Reagan). So be angry, but please place blame on the correct perpetrators. It might help if you stop listening to Hate Radio and FAUX Noise.

Skeptic, why not ask the Republicans the same thing? Seems to me it doesn't matter which party your affiliated with they are all useless. The only thing they are about is reelection and will feed us anything we want to hear. Forget about consistency in what they believe they are just in the moment with who they are speaking to.

Maybe we need a little "gridlock" right now!

That would be better than spending this country into oblivion at light speed, simply because you can!

I know every administration HAS to outdo the other in spending but C'MON!

Please remember all you long-haired hippies of the 70s types that we are only listening to the media pundits trying to make the news and shape the news. I don't believe that after all the crap that has come out of the TV and the spewing and the lying and that Democrats, Independents in our diverse and wonderful culture are going to sit still and let the Repugs take back anything. They haven't really done so well, now have they in these primaries? Just remember what you're listening to, 24/7 that says omg the Repugs will take all those seats. I don't think so. I think we all, those of any intelligence, just took a nice long rest after the general election. I don't think we're all going to just sit there and let these idiots run us off the rails. And if they do, then we deserve what we get. You know, we worked very very hard to get this man elected. If we can't work very very hard to keep our party in leadership, then the country is sunk, thrown to the dogs. I remember when people used to believe that life was beautiful, with or without godawful greed. I remember "flowers in her hair" and passive dissent and marching. Well times they have changed and somewhere along the line many of those who believed in goodness and rightness just jumped onto the gravy train and gave up any humanity whatsoever. There's nothing wrong with the gravy train, it's when it is the only thing that feeds your sould that you've got problems. That's what's wrong with us today. Get on up!!

I agree with the skeptic, and with others out there. And it is ok to blame the Republicans, for now. But to the skeptics point, what are the Dems doing to prevent job loss to overseas labor? This is one independent that voted for Obama that is not seeing the benefit yet in terms of jobs. It is why I voted for Obama, and why I will vote against him if I don't see action, more than blame the rich and tax the XXX out of them. Right or wrong, it won't create jobs.

So to Bushwackeded1's point, blame the right party. Show me where the Dem's are addressing the problem and I'll agree with you. Dem's seem to be a little strong on blame, and very weak on ideas when it comes to the Economy.

So to Bushwackeded1's point, blame the right party. Show me where the Dem's are addressing the problem and I'll agree with you. Dem's seem to be a little strong on blame, and very weak on ideas when it comes to the Economy.

That's an understatement if ever there was one!

There's a reason many dems will be on the chopping block this November, and it's called Obama! Plain and simple.

ClintHorace,

I hope there is a good candidate that will do the job right! I am not going to vote republican just because they arent democrat and I wont vote democrat just because they aren't republican. I will vote for the person who fits what we need as a country not which party they are affiliated with. This goes back to my last issue though. When all politicians do is tell you what you want to hear how do you know what they truely stand for? When they take multiple stances on different topics (i.e. Abortion,Gay rights/in the military) I believe they should stand up for what THEY (the politician) believe in and people will naturally follow. But with the ruling of the supreme court regarding campaign contributions from the corporate sector everything is bought and paid for nowadays.

A lot of people seem to forget that it took 10 years to recover from the Great Depression, and yet people are screaming because the Dems haven't been able to turn things around in a year and a half. You can't just snap your fingers and make jobs out of thin air. So what our quick fix, one hour photo, instant gratification society needs to decide is do we want to pretend there's no problem and hope it goes away, or do we want to reform the system so this can't happen again. Keep in mind all of the Repub senators who voted against Wall St reform and the financial reform bill. These people obviously don't have your best intrests in mind.

Bravo Captainthursday, bravo.

What are you? 6?

Zen Fascist's are out again

Great post.

Government is the structural glue; without it, the country would fall apart.

Steven,

You are quite right, we need some balance in government for sure, but we also need to kick out the foxes that have been guarding the henhouse so that Everybody can have eggs and drumsticks, not just the fauxes.

B. Honest

You are quite right. There are those in congress who believe there own press releases. Those who work for us should stay, those who work for the corporations and/or themselves should be voted out.

That would be about 80% of the democrats and 99.9% of the republicans and 50% of the independents.

Socialists just murder hundreds of millions of people last century. I'll take capitalism

Brian -- It may be helpful if you and others like you actually did some research on socialism.

Here's an example: In its pure form, socialized medicine is free and doctors are government employees. Medicare is not free. Medicare is a fee-for-service program, and hospitals are run by the private sector (though I believe these should be non-profit, because it is immoral to profit from someones illness). The health care reform is based on these same principals. Social Security is an entitlement program because folks are required to pay into the system. These are far better programs than having nothing in place and then having to provide services anyway completely at the tax-payers expense.

You should also examine the standard of living in modern socialist countries compared to the U.S.--we don't have it as good. And while you look up socialism, I suggest you look up fascism too (which is pro-corporatism). I'd take socialism over fascism any day. Once again, beware the far-right propaganda that is seeded by those who profit--just follow the money to Big Business.

To Steve and Brian,

The roles of government, capitalism, and socialism in our society are all important, but perhaps the most important part of each is proportion. Like in your (Steve) analogy to the racehorse, too much use of the bridle (regulation) leads to an unruly, unhealthy, and unusable racehorse. On the other hand, too little means no control and a dangerous runaway.

The view that the government should help those in need is indeed a progressive view. I debate it, I believe the Church and community should do that job (and see it as the greatest failure of our society that the government needs to provide it), but even if we accept it, the capitalists provide the government with gold (from their pockets) to do all this. Short of a fully socialistic society (which numerous times has been shown to fail on the large scale), there is no other choice. Then again, if it were all capitalists, there would be no such aid at all, and our society would become a cut-throat, dog-eat-dog world: a nightmare. In short, the pure capitalists eat their wounded.

Government as the structure of our society is right, but not the whole of our society. Government should be the bones, the frame, the infrastructure, but not the beauty, not the grace, and not the productivity.

All too often, I see the debate fall between the two extremes: pure capitalism and a form of liberal progressivism that sees all profit, development, or achievement as the greatest evil. Neither side pays attention to the history that shows how their own side is self-destructive and unsustainable. Both sides are consumed with propaganda, and believe their own. They're too consumed with 'beating the other side' to give any concern to the America that get's beaten with it. The point of American politics has become to 'win', and not to provide the best laws for America.

My biggest disagreement with you, Steve, is then that it isn't 80%/99.9%/50%, but rather 95%/95/X (independents haven't been given enough of a chance to prove themselves).

Professional politicians are the problem. Term limits are one answer. Let them serve two terms and then back to their regular life. No pensions, fair pay and benefits.

From the Washongton Post / ABC News Poll - July 13

58% say they have some or no confidence in Obama to make the right deciions

68% say they have some or no confidence in the Dems to make the right decisions

72% say they have some or no confidence in the Republicans to make the right decisions

Did you miss that part Mix bag?

Sigh. Boys, boys, boys ... ;)

On the contrary, CA-

That's the most interesting part of the story.

The public is even willing to vote for the GOP...if it rids them of the Obama agenda.

Actually the Republicans had an agenda in 94. They just have 'take our country back' as a slogan now which is kind of stupid. Take it back from who? Americans? the black man? As an independent voter I find that phrase offensive. This IS my country and I am proud to be an American no matter what president is in office, no one has taken my country from me and no one will!

Mixed Bag:

The same people who say that 72% have only some or no confidence in the Republicans to make the right deicisions versus 58% on the same question for Obama are willing to vote for the GOP if it rids them of the Obama agenda?

You bet that sounds contrary. In fact it sounds down right contrite, confused and contradictory not to mention plain ignorant.

You got my vote, Steven. I've been asking that question for months now. Take our country back from whom? And, what freedoms have these people lost that they keep screaming about? Where's the substance to back up their hollering?

CA, Mixed bag only reads what makes him smile, and anything that is bad for the country makes him smile.

It's only dissent, Mo.

Don't be afraid.

You need to go into the poll and read the numbers-if you compare the polls in August of 94 to the polls taken today, the republicans are AHEAD of where they were in '94. ANd, by the way, the public had more confidence in Clinton at that time than they have in Obama today. (I mention August because that is the month the numbers were taken. It is not a perfect world.)

Also, as I recall, the "Contract with America' was not rolled out until September.

Here is Obama's problem: even the liberals, (who now call themselves progressives because liberal leaves a bad taste in voters' mouths), have realized that Obama's plans DO NOT WORK. Last week, in Aspen, the annual liberal fest was held, with speakers from Mort Zuckerman to Paul Krugman. I understand from the coverage that Paul Krugman spoke to an empty room. There were speakers from Harvard and Yale, and all had the same message: this economic plan is a disaster. That, however, as interesting as it might be, is not the most important point. What is important is that Barbra Streisand and her husband James Brolin, they of the most uber-liberal point of view, were applauding the speakers, calling them brilliant, and saying that it is infuriating that the White House will not listen or learn.

When you've lost Streisand, folks, you can turn off the lights.

I have noticed this myself. Relatives who campaigned for Obama are now calling themselves 'republicrats'. It is the spending, and the inability to concede that something is not working.

Unemployment benefits are a good example: exactly how much longer than 99 weeks do they need to be extended? At that point, it is not a stopgap, it is a lifestyle. When does Obama concede that the stimulous has not stimulated anything but the deficit? When does he concede that it was a mistake to cram HCR through without the public's consent?

When does he figure out that the amount of time he spends on unimportant things makes him look bad? That the job he campaigned for and fought for demands that his priorities be rearranged so that he spends more time on the job than on the course?

