I continue to wonder why Ben Nelson wishes to continue to call himself a Democrat while he votes with the Republicans more often than not

ben must be feeling guilty about that healthcare takeover vote of yes. now he is moving in the right direction. I'm just glad that scam will be defunded and never take affect.

@Husky: What healthcare takeover? The Dems could have given us real healthcare, instead they caved to the Party of No, gave up essentially everything in compromise, and then not a single NO NO voted for it anyway. All we got was a bow to the big insurance companies. So if you're running around shouting about Obama care and takeovers, you're watching WAY too much Fox News.

Hi Guys, Interesting blog. Nelson is one of those Republiclone-type-guys who, besides his own personal views, goes with the flow, as do too many politicians who sometimes are doing nothing but watching their butts for the next election. As a side question to all of you Un-Obama enthusiasts. George W (Worst) Bush was in office eight years. Can anyone of you enthusiastic supporters tell me eight things this president did for all the American people? How about four? Having Republiclone problems? How about just ONE? I've asked this same question hundreds of times during the past several months, and for some odd reason, I have never received a reply. Could it be that you Republiclones have a problem with the truth? NO WAY! Just look up Richard Nixon, a true Repub.

Sandan,

You ask what President Bush did for all Americans. Here's a partial list.

Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty – which, while China and India (the greatest polluters) were exempt, the treaty would have ruined our economy. He had nearly 100% support in Congress killing the bill.

No Child Left Behind – cosponsored by Ted Kennedy. Teachers and Teacher’s Unions eventually learned to hate this legislation because it requires they be accountable and prove they are achieving results. The law made sure kids grades 3-8 could actually read.

Teacher’s Protection Act – protects teachers from being sued for disciplining students.

Medicare Prescription Drug benefit. Although written poorly and creating the absurd “donut hole,” this bill was huge for seniors living on a fixed income and trying to pay for increasingly expensive and necessary medicine.

Appointed Sam Alito and John Roberts, keeping a conservative balance to the Supreme Court.

Turned around an inherited economy that was in recession, and shocked by 911.

Sarbanes Oxley – allows CEOs and Executives to be tried criminally, and holds them accountable for financial information their companies report.

Provided matching funds for state programs that help landowners protect endangered species.

Disarmed Libya of chemical, nuclear and biological weapons

Raised military pay three times.

Created the Department of Homeland Security and consolidated overlapping, non-communicating agencies.

Created Health Savings Accounts.

Signed the Workplace Verification Bill to prevent hiring illegal aliens.

Created the USA Freedom Corps.

Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions in Africa suffering from AIDs.

Signed International Treaties: with Russia to limit nuclear arsenals, Dominican Republic Central America Free Trade; US-Jordan Free Trade Treaty, for the protection of children from exploitation; US-Chile Free Trade Act, US-Singapore Free Trade Act, US-Morocco Free Trade Agreement; US-Australia Free Trade Agreement; US-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement; Iran Freedom and Support Act.

US Patriot Act.

Bankruptcy Reform Act

Signed Laci and Conner’s Law.

Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2001 – which, despite Democratic talking points, provided tax benefits for the middle class as well as the wealthy, by eliminating the marriage penalty, providing tax credits for children and education, lowered capital gains and taxes on dividends, and lowered every tax bracket.

Sandan, can you pick out eight things that President Bush did that you agree with? How about four? How about just one?

Oops, almost forgot:

January 2001-October 2007:

4.8 million jobs created.

Unemployment between 4.61% and 5.99%.

GDP Growth 1.1% - 3.6%

Killed the Kyoto Treaty and the planet is still suffering...yeah, great move. Record heatwave anyone?

No Child Left Behind? Ever talk to an educator about that law? How it was never funded? Nah, didn't think so.

Teacher Protection Act? You mean the legislation written to give maximum legal cover to adults who mistreat children? The one whose child-protective features do not come into play until after a child has been seriously injured?

Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit? You mean the one that wasn't paid for in any fashion? The one that's adding trillions to our deficit? The one written to ensure maximum profit for the drug companies by making it illegal for the government to get volume discounts?

I could go on, but you get the point....Bush was a disaster for this nation and we'll be suffering the effects of his term for decades.

Candice, with all due respect, what have you been drinking? Sarbanes Oxley? please enlighten me just how effective this has been over, lets say, the past 21 months. And while we're at it, how's that completely unfunded drug benefit working out for you?

President Obama rejected the Kyoto Treaty too, ensuring that it would expire, because he even agreed it would kill jobs and kill our economy. Everyone agrees on this. Our EPA regulations are still the strictest in the world.

No Child Left Behind. House 384 to 45, Senate 91-8. Very bi-partisan. Yes, I've talked to teachers. They whine and complain they have to teach the kids and prove it. I don't get why they think that teaching a student math and science so they can pass an achievement test is all that hateful. Why does it cost more?

Medicare Drug Benefit. You're against helping seniors cope with the cost of their prescriptions? But you're okay with an unfunded Healthcare bill, unfunded unemployment benefits, and an unsuccessful $787 billion stimulus plan and 2 million jobs lost? These are disasters we will be suffering the effects of for decades.

Come on....pick something you agree with. Laci and Connor law, perhaps?

Steve,

Actually, still chilling that Pinot Grigio.

Michael Kopper, Enron, Andy Fastow, Jeff Skilling, Kenneth Lay, David Duncan, Arthur Anderson, Joe, Michael and Tim Rigas, Adelphia, Dennis Kozlowski, Tyco. Thought you all would be happy these guys are in jail - evil corporate executives and all. (They should be in jail, by the way).

The latest financial and housing crisis had nothing to do with cooking the books and nothing in Sarbanes Oxley would have prevented it. We can only do one financial reform bill a a time.

