I suppose this will make me sound naive, but I wonder how people spreading the lies or failing to stop the spread can sleep at night? Senator McConnell knows full well that President Obama is a Christian and was born in Hawaii and yet he says "I take him at his word". I wouldn't have thought it took that much political courage to simply say--"I have lots of differences with the President but I don't question his faith or his love for our country." A lie repeated enough becomes the truth to many.

Hi Ron, very thoughtful post.

Good morning Steeler Fan: You are absolutely right. It was a softball question. McConnell could have handled it with grace and dignity. But he chose to not give an inch on a simple question. That is a snapshot of how bipartisan Washington is right now.

Tax Cuts and Spend Anyway, GOP.

McConnell and his fellow republicans cannot answer the question--how do they plan to pay for extending the Bush tax cuts, especially for the wealthiest 2% of the population. Why should they be able to answer--they did NOT pay for them the first time. Regardless of party affiliation, think about it. Did anyone hear republicans speak of fiscal responsibility from 2001 through 2006? Every piece of legislation they passed was UNFUNDED. The GOP make NO effort to fund two wars, they added it to their children and grandchildren's credit card.

Why did they pass an UNFUNDED Rx plan for medicare? The answer is simple: eliminating medicare and social security are high on their priority list despite the denials. Their unfunded mandate shortened the life of medicare by creating massive new spending without paying for that spending.

The GOP's "conservative" values did not re-surface until Jan 20, 2009, when the nation was in a collapsed economy most of it caused by their UNFUNDED, UNSUSTAINABLE policies. Pay attention voters. The republicans cannot reduce the debt and extend the tax cuts at the same time.

Either Americans want debt reduction or they want tax cuts. Both is not an option.

Ron, as per usual, you hit it out of the ball park!

Jody,

Just two weeks after Reps. John Boehner (R-OH) and Mike Pence (R-IN) could not say how the extension of the Bush tax cuts would be paid for ….

Mitch McConnell yesterday on MTP talking about extending the tax cuts: “Why did it all of a sudden become something that we, quote, ‘pay for’?”

This attitude is exactly why our debt is $1.4 trillion higher. The tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 did not “pay for them selves” and they clearly did not create any jobs.

Extending these tax cuts will add another $3.2 trillion to our debt over the next 10 years. The party that warns us about our mounting debt every day now wants to increase it by a whopping 25%.

Ron - Well said, as usual, but I think you answered your own question - "Why would anyone with integrity choose to lie"?

They don't - it's the ones with no integrity who make that choice.

Steeler Fan - These lies and the traction they keep gaining keeps ME from sleeping at night. If you're naive, I guess that makes two of us.

Jody: Good to see you this morning. Putting the GOP tax issue on the table is right on.

JoAnne: I think you said it better than I. If you have no integrity; it's easy to lie.

Last week I was involved in some back and forth over the claim that 350,000 jobs will be lost to the deep water drilling moratorium. The number sounded excessive even though its being used very commonly so I decided to do some research on the subject. It turns out that 79 rigs will be affected by the moratorium http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/11/eveningnews/main6573602.shtml . Do those rigs really have 4,430 workers each? Of course not, if Deepwater Horizon is anywhere close to average the number is more like 120 http://askville.amazon.com/people-died-deepwater-horizon-oil-rig-explosion/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=68068865 . So thats more like 9,480 jobs impacted during the moratorium. Ah, but there are support personnel as well I was told, echoing a point that Ive heard in the punditocracy. So that ends it, right?

Does it? A little quick math tells us that would mean each job on the rig supports 37 jobs off the rig. We know theres a multiplier effect for all economic activity, but does 37:1 REALLY seem like a plausible number? What if I came here and claimed that every time a company moves 100 jobs overseas 3700 other families lost their livelihoods? Would you believe me if I claimed that rescuing GM and Chrysler saved 18 MILLION jobs? How about if I told you that unemployment benefits for 7.3 million people prevents 270 million OTHER people from being unemployed?

Those would be ridiculous claims, so out of line that even other Liberals wouldnt support me. So what Im asking here is to THINK a little before just repeating something that someone you agree with said. There are a lot of outlandish claims being made. They may make great politics but they make lousy policy. Thats no way to run a country and people who say such things really dont deserve our ear, or any credibility.

Ron - KNOCK OUT!

"I have lots of differences with the President but I don't question his faith or his love for our country

Steeler Fan - Oh so true - as much as I despise McNasty at least he had the COURAGE to stand up to the craaazzee lady in the red shirt who called President Obama a Muslim...

Can't anyone else out there see what the right wing nuts are up to? Do they REALLY think this is politically advantageous for them?

Courage & conviction is sorely lacking in the party of NO... easier for them to keep playing the fear & deceit card... after all they have a 'captive' audience with the stuck on stupid crowd!

Ron Indiana

Another example is the evangelical minister, Rev Franklin Graham, son of Reverend Billy Graham. He said that President Obama’s problem is that he was born a Muslim and somehow carries the seed of Islam. Well, in one sense, it is an opinion, but in another sense it is getting close to being a lie.

i saw that interview on CNN last week, but what Franklin forgot to mention is that both is parents were atheist. i have never heard such religious racism from a minister ever before. Now i said religious racism. Ron the next interview was from Former president Bush's spiritual adviser, who is president Obama adviser. the guy(forgot His Name) married One of Bush's daughters. he could not believe that people like Franklin graham and others trying to question his religion. again religiousracism. there are many black that belong to grahams church, so again to me this is religious racism.

I also say the interview with the cleric and minister, the minister does not want a mosque across the street from his church, Now if that were a baptist or Lutheran, or catholic church this guy would not care, but because its a mosque there is a problem. Religious racism.

GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell gave what appeared to be a similar answer when NBC’s David Gregory asked why 34% of Republicans, according to that recent Pew poll, believe the president is a Muslim. McConnell’s response: “The president says he's a Christian; I take him at his word. I don't think that's in dispute.”

this guy is a cowardly bast**d. this guy could not give a answer about the extending of the bush tax cuts.

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

This attitude is exactly why our debt is $1.4 trillion higher. The tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 did not “pay for them selves” and they clearly did not create any jobs

It's amazing that the Libtards are all up in arms about a tax cut that "cost" $1.4 trillion dollars, over ten years, but are absolutely silent when Obama adds that much, and more, to the national debt with his deficit each YEAR, and lost 4 million jobs! What attitude is that projecting Libs?

You are right, Jody, on the tax cuts issue. Senator McConnell had 2 weeks to come up with some answer to how the cuts would be paid for--and the best he could come up with was a rambling non-reply. The point is that 10 years ago the Republicans took the Clinton surplus & gave it back in tax cuts, citing their "trickle down" theory. We never got a chance to see if it would in fact trickle down as the events of 9/11 and the aftermath of 2 wars overtook the economy but were never accounted for. And then the economy crashed. So it is a completely different landscape today. And yet they speak of fiscal responsibility while wanting to keep the tax cuts permanent.

JoAnnaSmith1

It's amazing that the Libtards are all up in arms about a tax cut that "cost" $1.4 trillion dollars, over ten years, but are absolutely silent when Obama adds that much, and more, to the national debt with his deficit each YEAR, and lost 4 million jobs! What attitude is that projecting Libs?

First of all, those who know me Joanna Knows that the use of retard in any way offends me worse than to be called a Ni**er. My brother is a libtrad. he is mentally retarded and voted democratic. you show everybody here that your are nothing but trash to use a term like that making fun of a group of people who had were born with something that will make there lives different, something you i see take for granted. so if you want any body here to show you any respect don't ever use that term again. show us you have SOME upbringing!!!!!

Now thats over with, the one who is mentally challenged are you, liberals are not the only ones who are up in arms about the 1.4 trillion in tax cuts, its economist all over the country that are saying, those tax cuts were the dumbest thing to ever do considering we were in 2 wars. those tax cuts as they were structured were never going to cause any sustained growth, and the recession we are in right now shows that they know alot more about economics than you do Joanna.

so as i asked you last week, please offer real thoughts and not talking points.

Have a nice day.

I'm mad to day because the Chicago white sox have fallen 5 games out and this weekend lost 2 of 3 to the kansas city royles.

JoAnna,

Here is the breakdown of the FY2010 deficit (dollars in trillions) per the CBO.

$0.15 - The 2 wars (Bush)

$0.45 - 2 tax cuts (Bush)

$0.50 - The Recession started in 07 (Bush)

$0.30 - Stimulus (Obama)

$1.40 – TOTAL

Bush = $1.1 trillion and Obama = $0.3 trillion

Hey, Ron? try these facts:

there are still 50,000 troops in Iraq. They are, in fact, combat troops, but they are not called combat troops. You could call a chicken cutlet filet mignon-it would remain a chicken cutlet.

500,000 new claims for unemployment reported last week-hidden under the idiocy of 18% of people who think Obama is a muslim. So What. (by the way, your twisting Grahams words belies your supposed ardent desire for truth. Graham was stating a fact-that in the Muslim faith, the 'seed' is carried through the father, as in the Jewish faith the 'seed' is carried through the mother. All that means is that if it is not passed through one or the other parent, a person must convert to belong to the faith. No more, no less)

600,000 new jobs WERE NOT created by the stimulous last summer---this supposed summer of recovery is also a bust.

HCR is more unpopular than when it was passed-once again, the White House was wrong. See,when people found out what was in the bill,they liked it less,not more. Here in my state, the Star Ledger reported this morning that the new program (NJProtect), mandated by the government to insure those with pre-existing conditions has garnered exactly TWO enrollees. Two. Must have been some crying need out there for this $141million federal dollar program.

How about the fact that Iran has gone live with its first nuclear reactor, and an unmanned drone capable of carrying a missile into Israel. Not interesting to you?

Or the fact that the Democrats STILL have not crafted a budget. This fiscal year ends September 30. What, pray tell, are they waiting for? My 'opinion' is the mid-term election-as in, they know anything they craft will be unpopular, so they decided to wait until after the damage is done.

How about the fact that Obama CONTINUES to lie about the Citizens United decision-it did not open the door to foreign contributions. No matter what he says,or how many times he says it, IT IS STILL A LIE.

I could go on, but it is depressing-not to mention, absolutely nothing will change your mind about your chosen messiah. You want to look at the facts-please do so. If you really wanted to see the facts, you would admit that the man is a disaster as president.

Doesn't really matter what your 'opinion' is,though-the majority of the electorate see the facts, and they will be voting to begin to undo most of what Obama has inflicted on this country soon. That fact is really going to depress you.

Terrific post, Ron. I was disappointed in Franklin Graham's comment; he is NOT the man his father is.

Pres Bush and his fellow republicans doubled the national debt adding $1.4 trillion to the debt with the tax cuts alone, left the economy in shambles, lost millions of jobs from Dec 2007 through 2008. Defending that is a new low for a republican. It was fine to add $1.4 trillion to the debt while fighting two wars, for unfunding everything they passed. If I were still a republican, I would be ashamed to make a statement saying it was only a $1.4 trillion tax cut debt over 10 years.

You can't have it both ways JoAnna

We've spoken about this before. If the tax cuts don't expire that would add to the deficit.

You were against providing unemployment insurance, against the jobs bill and against funding for the 911 responders. Those bills were 28 billion, 30 billion and 7 billion respectively. The tax cuts would add hundreds of billions of dollars a year, they are not sustainable.