It is for these and other reasons that the public has figured out that the change that they hoped for does not even slightly resemble the change they got. More fools they, for falling for it to begin with. However, there is that old saying---and I don't believe that the country will bring that kind of shame on themselves.

No Joe - if you haven't figured out by now, this President does NOT govern by 'consensus', so to make that statement that if 'the president has lost Streisand, then it's lights out' is just plain silly.

I think that everyone has an opinion on how the President should advance his agenda. I have never seen in my life so many people who 'KNOW' how to be President better than the President does! It makes a lot of the comments critical of the President reduced to mere conjecture. You CANNOT know what it takes to be President unless you have BEEN President. It's also very funny that most of the people who have BEEN president are strangely quiet about giving advice on what the President 'should' do publicly (Cheney doesn't count because he was NEVER President).

The mere fact is this - it is too early in the mid-term cycle to know for sure what the electorate is going to do. We do NOT know for SURE that the electorate has REJECTED the Obama agenda, although we hear a LOT of noise about it from various camps.

Finally, I'll leave you with this thought - everyone seems to be concerned about the spending and the debt that is being piled up. I gave an analogy on Government spending yesterday, comparing Government spending now to how we spend money for maintenance on our vehicles. Although we DON'T want to spend the money for car maintenance, we do so anyway because we KNOW that if we don't spend the money now, we will be spending a LOT more later. Sometimes we have to put that maintenance spending on our credit card because we are short of money when we need the maintenace.

Right now, the spending we are doing is to right the ship from the bad policies of the past. You STOP spending now, you will cause an even GREATER cost later - that you will have to SPEND even MORE money to satisfy. Once the ship is righted, then we can look at cutting costs; not before.

American society REQUIRES that we spend SOME money or else it will cease to exist, throwing American society into chaos. Is this what the 'deficit hawks' REALLY want?

"American society REQUIRES that we spend SOME money or else it will cease to exist, throwing American society into chaos. Is this what the 'deficit hawks' REALLY want?"

You actually subscribe to the Keynesian economic theory? Sad.

Tracy1973 - Actually, I don't subscribe to any ONE economic theory. Just like I think that Freud is overrated, I think that subscribing to only ONE economic theory is overrated as well.

What I was eluding to was this - we (this country) are like a car hurtling down the road at 80 MPH (130 kph), burning fuel (the economy) faster than we should.

The Democrats was to continue with the current fuel burn until we can SAFELY ramp down. The GOP wants to 'starve the beast' and to STOP filling the tank. Barring that, they would rather throw the car into FULL REVERSE as we are going our 80 MPH, thereby destroying the transmission, which would require a LOT MORE MONEY TO FIX than to just continue with our current fuel burn.

Wouldn't applying the brakes be a better method of deficit reduction?

In this analogy, common sense would tell you that you want to SLOWLY and SAFELY operate the car - maintaining full control, mind you - and amend your fuel burn. You would NOT want to destroy the whole car just because you can. That would be irresponsible.

I submit that for the past 18 months, the GOp has been 'starving the beast' and, if they control Congress in November, throw the car into REVERSE, thereby destroying the transmission. What will be funny is that once the transmission is destroyed, there will be loud complaining about how much gas is left in the tank.

Do I subscribe to ANY economic theory? No, I do not. However, I do see that the places where costs SHOULD be cut are not going to be. When you have Ron Paul and Barney Frank actually teaming up to try and tell you that we need to cut the sacred cow of the GOP - the defense budget - then we should probably take a closer look at what these two are saying.

If you would read and understand the Keynesian theory Tracy, you might quit using it to make someone sound radical. BTW what theory do you subscribe to Tracy? The Republican theory of give unpaid for tax cuts to people earning over 200,000, while at the same time denie benefits to the unemployed till their paid for and clam your for deficit reduction, that's called hypocrisy.

Mo-1852032

You must have seen that same John Kyl footage where he states the Unemployment Benefits need to be paid, but smiling all the while stating that Tax Cuts don't have have to. I wonder if his philosphy is "Give to Rich and take from the Poor". The best way to get out of some of this mess is to let the Bush Tax cuts expire, permanently, and rescind the Reagan tax cuts as well. But I think I might just be living in a dream when you would think both sides would do whatever is possible to get us out of this mess. Repubs like to think that from Jan. 20 2001 thru Jan. 19 2009 never happened. That Bush didn't turn us into one of the biggest Debtor Nations in the world. Yes Clinton has some cupablity as well w/ that damned NAFTA. yes our trade policies need to be revamped and restructured to meet our economy. We have shipped so many jobs overseas and across both borders and nothing has been done about the business that do this.

Wake up America, our country is being sold out for the highest dollar by corporations and politicians

Pat,Boston,MA

Yes by all means - bring back the GOP to power.

Looks like the Libs are coming around to the truth, the truth of what a failure Obama and his stooges Nancy and Harry have been for the last 18 months. What a turn of events, ehh Libs? 18 months ago you thought you controlled the world, you thought you had all the answers. Turns out you didn't even understand the questions. Remember when the Libs swooned every time Obama gave a speech? Tears of joy would form in their eyes when they listened to the Great One give his wonderful speeches. You don't see that from the Libs anymore. They are learning what Conservatives have always known, that Obama is full of bs.

And even though I voted against the stimulus, I took credit for the stimulus money that came to my state.

I keep wondering why Dem's don't use this to their advantage. When those "R" politicians keep saying, "The stimulus didn't work," run a split screen ad: One with them saying that, and the other with them standing there holding the check for the stimulus money that they are taking credit for creating jobs. Hopefully we'll see some ads like that in the coming months.

It is still early in the election cycle. However, if people insist on voting against what seems to be their best interests, why not let them find our for themselves that the alternative(s) they are voting for may hurt them?

Pat ~ the reason no one cares is that they see no connection between politics and where LeBron James will play basketball this year, who wins American Idol, or what happened in the World Cup Soccer Tournament. And corporate America intends to keep it that way.

The next shiny object? Baseball ... (not that I don't like baseball), and then it will be almost football season. Where IS Brett Favre playing this year, anyway?

Where IS Brett Favre playing this year, anyway?

Lol!!!

All this fault finding with the republicans accepting the stimulus money, perhaps shows why progressives fall for the lie of Keynesian Economics! The republicans did everything possible to stop the damage to our economy, they failed! The moneys were allocated and would be spent! For them not to attempt to aquire some for their constituants would have been as irresponsible as the progressives passing it in the first place!

George W. Bush as President and Dick Cheney as Vice President participated in criminal conspiracies to violate the federal law and the guaranteed civil liberties of hundreds, maybe thousands of human beings.

Finally, someone from the conservative side is saying what needs to be said.

JoAnnaSmith...what? The thread was about how George and Dick should be thrown under the prison and you respond with this dribble? If you cannot contribute to the conversation, be quiet.

Your republicans are criminal in just about everything they do, if not legally then morally.

tedcrawford, Six years of unlimited spending and borrowing by the republican controlled congress and presidency left my and your country in apallable fiscal shape and you want to blame it on the democrats? Obsurd!

Terrific post, Pat. Thanks for posting some of the interview. It puzzles me why people are so willing to go back to what the GOP scorpions gave this country.

I'll have to read Bugliosi's book. Another good read discussing what the Bush/Cheney WH was all about--John Dean's "Worse than Watergate" and it was written before all the allegations of torture and wire tapping came to light.

Pat, Boston, MA

No need to apologize. I remember that it got great review's and around the time of George Washington.

Thank you so much for getting back to me.

Have a nice day.

JoAnnaSmith, remember in 94 when Contract With America was going to set the agenda for a generation, then a Democratic wave in 96? Remember when The Decider ruled all and there would be a "Permanent Republican Majority? The elections of 04, 06, and 08 pretty well put a stop to that. Even with those electoral victories, Nancy Pelosi looked at the Bush Recession and the reality of being the party in power during midterm elections. She didn't plan a third wave in a row, instead she started planning immediately to minimize losses during this election. No matter what the press would like to pretend the current circumstances were determined far in advance.

The only thing for sure is that if the situation were reversed, with a Republican Congress and McCain/Palin Administration the wave would be much larger.

tedcrawford, what stopped the Great Depression? If you're like most Conservatives you'll say WWII. What was different with the advent of WWII? We spent massive amounts of government money on the war and instantly went to full employment. That's Keynesian stimulus. Denying it is impossible.

TRR, you're very welcome.

Maybe we need to go to a straight flat tax. I don;t know much about it, but if I paid )0.01 for every dollar that was earned, and everyone did the same, then there might not be all this debate. EVERYONE would have to pay the same and no loopholes. So those dividends that you get you pay tax on. If you lose, then your income is down. Of course this might be too simplist for some on this board, but if we want solutions, then we need to start thinking outside the box.

Fair Tax, national sales tax, what ever...maybe everyone needs to start coming up with solutions rather than picking at each other. We need to pay for things or we will end up like Somali with no government, no law, nothing.

Sounds good sonokursh, except that .01 isn't nearly enough. In fact the "Fair Tax" claims to be 23% but the doing the math the same way you'd figure a sales tax it's actually 30%, and that wouldn't even bring in the revenue required. For the vast majority of taxpayers it would require a tax increase. Only those in the upper brackets would see a decrease. It completely and deliberately undoes the progressivity in the tax system that has been standard throughout the industrialized world for 100 years. It turns on its head the concept that those who get the most advantage from society have a greater duty to give back to its support.