Candice,

1. We SHOULD have gone ahead and ratified the Kyoto Agreement, while it would have been some cost, the benefits outweighed the costs involved, there is NO proof that it would have killed our economy, in fact, there are points to it that would have Strengthened it instead.

2. No Child Left Behind was a flawed program that put most of it's emphasis on tests, and teachers taught to the test rather than just TEACHING. Many school districts falsified their grade scores for the money. There were better ways to accomplish better results.

3. Teachers Protection Act, while it is overall a decent thing it also emboldened some teachers to be over aggressive in disciplining children leading to actual abuse...will give this a tentative thumbs up tho.

4. Medicare Prescription Drug Act was a pure giveaway to the Pharmeceutical Industry and actually increased costs to the Government and caused much stress and strife amongst the elderly. In many cases it ended up MORE expensive than regular Medicare would have been and prevented the Government from negotiating drug prices. The 'Donut Hole' should NEVER have been included. Overall, it helped a little but gave away much too much in exchange and increased costs since it went unfunded.

5. Alito and Roberts are two of the WORST Justices ever to sit on the Supreme Court. It turned the Court from Centrist to SHARPLY right wing and the recent decisions handed down prove that out. The Citizens United case should never have been expanded and misdirected from the narrow ruling that was asked of the Court, but Roberts, in a fit of overbearing Judicial Activisim, Ruled Money equal to free speech and tilted power sharply over to the Rich and Corporations.

6. Bush squandered the Budget Surplus he was handed in an overzealous correction of the MILD recession in 2001, his tax cuts in 2003, with two wars, were disasterous and his idea after 9/11...Go Shopping. What little good he did in the beginning of his administration was vastly overwhelmed by his mismanagement and doubling the Deficit. His excessive deregulation allowed the banks, real estate dealers and the Corporations to nearly destroy not only ours, but the entire world economy.

7. Sarbanes Oxley is, on the surface, a good thing, however, there are too many exclusions and loopholes for it to be properly effective, and was never properly enforced.

8. Under the guise of giving matching funds for Endangered Species Protection, he also tried to remove millions of acres from existing protections and loosened the rules on those protections. However, he was stopped from doing this by the Courts.

9. Libya disarmed ITSELF, giving up it's WMD programs because they knew that Cheney would likely attack them next at the drop of the hat. We got a raw deal out of that in that WE absorbed the cost of the actual removal yet did not get any real guarantees of political change in that nation.

10. Raising Military Pay three times is nothing to actually be bragging about. While, yes, our men and women in Uniform need to be paid properly, doing so in an unfunded manner helped to balloon the deficit. The raises were more than the actual rise of inflation and mostly served to secure the Military Vote. A not-so-cheap method of vote buying.

11. The Dept of Homeland Security has actually VASTLY raised the price tag of the intelligence services, added more agencies and it STILL does not communicate well amongst it's various entities. There are many buildings going up in Washington DC that come up to more than double the size of the Pentagon and has made coordination amongst the various agencies actually much harder and the Intelligence is spread out over way too many people. Again, this was mostly a political feel good act that actually established a stronger shadow over our Constitutional Freedoms at great monetary cost.

12. The Health Savings Plans are EXTREMELY limited in who can apply and the deductions are too high and maximum payout is too low to be useful for most people to ever use. While some in the middle classes in good health may find them to be a decent service, most will find them to be much too restrictive and not cover enough.

13. The Workplace Verification Bill, another unfunded wonder, was not made mandatory enough, there are too many loopholes and not enough actual verification. Mostly window dressing.

14. USA Freedom Corps was essentially a revamping of the Peace Corps and In a commentary on the right wing website NewsMax.com Miguel A. Faria Jr. attacked the program as statist and collectivist, a "bureaucratic boondoggle" that might evolve into "compulsory service," and the name "USA Freedom Corps" as an instance of Orwellian Newspeak. Meanwhile, in a piece on the left wing magazine American Prospect's site, Jeremy Lott critically linked the announcement of the Corps' creation to the controversial Operation TIPS, a program encouraging citizens to report 'suspicious activity'. And so it was not well received by either party and was mostly a photo op for Bush. (Wikipedia)

15. While purchasing AIDS medications was an imminently good thing, it was too heavily based on religious tennents and excluded many programs unless they taught abstinence only instead of encouraging condom use also, Many decided not to participate due to the overbearing religious based exclusions. On top of that, the funds could only be spent with certain pre-authorized Pharmaceutical Companies and so was another giveaway to them.

16. While Bush may have signed many of the treaties they were actually accomplished by Clnton. Sadly the free trade agreements mostly meant that jobs were easier to ship overseas leading, in large part, to our present economic woes.

17. The US Patriot act is an abomination against our Constitutional Freedoms and needs to be repealed for the greater part. Minor portions actually do a little good, but NOT at the Cost to our Constitutionally Guaranteed Freedoms.

18. The Bankruptcy Reform act made it MUCH more difficult for a middle class person to actually declare bankruptcy while making it easier for the rich to do so. This should have been a non-starter however it was pushed through by the Repubs for the benefit of the rich and the banks, which frankly do not need the help.

19. Laci and Connor's Law, limited the the Military, was a very narrowly constructed law that arose specifically due to a highly televised case in an attempt to try an individual that had not been proven to have committed the crime. It was an EMOTIONAL appeal to the masses to put another penalty on someone convicted of murder. although I happen to agree with the basic premise it was nother attempt at vote garnering based on emotion and has very limited application.

20. While portions of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act were certainly valid, it overall was a HUGE benefit for the overly rich in reducing the taxes on Capital Gains and Dividends, which as I pointed out in #6 helped balloon the deficit. While the benefits of the tax credits for children and eliminating the marriage penalty are good there was not enough focus on the poor and the education credits actually hurt our public education system by taking more children out of it and paid for private schools, which mostly benefitted the rich only.