The deficit has increased under Obama's watch because he has put the Iraq and Afganistan confilicts on the books. He had to swallow the deficit created by the Bush tax cuts. He reacted to the huge recession crisis by passing the stimulus bill, pulling the GDP up for the last three quarters, job losses have dropped. If the big banks started lending again, using the plan Bush authorized and Obama has shepered companies could start hiring more. Why aren't they hiring? Don't say they are uncertain about upcoming taxes. They as well as republicans are just waiting to see the economy falter more for their own political benefit. That is pretty sad.

I really hope this partisan bickering doesn't push the country past a tipping point where we can't regain our economic footing. Its time to actually work to fix these problems, Don't you think?

Lets talk again when the debt commission comes back and you can explain why we can't cut taxes, can't afford social programs but need to increase defense spending.

Jeff - Cool your jets. Everyday we see the likes of your type calling people on the right the derogatory term "tea-baggers". You don't ever seem too upset with that distinction. If you think otherwise, then say so, but I doubt you much care.

This weekend I got into an argument online with a self described "Independent" over letting the tax cuts expire. This guy was convinced it was a ploy by Democrats to win the votes of the little people. That was his big argument, not that letting the wealthiest get wealthier would somehow generate jobs for the rest of us, or anything else one might actually debate, nope. He didn't want to hear about the impact on the deficit. He's convinced its a political vote to bolster the Democrats' image as protecting the little guy. And he hates Obama. THat's it. It's like these people live in a parallel universe. Where does this come from?

JoAnnaSmith1

Jeff - Cool your jets. Everyday we see the likes of your type calling people on the right the derogatory term "tea-baggers". You don't ever seem too upset with that distinction. If you think otherwise, then say so, but I doubt you much care.

Joanna go to church and ask god to forgive you, you have just compaired the term tea bagger to libtard. the media gave us tea bagger, the media has and would not ever say libtrad. you know sarah palin would be offended by what you have said. her son is retarded.

So your telling me its ok to offend the mentally handicap?

joanna go to church and ask for forgiveness!!!!

if igronance were bless, you would be a saint.

Yellowdog-Mark D

You can't have it both ways JoAnna

We've spoken about this before. If the tax cuts don't expire that would add to the deficit.

Frankly YD, I don't see many Democrats caring much about the deficit. Not too many Republicans cared about either for the last 10 years either, but now there is a new-breed coming along that may be getting that message.

As far as the programs you listed, unemployment insurance, aid to state governments and first responders: are there no other programs that could have been cut to fund those programs? Well, I guess there was one, Food Stamps, that would be "cut" in 2014.

The money added to the debt by Bush was about $5 trillion in 8 years. Obama has added about $3.5 trillion in less then 20 months, including a record $165 billion for July. There is no amount of tax cuts expiring that will fund that amount of government spending. It won't even make a dent in it.

Jeff, you're a typical liberal. You can offend others all day long without consequence, but when you are offended, the world must stop while you rant out your argument. Time to man-up Jeff.

Never mind, Jeff. JoAnna's snarky comeback simply means that she knows you are right. And it always bothers her to be reminded of how ignorant she really is.

JoAnnaSmith1

The money added to the debt by Bush was about $5 trillion in 8 years. Obama has added about $3.5 trillion in less then 20 months, including a record $165 billion for July. There is no amount of tax cuts expiring that will fund that amount of government spending. It won't even make a dent in it.

Joanna so on the CBO web site, the 5 trillion you mentioned does not include the perscription drug program, that alone will add 6 trillion on the defiect over the next 10 years. again unfunded mandates from the Bush years are killing us. the projection to the Obama defictes are projected if he does not do any thing about them, if he lets the tax cuts for people making under 250k expire, his deficet projections will go down because of the added renevue. Bush's defiects are projections to the defiects are a total of 11 trillion and that does not include the tax cuts if they don't exprie, unless Obama figures out a way to pay for it, Bush's defiects will go up.

Bush left too many Unpaid Bills that are now falling on Obama.

JoAnnaSmith1

Jeff, you're a typical liberal. You can offend others all day long without consequence, but when you are offended, the world must stop while you rant out your argument. Time to man-up Jeff.

No Jo, you as a former teacher, Can you believe JoAnna Smith1 is making a case for making fun and or calling out a group of people who, for not there fault are different. a handi cap person esspecially one who is mentally retarded. Joanna, i can see you have never had a reletive or friend who was mentally retarded. i can see in your last post that to you this is something that should be made fun of, something that you take for granted. my mother has a hard time carring my brother and when he was born they told my father they would try and save my mother as well as my brother. this is something that not funny or should be used in politics!!!!!!!

but to you joanna you can't offer any thing of really important but talking points, No links to web sites to substandtate your clams. all you do is call our retarded people, Joanna I'm sorry for your fellow republicans, because they have you!!!!!!

Bush left too many Unpaid Bills that are now falling on Obama.

Back to the "Blame Bush" attacks.

Obama has done nothing but add to the size of the government, both in control and physical employees hired on. Obama has deficit spent nearly a trillion on his so called "Stimulus" plan which has done nothing but bail out federal and state government jobs and not been the job creating engine he claimed. If the "Bush tax cuts" were to toxic, he and his very liberal Congress could have raised taxes in January 2009. Obama's budget projects deficits for as far as the eye can see as seen in the following charts:

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

And every President "inherits" something from previous administrations. If Obama doesn't like what Bush did, he's free to change it, he has the votes in Congress. Just like I told you Jeff, and I'll do the same for Obama - time to man-up.

I'll call you one, JoAnna. It's easy to listen to years of extreme right-wing antics and label them as nut cases.

You see.. "Teabaggers" just fit SO WELL

SO PERFECTLY

Good post, Ron

I find it easy to believe that Obama is a Christian, exactly as he said, but I also think it's a very complicated set of beliefs that he carries around with him. He knows and understands Islam in ways many of us never will; his father was a muslim and he had early exposure to the teachings of the Quran. He might also be much closer to the faith in the streets of Chicago, where the Muslim religion is taken very seriously.

I believe that Obama has been confronted by the issues for a long time, now, but his faith has been a choice that he made a long time ago.

Obama's claim is true, as is he. But he also is hyper-aware of the Muslims in America and that is really a good thing for all of us.

JoAnnaSmith1

i read your link from the FOUNDRY. It Promotes consertive policies & prinsiples.

every thing they said is for ther most part true. but what is missing is how bush spent the surplus, gave tax cuts that have us in this mess that caused government to expand, causing Obama to add to the defiects. Obama did not add to the defiects because he wanted to, he did it to try and restart to economy that Bush tapped dry.

President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008.

If the war was off the books then why did Bush expand the federal bugets by a historic 700 billion through 2008. according to your link this is what he did, but why!!!!!! did he give it to the iraq government, god knows he gave then 4400 american lives.

"But according to the polls and the political momentum in tomorrow’s primaries in Alaska, Arizona, and Florida, the insiders appear be staging a comeback."

Perhaps the premise is wrong. It's not an anti-incumbent wave, but an anti- DEMOCRATIC incumbent wave.

First Read doesn't want to admit that it's the Democrats that are at risk, so they've tried to paint it as a vote against ALL incumbents.

The "spin" never stops. If they reported the truth, they'd have a lot more credibility.

Jeff-1541632

JoAnnaSmith1

i read your link from the FOUNDRY. It Promotes consertive policies & prinsiples.

So? Others here have liberal links to places like media matters and you don't say a word about that.

Jeff, just what is the problem? First you attack me for you taking a representation of liberals as a personal affront to you. Then you say I don't post links, and when I do, you complain that you don't like the point of view of the links.

It may be time for you step away for a bit and collect yourself.

Steeler Fan-380417 ' I wouldn't have thought it took that much political courage to simply say--"I have lots of differences with the President but I don't question his faith or his love for our country." '

It also wouldn't take much political courage for Obama to say "I have a lot of differences with the Republicans, but I don't question their love for the country and their desire to do what's best for America".

I won't hold my breath.

Summary of the arguments:

Democrats say, "Republicans, it is all your fault!" or "Democrats may not have made all the right choices, but you guys are worse!"

Republicans say, "Democrats, it is all your fault!" or "Republicans may not have made all the right choices, but you guys are worse!"

Reality says, "Politicians of BOTH political parties are at fault."

Finger-pointing and blame-shifting do nothing for progress. That's all I ever see on this board. "But, but, but...YOUR party did this!" So juvenile and mind-numbing.

Just because Bush made serious screw-ups, it doesn't give Obama a pass to make similar screw-ups. And nobody talks about how Obama doesn't worry about how stimulus funds are going to be paid for, except to say that it was necessary to stimulate the economy. Well that same argument exists for the continuation of the tax cuts, regardless of your view on the issue. You guys sit on here and talk about raising taxes as the only means to reduce the deficit, but no one ever talks about cutting spending. It's very interesting.

Since 75% of the tax cuts went to the middle class, let's see the Democrats rescind them.

It's interesting that in the 3 years prior to the Bush tax cuts, Federal revenues increased only about 6%, but in the 3 years AFTER the tax cuts, Federal revenues increased by about 44% (even with the lower tax rates).

What people overlook is that those tax cuts stimulated the economy so much that actual net tax revenues increased dramatically after the tax cuts.

So how do we pay for a continuation of the tax cuts? They more than pay for themselves, something that "tax & spend" liberals refuse to acknowlege.

Well, it's clear that Joannasmith1 is a clone and not quite bright.

Calling someone a "tea-bagger" is a reference to a choice they have made. They have joined a political movement and have expressed their desire to emulate the pseudo-native americans who perpetrated the "Boston Tea Party". They somehow relate this act of vandalism and destruction of private property (hallmarks of the GOP) to patriotism. Ya gotta love 'em. To refer to them as a "tea bagger" is just a harmless play on words reflecting our disdain for a group who somehow equate the above-noted thuggery as something to be emulated.

Calling someone a "libtard" however is much much different and I'm assuming it's because poor Joannasmith1 has been cloned, the difference escapes her (uh..him..it..whatever). "Lib" short for liberal, of course reflects a political position and is fair game, just as the tea party word play is fair game. However, the "tard" is intentionally short for "retard" which is a comment on the mental state of all liberals. It is also a perjorative term used to characterize the developmentally challenged. These unfortunate individuals have publicly objected to the term because it diminishes them in the same way calling someone the "N" word.

The use of "bagger" is not the same at all. Unless, of course, you are claiming some form of mental disability by your association with the Tea Party movement, then you may have a case.

I know some of you think "libtard" is a clever usage of two words, but it is offensive to those Americans with physical and developmental handicaps.

So, as usual, joannaclone1 and her "bagger buddies" make our points for us. They demonstrate that they are, indeed, uncaring and lack the humanity to understand the offense they are giving to a large group of people who are already fighting an uphill battle in life. If they had their way all the "tards" lib or otherwise would be unfunded, uncared for, unrespected and left on a mountain top at birth.

Joannaclone1, did it ever occur to you that Sarah Palin's new son is developmentally handicapped?

No, probably not.

But here's what I really want to know....Joannaclone1...what DID you do with Joanna?

MSNBC..don't you have a no clone policy? Maybe you should think about adopting one, huh?

JoAnna

Jeff, just what is the problem? First you attack me for you taking a representation of liberals as a personal affront to you. Then you say I don't post links, and when I do, you complain that you don't like the point of view of the links.

I attack you for calling Liberals Libtards. that shows you have no compassion for people less fortunate than you. people who have to be taken care of the whole lives. i read your post with a open mind, but because i have a open mind i had to ask why did Bush expand the federal budgets 700 billion, when he had the cost for the wars off the books ?

WHEWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeez, I had to pinch myself. As I was reading these posts I thought I was in the "War Room" at the White House or even more frighteningly reading the Huff-N-Puff Post. You Liberal Progressives are hilarious in your self-adoring patting of each other on the back and your self proclaimed brilliant posts as the economy continues to teeter on the brink of deeper collapse. You'd think all the problems of the universe were being solved right here, right now.

The endless and mindless barrage of blaming and finger-pointing by the Liberal Progressives is entertaining as much as it is ridiculous. The statute of limitations on blaming Bush, the last 8 years and what has been inherited are long past. It's time for Barrack to take off his mom jeans and slap on a pair of real mans pants and start doing something productive. Contrary to your obvious love-fest with Barrack's failing foreign and domestic economic policies the truth remains as of his signing the useless and tragic excuse of a $TIMULU$, this is now his economy. His masive expansion of government size, regulation and incompetence is even being derided by our allies. To have a super-majority under his control, the results of the Health Care Redistribution of Wealth and the Financial Deform legislation are proving to be abject failures and they will create even more economic chaos as more and more of its content is exposed.

Liberal Progressive adoration of the senseless Keynesian's such as Bernanke and Krugman is an insult to the greatest economy in history. As evidenced by the developing head-and-shoulders (2000 is left shoulder, 2007 is the head, 2010 is the right shoulder) stock market with a 61% retracement rally we are following exactly in the preceding footsteps of the Depression. As the pundits profess personal frugality and debt reduction our illustrious POTUS continues on course for the greatest debt accumulation in history.

Here, as I see on the Newsvine and the Huffington Post, the incompetence of the Barrack administration, with its 9% of Cabinet members with any experience in commerce creation, continues to exalt the promise for hope and change. The crime is that China, Great Britain and the G-20 have scoffed the Barrack policies and yet he persists in his quest for historic legacy. His own legacy. The steps of this administration are simple to see, the Bush Tax Cuts will be allowed to expire, with caveats, and in their place will be added a VAT as will be proposed by Barrack's own Debt and Deficit Commission. Yet the spending cuts necessary will never happen under this dysfunctional administration which is hell bent on more and more expansion of authoritarian government (I dare not use the colloquial term "socialist" for fear of being labelled a xenophobic Capitalist).

With that said I'll leave you to your Liberal Progressive Love-In and go to a more constructive sight where actual solutions are being discussed such as rebuilding our domestic export manufacturing industries, tax reformation and union restraint. Policies Liberal Progressives can never embrace as it would require understanding free-market policies supported by fiscal responsibility.

Good morning, Ron ~ The total irony for me in the selling of President Obama as a Muslim is that it completely ignores President Obama's many years as a member of Reverend Wright's CHRISTIAN church, and runs completely counter to all of the rants from those same people about how Wright had influenced him.

Doggone it, make up your minds, will you? And where ARE the Chihuahuas, anyway?

But, I've heard somewhere that foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, so I guess Limbaugh and his ilk have just decided to leave that to us little-minded liberals.

I accept.

JoAnnaSmith1

Jeff - Cool your jets. Everyday we see the likes of your type calling people on the right the derogatory term "tea-baggers". You don't ever seem too upset with that distinction. If you think otherwise, then say so, but I doubt you much care.

Well, JoAnna, I care.

I care very much that adults can't speak to each other in a civil manner.

I care that too many no longer treat others as they wish to be treated.

I care that our children watch and read all of this and are influenced by bad behavior. (Bad behavior by everyone, not just you.)

I care that disrepect is now considered acceptable.

I rarely post on this site, and many others, because of this. If you want to discuss the ISSUES I'm all for joining in. But it's nearly impossible to find a place that isn't filled with outright disrespect.

That is the easiest question to answer. The started cutting the budget. First we start with the Health Care Act which was supposed to save money but now we find out from the CBO that it will actually add huge sums to the deficit. That is if they raise the amount of money which they claim in the numbers given to the CBO. Then we cut all the huge amount of worthless programs with give away to the Unions and Green industry. Simply we say we are not going to spend more money than we did in the 2000 budget. We have to cut and cut and cut until we reach there. Now that will mean cutting some Left wing and Right wing "sacred cows" until the Budget is balanced. Then you adjust the budget each year for inflation but it must to balanced. Any taxes collected over the amount budgeted go to retiring the debt.

"Since 75% of the tax cuts went to the middle class, let's see the Democrats rescind them.

It's interesting that in the 3 years prior to the Bush tax cuts, Federal revenues increased only about 6%, but in the 3 years AFTER the tax cuts, Federal revenues increased by about 44% (even with the lower tax rates)."

I often see this argument favoring tax cuts. These tax cuts came during the recovery from the tech bubble that destroyed a great deal of wealth (and, therefore, tax revenues). Let's say they did help the economy. Do you believe that a tax cut of about 4% expanded federal revenues by 44%?

Jeff - the cost of the Medicare part D expansion was roughly 1.2 trillion dollars over a decade, not 6 trillion.

JoAnna - Do you really believe a new group of fiscal conservatives is emerging in Washington, or might it just be that fiscal responsibility is a hot topic as the American people are tightening their belts and saving money for the first time in a decade? Might they be just as full of hot air as the fiscal conservatives of the past?

VermontGirl: I rarely post on this site, and many others, because of this. If you want to discuss the ISSUES I'm all for joining in. But it's nearly impossible to find a place that isn't filled with outright disrespect.

Interesting. A quick look shows that you have nothing to say about a certain Redhead posting around here. Little hypocritical, don't you think? Another quick look shows you the same type of liberal that posts around here, nothing but another cheerleader for Obama and a critic of anyone that doesn't think he's the greatest thing since sliced-bread.

Nice try though.

Vermont Girl,

Those are nice sentiments, but JSmith and NoJo, (along with the vast majority of the right wing posters here - just look at the replies in this thread alone), will never give a crap about any of them. If anything, they have grown even nastier, more acerbic and less capable of civil discourse since I stopped posting much here.

Anon Monster!

JoAnna - Do you really believe a new group of fiscal conservatives is emerging in Washington, or might it just be that fiscal responsibility is a hot topic as the American people are tightening their belts and saving money for the first time in a decade? Might they be just as full of hot air as the fiscal conservatives of the past?

That's a fair question.

For the sake of the country Anon, lets hope a group of fiscal conservatives show up in Washington. It's at the point now that the someone in the government, both at the state and federal levels needs to start saying no. No to new and expanding government programs, no to bloated bureaucracies, no to deficit spending. You are correct, many have tried to bring some sanity to the government spending, and many have failed. It's at the point now where someone has to step up, and as unpopular as it will be, start saying no. It's started in some states, like California, New Jersey, Virginia, and even in New York with Paterson. Now it has to expand to include many others states and the federal government.

JoAnna - though you and I clearly disagree on how the deficit might be erased, I do agree that someone will eventually be forced to deliver some hard truths to the American people. I hope that occurs sooner rather than later.

Interestingly those who call Obama a Muslim are the same ones who complained about his Christian pastor during the campaign. Is he or isn't he? Does it really matter? There is nothing in the Constitution that requires one to be of any particular religion to become President.

With each passing day a certain 'large mouth a@@' is sounding more and more like Juven Bachmann in drag!

BOTH are totally incoherant!

Roy, how do you define "middle class"? Since 52% of the Bush tax cuts go to the TOP 1% that makes it impossible for 75% to go to the middle class. http://www.ctj.org/html/gwb0602.htm

That number right there says all you need to know about who the Republican Party values.

Jill, well spoken words HOWEVER, do not expect any constructive thoughts from these guys! I have been watching these boards for several days and 'well thought out' arguments and solutions are few and far between.

Both parties are playing blame game, however I beleive the Dems ,at this moment, have the plausible solutions.

Hi, kids. Just got my first chance to get on here today. Nice to see JoAnna and the rest. If this has been broughtup already, my appolgies for dragging it up again, but:

McConnel. I was glad to hear him proclaim, emphatically, that the Mosque issue is one of MUNICIPAL matters (i.se.-zpning)! Now, if Mitch McConnel can say it, why can't Beck, Hannity, Ingrahm, Limbaugh, Medved, O'Reily, and so many of the posters on here say the same thing??

gpotts, I think the problem I have right now is that NOBODY is LISTENING to each other (and this is played out all over this board on a near-constant basis). Instead, we have Dems finger-pointing and name-calling the Repubs, and we have the Repubs finger-pointing and name-calling the Dems. I think there are viable solutions and good ideas coming from both parties, and if they would listen to each other and engage in the art of compromise, we the people would be far better off, as the best solutions are probably found on middle ground. Instead, we get each respective party distorting every single difference and appearing on various media outlets to see which one can scream the loudest. It's nothing but a big pis*ing contest, and the American people are getting drenched.

True, It reminds me of a married couple arguing; one is screaming their point at the top of their lungs; the other is NOT listening, they are trying to think of response! The end result is nobody hears anything and the wheel spins around.

Repubs have to get past the idea that if a Dem. suggests a solution, it is not necessarily bad and vice-versa. Then 'we the people' win.

But in our current political climate, the best way to insure that you won't be re-elected is to agree with the opposition.

Anon Monster! - JoAnna - though you and I clearly disagree on how the deficit might be erased, I do agree that someone will eventually be forced to deliver some hard truths to the American people. I hope that occurs sooner rather than later

On that we agree. My hope is that it is not the Chinese that are the ones delivering that truth to us.

That is exactly what it is: a dysfunctional relationship.

Perhaps our government needs couples counseling? Can't you just see it? Pelosi and Reid sitting in a room with Boehner and McConnell talking about their feelings and legislators of both parties doing team-building exercises together?

Us Republicans Understand that Democrats want to take more money from the Rich in this country. to pay for the things that democrats want. to provide more money to promise other Democrats things that they will not work hard enough to provide for yourselves..

Us Republicans understand that you wish to Tax the top 2% of Tax payers in this Country More. We understand that you wish to Take more money from these people that own Business, that are Doctors and Lawyers and Dentist. People that Own the Grocery Stores and Clothing Stores ect ect ect

What us Republicans understand that you democrats refuse to understand is that by Raising TAXes on these people. The people that own Business and provide the Goods and Services that we americans use they inturn will just raise the cost of those goods and Services and we will all end up paying more for those goods and services, You democrats will do as you always do Blame them but you dont realize you have done it to yourself.. YOu complain about Big business. but you buy those Nike Tennis Shoes.. YOu complain About big Business but you buy that 60 Flat screen tv.. you complain about big Business but you have to have that BMW..or that caddy...

Steve -

Do your arms ever tire from painting in such broad strokes?

Anon Monster..

Just pointing out the Facts.. sorry that you dont like them but its still the Facts.

Steve-505729

Who is the richest person in America? Warren Buffet. Which party does he support? The Democratic Party. What does he have to say about paying taxes: "Something's wrong when my secretary pays a higher rate on her salary than I do on my investment income." Furthermore, the doctors, dentists and lawyers you worry about will not be paying taxes than they did during REAGAN"S administration. That's right, Bush cut their tax rate lower than it was during the Reagan/Clinton years.

Amy.. Actually i think the Richest man in america is Bill Gates.. And Amy the Bush Tax Cuts were given to all Americans.. if they Sunset then All americans Taxes would Go up.. but what Democrats want to do is only Make the top 2% pay more.. its how it is.. They will just Raise their prices and you and i will be paying thier Taxes . Not sure why its so hard for you to understand that.. ..

Let me explain it too you.. If i charge you 10 dollars for a Widget and you Raise my Taxes by 3 percent and i raise the cost of that Widget by 3 percent . Who ends up paying the majority of the Tax that you just asked the Govt to make me pay?.. YOU DID.......and its not about Supply and Demand. because every Business .. Corporation . ECT ECT ECT is gonna raise their costs...