While a flat tax seems fair think of it like this....Suppose you earn 30K a year and thus need every penny you can get just to pay the rent and put food on the table let alone invest, buy a home, or new car. Looking at percentage, if we take, for example, 10%, and that 30K person would pay 3,000 in taxes. She needs every bit of that 3K to help pay the bills. Now look at someone who makes $3,000,000 and pays 10%. Do you suppose they can make housing payments and put food on the table easily even after paying 300K in tax? Of course they can make ends meet with money to spare. I know your example is 1% but the result is still the same. Perhaps people below a certain level pay a lower %, the middle pay a little more and those at the top pay the highest %. The rate within each of these brackets would be the same for everyone in each bracket with NO loopholes or deductions for anything. No mortgage deduction, no child deduction, no married deduction, no deduction for losses of stock other than it might put one in a lower bracket, just a flat rate within the bracket for all within that bracket. So it would seem to me that the best way to go would be a combination of bracketed tax levels but with a flat rate within those brackets. Also those who don't pay their taxes should have no way out. No more ads saying "We owed the IRS $3000,000 but paid less than $1000,000" and so on. If they owed it they should pay it PERIOD.

CU - you are either flat out uninformed or blatently lying. Either way - you are making yourself look like an idiot. As I'm certain that is not your intention - please educate yourself on what the question presented to the court in the matter of the Arizona Immigration law is clearly asking.

CU Farley,

Ummm, it was GWB that made us into one of the largest debtor nations in the world. Your pal Dick Cheney said it was ok to run up high deficits. Where's your criticism for that. Oh I forgot, Repubs can do no wrong. They create massive debt, Hoover Bush, Reagan, cowtow to the Wall Street and Corporation, deregulate, and when it come goes to sh**, someone else has to come in and clean up the mess. All the while, blaming the other party for their own mistakes. And if back in power again, start the machine right back up again. Are you like Sharon Angle and believe the EPA, Dept. of Energy, Dept of Education should be disbanded? Would you prefer that factories dump even more toxic waste into the waterways, that your food was never inspected, the the power companies deregulated as they are now, charged even more for your electricity? That nuclear plants didn't have anyone inspecting them for safety, that George Bush did put your Social Security into the Stock Market like he wanted? If you can say yes to any of this, please leave.

Hiya Nash!

Seems to be happening quite a bit around here this morning! Guess the 'gremlins are hard at work! lol

Nash, I had the same thing happen on an earlier thread today. It said I had deleted my comment! Glad it isn't just me.

What'd they do, hire Palin as their 'IT guy"?

the republicans are crazy? is that a good enough response?

Yes.

pathuntington:

I was pretty sure that was the short answer, along with the fact that the Republicans support and believe in a trickle down caste system. Help to keep the wealthy wealthy and those crumbs they wish to toss out to the average Amercian now and then will keep these silly masses quiet.

TN's two Republican senators, Corker and Alexander, will vote for the unemployment extension if the funding comes from unused stimulus funds. I think that's a good solution. Does anyone know why Democrats don't want to do this? It would stimulate the economy and not add to the deficit. Sounds pretty middle of the road to me.

Hi CA,

How about greed, lack of any moral or ethical responsibility. The republicans want to keep as much as they can and take more away from those who need help. There arguments make no sense. They claim to want to reduce the deficit but turn around and want more tax cuts for the richest (which is not funded). This adds to the deficit. Rachael had a nice piece about this last night.

Morning U.S. Navy

I'll agree, greed has a lot to do with how both sidse function. Not only greed for money but greed for political power.

Frankly, I am a little fed up with the lot of them. The majority of us are pretty screwed when it comes to politicians really being in touch with and concerned for your average American. As a person I like Obama. I see he is graying quite a bit. My advice to him would be to hang it up after four years and move to Hawaii where he and his wife and kids can enjoy the good life near the beach. And then let's let Sister Sarah run the show for fouyr years. At least then maybe we could go from all this bickering to laughing all the time.

C.A. I think the Bullfrogs just need to smarten up and take the water wings off the scorpion(voodoo economics) before they start back across the pond. If we know that everybody is going to sink then maybe old Scorpion will pull out an oar and help old Frog out.

Simple, taxes and revenue are inversly proportional, not directly proportional

CA

Is it true that the Bush Tax Cuts helped all people with their taxes and not just the wealthy? I have read that all taxes will go up even on the 50K family and that we will lose half of the child tax credits if they are allowed to expire. Is this true? I have also read that it will hurt married couples.This question is from a person who can't understand the tax form so keep it simple.

The deficit hysteria that the Republicans and the media have successfully whipped up is totally bogus. That liar John Kyle inadvertently proved that he and the rest of his crowd couldn't care less about deficits when he proclaimed that tax cuts (favoring the rich) don't have to be offset by any spending cuts but unemployment benefits for middle and working class people do.

The GOP-corporate-media complex is simply manipulating public opinion to oppose stimulus spending in order to keep the economy depressed as long as possible and then manipulate some more to get the public to blame the Democrats for it. And it works. When people are blasted with propaganda from supposedly trustworthy media sources like CNN and the Washington Post on a daily basis, a lot of them will believe anything they read or hear from them. Look how successful they were in shifting the blame for the oil blowout disaster in the Gulf of Mexico to the president from the criminals who were really responsible: the anti-regulatory Bush/Cheney stooges that have burrowed deep into the federal regulatory agencies who cannot be fired.

Maggie, the lowest tax rate under bush was 10%, that will be increased by 50%, to15% if the cuts are allowed to expire! The progressives like to rant about tax cuts to the rich, in reality, a place they don't visit often, the tax cuts were across the board!!

CA, Tuscaloosa, AL

Can anyone explain to me why it is the Republicans are expressing that the deficit is their number one concern and therefore use the same as an excuse to vote against extending unemployment benefits where for every dollar spent $1.63 is returned to the economy,

More lies. If that were true, the economy would be booming. Instead, it's failing. Keynesian economics just does not work. And do recall that the money used to fund those unemployed benefits has been borrowed from the Chinese, and they do expect a return on their investment.

The only explanation I have is that GOPer legislators are loons as well as liars!

JoAnnaSmith sez:

More lies. If that were true, the economy would be booming. Instead, it's failing. Keynesian economics just does not work.

You're the one who's not telling the truth. Most economists, INCLUDING John McCain's economic adviser during the 2008 campaign say the stimulus prevented the recession from getting much worse than it is now. And Paul Krugman has, unfortunatley, been proven right when he said the stimulus wasn't big enough.

Houston!

The GOP-corporate-media complex is simply manipulating public opinion to oppose stimulus spending in order to keep the economy depressed as long as possible . . . .

I love it! The "GOP-corporate-media complex"! What in the world is that? Would that be the NY Times, the Washington Post? How about CBS, NBC, or ABC? CNN? MSNBC? Or, God forbid, CSPAN? Just who runs the "GOP-corporate-media complex" and how did they acquire the power to control the economy? These people that run the "GOP-corporate-media complex" must be geniuses!

"Simple, taxes and revenue are inversly proportional, not directly proportional"

OK, that's a statement. Proof? Here http://www.alternativesmagazine.com/25/beaton.html is an argument to the contrary, from a Professor of Economics.

Houston!

JoAnnaSmith sez:

More lies. If that were true, the economy would be booming. Instead, it's failing. Keynesian economics just does not work.

You're the one who's not telling the truth. Most economists, . . .

Ohh, bad move Houston! Bad move. This is a response to CAs post, and you used the word "Most". CA does not like when people use the word "most", some", many". CA wants details, none of this mamby-pamby "Most" for CA. Prepare for the wrath.

Yes. Bush tax cuts did go to everyone. But when they expire all I'll be losing is $46 dollars a year. I was getting 2.00 every pay period. I get payed twice a month. Oh my how that was really big of the Republicans to give me that.

CA-here is your problem: yes, given the average multiplier in this country, each dollar of government spending SHOULD contribute about 2 to the economy. However, you miss the underlying point, which is that this is borrowed money.

Therefore, considering the interest that has to be paid on that money after it has been lent out, the net effect on the economy is a loss of five per cent on each dollar. So, giving the dollar actually takes a dollar five out of the economy.

SPENDING is what got us into this mess, not tax cuts. If you outspend your income, you don't blame your employer for not paying you enough. Liberals do not get this disconnect.

There was another story on Sunday that First Read missed: Erskine Bowles speaking to the governors meeting. His commission is going to come out with suggestions that:

the mortgage tax credit be further curtailed-that will do wonders for the housing market, wouldn't you say?

there be an income trigger on Medicaire-that is wonderful news to people; after all, you pay Medicaire tax on ALL of your income. Having been forced to purchase it does not mean you should be able to utilize it, should it?

A VAT tax-I guess they are hoping the hue and cry about the above two will serve to hide that little gem.

The fact of the matter is that the only way to get the deficit under control is to CUT SPENDING. Eliminate the Department of Education-that will get twenty percent of its budget off the books. Send the monies to the states as block education grants. Cut twenty percent of the federal workforce. That works today and into the future, as all those people get pensions that the private sector would not even dream of having. Cut the corporate tax rate-there is a reason all those jobs have been moved to foreign shores, and the highest tax rate in the world is one of the biggest. Bring in some efficiency experts-only in government can you actually get a job as a file clerk. Leads me to wonder how many keypunch operators are employed by us.

Actually, Paul Ryan has a blueprint to save the economy, and it is well thought of by many liberals. My understanding is that it is the keystone of what the GOP plans to roll out in September. Obama is going to be swimming upstream against that agenda.

Don't worry-you'll still have those who believe that the sky is pink because Obama told them so to console yourself with after November.

JoAnnaSMith sez:

The "GOP-corporate-media complex"! What in the world is that?

It's in the real world where idiots like John Kyl can get away with claiming that tax cuts favoring the wealthy don't have to be offset by spending cuts even though it would add over 600 billion to the deficit while emergency relief for the unemployed must be balanced by spending cuts. The real world where 55% of the public has been misled into believing that President Obama is a "socialist," a word with a meaning that the media carefully avoids explaining.