So overall I can only see one that I actually liked, with reservations and another that while I have grave reservations, works 'ok'. The rest I feel truly hurt America economically and limited it's Constitutional Freedoms more than they helped and they also ran the deficits up along with his 2 unfunded wars. Not really a list to be proud of in all reality.

Hi, B.. Honest.

1. The Kyoto treaty’s fundamental flaws were well understood: It set very ambitious—and costly—targets for the United States while allowing emissions from the developing world to continue to rise unchecked. China has become the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases. Cap and Trade is thankfully failing in the House and Senate. No one agrees the costs involved and the shell games it will allow will make a difference in helping the global environment. We already have the strictest EPA rules. That's one reason manufacturing has moved to China and India.

2. No Child Left Behind - started with huge support from both sides and was Ted Kennedy's idea. I totally agree that there has to be a way to measure the success of our kids in school. Too many were simply being passed along to the next grade - to their long term detriment. I truly don't understand why the teachers are against a comprehensive way to see if what they're doing is working. The program has flaws, I'm sure. But the intention to provide a measurable way to be sure our kids were getting the education they deserve was a good idea.

3. I don't know a lot about this law but a lot of parents don't discipline their kids and go into a tizzy when someone else does. When I grew up, any of the mom's on the block could beat our butts if we misbehaved and no one was arrested and no one got sued. We turned out alright. Duct taping kids in their seats is not okay. But a teacher needs to have control for the benefit of everyone.

4. Prescription Drugs. Just like President Obama's Healthcare bill. A windfall for insurance companies, completely unfunded and it's costs will get out of control. I know seniors, though, who were paying $500 to $1000 a month for their drugs. This bill helped them enormously. The "donut hole" was and is insane. Typical Washington legislation.

5. No surprise... I like Alito and Roberts. We need to keep a balance on the Supreme Court. The Citizens United case is grossly misunderstood. Has anyone actually read the issue and the decision. I don't know why the left are so upset about this one. It allows the Unions and MoveOn.org, and the likes of Michael Moore huge latitude in supporting your side.

6. Trust me. President Obama desperately wants to tell the American public to "go shopping." 70% of our economy is consumer driven. He constantly wants to extend unemployment benefits so people will go buy things. (He doesn't get they will use the pittance the Unemployment pays to pay the bills) and he promotes vacationing and tourism. Same thing as "go shopping." The recession President Bush inherited could have become a lot worse had he not acted effectively, in my opinion.

7. We agree on Sarbanes Oxley. No, its not perfect. And it was a reactive law, not a preventive one.

8. Skipping this one.

9. Yes, Vice President Cheney and President Bush spooked Libya into doing the right thing. That's what quiet diplomacy is and that's why it's important to be perceived as strong and willful in the world.

10. If we're going to have deficits that I will have to pay for, I want them to support our military by increasing their pay, and providing them what ever they need.

11. Homeland Security. As per the 911 commission, the agencies that are supposed to keep us safe were a mess. Homeland Security, while not perfect, was needed not only to try to improve communication and effectiveness, but also put a message out that we were going to be prepared to protect ourselves.

12. HSA's are limited. I was not a big supporter of those.

13. Workplace verification. E-verify. Why are employers required to use that system?

14. Freedom Corps. Any program that helps folks volunteer and do some good is a good idea.

16. President Obama seems completely disinterested in expanding our trade agreements. The Columbia agreement that's ready to go but just sitting around would put 1000's of Caterpillar employees back to work.

15. President Bush directed more money to AIDS in Africa than any other President including President Clinton and he doesn't get any credit for it.

17. Some provisions of the Patriot Act were probably overreaching. But it was not freedom robbing legislation. May provisions were just common sense. Having to make them law is pretty sad.

18. Rich people don't tend to go bankrupt. The major provision in that bill was that people filing bankruptcy would still be responsible for many of their debts.

19. Yeah. I want more punishment for people who murder other people, including pregnant women.

20. The tax cuts benefit everyone. The talking point that it just benefits the rich is misleading.

No legislation that comes out Washington is perfect. Much of it has unintended consequences, as will be illustrated by Health Care Reform and Financial Reform. The most well intended laws, and the most well thought out and structured legislation always has holes that will allow it to be distorted and misused.

How's your mom, by the way. I've been thinking about her and you. Hope all is good.

Candice,

Hey, I never expected us to totally agree, but obviously we DO agree on some things, some things we just see from differing viewpoints and some we just plain disagree on, that is ok. I truly wish that more folks could honestly discourse like this (Think the Legislative Branch of our Govt, lol)

Mom is doing much better, apparently they stopped monitoring her when her potassium levels got UP to normal from her electrolyte imbalance yet did not monitor further to make sure that they did not KEEP rising, that combined with a minor infection set up the rest of it. She is back at home and doing great now, Thank You for asking!

B.

It's interesting how we can look at the same piece of legislation and have totally different perspectives. You're going to find the faults in a lot of Republican policy and I'm going to see the good points. I'm going to find fault with parts of Democrat policy and you're going to see the good points. I wish our legislature would recognize the reality of this, empathize, use reason and real compromise to at least try to come up with policy for all the people. We are too divided as a country. We need leaders that can bring us closer together.

Glad your mom is doing great!

All this Bush did this, Bush did that, For the last time! Bush was NOT doing anything! Bush was NOT president. He was an alcohol damaged idiot who was the hand puppet of Dick Cheney and the ultra right wing of the Republican Party. The power structure of the Republican Party was never going to let that "drunk Bush kid" run this country. Lets see... Cheney is supposed to find a vice presidential candidate and he picks...... HIMSELF! Bring on all the old Repub stand bys like Rumsfeld to pull his strings and move his mouth and Bingo we have "the Bush presidency" This guy spent the first twenty years of his adult life as a coke snorting, pot smoking drunk!!! Clueless and easy to manipulate, he was the PERFECT Republican candidate. ( Think Sarah Palin 2012 ) Cheney made all the important decisions and told Georgie what to do and when to do it.