Steve is one of the guys you will not get through to. He is blinded by the hope that he might be one of those 2%ers.

But here goes anyway: If a business owner takes home 1 million in profit, but still raises his prices, he is the bad guy. If you do not get the money from us working people and the richest people, who is left!!!!!

No, you used broad, insulting generalizations about both sides (how sad is it that there are apparently only 2) of the debate.

Plenty of people here do it, I just chose to pick on your post because of your condescension.

Nevermind the back-and-forth about the cause of our current deficit. Reading the posts in this thread indicates that we're all pretty pissed off about any policy that contributes to the ever-deepening pit of American debt, yet we all seem stuck on blaming the other side's guy instead of finding consensus on the issue.

In retrospect, can we agree that the Bush tax cuts, in tandem with the ongoing and costly quagmire of Iraq and Afghanistan were very bad ideas? In retrospect, can we agree that bailing out Wall Street and the stimulus package were very bad ideas? Can we agree that, at the time, all of these things seemed like the appropriate course of action?

Let's go a little deeper. I highly doubt anyone here can sit back and honestly tell me that, in 2001, immediately after 9/11, when the decision to invade Afghanistan came down that we all didn't feel an underlying sense of not merely justification but rightness as well. In 2003-04, though the advance towards an invasion of Iraq was met with rancor and protest the world over, no one here can tell me that there wasn't a moment that perhaps, perhaps we'd made the correct decision when we saw the feed of that tank pulling down Saddam's statue together with the seemingly endless video of thousands of Baghdad citizens cheering on our military, hurling shoes at old murals and posters of their former dictator and, in particular, that one man shouting at the top of his lungs, "Thank you, Mister Bush!"

No one here can tell me, even if they had reservations about first Bush's stimulus and then Obama's, that they didn't secretly hope that it would halt the continuous job loss. No one here can tell me they didn't secretly hope every Wall Street firm that received our money would be held to a rigid standard and refused the opportunity to pay out bonuses or allow golden parachutes. No one here can tell me they didn't fervently wish to see a massive surge in hiring and the DOW rebound to 14,000. Are we really pissed off at one another because of our opposing ideologies or because we're upset at the fact that more than a decade of intended good acts have blown up in our collective faces?

Pointing the finger and blaming others with heated exchanges solves nothing. The same exact behavior we all seem to loathe in our so-called leadership we perpetuate ourselves with absolutely no sense of irony.

My own opinion is that, for a while, we will need to make difficult decisions and accept some very tough realities because of our, to date, short-sighted and blame-heavy domestic policies. At some point we will need to accept that taxes must increase and that services provided must be cut if we're ever to get a hold on the nation's spending and spiraling debt. I can't imagine for a single second that anyone here, regardless of whether they're part of the left or the right, wants to see happen in America what's happened in Greece or Japan for the sole sake of cajoling the other side to say, "Ha-hah! I told you so!" If I'm wrong on that account, then I and everyone else may as well go blink away the hours immersed in petty diversions and await the impending Malthusian collapse.

If I'm wrong, then for God's sake, tell me. If someone has a better idea, then for God's sake, please express it.

haha. Well sorry thier Anon Monster.. I dont stay things so they come out PC. i say things that are factual, if what i said was wrong or incorrect please point it out. I am sorry that i dont call a Spade a Spade. I call it a F..ing Shovel...

and Gpotts . This is the statement i would expect from someone like you. They are the Bad guy for gettting rich. You sir or maam. Are just Jealous of what they have.... they worked hard for it and deserve to keep it.. but to always only raise the Taxes on 2% of the people becausae you think its Fair is just stupid..

haha. Well sorry thier Anon Monster.. I dont stay things so they come out PC. i say things that are factual, if what i said was wrong or incorrect please point it out. I am sorry that i dont call a Spade a Spade. I call it a F..ing Shovel...

Telling it like you believe it is is fine, so long as you use a disclaimer such as "I think." You chose to speak for both parties as a whole - something I find offensive though I'm not a member of either. While parties have members that move in lock-step, they are nuanced groups. Democrats don't simply wish to steal from the rich, and if they do their intentions are surely more noble than to just take from others out of laziness. By that same token, Republicans aren't all liars intent on making the rich richer.

Your argument that a tax increase on the rich would result in price increases for the poor isn't really correct either. First, not all rich are business owners, and second, Businesses must engage in competition. Considering the already weak demand they're facing, price increases would be bad for business. Unless all businesses were to raise all prices by an equal amount, which isn't likely, prices will remain in their current range. Small businesses would wind up taking a hit to their profit margins instead, which is why many are (understandably) against letting the cuts expire.

Anon Monster. I do choose to speak for both Parties. you see I have Watched for 50 Years what the Democrats do and what the Republican Do. .. So yea 50 Years Experience makes me an expert as to what both Parties do. Sorry that you cant handle it. But to Bad.. I really Dont care if you agree with me or Disagree with me. but you are correct.. in the End Democrats want to Raise the Taxes on all Business and in the End it is gonna Hurt the Smaller Business the most.. Because they dont get the Discount buying that Larger Retailers get.... However. All Business are gonna have to Raise Prices to offset those Taxes.. Its just smart Business..

I guess what i am trying to say is that a business usually gets its product from another Business.. and when one business gets their Taxes raised.. they pass it on thru thier products to other business.. so even the small business that you claim is not getting its Taxes Raised is having to pay more in the cost of the product they are buying from other Business.... so although . .they dont have to pay more taxes.. They still have to raise the prices of their goods to offset the more expensive product they bought from their supplier

I understand what you're saying, it's just that with the slack demand we face now, rising prices will cause further tightening of consumer belts. Businesses do want to pass those taxes on to the consumer, but prices only have so much wiggle room. In addition, larger businesses (public companies) won't be facing those taxes, so there is no cost to pass on. As I said, small businesses will be forced to eat the cost, however small. I'm not saying this because I demonize business, only to show that your point of prices being passed to the consumer is incorrect in my estimation.

No it wont .. and let me explain Why.. .. I sell a widget for 10 dollars.. but i buy that widget from my supplier for 5 Dollars.. now after i pay all my Bills.. .. I make 2 dollars off that widget.. you raise my Taxes by 3 percent.. ..3 percent of 2 dollars is only 6 Cents.. You think the Consumer is gonna notice 6 Cents?.. NO...and you have just paid my Taxes the the Govt raised on me.

Brilliant Steve. If other people realized that then all businesses would have been profitable for the last 3 years. Who knew it was that easy?

Or you've oversimplified. Wonder which?

John B, Des Moines,

Nope. Explained it exactly how it works.. No oversimplifacation at all.. Most people that understand how business is run in this Country knows they have to have a Bottom line.. they understand that they cant eat Every price increase that is Thrown at them. Whether it be in Taxes or some form of other Fee.. you throw a 4 percent tax at me.. and i am gonna pass it on.. just how it is.. and Rich people get Rich because they understand this.. and all Because Govt wont live with its means

So Steve, since you are the master of Economics, why don't you explain to me what happens when you give tax breaks, the largest share going to the wealthiest Americans, and you have to borrow 100% of the money to do it? Hmmmmm?

Newday Dawning.. Tell me Why does the Govt seem to think that the money that they Take from the American Citizen is thiers.. Why cant we elect people to serve in Govt that will Always live within their means.. That means. .Not spending more then we take in Tax Revenue.. .. Its a Fairly Simple equations.. If i have only have 1 Million Dollars to Spend.. . I shouldnt Spend 2 millions.. but thats what our Govt Does on a Contious basis...

Define "means" Steve. As in live within their means. And then tell me what services you are willing to live without. But, I am waiting for an answer to the question that I asked you previously.

Newday,,

thats what your problem is you can't Define means..... i already made my point very Clearly. if you Raise Tax on Business.. they are gonna just pass it on to the Consumer.. Simple. .And yes.. people that make over 250k a year. the top 2percent.. Are business people.. . so please spare me your double Speak. i care nothing ab out it.

Except Steve, you have a very rudimentary understanding. You asked me a question: why does the Govt. take money from American citizens. I answered that question and asked you what services you are willing to give up. Because that is exactly the problem, if you want services, you need to be able to pay for them. We do that with taxes. If you don't want to pay taxes, be prepared to decide what you are willing to do without. Military? Roads, what?

Newday.. YOu have A dependancy on Govt that you can't live without. I dont Depend on Govt.. what part of that dont you understand.. Your understanding of Govt is what you want it to pay for you. how much others owe you because you are Breathing. YOU sir Depend on GOVT.. not me

and Newday. .I am More then Willing to Pay Taxes. . but there comes a time when enough is enough.. And right now that is where the MAjority of AMerican people are. They are Tried of the over spending of Govt.. and thats why when November comes around the Peopple are going to Change things..

Really Steve? Do you depend on the military to protect you? Do you drive on roads, across bridges..will or are you accepting Social Security? If you do any of these things, and about a million others I can name, including the internet, then you depend on Govt. So, what services are you willing to live without?

Newsday..

again. When Govt raise Taxes on the top 2 percent of the people. You kow the Business owners Who is gonna end up paying the Taxes?.. i know you understand its gonna be the consumer..

JoAnneSmith1 - I wrote (Bad behavior by everyone, not just you.)

"Everyone" means just that.

Also, I "choose" to support the President. I "choose" to be a positive person. You would do well to try the same. If President Obama is successful it benefits us all. He was elected to a 4 year term. He deserves support during those 4 years as any other President does.

As I said in my ealier post...I care that (folks like you) have forgotten how to have civil discourse. How about you prove me wrong.

Steve: You are wrong, and believing the lies from Faux News and that ilk. The canard that small business will be punished by that tax rate change is a deliberate lie. The small businesses, by and large, do not earn enough to BE affected. Here is what will affect them. 100% of the money to provide that tax break was borrowed. It is likely that interest is going to go up. What happens when the money that small business needs to access becomes more expensive. And Steve, you need to start answering the questions that I have asked, to avoid them only proves what I already know. You are parroting that which you hear from Faux and fools.

DawdayDawning...

I dont have to Answer any of your Questions. you are a Big govt liberal that Depends on the Govt for all your Needs. Your Answer and Solution to Everything is for the Govt to take more of the top 2percent of the peoples money. You continue to beleive that when Govt takes money from its people its a Good thing. As long as its not your money and someone Elses.. .... and i understand that you wish to blame Everything on Fox news Station. Everything is their Fault. Is Fox news STations fault that 75 percent of the American people think that Govt is headed in the Wrong Directions. Its Fox news Fault that most Democrats dont want Obama anywhere around them during this Election time. its Fox news Fault that Democrats are gonna lose alot of Seats in the house and the Senate.. .. You Give to much Power to Fox news. your are Obsessed with Fox news.. but yes I understand . Thats Fox news fault too.. and probably Bushs.. grow up.. and start Accepting responsiblity..

And for those of you still reading what Steve has to say, he illustrates the point I wanted to make. If you get the Faux News fans off their memorized rants, and ask them to go deeper, they demonstrate that they cannot do that simple thing. I asked Steve a simple question: "What services are you willing to do without". He is unable to respond to that question, for a very elementary reason. He is unwilling to do without, but wants to accuse others of living off the government, which, truth to tell, we all do. This is the problem that the "tea baggers" have. There is a misunderstanding of how govt. works, the impact on our daily lives, and the total lack of knowledge that the govt. is us. Not an enemy, but each and every one of us. The "tea baggers", through their ignorance and greed will be the downfall of the Republican Party. And if we allow them to, they will be the downfall of America. So, thank you Steve, for making my point so graphically. I couldn't have done it without you.