JoAnnaSmith

This is a response to CAs post, and you used the word "Most". CA does not like when people use the word "most", some", many". CA wants details, none of this mamby-pamby "Most" for CA. Prepare for the wrath.

I can't answer for CAs' standards, but when "most" economists includes even John McCain's economic adviser saying the stimulus works, it's clear that only kooks like you are peddling the claim that it didn't.

Houston!

It's in the real world where idiots like John Kyl can get away with claiming that tax cuts favoring the wealthy don't have to be offset by spending cuts even though it would add over 600 billion to the deficit while emergency relief for the unemployed must be balanced by spending cuts.

Still waiting. Still waiting for you to name names on who is behind the "GOP-corporate-media-complex". Are you trying to tell us Senator Jon Kyl is behind this mysterious group? Does he wear a cape?

Houston!

The real world where 55% of the public has been misled into believing that President Obama is a "socialist," a word with a meaning that the media carefully avoids explaining.

Obama a socialist? Debatable. Some would say yes, others no.

Obama a partisan big government left-wing ideologue? That would get nearly a 100% agreement from the real world.

JoAnnaSmith:

Still waiting. Still waiting for you to name names on who is behind the "GOP-corporate-media-complex". Are you trying to tell us Senator Jon Kyl is behind this mysterious group? Does he wear a cape?

No. Do you wear a dunce cap? You should if you believe in the "liberal media" fiction. When Dwight Eisenhower (a Republican that JoAnnaSmith probably thinks was a Commie) referred to the "military-industrial complex", he wasn't referring to a gigantic conspiracy, and neither am I. Ike was referring to a community of cooperating groups with interests in common. The corporate media serve corporate interests just as the Republicans do, and they both twist the facts to do it. As has been pointed out numerous times on this blog and elsewhere, there is an undeniable tendency to selectively report facts to favor Republicans and harm Democrats (as the two LA Times articles blaming Obama for the actions of Bush appointees who are burrowed into the federal government).

Of course, there are exceptions since I'm not talking about a monolithic conspiracy. Thankfully, Keith Olbermann and Rachael Maddow are there because they bring in money to the corporation they work for. Thank goodnes for the profit motive.

No. Do you wear a dunce cap? You should if you believe in the "liberal media" fiction. When Dwight Eisenhower (a Republican that JoAnnaSmith probably thinks was a Commie) referred to the "military-industrial complex", he wasn't referring to a gigantic conspiracy, and neither am I. Ike was referring to a community of cooperating groups with interests in common. The corporate media serve corporate interests just as the Republicans do, and they both twist the facts to do it. As has been pointed out numerous times on this blog and elsewhere, there is an undeniable tendency to selectively report facts to favor Republicans and harm Democrats (as the two LA Times articles blaming Obama for the actions of Bush appointees who are burrowed into the federal government).

Houston, you are incorrigible. Do you check under your bed at night for boogey-men too? You can't name one name because there are none. It's just some liberal claptrap rattling around in that thing on your shoulders that should contain your brain.

One thing liberals cannot admit is that Obama and the Democrats are failing, not because of some media conspiracy, but because of the results of their actions. People have figured out Obama and Democrats Houston. They know they are full of crap. It's not hard to figure out, the evidence of their failure keeps piling up everyday. So lets cut the bologna that the media is out to getcha Houston.

No Joe,

"Liberals do not get this disconnect."

This is where you lose any credibility. Condescension is not a sign of an intelligent argument. The idea of borrowing money in such a fashion is to secure yourself (in this case the economy) so that you'll be in a better position to pay off the debt. The car analogy seems to work best in this situation. Put the repairs on credit so that you can still make it back and forth to that job.

Some Republicans want this country to fail so they can get back in power. It is that simple. In Wisconsin, 59,000 more people lost or will lost their unemployment this month. That means that 59,000 more people will have NO MONEY! No money to purchase food, pay the rent, pay utilities, buy clothes, make a house payment or a credit card payment. The result will be that business will have less customers buying there goods, so they will lay off more people. Then those laid off will stop spending any money except for necessities, there by decreasing the demand for more goods, so companies will have to lay off more people, who will then spend less and less and then the demand goes down so more people get laid off and then............It is almost like a circular firing squad. NO ONE GETS AHEAD or OUT OF THIS RECESSION/DEPRESSION. (sorry for the shout) No taxes coming in if no money is being paid to the people, so then the deficit will continue to mount.

Has any of our representatives volunteered to decrease their salay and just receive minimum wage? Or maybe what the average unemployment is of 1,000 a month?? That is what should be done to help the deficit.

Maybe someday you guys will talk about the ENTIRE story regarding unemployment...

People are blocking it because they want the money to come out of another pot of existing money and NOT raise the deficit anymore....

And like No Joe said.....after 99 weeks your changing peoples thinking from "Im only taking this money till I find another job" to "I like not having to work so I think Im going to stop looking for a new job".

And also to Newday....just heard a report that North Dakota's unemployment was 3.3% with over 10,000 unfilled jobs.....

Oh and one other tidbit..... The highest unemployment rate in NoDak since Obama made this whole mess worse? 6.5%

I guess the more conservative nature up here is failing big time right?

'And like No Joe said.....after 99 weeks your changing peoples thinking from "Im only taking this money till I find another job" to "I like not having to work so I think Im going to stop looking for a new job".'

Yes, if there's one thing that's no end of fun it's taking an endless series of collection calls, praying that you won't need the health insurance you no longer have, jumping through the hoops necessary to keep the checks coming, living on a fraction of what you used to make, and explaining to the kids why you no longer can afford to stay in the house.

As far as the conservative nature of ND, Iowa peaked at 6.9%, very close to the same. None of the Midwest states has suffered as badly as some other areas, but then again we didn't "enjoy" the Wall Street bubble as much, either. What's your point?

So let me get this straight "sonokursh2" and the others who think unemployment checks are stimulating the economy. Cashing unemployment checks for almost 2 years (99weeks) is "stimulating " our economy? And the unemployment rate is what %? Folks it works like this : Evil Corporations make "products or services" and pay people real wages to produce these items. These people then buy other products and pay TAXES! TAXES help fund government. No corporations = no jobs = no taxes = no government. Not the other way around. Sheesh....and by the way if someones unemployment benefits run out they CAN go on Welfare. Essentials provided. Not a good thing but we have to stop this somehow at sometime. Paul Ryan's plan is intriguing. Read it. Sorry for the rant.

John the point about ND was pointed to Newday who the other day claimed that ND's way of doing things was wrong. I was pointing out that the facts show something totally different...

And to your point....when the government offers health insurance and also all but tells people to walk away from their mortgages it makes being on unemployment a pretty good gig. Its to the point whereits almost better not to work (especially after our taxes skyrocket next year and if our energy bills "neccessarily" skyrocket due to cap and tax (aka another Obama slush fund to give to the unions....)

Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels was the master of the “big lie” tactic in which a lie, no matter how outrageous, is repeated often enough that it will eventually be accepted as truth. Goebbels explained:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Substitute Nazi for Republican and substitute Goebbels for FOX and you got your answer.

Houston,

Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels was the master of the “big lie” tactic in which a lie, no matter how outrageous, is repeated often enough that it will eventually be accepted as truth. Goebbels explained:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Just substitute Republicans (particularly the right wing extremists) for Nazi and substitute FOX or any of those talking heads for Goebbels and you will know what they are up to.

JoAnnaSmith

Do you check under your bed at night for boogey-men too?

No, but I do believe in trolls, and your one of them. You'll deny any facts presented and mouth the brainless nonsense you pick up from the Fox News idiots. The incenstuous relationship between the "serious" media and Fox News (which Jake Tapper called his "sister" news organization) is laid out in this Media Matters article pretty clearly:

http://mediamatters.org/research/201007120005

"The Fox Cycle: From bogus right-wing attack to mainstream news"

I won't bother paraphrasing any of the facts from this article, since JoAnna has shown there's no fact she can't pretend doesn't exist.

Houston!

JoAnnaSmith

Do you check under your bed at night for boogey-men too?

No, but I do believe in trolls, and your one of them. You'll deny any facts presented and mouth the brainless nonsense you pick up from the Fox News idiots. The incenstuous relationship between the "serious" media and Fox News (which Jake Tapper called his "sister" news organization) is laid out in this Media Matters article pretty clearly:

http://mediamatters.org/research/201007120005

Oh my gosh Houston, my sides are hurting from laughter. MediaMatters Houston? You're referencing a MediaMatters article as your "proof"? And you're trying to tell us all that MediaMatters is a serious news organization and all the others are in a conspiracy to getcha?

You have a nice day Houston.

Houston!

"The Fox Cycle: From bogus right-wing attack to mainstream news"

Just one more thing Houston, because this is just so entertaining. You've gone from this huge GOP lead corporate media conspiracy all the way down to saying you don't like Fox. Now Fox is the ratings leader when it comes to cable news, but it pales when compared to the audience of the networks. So you're trying to tell us that little'ol Fox is causing all these problems for the Obama administration?

You have a nice day Houston.

JoAnnaSmith:

You've gone from this huge GOP lead corporate media conspiracy..

You're just flat-out lying, now. I explicitly stated that I wasn't talking about a "conspiracy" any more than Ike was when he referred to the military-industrial complex. Of course, you hate Media Matters. Like Harry Truman, they give you the facts and you think it's hell.

I know you didn't cite Media Matters as a credible source for anything. That is one of the most Liberal sites out there. They even admit it. I have never since it's conception saw one story about Liberals.

Media Matters is full of sh!t and you know it. I know you won't admit it because the source is WEAK.