Watch the video from the Florida school when Bush was first told of the attack on the World Trade Center. He just sits there staring out. Then Andrew Card comes in and whispers to him that a SECOND plane had hit the second tower. He still just sits there!!! Why? He's waiting for someone to TELL HIM WHAT TO DO !!!!! Bush was a nothing!! A disastrous "president" Candice, wake up!! Dont be a fool!

Bluelake,

I don't understand the blood boiling anger so many feel about the Bush Presidency. I'm guessing people feel jilted or taken by the WMD issue. Is that it? But, Bluelake, there was no vast right wing conspiracy. There was no manipulation of the election. There was no secret plan. There was no evil plan made up by Vice President Cheney to ruin the country for monetary gain or whatever bizarre motivation is sunk into your heads. He was elected twice by a good 50% of the country. For all his faults, I think he was truly compassionate. (You'll go ballistic over that one, I'm sure).

I don't defend President Bush as the greatest President that ever lived. The Republicans were even disgusted at the end.

I was simply answering Sandan's question. I answered his question because, he, along with a lot of people here, seem totally mystified by President Bush and the fact there were actual accomplishments during his terms. I see everyone who replied to me ignored the most important accomplishments of low unemployment and growth in GDP. You have to admit life was better back then for most people compared to now. Can you admit that?

The left and the right will not agree on the soundness or effects of his policy. That's why there are Democrats, Republicans and Independents, I guess.

On 911, would you have preferred that President Bush leap out of his chair, bolt from classroom, hair on fire, squealing, scaring all those little kids? How exactly should he have behaved? Just curious to hear your thought.

I truly don't mean to be rude, but find it within your soul to get over the Bush Derangement Syndrome that has taken over so many otherwise reasonable people. It's probably not healthy.

Respectfully, Bluelake, really.

Was going to add one last thing but....never mind.

Candice- Last things first. As soon as I heard of the second plane into the WTC I would have immediately stood up excused my self from the children and gotten the hell out of that school. No running no screaming just sorry children but its time to be president. Not sit there like a paralyzed fool.

There was no right wing "conspiracy" Just a plan from the beginning. Get our guy in, give billions of dollars to our political supporters, take over the Federal Judiciary, invade Iraq, steal their oil, perpetuate our "100 year Republican majority".Just a plan evil or not.

You THINK life was better under Bush? I will never agree to that. If you were a member of a national guard unit, a resident of New Qrleans, or just a member of the American middle class things were getting bad fast.

I guess I will admit to feeling the same way about Bush that most Republicans feel about Bill and Hillary Clinton. Even now their hatred is incandescent.

When I look at Bush what I find in my soul is shame. Shame that my country fell for his "compassionate conservative" crap. Bush as an individual was not an evil man. He probably had more compassion than the people who really ran this country. As I said he was simple and easily manipulated. And to that point your first paragraph was full of mistaken beliefs.

You are however intelligent and civil and you are correct in saying thay the right and left will never see eye to eye. Thank you for your respect Candice but you and I will never agree on these points.

By the way I live very close to you in Illinois where both Republicans and Democrats are crooks!

Bluelake: You have written an excellent response to Candice, but I doubt she will have any ability to understand what you say. The fact is that the Cheney/Bush administration was a disaster for this country. What Candice, in her very limited right wing way is unable to take in is that the only people that did well during that administration were the very rich. FAIR has a good article in its archives that makes that clear, and may be simple enough for Candice and other right wingers to understand. In "Good News! The Rich Get Richer"( Janine Jackson) the lack of gratitude for Cheney/Bush becomes clear: "wages and income went down for average workers, all growth went to corporate profits and higher economic brackets." In other words, most families found it harder to buy things as their wages did not keep up with what the things cost that they needed to buy for their families. Real families feel the pain of that, which is something that Candice and her ilk are divorced from. I agree with you that Bush showed his cowardice on the day that WTC buildings were attacked. It wasn't just that he sat there with those children, it was the rather stupid, frightened look he had on his face as he sat for how long....7 minutes or so? After that, being concerned for his own hide, he took off in Air Force One, and did not take control of the situation as he flew from point to point to escape whatever bogeymen hound his rather pathetic mind. This....while innocent Americans died. One of the best examples I can give of how LEADERS react in the face of disaster is the Royal Family in Great Britain during WW II. They stayed in London, even as it was being bombed, and were in Buckingham Palace when the Germans strafed it. The Queen Elizabeth (for Candice's sake, she would be the mother to the current Queen) said " the children will not leave without me, I will not leave without the King, and the King will never leave." They understood their duty during a time of war. Bush, who has only one thought, what is best for him, is incapable of that. Only true partisans can feel good about the damage done to American during the Cheney/Bush administration. I would posit that you can have no love for this country if you make excuses for what happened to America during that time. It will take years to recover from it.

Bluelake, I actually liked President Clinton. I voted for President Obama. So, we agree(d) on something! I'm afraid some will feel the same way about President Obama eventually as you do about President Bush if the economy doesn't turn around soon and if Congress continues it's current behavior.

Yes, things are certainly a mess in Illinois - always has been. Will it ever change?

Hey, Newday. Haven't seen you around lately. Hope all is well with you.

I have to go to work now. Thanks to God I still have a job to go to. Before I go I will refer you all to an historical parallel to the Bush presidency. If you can Google or refer to Wikipedia, go back and read about the presidency of Warren Harding. It was under the Republican Harding that the Teapot Dome Scandal occurred. We all remember at least that name, don't we? Read about Harding and the people he had in his administration. (Harding died in office) Read about what was happening to the country. I find an eerie similarity between Bush and Harding. At one point Harding was quoted as saying "... I have no idea why I am president". To Candice, Dawn and etc: thanks for reading!