No it wont .. and let me explain Why.. .. I sell a widget for 10 dollars.. but i buy that widget from my supplier for 5 Dollars.. now after i pay all my Bills.. .. I make 2 dollars off that widget.. you raise my Taxes by 3 percent.. ..3 percent of 2 dollars is only 6 Cents.. You think the Consumer is gonna notice 6 Cents?.. NO...and you have just paid my Taxes the the Govt raised on me.

If you raise the price of one widget, consumers may not notice. But, for you to pass the tax on completely to consumers, you must raise the price of all of your products. In addition, consider that most products don't sell for a flat dollar value. Your $10 widget probably sells for 9.95 or 9.99, more attractive price points. If you raise your 10 dollar product by 6 cents, you lose the psychological value of the 9.xx price point. If you do that on all of your products, consumers will simply cross the street and go to the big box retailer.

Joe in Albany: All together now, lefty liberals: “You’re doin’ a heck of a job, Barry.”

But according to the Libs, what you list Joe are "All lies". The Libs are telling us that unemployment is at 4%. 500,000 private sector jobs are being created every month, Iran is a peaceful country, the immigration process is working, HCR will bring down the cost of medicine, increase the access, and provide better care, and the government is being careful in how they spend taxpayers money. Well, at least that's how things should be the Libs tell us. And if things are not that way, well, that's because of the Republicans.

Joe in Albany

The WSJ is another Rupert Murdoch rag. Gawd...When are you going to learn that?

Joe--can you explain to me how a tax CUT enacted by President Bush (you see, I give him the respectful title he held--try it sometime) and a Republican Congress that was set to expire in 10 years could possibly be called President Obama's tax increase?

Hey, Joe--how do you feel about Saudi's being investors in News Corp--aka FOX NEWS. A Rupert Murdock organization as is the WSJ?

Have any problems with your source of news now?

Steeler Fan, don't you know we're not supposed to talk about HIM?

We're not allowed to even say his name!

Steeler Fan-380417

Joe--can you explain to me how a tax CUT enacted by President Bush (you see, I give him the respectful title he held--try it sometime) and a Republican Congress that was set to expire in 10 years could possibly be called President Obama's tax increase?

You see SF, there's your problem, you think the pending tax increases are all about Obama and not about the American people. You think raising taxes will help the economy SF? And not just the so-called Bush taxes expiring, but all the HCR related taxes that will kick in also. Taxes are going up in a very fragile economy SF. So how many private sector jobs do you think that will produce SF?

Obama will be dragged kicking and screaming to it, but he now owns the crappy economy. No scoring Obama on a curve when the so-called Bush tax cuts expire, all the economic failures associated with that raise in taxes are all on Obama.

Da Noid

Steeler Fan, don't you know we're not supposed to talk about HIM?

We're not allowed to even say his name!

Him? You mean Obama? Do you also turn to stone now if you look "HIM" in the eye?

Crude and slow. Your attack was no better than that of a clumsy child.

JoAnna--my basic question is not answered--President Bush and the Republican Congress enacted the tax cuts (through the reconciliation process) with an expiration date of 10 years. When the expiration date occurs, how is that President Obama's doing? Why do you call them the "so-called Bush tax cuts"? What else are they? What proof can you offer that the actual Bush tax cuts created any jobs?

Steeler Fan-380417

JoAnna--my basic question is not answered

It's on his watch SF. The Democrats (still) have total control over Congress and they will be allowing the tax increases to occur in a time where we are heading for a double-dip recession.

You see SF, sooner or later Obama has to quit playing the victim and start taking responsibility for his actions. It is a fact that Obama is raising taxes. Liberals like yourself want to believe Obama is just an innocent bystander in all this, but instead he is the one driving the tax policy of the nation.

So will you Libs "Blame Bush" when the "Bush tax cuts" expire and the nations economy again goes into recession? I guess you will, because you don't seem to hold Obama accountable for much of anything. But it's Obama that controls the tax policy of the country, not Bush. But yet you Libs ignore that fact.

"....... could possibly be called President Obama's tax increase?"

Gee, maybe because it will be his signature on the bill that leaves out a selected group of people when the Bush tax cuts are extended. If it's his signature on the bill it's his tax increase. (BTW, I'm not going to belive they will be extended for anyone until the ink from Bayy's signature is dry)

"The WSJ is another Rupert Murdoch rag. Gawd...When are you going to learn that?"

You don't seem to be disputing any of the facts in my post??

"how do you feel about Saudi's being investors in News Corp"

And your point is.......??

News Corp. is a publicly held company whose stock trades on exchanges all over the world. Just like GE and Microsoft, owners of MSNBC. I would be very surprised if Saudi's don't invest in both of MSNBC's owners.

We're waiting for an answer Joe and JoAnna. Possibly one of you can copy and paste an answer.

JoAnna - You have the same perception problem as Sen. McConnell - There is no tax increase! Taxes were lowered 10 years ago by Pres. Bush in an attempt to stimulate the economy. Taxes are now returning to the correct rates just as they were prior to the TEMPORARY tax reduction as was agreeded upon at the time.

This is not an increase - if you go out and buy a purse on sale for 10% off you dont expect to get 10% off of every purse you ever buy after that do you? The richest 2% got a reduced rate for the last 10 years, now the sales over.

Ron, you are spot-on, as usual. I think many people prefer to believe those lies because they can't face possibly being wrong. And when you have national leaders repeating those lies like a broken record, it gives people who can't bear to face the truth more support for their erroneous beliefs.

People, think through what those you look up to say, and have said in the past, to see if their thoughts follow logically over time.

For example, Sarah Palin refers to Ground Zero as "hallowed ground." Yet, she says that "real Americans" live in the small towns scattered across our land. She has railed against "East Coast liberal elites." Well, who does she think worked in the Twin Towers? Small town Americans commuting from Russellville, KY? No, New Yorkers did - many of them the dreaded East Coast liberal elites, and at least 300 of them Muslims. Does she still consider Ground Zero to be "hallowed ground?"

Think!

Here's more food for thought about the negative response to the Islamic Community Center from Troy Jackson, Sr. Pastor of the University Christian Church in Cincinnati, OH.

"As we support and pray for the victims of Sept. 11, we must remember that this was not the first act of terror and evil perpetrated on American soil. The forced removal of Native Americans from their land is tragic, and the consequences of this act are still felt generations later by the remnants of Native American tribes. Some churches and Christians played a part in this tragedy. Could not the same logic be applied to prohibit the construction of churches within a few blocks from the Trail of Tears?

Slavery once existed in every American colony, and persisted in the South until the end of the civil war. Few can argue that the legacy of slavery still marks this nation, and that churches and Christians often supported this peculiar institution. Could not descendants of slaves ask for a moratorium of new Caucasian churches near former slave auction sites, plantations, and even the locations of thousands of lynchings?"

We self-righteous Americans have blood on our hands, too, people.

Think about this...how many Ground Zeros have we opened next to mosques in Muslim countries?

Mike -1948965

JoAnna - You have the same perception problem as Sen. McConnell - There is no tax increase!

This is getting absurd.

Mike, you're talking in relative terms, but the world works in absolute terms. Will taxes be going up come on January 1st 2011? The answer is YES. Will people and businesses have less money for themselves after January 1st 2011? The answer is YES? Will those same people and businesses be sending more money to the government after January 1st 2011? The answer is YES!

Sure sounds like a tax increase to me.

Jody Iowa

We're waiting for an answer Joe and JoAnna. Possibly one of you can copy and paste an answer.

It was answered Jody. Either you didn't see it, or more then likey you didn't understand it.

JoAnna--9/11 happened on President Bush's watch--do you hold him responsible for that?

I doubt you care about my opinion on the recession, but I believe that President Bush and his policies were major factors in it, along with lax regulation on Wall Street. I don't hold President Obama responsible for that but I do believe he is responsible to do everything he can to address the economy and end the recession. And, guess what--I think he is doing that.

Yes JoAnna,

All put in effect when Bush 43 signed the bill into law that set the date for the tax increase.

Sounds exactly like a pre-determined tax increase to me by GWB.

SF - to believe Obama is succeeding, you have to ignore the growing unemployment, the slowing economy, and the ballooning deficit and debt. Blaming Bush is simple, it solves all of your problems with regards to Obama failures. But the truth is Obama has done many things that have not helped, and in fact have hurt the economy.

Well, Dennis, you want to blame Bush, then be my guest. You hold Obama responsible for nothing, so it only makes sense.

Great post as always Ron,

Gail TN,

Great analogy.... there's a mosque currently right next to ground zero.... and no one says anything about it.. but you know what though, if fox noise pushes a story about that already existing mosque close to ground zero, I bet you, we will all be talking about why the mosque need or need-not be demolished within a week.

Fox noise have been "GREAT" and "SUCCESSFUL" at driving whatever story they like and I dont see that changing... they push whateva garbage out there and since people in this country are frustrated about the economic situation, they buy all that garbage coming out of fox noose. It's sad because they are playing with the fears of the American people; in a fragile economy and times of uncertainty we have, that opinion noose station is causing deep wounds in the fabric of America and literally driving the country into the ground.

Unfortunately they don't know it, because they just believe politics is a contact sport and if you destroy your enemy, you win... not realizing that it is the American people who lose by all their BS. American's need to learn that we need to stop the hate a demonizing of each other, because "WE ARE ONE NATION UNDER GOD". Since the lame street media is mainly driven by the "right" agenda, we can only educate our kids about true right and wrong because even the president's voice is drowned out by the screaming fox noise.

Keep doing what you are doing Gail, Let's git-r-done... teach your kids and educate your neighbors, don't let them sow seeds of hatred in any of our hearts.

JoAnna, you're really funny, and full of Sh** at the same time.... name one "liberal" who claims that unemployment is 4% or any of the other ridiculous assertions you made in that post. If you have a valid point to make, make it based on something resembling fact. Your attempts to put GOP spin on everything are pathetic.

OK, let's consider the world in absolute terms. If that's the case then the Bush Administration and Congressional Republicans 10 years ago set a time bomb that was designed absolutely to increase people's taxes, and they knew it.

Feel better?

Thanks, Tunde Akins...and thank you for sharing your thoughts. I look forward to your comments. We have to keep encouraging people to think and also to seek their hearts for the larger truths of who we are as Americans.

Mike1948965, I loved your responce, and reasoning to JoAnna, with the purse & 10% off.

You must speak slowly, and simply to these people, so they can keep up! LOL John

"All put in effect when Bush 43 signed the bill into law that set the date for the tax increase.

Sounds exactly like a pre-determined tax increase to me by GWB"

The reason the Bush tax cuts expire after 10 years is the Senate has a budget rule adopted in 1985 under the reconcilliation process called the "Byrd Rule", named after DEMOCRAT Senator Robert Byrd. It limits tax revenue changes passed under reconcilliation to no more than 10 years.

Barry or Byrd, it's DEMOCRATS increasing taxes.

From the Tax Foundation FAQ'a on the Bush tax cuts:

Reconciliation was devised in 1974 as a way to for the Senate to deal more effectively with budget bills, but it soon became a technique to limit amendments and debate. In 1985, the Senate added the so-called Byrd rule to reconciliation. Named after Senator Robert Byrd, the rule forbids a bill passed under reconciliation from, among other things, altering federal revenue for more than 10 years.

No JoAnna I’m NOT blaming Bush. I just point to the fact that he signed a bill that had an automatic tax increase built in. He didn’t write the bill he just made it law.

John B. Exactly.