Media Matters....LOL...get F out of here......lollll

I dunno, ITM. Yes, Media Matters is a Liberal site, and they admit it. The interesting thing is that no one ever bothers to challenge their facts, because they're nearly always right. Somewhat biased, sure, but when they point out for example that Glenn Beck has wondered why the Navy isn't involved in the BP cleanup when they ARE, bank on it.

It's just easier to sneer at them and invoke the name of George Soros, carefully of course because saying his name three times might just summon him in person and bring us all to unholy terror.

John B:

Have you ever thought that maybe people just don't want to waste the time or energy debunking everything a web site says. Republicans don't waste all of their time worrying and starting web sites to debunk every single thing a Liberal says. That is a total waste of money. People are going to vote for whomever no matter what a web site says. The 48% that is in both corners is there to stay at least in the near future. Why do you play with words when describing this site? It is not SOMEWHAT biased; it IS biased.

OK, it's too hard for Conservatives to do. That only bolsters my argument.

You know what they say, John B:

Facts and Truth have a Liberal bias!

It drives the roaches to drink in the crevices - THEY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

You are spot on Steven. I'm really embarrassed by these two. McInnis is no better. (and looking at the Post this morning....he's got ISSUES!!) Now I see that Newt Gingrich in back on the scene, sniffing around at a Presidential run.

Are these people REALLY the best and the brightest the Republicans have to offer? Really??

Seems to me that the largest collection of racists are found in the White House and the DOJ!!!

For one day, I thought Buck might "buck" the Tea Party fringe and stand on principle. Good to know that Colorado voters like yourself are paying attention. Even if I was a republican, these guys would make me run toward the democrats.

tedcrawford. What you said must be true because that's what FOX and Limbaugh say. Good grief, what nonsense.

The disturbing thing about this fake story is that it's not just Fox that's peddling it; CNN is hyping it, too, and once they start hyping something CNN will never correct the record any more than Fox does.

Which lie are you reffering to eric? The one about king whats his face advocating the killing of "crackers and their babies" or the one where the president of the panthers called for a cheer and praise to Bin Ladden?

Unlike most of you progressives the general public tends to believe their "lying eyes" to progressive spin!! I'm sure that comrade alinsky is proud of you though!!

I give credit to MSNBC Houston! They will & have corrected the record when they've been wrong!

Feisty:

I give credit to MSNBC Houston!

The problem is that MSNBC gets smeared by the rest of the corporate media, including CNN, as the wacky liberal mirror image to Fox News, so they don't feel obligated to report stories that start on MSNBC even though they eagerly take goofy stories from Fox like this lie that the Obama Justice Department dropped the charges against the New Black Panthers. If MSNBC has a liberal bias it's because they report the facts, and as Steven Colbert told G. W. Bush to his blank face, facts have a liberal bias.

I hear you Houston!

I get a GOOD laugh daily at the right wing nuts who come to FR and b!tch that it's a left leaning website!

H E L L O!!!

Then what the hell are they doing here other than regurgitating the Faux & Freaks BS and instigating? They sure have nothing else to offer the discussion!

Good post, Eric. MSNBC's evening lineup is where journalism does its job.

Rachel also pointed out that California's Jerry Brown found out the truth about the republican Pimp and his pimpster aiding chick who went after ACORN--their edited tapes ignored the truth about those creeps who now are being charged with some serious crimes. Too bad FOX won't run a continuous loop of the REAL tapes and not the edited ones. How sad, several ACORN employees were fired because of those tapes even though they had reported the pimps "plans" to local police.

tedcrawford -- Pay attention, it was the BUSH Whitehouse that decided not to prosecute the new Black Panthers. The Obama administration had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

Uh, Houston? It isn't a lie. Holder DID drop the charges against the new Black Panthers, who did lose the original case because they did not appear in court to answer the charges of voter intimidation that were easy to prove because there was VIDEO.

The VIDEO showed the new Black Panthers dressed in paramilitary garb brandishing nightsticks. The VIDEO showed some elderly ladies leave the voting area in fear without casting ballots. The VIDEO has sound that is so vile I will not type it here-suffice to say it was racist in the extreme.

So, where in all of this do you find a lie?

The truth is that there was testimony taken by congress by a whistle-blower, and subpeonas were issued by that committee to Justice. The word out of Justice is that they plan to ignore them-it remains to be seen if Holder will, or not.

Calling the truth a lie does not make it so-it also does not work anymore, although it worked like a charm during the campaign. Now, however, too many people have woken from their Obama-stupors, and see the reality of America today.

Now, the truth is easily seen. Don't bother calling it a lie, you only make yourself look foolish.

Well when The Regime basically backs a hate group (by not prosecuting them for voter intimidation) what do you expecet will happen?

Link to this so-called truth?

Seeing as how it was the BUSH AG that found there was NOT enough evidence to prosecute for intimidation, even with those edited vids, however enough for them to RECCOMEND to the incoming Admin's AG that they be kept from the polls until 2012, which AG Holder DID.

I saw those EDITED vids and I never saw ANYONE tuurning away from the polling place, I DID see the guy exercising his right to free speech and holding a weapon near a polling place, for which he earned the penalty of having to stay away from the polls until 2012.

So Stop blaming Pres. Obama, start blaming Faux for lying to you so baldly, and shame on you for actually believing those lies!

Yes, No Jo All Blow, the TRUTH CAN be plainly seen, and the lies from Faux, which you repeat ad nauseum, are plain to see as well. Faux like to whip up the racism, especially since we happen to have a black President. They are completely owned by the Right Wingers that control the Repub party and so have no remorse in lying to anyone, especially the sector of the public that actually watches their drivel that even they say is Not based on fact, but for entertainment purposes only.

Apparently they find it entertaining to lie and then watch the firestorm between those who Know the Truth, and those who think that Faux is telling them the truth, just for the ratings and the support they get from the Repubs.

Faux Neuz, Unfair and Unbalanced Lies for the World Today! Believe at your own risk, Viewers Beware!

Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels was the master of the “big lie” tactic in which a lie, no matter how outrageous, is repeated often enough that it will eventually be accepted as truth. Goebbels explained:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Just substitute FOX for Goebbels and right wing extremist Republicans for Nazis. As much as they try not to be Nazis and it is rather extreme to even them to be true Nazis they seem to do some of the same sort of thing the Nazis did but to a lesser degree.

Using your own logic, wouldn't the independents putting the Rebuplicans back in charge of one or both houses of Congress be them seeing the error of their ways in 2006 and 2008?

Since we have no real choice we are required by those who regulate the process to choose between two corrupt bodies of partisan hacks every election cycle and the leaders of both herds consistently misread the voters anger as support for their agenda. They are not wise enough do the peoples will and as a result we (the voters) go through the futile exercise again and again. Sadly the partisan gurus are safe most of the time as the people only react to either their excesses or glaring incompetence. When the country can survive their crazy antics we usually don't pay close enough attention to get angry at their hi jinks and hypocrisy. When things settle down who ever is in power will get a pass and we will start the cycle of partisan government all over again until the next explosion. So all you partisan nincompoops can relax things will return to normal soon enough.

According to obamas own Debt Commission, if we don't vote them out in November there will not be an economy to improve in 2012!!

And where did that debt come from? Reagan, Bush and Bush. Clinton left a budget surplus and Bush and his GOP legislative cronies squandered and plundered this country to where it is today. The GOP has NOT been fiscally responsible since prior to Reagan--and that's the truth!

Jody, the debt and the deficit are not the same thing. The debt is the cumulative total of all the annual deficits. The U.S. national debt has been around and growing since 1790 under virtually all Presidents, regardless of party affiliation.

The annual budget surpluses attributed to Clinton were largely a function of the boom economic times (think "irrational exuberance") and the stock market bubble (think cap gains taxes on internet stocks that were really worthless) of the late 90's. Once the bubbles burst and the stock market tanked and recession set in during the early 2000's, Clinton's surpluses projected into the future disappeared with them. I'm NOT saying GWB didn't have his hand in the deficits, he did. I'm just saying the Clinton surpluses were largely imaginary since they were due to economic and stock market bubbles.

Joe in Albany. I know the debt and the deficit are NOT the same thing. Clinton left a budget surplus which had nothing to do with the debt; Bush had a red ink budget which added to the national debt.

Jody:

Meaning that all he did was move money around along with the REPUBLICAN congress to show an overage on the BUDGET.

WE STILL OWED everybody and their momma.

Clinton benefitted from a Republican Congress, DOT.Com, Internet, cut the frikken military in half, etc...

If I borrow 10 dollars and place it on my budget bill of 9 dollars, you can say I have a surplus of a dollar.

....and you are entitled to George Steinbrenner's money, how? The people who complain that the rich do not pay their "fair share" generally have absolutely no idea how much they are actually taxed. Ignorance & jealousy fuels a lot of resentment among the entitlement class. Educate yourself about tax codes and what will actually occur when the Bush tax cuts expire. I'll bet you will find that you too will feel the pinch in your pocket.

Gee, Eric, how is it that it's GWB's fault that the Dems, who have controlled both houses of Congress with huge majorities since 2007, and controlled the White House since 01/20/09, never got around to reinstating the estate tax??

Oh, yeah, IT'S ALWAYS ALL GWB'S FAULT!!!!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Joe, Albany. And just how would democrats do that when Bush would have vetoed any bill? It is also important to remember the Great Recession started in Dec 2007 so allowing these tax cuts to expire on their own made economic sense.

"Joe, Albany. And just how would democrats do that when Bush would have vetoed any bill?"

Ummm, by passing a bill reinstating the 2010 estate tax on or after January 21, 2009?

Here is the real flaw in the progressive/liberal argument:

If you break into my house, and, at the point of a gun, steal money from me, I can have you arrested.