And the 1st Sheep Award goes to.........

JOMAMA72....CONGRATULATIONS!!! WOOO HOOO!!!

Yea, it takes a sheep to call a repug a repug. I mean only a true individualist would be able to parrot Glenn Beck. I mean you must really be able to think for yourself to support a party that turned a $237 billion surplus into a $1.2 trillion deficit. Oh, let's not forget how the repugs doubled the national debt in 8 years and created the worst financial crisis since the great depression or how they gave tax cuts to the wealthiest American while trying to block unemployment benefits to those who need them most. Yes, I suppose you must be freakin' brilliant Jess. Repugs don't know anything other than what Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Fox Noise tells them. Now, who was the sheep again?

Vince,

So based on your numbers, what Bush did in 8 years doesn't compare what Obama did in 20 months? I would take that 8 years. Read the article, it might open your eyes:

"Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for the FY 2009 budget deficit that overlaps their administrations, before President Obama assumes full budgetary responsibility beginning in FY 2010. Overall, President Obama’s budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years."

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/

Maybe you can answer this question that all you say on these blogs, what do you concider rich/wealthly? I've asked this all the time and no body can answer a simple question. Obama can't answer it either.

Paul-Florida

There is a big difference in coming into office with a ten year projected surplus and turning it into massive deficits, and coming into office facing a depression and huge deficits and having to spend to stabilize the economy. Thirty years of redistributing the wealth away from the middle class to 2% of the richest Americans by the last four presidents, deregulating every facet of the federal agencies that had oversight to protect this nation from environment, energy, and the financials, and tax laws that incentivize off shoring of jobs and profits, so that wealth that has been created by corporate America no longer filters through our economy and create free enterprise and economic security. That's what has created the nation we have today.....not the propaganda you hear from the Radios of Hysteria and the Televisions of Crisis.

Bush did not pay for his wars, kept them off budget. Illegal ballot florida 2000, 5-4 supreme court vote for bushI know the gopers are going to say get over it, and I say get over it President Obama won with 53% of the vote. Roberts who was bush's Chief justice did not even know how to swear in a president. The Roberts court 5-4 for unlimited corporate campaign donations. With Kagan it will still be 5-4, gopers are still the 5.

ByBush or ByeBush?

His Wars? Maybe one not two. Unless you think going into Afghanistan was a mistake, do you? What do you mean "get over it President Obama won with 53% of the vote"? I would say over 50% of the country don't like:

His Health Care Plan

Dealing with the Economy

Government bail outs

Running up our debt faster than any other President in history.

If your only source is "Bush did this, Bush did that" is really getting old. My 14 year old uses the same excuses. This is 2010. Obama said he would fix it. Well he has made it worse by employment at almost 10%, real figure it's about 17%, people have 99 weeks to look for a job so they aren't really trying.

I see you can't answer my question above. typical answer "Bush" Try again, what is Wealthy or Rich?

Palco,

Post your source that we had a ten year surplus. I'll ask you too, what's wealthy or rich? I find it hard to believe nobody knows, but yet cry about it. It's kind of like AZ's Law, everybody hates it, but never read it. Amazing, truly amazing!!

Paul-Florida

I did not say we had a ten year surplus....In 1999 the OMB projected out the paying down on the debt over a ten year projection would result in a two + trillion budget surplus. Since 1980 85% of the wealth created in this nation has gone to 2% of the population, greater than any time in our history including the depression, the major banks (10%) have 65% of our GDP, again even greater that before the depression. The Bush tax cuts on the last year 2010 has a 85%/15% disparity between the middle class and the rich, no need to think about who the disparity favors.

What is Rich or Wealthy ? figure it out yourself.

I believe going into Afghanistan WAS a mistake. Nobody has ever defeated them in those mountains. Look what they did to the Russians. Oh, I forgot, they did that with the weapons and supplies WE gave them. We built Bin Laden and the Taliban to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. Now they're fighting us.

Palco,

I guess I didn't understand your statement below.

"There is a big difference in coming into office with a ten year projected surplus"

LOL, I figured that was going to be your answer. See, you and about 99% don't know what Wealthy/Rich is. Obama doesn't know. That's why Obama is going to raise the taxes on EVERYBODY. It's sad that the people that make under $49,999 will get hit the hardest by a 10% increase. Not my numbers my friend. They will see 15% go to 25%.

"What is Rich or Wealthy ? figure it out yourself."

I know this, besides me, you and everyone one that pays taxes, this country will go to hell when those taxes hit. Yet another promise broken by Obama. You can't blame the Wealthy. The Wealthy pays MOST of the taxes in this country anyway.

HankE,

I respect that answer, but I know if someone punched me in the face I would strike back 10X more. That's just me though. Kind of like that day in September 2001 you know. What ever it takes, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, it doesn't matter, punish them and kill them. That's just the military side in me...................

Paul-Florida

Currently middle class taxes are at the lowest rate in the last fifty years, in part because of the Stimulus tax cuts for the middle class, and the portion for the middle class in the Bush tax cuts. The administration is seeking to make permanent the middle class rate including in the Bush tax cuts, the only part of the Bush tax cuts that would be expired are the top 2%.

As Mr. Buffet said " you can tax me 20% more and I will still be a billionaire, we (the rich) can afford it, and it will not make a difference on how I invest, or how I will spend".

Well needed step to the left? HAHAHAHA!!! Do you even know what is going on? Eleana Kagen (a semi-lefty) is replacing Judge Stevens (a far lefty). If anything you moved more towards the center.

WOW...the lack of understanding people have about things like this is simply amazing.

The Supreme Court is still balanced 5-4 in favor of the right. Now it will be just a little closer on close issues.

I have to agree, unless we get a pinko commie liberal on the bench, this is still going to be the most radical right-wing activist court we've seen in a long time.