The GOP knew what it was doing, it was on purpose--the maximum years they could pass the cuts through that evil "budget reconciliation" was 10 years; they could have chosen any number of years from one to ten but 10 meant that most likely a democratic president would have to defend not extending them.

Dennis Columus Ohio: NoJoAnna I’m NOT blaming Bush. I just point to the fact that he signed a bill that had an automatic tax increase built in. He didn’t write the bill he just made it law.

Come on Dennis, cut the bs. The Libs have been whining that the "Bush tax cuts" have "cost the government $1.4 trillion dollars". And yet, they liberals have been in charge of the tax laws for 2 years and have done nothing to change them.

Bush could have not known what the economic situation could have been in 2010 back in 2001. He left that to any subsequent administration and congress to figure out. Now that it is clear the economy is doing poorly, the current Obama administration has a choice, either extend the tax cuts, or let them sunset. The far left, of which Obama and the Congressional leadership are members, love big government and big taxes, so they will probably let the tax cuts sunset. But they'll have to put up with the consequences of higher taxes in a poor economy. You can only point towards Bush for so long, and that time period has now ended.

Also, see post 2.26 above for an explanation as to why the tax cuts sunset.

VICTORY!

High fives all around folks. We have scored one big time.

Did anybody notice that Joannaclone1 stopped using the term "libtards"?

Note my geriactric end-zone dance.

"The far left, of which Obama and the Congressional leadership are members, love big government and big taxes,..."

That's a rather extreme characterization, considering most moderates agree that to erase the deficit, some combination of tax increases and spending cuts will be necessary.

Joining you in that dance, skip! But, my view is this: the use of pejoratives is the hallmark of a weak mind, and weaker language skills. People like poor JoAnna do that, simply because they lack the gift to cogently articulate a position. I feel sorry for poor JoAnna, she seems very bitter and unhappy. I have an adult son with Tourette Syndrome, who meets his challenges with the courage and bravery that poor JoAnna can only imagine. Frankly, the use of the word "libtard" says more about her than anything else she would post...and it says nothing good, either about her character or her mind.

Anon Monster!

"The far left, of which Obama and the Congressional leadership are members, love big government and big taxes,..."

That's a rather extreme characterization, considering most moderates agree that to erase the deficit, some combination of tax increases and spending cuts will be necessary

The "moderates" can agree all they want, but it's the big government liberals that are the ones in charge, and we see what they have produced - A failed stimulus plan costing a trillion dollars and producing a poor economy, the biggest government entitlement program of all time, rising taxes, and massive deficits.

Either you put the blame for the things that piss you off on the people for whom the blame truly lies or you don't. The Republican House and the Republican senate put this tax plan into motion ten years ago. A Republican president signed them into law. You can put the blame on the Democrats for refusing to take action to EXTEND what the Republicans did, but you can't blame the Democrats for taking ACTION to raise taxes, which they clearly are not, because they clearly thus far are taking no action at all.

At least be intellectually honest about the situation instead of trying to jump the shark every time someone brings up this point.

I really don't give a crap where the blame lies, but you look like you're too stupid to understand the point when you do this. And generally, you aren't, so I think it's far more likely that you're just being intellectually dishonest about the whole thing and hoping no one notices.

joe mota

JoAnna, you're really funny, and full of Sh** at the same time.... name one "liberal" who claims that unemployment is 4% or any of the other ridiculous assertions you made in that post. If you have a valid point to make, make it based on something resembling fact. Your attempts to put GOP spin on everything are pathetic

"One liberal that claims it", joe? All of them Joe. You hear it every day from the idiots like newdunceDawning and Skippy of Oak City, "If only the Republicans would have voted for everything Obama wanted we wouldn't be in this mess".

And newdunceDawning and Skipper, do you prefer "Libtards"over "idiots" as descriptions for yourselves? Your choice, both are valid. I'm here to please.

JoAnnaSmith

The "moderates" can agree all they want, but it's the big government liberals that are the ones in charge, and we see what they have produced - A failed stimulus plan costing a trillion dollars and producing a poor economy, the biggest government entitlement program of all time, rising taxes, and massive deficits.

What I'm saying is that it's a bit disingenuous to characterize a moderate tax increase (or a reversion to previous tax rates) as liberal extremism, particularly considering the tax rates we have now vs. other nations of the world or our own historical rates. In addition, no politician enjoys raising taxes. No matter how you explain a tax increase, they don't go over well.

As far as what the Obama administration has produced, I can only reiterate previous posts when I say that I believe progress has been made and the course of a ship the size of the American economy can't be changed overnight.

See, skip? Poor JoAnna is absolutely without the expressive gifts. You can tell when she becomes frustrated,she will act out more. Poor soul.

Oh Joannaclone!, you silly clone you. I frankly don't care what you call me as long as you don't forget to call me for dinner, honey. I have been called many things much worse in my life and I've lived through it all. So what ever sets your little clone heart on fire, you go kiddo.

But as for the term "retard" in any adaptation I think you have shown wisdom beyond your clonedom but switching to simply calling us "libs". Now please don't make me take that compliment back by reverting to your previously unacceptible vocabulary.

Darlin' you still ignored my main question. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH JOANNA?

The whole blogosphere wants to know? Did you stuff her body under the bed after the cloning process? What?

Of course, I still lean toward the theory that a new troll was assigned the "Joannasmith" blog account and they forgot the password so had to create a new name and account or get fired.

Isn't it rich? Aren't we a pair? Here I am standing on earth and you in the air. There ought to be clones, send in the clones, don't bother they're here!

"Moderate tax increase"Anon? I guess we disagree on the degree of it, and that's fine, so be it. The point Anon is that it is probably not a good idea to raise taxes with the current economic climate, but that appears what we are heading for. Do you believe that the increase of taxes will spur the economy and more jobs will be produced? Not to answer the question for you, but you have to believe that to be true because you end your post by saying "progress is being made". The current set of results are not showing the kind of progress most Americans are expecting Anon.

JoAnna -

I believe an increase in the Federal Income Tax of roughly 4 percent is moderate, yes. (of course there are other changes, such as the reduction in the Child Tax Credit, but the bulk of it is in rate changes).

As for tax increase helping or hurting I am not under the assumption that it will help, I simply don't believe it will hurt nearly as much as you believe. I'm not necessarily opposed to kicking the can down the road for a year, but in the near future I believe the cuts need to be allowed to expire.

Most people don't expect progress, the expect instant change and they expected it ten minutes ago. An economy doesn't come back overnight, certainly not from a disaster of this size and scope. As I've said before on these boards, it's also difficult for the government to bring back the economy quickly due to its role in the economy. The government accounts for about 1/3 of our GDP, while the people account for the other 2/3. With people not spending, the burden falls to the government. (if you'd like to look at it that way. I do.)

"What proof can you offer that the actual Bush tax cuts created any jobs?"

But, Steeler Fan- the cuts are STILL IN PLACE right now. You mean, you don't see all the jobs still being created by them?? Hey, JoWhhaaaana- can you help our friend Steeler Fan out with this "paltry dilema'?

Beverly, wonderfully said. But the President's detractors aren't interested in history. Most haters aren't, until they're old. Then they feel ashamed for how they felt. Until then, it is going to keep on going. The GOP must be so proud.

Well said, Beverly.

FOX began claiming Illinois State Senator Obama was Muslim in 2005. Why 2005, a full year before he ran for the federal Senate? Because in 2004, Barack Obama gave a keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention and republican owned FOX recognized that this man would have a huge impact in the democratic party. Anyone watching that keynote speech recognized immediately that State Senator Obama was a political force for the GOP to fear.

"Bigotry has no head, and cannot think; no heart, and cannot feel." Daniel O'Connell.

Check out this link for more information on how the Right wing promotes the Obama is a Muslim canard:

http://mediamatters.org/research/201008190061

You're very correct, Jody. I watched and taped that speech and remember being totally blown away by this man's intelligence. I had no clue who this Barack Obama was when I saw that speech. I took the tape into work the next day to lend to a friend (and never got it back!), telling him this guy would be President one day.

Its Fairly Amazing that the Liberals on this page wish to Blame everything on Fox news..

It must be Fox news fault that 65 perceont of the people in this country want the HCR bill repealed. it must Be Fox news Fault that 70 percent of all people in this country think the Country is headed in the wrong Direction. It must be Fox news Fault that 65 percent of all people in this country Believe that Muslims building a Mosque at Ground Zero is wrong.. Not because they Have the right to build it . But because it is Offensive to us.. It must Be Fox news Fault that Obama is polling bad in most polls all over this country. It must be Fox news Fault Obama seems to Take Zero Responsiblity for anything and Blames it all on BUsh. .. Keep it up.. its amazing how much Power you assign to Fox news. but hey. That must be fox news fault too.. And Bush's...

LouisJ, you are spot on brother. Here is quote from a high ranking Republican Senator regarding then Senator Obama when Senator Obama was running for President in 2008: "Barack Obama is a 'light-skinned' African-American who didn't have a 'Negro' dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

Those Republicans, always living in the past. All of them are racists.

Wrong, Joanna. I believe it was Harry Reid that made statement! BTW, if you play the race card in a false way to hurt others, who's the racist?

Dirt, that was sarcasm. Of course you are correct, that was none other then Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid describing what he thought about Obama.

Of course the Libtards would like to forget statements from their own that show that they are party of racism. The Democrats are the ones that need to keep the minorities on the plantation, have them vote for the Democrats, and the Democrats send them a few scrapes to survive on from time to time.

Louis...

Have you actually ATTENDED a Tea Party event?

The reason Iask is because you seem so sure that all tea party members are racist.

Are there racist people in the Tea Party? Sure.

Are there racist Republicans or conservatives? Sure.

Are there racist Democrats or liberals / progressives? Sure

Are there racist blacks or latinos? Sure

While there may be racist people in the Tea Party to say that the ENTIRE movement is racist is the EXACT same as saying that all Muslims are terrorists.

Attend a Tea Party rally and see what is ACTUALLY being said. Not just what the talking heads are saying is being said.

Just like Glen Beck. Have you actually been watching his show and have proof that he is a racist? Or are you just going by what everyone else has said?

Cause Im pretty sure MLK's daughter would not go on a show with a racist.

You want everyone to be more "open" and to listen to an opposing viewpoint. Do you do the same? Do you actually sit down and listen to what the ea party wants? Or listen to what Glen Beck says?

Or do you just assume that since its not what you think that the Tea Party or Glen Beck or anytone who listens to or thinks the same way is automatically racist?

JoAnnaSmith1

Of course the Libtards would like to forget statements from their own that show that they are party of racism. The Democrats are the ones that need to keep the minorities on the plantation, have them vote for the Democrats, and the Democrats send them a few scrapes to survive on from time to time.

What!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! in the world are you talking about. No one is talking about racism today, Now you are talking about plantations.

JoAnna let me give you a history lession.

i don't know where you live or how thing are where you are at, but my family or many families i grew up around on the south side of chicago did not want or need any thing from government. you are painting all black with a wide brush. scraps, honey i grew up in a neighborhood with doctors, lawyers, cops, firemen, teachers, business men. we all went to college, there were no drug, gangs, guns on the street.

Scraps, Honey back when Johnson declared his war on poverty, he was not doing it for my family or any of my neighbors.

i do have one question for you Gril Friend, when Obama extend the tax cuts for people making 250k or lower, are you going to see more money or will your taxs be going back up?

if you say will be seeing more money, then i ask why do you are about the richest 2% that have had cuts for almost 10 years and have created 1 job.

Larry

I have watched Beck on occasion. Can't stand his show more than 5 minutes at a time. Most of what I've seen are pure theatrics, reading from his telepromoter or scratching on his chalkboard. His chalkboards talks are really way out there, He usually starts cross referencing people and ideas back to communism or terrorists.