If you get the government to come into my home, and, at the point of a gun, take my money and give it to you, that is called 'redistribution of wealth'.

The only difference is who is holding the gun. If you, the individual do it, it will actually cost me less to get robbed, as I will not have to pay thousands of bureaucrats to hold the gun for you. On your part, though, it is riskier, as you might get caught and go to jail.

This explains why most of the thieves want the government to hold the gun. It does not explain the limousine liberals, though.

Maybe they are just insane.

Joe. You ignored the rest of my comment.

nojoe,

Please provide a real world example of the government breaking into your house, taking your money, and you getting nothing in return.

Enough of the conservative "capitalist fairy tales" featuring fictional companies and mythical examples.

What specifically are you talking about.

and what pray tell Eric would be the "rich" fair share of taxes? At what income level do you expect the "rich" to be in?

Oh, Nashville, Nashville, Nashville-did you ever look at your paystub and see how much money you ACTUALLY earned, as opposed to what you get to keep? The date "April 15" ring any bells?

And, if you don't think it is done at the point of a gun,try not paying your taxes. The place they ut you has bars, metal beds, and guards-with guns.

no joe . . .

You get an awful lot of services for the money that you pay . . . surely we can agree on that.

Nashville-military, courts, interstate highways? yes, I am all for them.

Paying taxes when 47% of people get welfare in the form of 'refundable tax credits"? THAT is theft from my pocket, to which, yes, I strenously object.

It might interest you that no less a 'conservative' than Barbra Streisand is now objecting to this circumstance. Seems that even she believes that it is untenable that almost half of 'taxpayers' have no skin in the game.

Looks like the tide is turning-away from the progressive/liberal state of mind.

no joe,

You are very good at slipping from subject to subject . . . you receive just as much or more in services as you pay.

You are currently paying one of the lowest tax rates in U.S. history.

And still you complain . . . seems like you won't be satisfied until the world actually revolves around you.

And I am supposed to feel more sympathy for you than for all the folks who cannot find a job, cannot afford health care, and cannot recover all the money they lost in the glorified ponsi scheme called Wall Street.

Cry me a river no joe, cry me a river.

NJ, surely by now you know that saying that 47% of filers pay no federal income tax is FAR from the same thing as saying that 47% pay no taxes. In fact many of the lower middle class pay MORE as a proportion of their income in total taxes than those in the upper brackets. The canard that over half of Americans are freeloaders on the "rich" is a disgusting lie.

John B:

Man make your argument but stop with the hyperthetical BS. Everyone pays sales taxes, some pay state, etc......You know this is all about Federal Taxes. Stop with the damn strawman theatrical production.

When I see people that make 20,000 a year get a tax refund of 8,000; yes I have a problem. I pay a ton of taxes and still owe every year. I can't even get a refund of $2.00

Hypothetical BS? EVERY right-wing talk show host claims that 47% of Americans "pay no taxes" EVERY DAY. That, my friend, is the straw man. It's a fact that the titans of Wall Street pay a lower proportion of their income in taxes than I do, and probably you as well. It's also a fact that a big chunk of the people who work at WalMart and many other low-wage companies are partly supported by your taxes and mine as a conscious strategy to maximize profits. To me that's a deal breaker. The BSDs don't have my interests in mind, I see no point in being sympathetic to them.

Jody,

Gets a vote. The repubs do not understand what a deficit is when it comes to them. Keeping the tax cuts for the rich (which is not funded) is going to increase the deficit. How many times do these people say they are in favor of doing something for the average American people etc., and then support a position that is in direct conflict with what they say. Can anybody tell me what the Repubs have done for America in the last 18 months?????? - Other than throw about 2M Americans into the street and refer to them as Hobo's, lazy, not worthy. etc. Support Big Business, the super Rich, Insurance Companies, Wall Street and the like and give them big tax cuts, reduced requlations and then claim they are for the middle class.

I am far from being a republican and if they win a majority in the fall it will be because the people don't buy the partisan crap the democrats are shoveling and did buy the crap the republicans threw their way. But what strikes me as arrogant is the idea that only idiots could disagree with the crap either party repeats as if it s gospel. Has it ever occurred to any partisanthinker that the majority of the people value their freedom and really like the country and honor the constitution and accept its tenets and do not want representatives who will support a party over doing what is right? Believers in the status quo will label me as a radical but I don't trust anyone who wants power any party that wants power or anyone who supports the policies of either party without reservation and scrutiny of both the outcome and cost and most importantly the impact on our personal liberty.

Carlos,

You do not sound radical to me. There are problems on both sides and I think that is the very reason that we need to get real honest information so we can make intelligent choices. As you, I am tired of all the lies, misinformation, pundits telling us what to think, etc., etc. As I mentioned before, I think most of the people on this board today have more in common than we think or allow our selves to think. Once we realize this I hope the fear and hate will reduce to the point where All Americans can work together. I know that there will be a percentage that just will not let go of the fear or hate, but I have to believe the majority of the people love this country and want to make it better, not only for themselves but for everybody. It is the only way.

Carlos. I don't disagree that both parties are guilty. Sorry about that, I can see where you thought I was calling all republicans crazy but that was not my intent. I was referring to Tom Tancredo's outrageous comment claiming Pres Obama is the most dangerous man on earth, and those like Tancredo who have made similar absurd comments. There are many good republicans and not all Tea Partiers are extremists, not every republican is a loon but when they make comments like Tancredo's and someone like Mr. Buck states he does not agree with Tancredo but the next day backs down and embraces Tancredo's remarks--well, those are the loons. There's some democratic loons out there, too.

Jody: Excellent post; You are indeed right. It's way too early to tell what will happen in November. BTW, Glad to see you on the Vine. Stop by more often.

Robin Hood fought a corrupt government that was abusing their authority. The government he fought was run by the rich establishment. Now look at the financial disclosures of our elected officials. They are the same abusing rich government officials old Rob was fighting.

Dottie,

I hear you, sister; but I have sworn off the DCCC and the DSCC. They will send money to candidates I oppose (Blanche Lincoln, for instance). I find it best for me to send money directly to the candidates at risk or of interest. Unlike taxes, I can control my own message and candidate with direct contributions. Just my two cents.

Dottie, don't let the polls get you down. Most of the folks who complain didn't vote for Obama in the first place. The Republicans were against change from the start. The Independents who drive the polls up and down are casual voters whose opinions are an inch deep.

The people who really know what's happening support Obama and the Democrats. Maine is poised to take off as a leader in wind energy, thanks to federal support turning boatbuilding technolgy to the manufacture of wind turbines. I bet there are exciting developments in your local community too. Focus on that.

I watched about 10 minutes of Morning Joe before his childish behavior forced a channel switch. Mika was talking about what a great job Michelle Obama is doing on childhood obesity and Joe starting blowing his South African horn brought to him by McAuliffe. Joe Scarborough is a disgrace.

I contribute to democrats as often as the budget allows. It is my understanding the dems have raised more money than the RNC this year. As for the polls, I thought it was an odd way to combine the numbers. Some and no confidence lumped together. We don't know if 40% had some confidence and only 18% had no confidence in Pres Obama or what the combination. Reagan's number was 43% as well and he didn't have FOX and Limbaugh to deal with.

Dottie:

I watched Joe bashed the President and the Dems this morning and thought he seemed a bit more hostile than usual. He must have had a good talking to while he was on vacation. He yelled aty Mika and Andrew Ross Sorkin for not allowing him to just keep talking and talking without taking a break for them to answer his self-serving questions.

He was on rant this morning and seemed really happy about the Poll numbers for the President. He ignored the real story coming out of the poll numbers...78% of those polled don't think the Republicans would be good for the economy. The President polled better than the Democrats and the Republicans but all Joe wanted to talk about was how BAD the poll numbers were for Obama.

Puleeze!

Dottie:

If you want to help someone; feed some of the homeless and stop sending your money to political machines. That is a waste of money.

I have never and never will give any politician a dime. I will vote but I will not financially support any of them. That is like taking food out of your family's mouth.

These people have enough private wealth on both sides to where they will be alright without your $10.00, at least I hope that is all you gave.

If you got money to burn on politicians; send it my way, I can enjoy a good night out on the town.

Eric,

I watched that yesterday. Dylan just did not let him get away with anything. He must have asked the guy 3,4,5 times "are you going to answer the question?" He did not and Dylan basically threw him off the air. I agree with you that I also would like to see more of this hard nose interviewing. Just answer the darn question and stop the talking points. Nice post.

I agree Eric, lets see more interviews like Dylans, if they won't answer the question and just change the subject take them off the air and explain why. It was good when Dylan kept telling him he didn't want to hear all the Republican talking points, and he congratulated him for getting them all in and said he'd probably get a pat on the back from the GOP for that.

Good job Dylan I agree we need more interviews like this.

Rachel Maddow cuts through the rightwing BS like a diamond etches glass. She kicks the Meet The Press roundtable up several notches. I've said it a million times: why is it that I, living without cable TV, avoiding talk radio, am so well informed of the rightwing BS and all the names of all the "stars" Limbaugh, Coulter, Palin, CHris Wallace, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, ad nauseum. The mainstrean media keeps me informed, that's why. Do you think the average voter knows who Rachel Maddow is?

The problem is, Chuck seems to agree with the republican point of view. That is why he will only ask them softball questions that they can hit out of the park. I find it humorous that people like Howard Kurtz will label MSNBC as a liberal network, they must never watch in the mornings.

Eric, it's hard for me to believe that anyone so, completely clueless as you could possibly exist!! The only answer is that you have memorized comrade alinskys book! Do you spout this blanant ignorance for free, or is someone paying you??

Amy B. Portland, ME

Do you think the average voter knows who Rachel Maddow is?