Justice Stevens might have been a member of the liberal side of the court, but he was by no means a far lefty - even taking out his early conservative opinions he would not be considered a far lefty. Perhaps it is you who has a lack of understanding about things like this. There is a lot of information about the Justices' voting record and how truly liberal they are. I suggest you take a look sometime.

Or a LONG Island Ice Tea's Bev! That covers all their bases! lol

Stay tuned for the Blago verdict... it's gonna be a doozy!

Enjoy your Starbucks! My daughter got me hooked!

Y'all listen to Jim. He speaks truth. They are ALL corrupt and none of us will be served well by them until we vote ALL of them out...repubs and dems. Then and only then will they realize who they are supposed to serve...we the people.

Kudos, Jim. Good post.

And when you vote them all out, who will run the country? The Tea Bag Party? Get real!

Vulcan,

You're joking right? TEA Party is not a political party, but I think you're joking though.

Paul-F,

Actually the Tea Baggers CONSIDER themselves a political party and even have their own candidates. But the truth of the matter is that they are a bought and paid for subsidiary of the Repub party, just the extreme far, FAR right of the Repubs. They have fooled a lot of Independents into thinking that it is a centrist party, but their entire platform is what even the old style Repubs would consider "The Lunatic Fringe" of the right. Sadly they have even less of a concept of how to govern than the presently-in-office Repubs, which is really saying something.

If "Lunatic Fringe" means adherence to Constitutional principles, then most Tea Party members and 9.12'ers fall into that category.

D Work,

Actually, if you listen to Sharron Angle and Rand Paul they are actually talking about removing entire sections of the Constitution. That does not sound to me much like 'adherence to Constitutional principles'.

B.Honest

I agree with you across the board. The tea baggers and the republican party are one in the same.

B.Honest,

Wasn't it the TEA Party that had the Republican from Utah lose his Primary? The TEA Party has a whole are not Right Wing. I know a Democrat in Florida that is part of the TEA Party. I've said this before, my Voters card says NPA. I can't vote in Florida's Primaries due to the fact I don't belong to R or D. If you compare D's and R's, they're all crooks. On side can't, won't pay their taxes, but yet write the tax laws. They call the Party of No blocking Bills they don't support, Obama gave them that name. I would vote NO too if you leave me out of the process in whats in the Bill. If I don't know what's in the Bill, any common sense person would vote NO if you don't know whats in it.

Good example is the Health Care Bill. It was crammed down our throats and 95% of the people have no clue whats in it. I don't know whats in it, do you?

I just want to know why these Bill are not on the WH website 5 days before the vote to read it? Didn't he promise that to the American people? Lie to me once, I'll forgive, Lie to me twice, I'll never forgive or trust you EVER. He's lied everytime he's opened his mouth.

@Jess: The only problem is that there's only Dems and Repubs to vote back in. So what if they're not incumbents? Same old same old.

"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

Undercover Repub, how about just a plain idiot? There's idiots on the R side and D side. The R side are Gay and the D side just don't pay their taxes.

Funny how politicans don't pay taxes, and why don't they ? Its not in the constitusion go figure if it works for them they use it, then forget about it , it's the unconsousness thats running everything everything is only half good or half bad if the system is working as it should I'd kill for that now, they are getting away with to much. I honestly do not see the destinction of the two parties any more but don't worry the way we treat the eco-system I say it's an even bet which will out last the other.

Nelson is a senator that Democrats are not use too. He smart and a Pro America Senator. Not a Socialist loving scum bag.

So Austin you're say that the court is reasonable now, but when Kagan is in it makes it more? Will I still get to keep my guns?

Will I still get to keep my guns?

Well, since (despite all the silly talking points), this administration isn't trying to take them away from you, and since the laws have become more permissable over the last few years (relaxing the regulations in the federal parks [which I have to say I disagree with], incorporating the 2nd Amendment in the Chicago decision, and so forth)... I don't think you have to worry.

Still spewing the GOBP stuff?

Nope ya Dope. It's ObamaBP.

Obama received more BP money in the last cycle than any politician in the last 20 years. Obama's Steve Chu was instrumental in University of California, Berkeley receiving a $500 million green dreams grant from BP. Berkeley gives Obama $1,591,395 in the last cycle. A real Win-Win-Win-Win. 1)Berkeley nets about $498.5 millon. 2) Chu gets Obama's Secretary of Energy gig (while being able to continue his science work - I didn't know Secretary of Energy was a part time job) 3) BP buys Obama protection? 4) Obama gets his biggest PAC contribution from Berkeley passing second place Goldman Sachs by $500 big ones.

BP's CEO before Hayward was Lord Browne, one of the world's foremost promoters of cap and trade, Obama's centerpiece energy legislation. BP has spent 20 millon since January 2009 (what happened then?) on energy legislation, energy jobs bills and derivatives legislation. Who's agenda does that sound like jo-mama and by the way - do ya think BP would spend 20 mil on the minority dopes to say nope to their/Obama's agenda?

Regarding BP's well that blew up, as you have heard before (and never refuted) the Oil Protection Act of 1990 gives Obama absolute authority to monitor BP, direct BP, or remove BP. Obama is responsible for everything BP has done and everything BP has failed to do. Obama refused the help of the world which would have contained and cleaned the spill. He left it to BP. Obama allowed BP to spray and pump almost 2,000,000 gallons of Corexit dispersant, a dispersant that is 4 times more toxic than crude oil and has been banned in the UK since 1998, into the gulf. Not only is the Corexit more harmful, its use reduces efficacious skimming. Instead of removing the oil, Obama allowed BP to disperse and effectively hide the oil. New reports and worries came out today.

In short, there is no reason for the disaster to be what it was/is. Despite the charade, Obama wantonly allowed it by catering to the unions and BP.

Thanks for bringing the GOBP thing up again and providing the opportunity to clarify the gulf disaster responsibility.