Beck said that Barack Obama was a "racist" who had a "deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture." I have no idea where he came up with it as I can find no evidence of Obama's "deep seated hatred."

I happened to see him crying about the generous gifts pouring in for his Aug 28th rally. Seriously it reminded me a lot of Benny Hinn, Jim Baker, Jimmy Swaggert and other telovangelists wringing money out of guillible people.

As for the Tea Party I would never want to attend any of their rallies. It would be like me driving my hybrid and showing up to meet the H. Angels at Sturgis.

Jeff-

if you say will be seeing more money, then i ask why do you are about the richest 2% that have had cuts for almost 10 years and have created 1 job

Jeff, this topic has been discussed. You do realize that there is more to creating/destroying jobs then what the tax rate is, don't you? Or are you of the "Simple Crowd" that are just trying to frame a message to fulifll your dogma? It's looking more and more like the latter.

And besides Jeff, as Obama has taught us, it's not just about created jobs, but it is also about saved jobs. I'm certain millions of jobs were saved by the Bush Tax Cuts.

JoAnna

Jeff, this topic has been discussed. You do realize that there is more to creating/destroying jobs then what the tax rate is, don't you? Or are you of the "Simple Crowd" that are just trying to frame a message to fulifll your dogma? It's looking more and more like the latter.

Ok. let me put this in more simple terms, over the last 10 years with the Bush tax cuts more jobs have been destroyed than ever before or do you forget the summer months in 08 when we were loosing 500k jobs permonth then the fall when that number went up to 700k in november. how did those tax cuts work them. voddo ecnomics is what there are called. hoping the trickle down will get to the middle class, well honey i did not work.

i remember the reagan years, when tax cuts to the rich business owners, ment that jobs went over seas and steel and machine plants were closed. yea Joanna tax cuts do desstroy jobs. because if they created or even saved jobs then why were we loosing 700k in november and december of 08. you aruguement does not add up. because if it did add up, tax cuts in 01 and 03 would and should have pervented this clamiety. that is what Bush called it when he has to let congress and the senate know that if we did not bail them out our economey would collaspe.

when he went to the congress to ask for the bail out i know he wishes he had held on to those tax cuts because he knows that they did not do what they were suppose to.

also Joanna, do you know that Bush is the only persident in our history to lower taxs while at war, His father raised taxs in 91 to cover his cost from the first gulf war.

Well Jeff, I'm certain your are comfortable that when taxes go up next year that job creation will just take off. I've asked the question to others, with no reply, and now I'll ask it to you too - What are the Democrats and Obama predicting for job creation after the taxes are increased?

Jeff, seeing you are so full of, . . ., facts today, why not also tell us when was the last time we taxed ourselves to prosperity? Thanks, and looking forward to your reply.

JoAnnaSmith1

See Joanna i think for my self, i think the president should extend the tax cuts for people making 250k and lower. making those perminate. extending the tax cut for the rich for 2 years more untill we see where the ecomoney is going.

See joanna i see things in the real world, you can't raise taxs while we are still in a recession. as much as i want to see the richest 2% pay there fair share. President Obama can't do right now.

he will be the only president the raise taxs during a recession. i don't want him to make the mistake Bush did by Not resending the tax cuts when we went to war in iraq. he had to know that deficets would follow him as he spent on both wars. Obama should not raise taxs on any body while we are still in a recession or very weak recovery. i read that from a economist.

See these are not liberal talking points and this is very unpopular remakes to make but this is how i see things. I'm a construction estimator and no bunsiness has been hit like the construction industry and i understand that if we want to jump start construction then tax rates have to be helf right where they are at FOR NOW so when a rich man want to spend 150million to build a building and needs financing and his tax rate are low like now then it makes it easeir to finance the project. the problem Joanna is that these rich Business men who would do this, is sending his money over seas for a better return on there money. they are not reinvesting in america. this is why our recovery is slow to nill.

Shortly after George Bush came into office the U.S economy went into recession from March 2001 to November 2001. In March 2001 the U.S. unemployment rate was 4.3% and increased steadily until it peaked at 6.3% in June 2003. Thereafter the rate came down fairly steadily and reached a low of 4.4% in March 2007.

In March 2001 non farm employment totaled 132 million jobs, during most of 2003 non farm employement hovered around 129 million jobs and during most of 2007 non farm employment hovereded around 137 million jobs.

Therefore, it is plausable to take the position that the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: a) helped the U.S. economy get out of recession and back to growth; and b) helped support the creation of 8 million jobs from 2003 to 2007.

Jeff:

See Joanna i think for my self, i think the president should extend the tax cuts for people making 250k and lower. making those perminate. extending the tax cut for the rich for 2 years more untill we see where the ecomoney is going.

See joanna i see things in the real world, you can't raise taxs while we are still in a recession. as much as i want to see the richest 2% pay there fair share. President Obama can't do right now

Obama and the Democrats extending tax cuts to those making less then $250K will add to the already ballooning deficit, every bit as much as they did when Bush signed those taxes into law. It's the Liberals case that those tax cuts did nothing for jobs, so how can those tax increases now increase the job market?

Also, just what are you advocating? It looks like you don't care about job growth and you also don't care about the deficit. What do you care about?

And seeing you're in the construction industry, what exactly happened to those "shovel-ready" jobs from 2009? Those should be going full speed ahead this year, and you're saying they are not? How can that be seeing we put so much money into those programs?

Bill, Fairfax VA

Therefore, it is plausable to take the position that the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: a) helped the U.S. economy get out of recession and back to growth; and b) helped support the creation of 8 million jobs from 2003 to 2007.

But that narrative is not allowed, at least by the Left. It seems like the liberals want it both ways. They want to blame the Bush tax cuts for the poor economy today, while at the same time pushing to extend those tax cuts for the taxpayers making under $250K. Those unpaid tax cuts by Obama would add to the deficit just as much as they did for Bush.

And Obama and the Democrats talk a lot about "saved jobs" and how it would be so much worse if they (the Dems) hadn't deficit spent all the money they have spent. So with that measure in place it's entirely appropriate to talk about how much worse things would have been if Bush didn't implement the tax cuts.

The Left wants to play by a different set of rules then the Right. We on the Right need to make sure that doesn't happen, and it's looking like we're being successful.

I made this statement about Juven on another thread but it seems it would apply just as well for you, Joanna.

Joanna, if you aren't 12 years old, you sure are acting like one.

And I might add just for you, your juvenile name calling impresses no one and your lack of economic understanding (especially macro-economics) suggests the educational level of a 12 year old.

JoAnnaSmith1

Obama and the Democrats extending tax cuts to those making less then $250K will add to the already ballooning deficit, every bit as much as they did when Bush signed those taxes into law. It's the Liberals case that those tax cuts did nothing for jobs, so how can those tax increases now increase the job market?

Joanna you just made my point, what ever the president does in regards to the expiring tax cuts, he is in a no-win situation. you just said if he extend tax cuts for people making under 250k it will add to the deficits, if he lets the cuts expire, then in my opinion that will slow the recovery, if he extend the tax cuts for everybody then as you said it will add even more the the defects. what would you do.

And seeing you're in the construction industry, what exactly happened to those "shovel-ready" jobs from 2009? Those should be going full speed ahead this year, and you're saying they are not? How can that be seeing we put so much money into those programs?

Joanna, the amount of construction spending in the stimulus would never replace the job losses in construction. i knew that when it passed. those shovel ready jobs were started and completed alot of them had 12 month schedules. before i got layed off in january those shovel ready jobs kept the company i was with at the time afloat. but i and the president knows that the Private sector is what keeps construction going. its the banks that are the key to construction. low bank rates and even more important banks lending for construction, and that is something the president can't control.

Construction spending is something that is a barometer for how the economy is doing. right now construction is sputtering at best, not because of the stimulus but the banks we bailed out are not lending. they are making record profits because they are sending there money over seas.

Jeff - : Joanna you just made my point, what ever the president does in regards to the expiring tax cuts, he is in a no-win situation. you just said if he extend tax cuts for people making under 250k it will add to the deficits, if he lets the cuts expire, then in my opinion that will slow the recovery, if he extend the tax cuts for everybody then as you said it will add even more the the defects. what would you do.

He does seem to be in a pickle, doesn't he? But that's why we elected a super-smart president, correct? To make these tough choices. What it comes down to is this, do you trust government to spend the money in such a way that the economy will come back, or do you trust the businesses and the people that own/run them to do the same.

My guess is that Obama makes the political decision rather then the correct one, and allows taxes to increase for the $250K+ crowd and lets the deficit grow by extending the tax cuts for those making under $250K. His base will love it while jobs will continue to be in short supply, but he can always blame the latter on Bush.

Construction spending is something that is a barometer for how the economy is doing. right now construction is sputtering at best, not because of the stimulus but the banks we bailed out are not lending. they are making record profits because they are sending there money over seas.

Construction should be in high-gear. Money is not the issue, many of the "shovel-ready" jobs were funded by the "2009 Stimulus and Job Creation Act", not the banks, and yet you say construction is DOA? How can that be? Construction, infrastructure, was supposed to lead us out of the recession, and yet you are telling us it isn't.

Again, how can this be?

JoAnnaSmith1

We are finnally having a good debate, ok think about this, Obama knows how working people feels about the tax cuts, and given the mid terms are around the corner, if it were me and i was looking out for fellow democrats i would have said months ago i was going to let the cuts expire. that would have been the political correct thing to do. but instead what is he doing. he has not said word one about those tax cuts. should they expire or extend them.

well he is a sentrist and he will in my estimate, extend the cuts for everybody untill he sees where the economy is going. think about this Joanna if you were in his spot and you wanted to do the political correct thing, would you have already let everybody know what you were intending to do. right. but he has not. so i think he will go half way. extend cuts for 250k and lower for 4 years and extend for everybody else(2%) for 2 years.

why 2 years, because all the economist are saying the economy is not going fully recover untill late next year. once the recovery has full steam and he can get real renvue projections with the new jobs(pay roll tax projections) he will then change the rate for the richest 2%. he should have a graduale increase, of 1% each year unitll we get back to either the clinton rates or the reagan rates. the reagan rate is i think 2% higher than the bush rate for the richest 2%.

this is how i see it, my personal view, I'm not trying to impress my views on others. but this is how i read the president right now. again you can't raise tax's during a recession, right Joanna!!!

JoAnna,

Construction should be in high-gear. Money is not the issue, many of the "shovel-ready" jobs were funded by the "2009 Stimulus and Job Creation Act", not the banks, and yet you say construction is DOA? How can that be? Construction, infrastructure, was supposed to lead us out of the recession, and yet you are telling us it isn't.

Joanna, please tell me you really believe that the money in the stimulus was going to lead construction out of the recession. Please girl, how naive are you, the president never said that was going to happen. he did say, which is true that the shovel ready projects would help sustain us and it did. the banks break down along with the mortgage melt down is keeping construction DOA.

4 years ago the plumbing contractor i worked for, we were awarded almost 50 milliom in work. all plumbing work. all that work came from the priviate sector. not the local or state or government work. private projects finianced by the banks. highrise condos and apartments were our bread and butter, but now with no one buying condos and banks not finiancing the apartment buildings this is why construction is still DOA.

i have been a estimator for 25 years and this is the worse i have ever seen construction. the second wrose time was during the Bush recession back in 1990. that was the last time i was layed off. this time my lay off would have come alot sooner had it not been for the stimulas. in illinois the problem is compounded by the state being broke. No capital works plan, no new schools.