Probably not. There are so many left-wing loons in the media, Maddow is just another screeching lib like any other screeching lib.

Joanna you are an idiot and you never have anything even slightly informative to say. I really hope you aren't reproducing. Do you ever actually use logic of your own or are you a copy and paste type?

I don't mind a different point of view as long as it can be expressed without condescension and name calling. You ask for facts but all you produce is redundant right wing nonsense.

Dan,

I rarely respond to JoAnna Smith anymore, she is only an inflammatory troll and merely tries to raise hackles here. She never, or extremely rarely, uses any actual facts that were not pulled from some right wing show or paper. Her useless drivel adds nothing of substance and she never backs down from a mistake, just makes more excuses and attacks the person who called her out with yet more speaking points from the right and insults.

She is just one of those useless Right-Wing screechers like any other Right-Wing screecher and flops around in circles like a chicken with it's head cut off.

Chuck Todd is a Republican - explains a lot now?

Elise,

And the righties do not get that this blog only Leans Left, if it was a REAL Left Wing blog then there would be a whole different contest to the stories posted.

Dan Austin, Tx

First this:

Joanna you are an idiot and you never have anything even slightly informative to say. I really hope you aren't reproducing.

Then this:

I don't mind a different point of view as long as it can be expressed without condescension and name calling.

Who wants to tell him? B.Honest, you think you're up to the task? Think he'll get it? Me neither.

Dan Austin,TX... you nailed it & I voted!

The JoAnna Smiths are a dime a dozen around here! It's what happens when you're paid by the word!

Keep up the great work!

Chuck Todd is a Republican? I knew there was something I didn't like about that guy, but are you sure?

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

Dan Austin,TX... you nailed it & I voted!

The JoAnna Smiths are a dime a dozen around here! It's what happens when you're paid by the word!

Fisty DeadHead! Where'ya been sister? I see you have your usual vacant stare response. Complex issues being discussed today DH. Real complex issues. Best you run along back to your Lemonade stand on the corner before the big kids grab your spot.

So JoAnna, are you going to engage on any of these issues, or just drop some sound bites and run?

JoAnna Smith,

Actually I second Dan on what he said. You must have missed my post. All I see in You is a screeching McCarthyite trying to smear the modern progressive folks, not because you actually have any facts, but just because you have NO Honor, No Class, and No Tact...let alone any significant intelligence!

I am a Democrat who lives in SC, the most racist, Retardlican state in the UNION, and I saw that commercial on COUNTDOWN w/Kieth O. I have to say that although MOST Tea-Baggers are racist, I can HONESTLY say I don't think Sarah Palin is one. STRANGE huh? Look up Niiki Haley( R-SC) and you will see that Sister Sarah actually is not a RACIST. She backed the Tea-Bagger candidate for Governor of Sc and the BIMBO won. She is just as big a NITWIT as Sarah "Caribou Barbie", and somehow the IDIOTS who live here voted her as the republican nominee for Governor. STRANGE huh? I say what's EVEN stranger is the fact that there have been claims against Nikki "NO BRAIN" Haley of infidelity in her marriage, but that only garners sympathy for her here. JUST a heads up, if you or anyone you know even considers moving to SC PLEASE I BEG of you, DON"T DO IT! YOu WILL REGRET IT! I have been in this HELL for most of my life and therefore am tolerant of the KOOKINESS I see and hear on a daily basis. For someone who has not experienced this CRAZINESS I say STAY AWAY! IT IS REALLY SOMETHING DOWN HERE! I have recommended to all of my immediate family that we all move to California, New Yrk, or Massachussetts, NO one except me wants to leave just yet. Pray that my relatives see the light.

Carter was the worst president in my lifetime, its too early to tell about this version on the old playbook.

You are consistant Amy, but very, very far from right!!!

Carlos, Were you an adult in the seventies? I was: Jimmy Carter was unpopular but correct in everything he predicted. Reagan was a showman, but his policies provided disasterous.

It's amazing how you teabaggers forget about George Bush when you spout the worst President, there's no doubt he is the worst President ever.

A recent report by Political Historians listed the past Presidents by how well they performed, Bush Jr. was second from the bottom...which is one place higher than I myself would have placed him, but I will go with the professional historians: they have all the numbers.

Really, Amy? If you were alive, you must have been asleep.

Jimmy Carter, and his wonderful, compassionate human rights foreign policy, opened the store to the Soviet Union, (and the Senate, thank goodness, did not pas his SALT II treaty), but far worse was his treatment of Iran.

That nitwit actually called the Ayatollah Khomeini a 'great, holy man". He orchestrated his return to Iran from Paris-where he would have lived out the rest of his natural, evil life harmlessly. THAT led to riots, and a government torn down, and, lest you have missed it, our embassy being overrun, and our people held hostage for over a year-until Ronald Reagan's election. Seems the Iranians thought he might do something more than stew over it.

Had it not been for Carter, (for whom I campaigned before wising up), we would not now be faced with an Iran that seeks nuclear weapons for the purpose of destroying our allies and, perhaps, ourselves. The new nitwit in the White House is as clueless as Carter in dealing with them, by the way.

On the other hand, you worship Obama, so it is no wonder you learned nothing from stagflation, gas lines because Carter redistributed the gasoline in a more 'fair' way, (Wyoming was swimming in gas-did not have enough holding tanks for all the excess; meanwhile, on the coasts, we were sitting in gas lines), and of course his spectacular failures at foreign policy.

I give people a pass on naivete-I was naive enough to campaign for Carter myself, although I was too young to vote for him. Fortunately, I learned my lesson. It seems you are incapable of that-so you cling stubbornly to your opinions that red is actually blue, cold is actually hot, sweet sour, and that the tooth fairy comes in the middle of the night. So be it.

Yes Amy I was just starting out in the mid seventies after completing my college and contemplating my next move. I actually voted for Carter and remeber him well, high inflation, high interest rates, high unemployment and a President who whined like a baby and was soundly thrashed after 4 years of incompetent leadership. In 76 I was a poor kid who had barely been able to get through school, now I run a private practice, something that was impossable to finance in 76 to the early 80's. Amy there is one thing I have learned for sure, both party's are corrupt, power hungry and incompetent and generally supported by people who have no concept of their party's history. Which is why I am adamantly opposed to both of them holding power. Skepiticm of the powerful is not a vice in my view and a healthy skepticism is lacking in most followers, my advice is wake up!

Bush 43 was the worse president in my lifetime and I remember Nixon's Watergate and Carter.

no joe, no bo, nj

A dissident under the Shah of Iran had his arms and legs amputed and he was returned to his family (alive), that's the Iranian leader the U.S. proped up before the Iranian revolution. Can you blame the Iranians for supporting Khomeni?

Funny how you pick and choose your facts according to whether they support your Republican affiliation or no.

I was 18 in 1976. I was able to go to college with help from low interest student loans. I take it you did too. Today's middleclass family can't afford college for their kids. The middleclass has shrunk since the Carter years and our dependence on foreign oil has tripled.

Amy-I was 17 in '76-too young to vote, but old enough to buy into the Carter mystique and campaign for him.

Interesting, but not surprising, that you took government subsidized loans to go to college. I chose to put myself through by working any job I could to pay my tuition. I graduated summa cum laude DEBT FREE

I'm sorry if there were atrocities committed by the shah-but they pale by comparison to the atrocities committed by the regime Carter enabled to take his place.

Iran was our bulwark against the soviet Union during the cold war days. There were those who believed that Carter was deliberately trying to sell this nation out to the Soviets-I was not among them. I did, and do, believe that the man was blinded by his own arrogance-remind me of another occupant of the White House-the current one.

That our dependence on foreign oil has increased is not the fault of any one party-but both. See, there is a shrill minority who oppose anything that will mitigate against that. No, not just drilling, although they are opposed to that. Windmills? They are being fought tooth and nail almost everywhere-including near my home,where there is a fight to shut down the one operational unit, (too noisy), and an even louder fight to prevent a windfarm in the bay. Nuclear? Want to see an environmentalist's head explode? Say 'nuclear'. Ditto hydropower. They are also fighting a solar farm in the desert in California-the panels displace the sand, or some such nonsense. I actually can't wait to read the stories that come out of Maine should this wind farm thing go through. I do believe you will be among the loudest to fight against 'polluting the view'.

My husband and I put ourselves through college and graduate school, and we put our son through college and law school. All it takes is the will and the sacrifice-we don't expect our neighbors to do it for us.

You should really try self-sufficiency sometime. It is amazing what it does for your self esteem.

no joe, no bo, nj

One positive thing about these comment sections is it allows us to get to know the people behind the partisan opinions. It is helpful to me to understand what makes rightwingers tick, because, frankly, I can't understand how anyone can support the party that brought us deficets, endless war, bankruptices and the polution of our Gulf. From your comments I can see you believe your are "self suficient" and all the problems in the country can be traced to people not being "self sufficient." I, on the other hand, don't see anything "self sufficient" about giving each and every Alaskan $2000.00 in funds from the oil companies, for example, while the federal government pays more to maintain that state's infrastructure than it does to states with triple the population. Hypocrisy, thy name is Republican.

"I can't understand how anyone can support the party that brought us deficets, endless war, bankruptices and the polution of our Gulf."

From your deficient spelling and grammar skills it's amazing you can even attempt to pin deficits on one party. Obama now taking first prize as the king of debt, endless wars i.e. Truman/N. Korea and Johnson/Vietnam, bankruptcies, and Clinton signing the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act of 1999 would hardly be proud of if I were a Democrat. As far as the oil leak is concerned BOTH parties are responsible for MMS being corrupt and incompetent as it is.

Amy - I have seen this 'be self sufficient' meme from the right-wing many times. I too, like you, want to understand the people behind the partisan opinions because I am naturally curious as to WHY people feel the way they do.