I eagerly await your typical intelligent, articulate ("tea bagger", "Beckerhead", "puss gut", "STFU", "DF") retort.

The individuals charged with the responsibility of ensuring the safety of the oil rigs did not do their job. When placing blame, look at everything. From the beginning to the end. This oversight agency should be brought up on charges. Bribes, gifts, etc. You name it, they took it.

Do you dispute this fact?

JBurns,

With regard to the explosion, you are absolutely correct and I do not dispute that fact. I think criminal charges should be brought if warranted by a thorough investigation.

In all fairness, although the event happened well into this administration's term, it could have just as easily happened under the previous administration, or any other for that matter. I don't place particular blame on Obama for the actual event.

The above takes great exception not for the event, but for the containment and clean up of the spill. The world knows how to handle these spills and they have the high tech skimmers and experienced crews. They offered and Obama left it to BP and its use of a fleet of makeshift shrimp boat and barge skimmers.

The media can largely ignore the fact that very little if any oil should have reached the beaches and marshlands, but Obama's willful mishandling of the containment/cleanup is not disputable.

Thanks for your comments JBurns.

What can Obama, a lawyer by training, be expected to know about cleaning up after an unprecedented oil spill?

Of course we can still blame Obama because, after all, it happened on his watch -- just as 9/11 and the collapse of the economy took place on Bush's.

But that gets us nowhere. It's BP's responsibility. They took the short cuts that led to this disaster, when they knew they were taking a risk for greater profits. If you want to blame someone in the government, Minerals Management Services (who are supposed to oversee the enforcement of safety regulations on offshore oil rigs) were being open supplied with cocaine and whores by the oil industry during a 2008 scandal. (Easily Googled.)

If you want the blame to go higher up in this administration, you can nail Ken Salazar, Sec. of Interior, whose job it was to clean out that nest of rats at MMS and who failed to do it.

Obama can't fix everything himself and has to delegate responsibility. Or did you expect Obama to don a wet suit and dive a mile underwater and fix the leak with a monkey wrench?

Robert Maxwell,

As I have stated, my complaint takes exception with Obama's handling of the spill containment and clean up, not the explosion and the reason for the spill.

The world knows how to handle - to contain and clean up oil spills.

One example is the Dutch. The Dutch government has their own fleet of high tech skimmers and experienced crews capable of removing more oil in 2 days than BP has removed in 100+ days. The Dutch government offered this help within 3 days of the event at no charge despite BP's financial liability to reimburse. Obama said no thanks. The Dutch alone could have handled the spill.

Norway offered 1/3 of all their resources. The French offered a fleet of Ecoceane skimmers. In total at least 30 countries offered various forms of assistance. ExxonMobile even offered the Nanuq, a super skimmer sitting idly in Alaska. On and on.

Yet, Obama picks BP over the rest of the world. BP, a company he wouldn't even talk to.

And this doesn't even begin to address the insanity of Obama allowing BP to use dispersants, the huge role of Obama's EPA in the disaster, the Jones Act, on and on.

The Dutch allow a company 12 hours to demonstrate and convince the Dutch government they are capable of handling the event. If not, the Dutch take over. The Oil Protection Act of 1990 allows Obama to do just that. It is his responsibility by law. Obama even said he was the one responsible in a national address.

Yet he left to BP, a company with 760 safety violations over the past 5 years, a company Obama sent his own Attorney General to personally investigate probable negligence which caused the deaths of 11 Americans, a company that Obama has said lies, a company that for months, nothing they had tried worked the way it said it would, a company that Obama does not even the confidence in to talk to.

And Obama picked BP over every other entity, or combination of entities in the world?

It doesn't take a Harvard lawyer with no executive experience to figure this out.

Thanks for your comments Robert.

That's a sensible enough reply. The EPA has nothing to do with what happened on an offshore oil rig, although it has some responsibility for what's happening on shore right now. The Jones Act governs the transportation of goods from one American coastal port to another and is irrelevant. (I don't know who first brought up the Jones Act but evidently all they knew about it was the name.)

My understanding is that there is a big difference between thick crude oil confined to a space like the Persian Gulf, where it can be easily skimmed, and a vast and turbulent region like the Gulf of Mexico. A lot of skimmers are designed for operation in confined waters. But I don't know if that applies here.

You seem to be suggesting that Obama turned down offers from "every other entity or combination of entities in the world."

Why would he do that? Out of ignorance? Is there some political reason behind his decision? Has he handed the job over to BP knowing they can't do it because he, Obama, doesn't WANT it done? Isn't there anybody in a position to advise him that, "Listen, the Dutch have this whole fleet....?" Did he decide to reject all these offers out of national pride -- or malice? Does he have some deep-seated hatred for Gulf shrimp fishermen?

You can see the problem. Even if your claims are true, and maybe they are, how can we explain such a stupid move on Obama's part when, as you say, it's so simple that it doesn't take a Harvard lawyer to figure out the answer.

Robert,

Actually the EPA is central. Consider the following:

As of July 30, the combined effort has collected 34.7 million gallons of oily water (from the official site and their word usage).

The purpose of the previous statement is to point out that the efforts of BP/Deepwater Horizon Unified Command have been the collection of oily water. Oily water is the operative phrase. They are skimming oily water (water and oil) and transporting it to storage for later processing. The EPA requires that any water put back into the gulf cannot contain more than 15 parts per million of oil.

The modern high tech skimmers take in incredible amounts of oily water (each Dutch skimmer takes in 400 metric tons of oily water per hour) processes the oil out of the water and releases the the water back into the original body of water. But since the water being returned to the gulf is not 99.99985% pure of oil - they are considered by the EPA to be polluting and thus were refused approval.

Insane? When considering that Commander Thadd Allen has said that the oil yield out of oily water is 10%-15% (in other words, 85%-90% of the efforts amount to nothing more than collecting, transporting and storing gulf water) and considering the amount of oil not collected that landed on beaches and in marshlands, the Dutch and the rest of the world seem to be at the least, amazed. When you consider that the BP has been allowed to pump and spray almost 2 million gallons Corexit dispersant (Corexit 9527 is basically automotive antifreeze and Corexit 9500 is basically paint thinner) materials that are banned in the UK, are 4 times more toxic than crude oil and bioaccumulate, the consensus is that it is insane.

Regarding the Persian Gulf, the Dutch, Norway and Sweden developed skimming fleets not to handle spills in the Persian Gulf, but in the North Sea, an area much more turbulent and difficult than the Gulf of Mexico, or Persian Gulf.

An additional comment on skimming efficacy: Dispersant is not only toxic, it does not remove oil, it breaks up the oil and hides the oil in plumes below the surface. It destroys the efficacy of skimming, the best way to remove the oil.

Why would Obama do this? Out of ignorance? The one thing I am absolutely sure of, Obama is not ignorant.

Is there some political reason? Everything seems to be a political calculation for Obama. Why would a Harvard attorney with an environmental agenda, with no executive experience (Obama) place a Harvard attorney, with no executive experience (whose main accomplishment was as the Editor in Chief of the Harvard Law EnvironmentalReview) in charge of the MMS (Birnhaun) and replace her with another Harvardattorney with no executive experience (Bromwich) BTW - Harvard donated $854,747in the last election cycle to Obama. Why did he put Steven Chu, a scientist and environmentalist, in charge of overseeing BP cap efforts. Chu is one of the most brilliant physicist and foremost authorities on trapping atoms with lasers and gravitational redshift dynamics, but he is again a physicist not an engineer, or biologist who knows less about a BOP than the average rig worker and less about marshlands than a shrimp boat captain. BTW - recall that Chu was formerly with UC Berkeley that donated $1,591,395in the last election cycle to Obama. Why did Obama pick a commission to study the cause of the Deepwater Horizon explosion that is comprised almost entirely (exception being a former Democrat Senator) of environmentalists/academics and not one engineer? BTW-Murray is a HarvardDean; others - Boesch, Garcia, Beinecke, Ulmer and a Republican former head of the EPA.

Salazar ordered a report from a committee comprised of National Academy of Engineering selectees for the recommendation of the moratorium. Salazar altered their report and misrepresented the opinion of the experts. When they came forward to state they were against shutting down wells because it posed a greater risk to life and the environment than leaving them in operation, Obama quit referencing them and nevertheless ordered the moratorium. The moratorium has been blocked twice by the courts. But due to pressure from the administration and uncertainty, combined with incredible operational costs (example - rental on the Deepwater Horizon rig was $496,800 per day) new offshore drilling industry is collapsing. This also includes shallow drilling which Obama expressly denied would not be effected. (The permitting and approval requirements have been changed since the Horizon explosion and no one seems to be able to meet the new changed requirements.) Salazar has also begun greatly effecting land production, especially in Utah and Colorado.

Many feel this is obviously a creative distruction of the energy infrastructure. Basically a back door alternative to his cap and trade agenda goals which the American public is strongly opposed to and has no present chance of passage.

Robert, 90%+ of everything I have written comes from RCP, NRO, links from those sites/articles and Wikipedia. It serves no purpose to misrepresent the facts.

You can see the problem. Even if your claims are true, and maybe they are, how can we explain such a stupid move on Obama's part when, as you say, it's so simple that it doesn't take a Harvard lawyer to figure out the answer.

I cannot factually state an answer to that. On the one hand, it is not important. It doesn't matter why he did it, the fact is he did it.

On the other hand, it is all important. Who Obama really is and what his real agenda for America is more important than his handling of the gulf.

As Commander in Chief, Obama (as well as Bush and all presidents during a time of war) makes tough decisions and in effect sacrifices American service members lives for America (the greater good in a way).

If Obama is a true statist that believes absolutely in the power of the state, his agenda and that his agenda represents a greater good, why would he not make tough decisions and sacrifice .....for the greater good?

It's happened before. Just a thought.

Thanks for your comments Robert. I enjoyed the exchange.

The problem is that Kagan is not particularly liberal except by the standards of Rush and Glenn. What you mean is probably that Republicans will not vote for anybody appointed by Obama -- and for good reason. Their success depends upon his failure.

I thought the judges rule based on the law and the constitution? There is no question that the current justices overstepped their boundaries when they ruled on campaign finance reform law to limit corporate influence.

It is obvious that the republicans will not vote favorably for Ms. Kagan because she won't cow tow to the republican agenda. It is also obvious that the republican agenda is to just say NO to anything going on.

Who in hell are they kidding?

Yup, already sent the weasel an email to let him know that voting down everything that is proposed to help this economy and jobs, isn't going to do him any good. He may be backed by the voters in Nebraska but there are a lot more of us than there is of them. We won't forget the members of the Party of No come November.

bopdaddytoo,

Hmmmmmmmmm..............I didn't know I was a Republican. My voting card says NPA. In Florida that's what we have if you don't belong to a political party, so there's one fact that you're wrong on. If I'm not mistaken, Bush and Obama believed in the stimulus plan, making them both IDIOTS.

As for the Wars, I fought in one of them twice, so if you want to talk about that, lets do it. You don't know what you're talking about with the oil. Post your source and not from a Left Wing site. I remember in 2005/2006 there was a gas shortage in Iraq and was getting fuel from Kuwait. Did you know this? Thinking NO......

One more thing, Explain that jibberish below??? I was in Iraq last year, I didn't see it, did you? Turned up the Heat!!!!!! WTF!!!!! With the ROE he placed is chicken S**T!!! Do you know what the ROE is?

"other a bungled mess that has had little success until Obama turned up the heat on the militants and killed so many number threes that they are having a real problem getting men to take on that position"