In No Joe's defense (not that I have to defend No Joe), it is obvious to HER that people should be 'self sufficient' and not ask the Government for anything. I think that when you have SOME sort of education, this line of thinking makes sense. And for the record, I worked my way through University with and I have NO student loans or debt, and I am NOT a Republican (nor a Democrat).

With that being said, you would think that right-wingers would ENCOURAGE education because when you have education, you bring more to the table. Unfortunately, many want to ABOLISH the Dept. of Education (and No Joe is one of the proponents of this), instead of REFORMING it so it will be more effective.

You would think that and 'educated' person like No Joe would be able to put 2 and 2 together; if a person has some sort of formal education, there is LESS CHANCE they will be on the public dole because there are MORE OPTIONS afforded them. There is a better chance that an 'educated' person will be 'self sufficient' because the will be MORE ABLE to contribute to society.

Unfortunately, the party line is followed and the whining about 'their tax dollars' being used for 'some lazy' person who is down on his/her luck from not being able to find work commences. Where is the logic in whining? Why is it OK for sitting Senators to call people out of work 'lazy'? Why is it OK for sitting Senators to block unemployment benefits? Do they FORGET that some of those on unemployment may actually be their constituencies?

I'll part with this thought - in University (at least the one I went to), being able to critically - and systematically - look at a situation THOROUGHLY before forming an opinion is one of the things that are taught. Typically, when you have to craft an argument, you need to gather ALL of the information available to you. To make an ASSumption that people who may not have the same educational experience or opportunity as you (or I) may have does not mean that they are NOT willing to 'be more self sufficient' and is a disingenuous conclusion to make.

Maybe No Joe has FORGOTTEN that not everyone thinks the same way as she does, and that a differing opinion is NOT a bad thing.

Maybe not.

The question is which one of them has done things to help working Americans and which one caters to the wealthy?

Neither, both are run by the wealthy and treat the voters as peons or serfs. The party are the status quo and will do nothing to rock the boat. Both party's seek power and will do anything and distort any issue for their gain. The fact the above observation is used regularly is a confirmation that their propaganda works. If we could change things by voting, it would be illegal.

Yes, both parties have special interests. But what form of legislation is considered when either is in charge of congress.

Let me ask more succinctly, what has the GOP ever ever done for working Americans?

During the Regan and Clinton administrations they gave us the healthist economy that the world has ever seen, for one, new wave!!

You do remember tedcrawford that Regan gave us the highest deficits in history don't you. Or did you forget that little fact?

But what form of legislation is considered when either is in charge of congress

Legislation that gives them power and talking points, look at the facts, most households are now two incomes and in many cases the second income pays the taxes and fees assessed by our benevolent leaders in congress. Those who cite the almost 50% who do not pay taxes fail to mention the taxes and fees paid at every step of production and transport, sales taxes, property taxes renters pay indirectly and a maze of other "fees" collected along the way. Both party's expect us to pay for the privilege of living here and we all do and they use our money to increase their power and any benefit to the people makes a great campaign ad. Question authority and their motives no matter who is in power! Unless you trust them all you shouldn't trust any of them!

Mo-1852032

You do remember tedcrawford that Regan gave us the highest deficits in history don't you. Or did you forget that little fact?

Reagan ran deficits higher then $1.5 trillion dollars a year? Just like Barack Hussein Obama is doing today? That is quite a piece of information you have there Mo. Care to back it up?

And no Mo, your hero Barack Obama is running the highest deficits ever. By the end of next year, Barack will have added just as much to the national debt in two years then what George Bush did in 8 years.

JoAnna:

The bulk of the deficit you attribute to President Obama was left to him by President Bush, and you know it.

But for anyone who may be genuinely confused:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/29/barack-obama/obama-inherited-deficits-bush-administration/

Actually JoAnna, the deficit exploded immediately when Reagan took office, to levels not seen except in WWII as measured in constant dollars. It went down through most of the Clinton years and immediately rose again once GWB became President. Yes, it's high now but approximately 1/3 the level it was during WWII as a percentage of GDP. This is manageable, if we can get Republicans to stop pretending that tax cuts result in more revenue and stop insisting that we spend more on defense than the rest of the world put together.

Nashville_fan

JoAnna:

The bulk of the deficit you attribute to President Obama was left to him by President Bush, and you know it.

Really? That $787 billion dollar "stimulus" plan, you know the thing that produced no jobs, and in fact lost jobs, wasn't that Obama's idea? And that $1.5 trillion deficit we're running this year, that's Bush's deficit too? And the same amount of projected deficit for next year (we can't be sure because Nancy and Harry refuse to write a budget for that year), that's Bush's fault too? I mean, we're up to nearly $3.8 trillion dollars worth of Obama debt here, in what will be less then 3 years of effort, and we're not even breaking a sweat.

Nashville;

When you VOLUNTEER to take the POTUS job, you don't get a pass on the defecit that was so-called passed to you. Obama knew long before he was POTUS of all that was going on. He was in the Senate, WTF was he doing? I guess he was just spectating, enjoying being a brother in the Senate.

John B.,

Man that BS you're stating is laughable. Reagan ran a deficit because he outspent the Soviet Union leading to their BR. Had he let the SU keep up neither of our countries may not be here today.

You're are attempting to just brush aside the deficit of today because Obama is running it up but he has to held accountable also. You can stop with the defense budget talking point. WE HAVE ALWAYS outspent the rest of the world. Would you prefer we had a military the size of Ethiopia's, vulnerable to invasion?

ITM and JoAnna:

A link was provided with EVIDENCE to back up what I say.

I do not wish to "debate" with you . . . I am presenting the FACT that President Obama is not responsible for the huge deficit we are facing today.

Whether or not you choose to accept the truth is completely up to you.

P.S. The stimulus bill was passed because it was needed . . . not to run up the deficit. Interesting that ITM says running a deficit to beat the Soviet Union is a good use of the money, but helping the American people get through a depression . . . debatable. Strange priorities indeed.

Nashville_fan

ITM and JoAnna:

A link was provided with EVIDENCE to back up what I say

Your reference was addressed yesterday NF. Politifact is a derivative of FactCheck.org, a Soros funded site.

Do you believe everything you read on the web NF? Or just the things that you want to believe?

Um, JoAnna

You are the one with the blinders on - although, thanks - My son was happy with his coin from the Tooth Fairy.

Soros owns FACTCHECK.COM - which he was more than happy to exploit when Dumbya was kind enough to send people to during one of his debates.

FactCheck.ORG is:

Our Mission

We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit "consumer advocate" for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding.

FactCheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state and federal levels.

Our Funding

Prior to fiscal 2010, we were supported entirely by three sources: funds from the APPC’s own resources (specifically an endowment created in 1993 by the Annenberg Foundation at the direction of the late Walter Annenberg, and a 1995 grant by the Annenberg Foundation to fund APPC’s Washington, D.C., base); additional funds from the Annenberg Foundation; and grants from the Flora Family Foundation. We do not seek and have never accepted, directly or indirectly, any funds from corporations, unions, partisan organizations or advocacy groups.

In 2010 we began accepting donations from individual members of the public for the first time, responding to many unsolicited offers of support from our subscribers. We launched our first public appeal for donations in April 2010.

At that time we also decided to disclose our finances in greater detail, so that our readers may judge for themselves whether or not any of those individual donations could influence us. Our first such disclosure was posted July 2, 2010:

JoAnna:

If you can't refute the facts, attack the source.

Fact is, you are wrong, and you know it.

P.S. Politifact was good enough to win a Pulitzer Prize . . . which I sure you will find a way to besmirch as well. You are deliberately repeating something that you know is not true. There is a word for that . . . and it rhymes with dryer.

Nash:

I know you're better than that. Because a Pulitzer is rewarded does not mean that entity has all of gods grace upon it. PULITZER has gotten very political...

It won because Soros finances the site through third parties. If Donyell "Slimm" and Shaquitqa Bonier' Jackson owned the site, do you think it would have got that prize.

The earlier we realize that the so-called 'pundits' are only interested in being employed the better. The pundits are fast turning into a set of Hollywood characters in la-la land.

I am not so sure they are in la-la land, but they sure seem to know which side their bread is buttered on. Most with salary's and health care benefits that dwarf the average Americans. Many of them are really out of touch.

I vote for the octopus. At least the octopus got his/her picks correct.

You're right about the pundits, Patrick. They have too much time to talk, and they talk to much!

Hi Beverly. Yes, the Black Panther story is another one. I was just going around the internet reading about it after watching Keith last night. It just never ends. And all we have are Keith & Rachel and their guests to debunk it all. What happened to our media? It's like they've all become Pravda-like; just continue parroting the party's theme of the day. The Republican Party. Just like Lenin and Stalin were able to do in the old days.

Is it possible that followers of both persuasions are victims of partisan propaganda? Do you truly believe one party is basically made up of liars and crooks and the other party is always looking out for sweetness and light and their leaders lay awake at night worrying about you and me and all the other working stiffs that fund their plans?

Carlos Toadvine:

Do you truly believe one party is basically made up of liars and crooks and the other party is always looking out for sweetness and light .

That's what's called a false dichotomy. Nobody here has said that the Democrats are all "sweetness and light." They are fallible human beings, and some of them are liars and crooks. On the GOP side, unfortunately, their leaders are almost all liars and crooks and the few with any integrity get voted out in the primaries.

Houston, I don't buy it, they are both the same. Whats changed since the last election. I live in Illinois and the president and his people are products of the most corrupt political machine in the country and I see them operate every day. Thank for the definition especially about integrity, i always thought people with integrity agreed with me but evidently i was wrong they must agree with your party's talking points.