Joanna its all about the money. the reagan recovery was all about banks lending, because volker lowered the rates. well the rates are at a all time low but banks are not lending, why because the bankers are making more money over seas than here at home. plus we need to sell off all the empty condo building that have glutted the housing markets. this recession is a tough one when the need for housing is not there.

Well Jeff, there is one problem with your theory, and it's name is Congress. And in an election year when so many Democrats have gone to the well for Obama, only to be abandoned by Obama and targeted for extinction by the Republicans, no one is going to give Obama what he wants. I doubt Congress could even get a bill through in the lame-duck session that would even come close to resembling what Obama asked of them. Can you see Pelosi pushing tax cuts for the rich? Now that would be a sight to behold. And it's not in Obama's nature to go to the mat with Congress, especially in extending the tax cuts.

So where does that leave us? It leaves us with all the tax cuts expiring on January 1, 2011. And unlike your Liberal friends here who will not answer the question of how many jobs raising taxes will produce Jeff, I think you know how many they'll produce, none. In fact, we'll lose millions more. Any additional revenue expected by raising the taxes will be lost because there will be less jobs. Not a good situation.

Like I said, Obama is in a real pickle.

JoAnna, i know but he has been in a pickle before and it will be the last time and he is still standing.

Now i have answered your question Now answer mine,

WHAT WOULD YOU DO ?

Here's a question for all of you. How do you feel coming home with a couple of hundred dollars less in your paycheck? If you make approx 50,000, you will pay an extra $1500 a year or $125 a month. $75,000 you will pay $2250 a year or $187 a month and so on...... just multiply .03% to your paycheck and poof, it will be gone..........here's the shocker if you make under $49,999 you will hit the hardest.

I'm pretty sure 90% of the people on here can't afford it. It's amazing to me that people are complaining that they want to pay more money to the Government. It's too damn funny.....

Paul-Florida: I have no idea where you are getting these numbers, but the tax breaks that will not be renewed are on the top 2%. I somehow think that they can afford it. The reason that the Republicans put this law in effect for 10 years was that was the length of time they could do it without paying for it. 100% of that money was borrowed to make that break possible. Why would you be for such mismanagement? This was purely a redistribution of money, from those who could afford it the least, to those who did not need it.

JoAnne in PA

Thanks for the reference.

It could be very revealing to the average America, if just one person has seen the President taking time out of his busy schedule to wash his hands, have one of his aides spread a payer rug for the President to turn to the east, and recite Muslim prayers five times a day.

This will never happen because the President is NOT a Muslim. Uh-oh, there is that fat, lying, tub of lard, Andrew Bribart's biggoverment.com who would do any photoshop to perpetuate a lie for the right wing's political gain.

Great post. I recall that when South Pacific was first on Broadway, there was discussion that it was too controversial; that it touched on subjects not acceptable to society, topics best ignored. There were a number of those broadway shows and movies. Fortunately, their excellence overshadowed the controversial subjects.

I wish I had seen the CSpan program, Pat---what an opportunity to hear about history from the brave people who made it. I think it is a good idea to remember how far we have come. Yes, we have a long way to go, as we are reminded constantly, but we have made progress.

Steeler Fan, it was a tremendous program. CSPAN is a great place to go on the weekends to listen to people talk about history. I had heard about this incident throughout my life of course, as we have all, but I don't recall ever seeing these students interviewed. They were fascinating to listen to. The students in the audience were spellbound as they listened to these gentlemen.

Pat: Thank you for a peek into history and an excellent post.

Pat, Boston, MA
I am so glad you mentioned what the social, political, and economic landscape was like 50 years ago. Some people , particularly, those not born at that time can't understand it's relevance . More importantly, the Right wing is distorting the Constitution,making it much more difficult for then to grasp.

For instance, Glen Beck 's rants and his fervent deserve to pervert the young minds today. I need to comment on two episodes which disturbed me greatly. on one of his coo coo lessons of correcting replace correcting with perverting, a teenager in his audience asked Glenn Beck since the Founding Fathers gave their lives, who would today? Beck replied Michelle Bachmann Plu-ez-z-z-z-e!
The next thing was Beck 's lying about the great African American orator and civil rights orator, Fredrick Douglaus. hBeck said the Fredrick Douglaus knew the Consitution was meant to include slaves. Duhh, hy the 13th amendment then?

The third was Beck telling a story about the Jewish Minister sympathizing with Negroes during that the 60's. Beck said Americans should carry a gun for this purpose. Beck's lecture over the days nas delvoled into a hate fest. Beck made it a point to equate the New Black Panther Party (I've read they are 6) to the Dixiecrats, and anti-segratist of that day.

My problen with Beck is he has no business wanting to claim a restoration of Dr MLK Jr. Beck is a hater, against the social gospel.

Glenn Beck is not a Religious Leader! He is a Cult Guru and Psychotic!

Glenn Beck has manifestations of bipolar has all the Clinical features of messianic delusions in schizophrenic spectrum disorders…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16737155

Glenn Beck has chit- chats with God and that God talks to him; Crazy!! What is God telling his new BFF about engaging in slander and fear-mongering; I wonder?

Pat, Boston, MA

i wish alot of our young people could have watched that, they need to be shown where we as a nation have come from. the dope dealers and gang bangers need to see how weak there really are. its easy to carrie a gun and sell dope, but to face what the freedom riders and the lunch counter sits in student faces, i know it would not make then stop but just maybe think twice.

Pa, that stretch is so far it is ridiculous.

The DNC talking point is now that opposition to the mosque being built on that site is racist, or bigoted, or hateful. 70% of Americans can be branded by that-is that where they really want to go?

How about some comment on St.Nicholas Orthodox church, the ONLY religious building actually destroyed on 9/11. They are NOT BEING ALLOWED to rebuild, thanks to the Port Authority. Why is that topic off the table?

How about the violation of city, state, and federal laws that demand disclosure of the funding source behind this-they have already bought this former Burlington coat factory building, which was damaged on 9/11, but refuse to disclose the funding source. Why no questions about that aspect of the debate?

Seems to me that there is a lot of highly selective outrage out there. Step into the mainstream for a change.

I would just like to add that one of the speakers was asked why their sit-in made such an impression across the country and he said it was because of television. It was one thing to hear about segregation or see photographs of certain images, but it was quite another to see filmed footage of what was going on with the hoses, the dogs, the "Colored People Only" signs, the beatings, etc.

Television brought to the country's livings rooms exactly what was transpiring, something photographs couldn't quite capture and do justice.

ThinkProgress:

At an anti-Islam rally yesterday at Ground Zero, a person of color wearing a skull cap and wandering through the crowd was targeted with insults and nearly attacked by protesters for the offense of looking vaguely Muslim. The videographer summarized the episode this way:

"A man walks through the crowd at the Ground Zero protest and is mistaken as a Muslim. The crowd turns on him and confronts him. The man in the blue hard hat calls him a coward and tries to fight him. The tall man who I think was one of the organizers tried to get between the two men. Later I caught up with the man who’s name is Kenny. He is a Union carpenter who works at Ground Zero. We discussed what a scary moment that was for him."

"Interesting way to “honor” Ground Zero, no?"

___________

Update from Think Progress: While there was much hate at yesterday’s rally, there were also many people who turned out to support the construction of the Islamic center. See pictures here, here, here, here, and here.

________________

Every time I've done something that doesn't feel right, it's ended up not being right. ~Mario Cuomo

Great post, Pat. Wish I had watched this C-Span program. The mainstream media television could do wonders to re-educate the country about its history by eliminating one reality show and replacing it with a documentary series.

Last night on Dateline, Brian Williams recounted Hurricane Katrina's first five days. I was again moved to misty eyes watching the suffering of New Orleans citizens. It has only been five years yet we have already forgotten how horrific it was. The civil rights marches, the sit-ins, have been many years removed--it is time television refreshes our memories.

Jody, unfortunately the majority of Americans don't care about history. I read this year books about the Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decisions. These books will stay with me for the rest of my life. I can't imagining ever reading 3 more important books than these ones. Ever.

And if I read books such as these and don't act upon what I have learned, then what's the point in reading them? It's impossible for me to ignore history.

Jody--I caught the Dateline special on Katrina last night as well--it was sobering to be reminded of how awful the storm and its aftermath was. These days I sometimes think an event doesn't seem "real" until we have seen it on television.

Pat-Boston I agree!

As a student of history, or more modestly put I try to be, it saddens me that all these cases are not required teaching in elementary school and high school. Only Brown vs. Board of education is typically covered.

Dred Scott decision the SCOTUS determined that even if a slave lived in free territory he couldn't sue for freedom, because it would infringe on his so called master's due process of property rights. Didn't become aware of this case until I took a college semester specifically about the Civil War's causes and social relevancy.

Plessy vs. Ferguson - Found out about this case while taking my planning and zoning Architectural course in college. We discussed more the implications as it affected red lining housing development and who could live there. Home owners associations were huge proponents of separate but equal.

Yellowdog: I hadn't heard about the Plessy/Dred Scott cases either until I was out of school. But it wasn't until this year that I read indepth books about them, together with Thurgood Marshall's work throughout his life, and these books literally blew me away. It doesn't make any sense that these cases aren't taught in school. It's mind boggling. These decisions affected millions of people. It's an America our school children need to be taught.

Thurgood Marshall. He is my most admired American, possibly after Lincoln.

I used to have C-Span. But then Comcast switched up the channels -every since we went digital. But wait, there was supposed to be no need to get the digital box if your TV was digital and you had cable. Alas, this was a lie. Comcast keeps taking/switching channels - one being C-span, but hey, I still have the Golf Channel - therefore, I am soon going to have to purchase a digital box.

Corporate America - gotta love it. Sorry, I know this has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Some of you may get my drift :)

No Jo,

If there are fundign source questions or issues, that's a legitimate debate topic. Unfortunatley your claim is the first I've heard of this topic at all, and this topic has NOT been the focus of this debate. It's been about whether or not "them Muslims" should be able to build on the land that they legitimately own. In that reagard, there is NO debate to be had.

As for the Christian church being unable to be rebuilt, I have a question: Why is the Port Authority rejecting?

Life, LIBERTY, and the persuit of happiness. Innocent until proven guilty. Treat others how you would like to be treated. Judge not, lest yee be judged. People in glass houses......

Just some words of wisdom I've been taught throughout my life that seem to have been completely disregarded concerning this (and a few other) debate(s)

Diane-42

I appreciate and admire your instinct to vote against Hoekstra. He is a moron. I do hope you reconsider and do not vote rethugliklan in November. The democratic mayor from Lansing (Virg Bernero) would do a great job for Michigan and advocate for our Presidents agenda. I don't trust Rick Snyder any further than I could throw him. I guarantee you he will raise all of Michigan's taxes and drive what's left of us out of the state.

Chris,

I'm from MI, and a staunch Dem. I must admit, I've been looking real closely at Snyder. I don't want to bad mouth the dems from the reasons that they have not won me. I'll just say at this point a political outsider is extremely tempting.

Chris,

Raise taxes more than Jenny? I left Michigan in 2007, retired out of Selfridge and headed to Florida. I was born and raised in Michigan until 88 when I joined the Army. I came back in 04 and the State was a S-Hole. You had Kwame in Detroit........Jenny destroying Michigan. The roads suck and didn't change since the 80's and Detroit looks worse than Baghdad. How many Jobs did Jenny chase out of the State? Don't get me started about the school system, how many kids graduated from DPS? 26%!! DPS teachers are the 3rd highest paid teachers in the country.

Jenny ran that State like Obama is running the country. Do you see that?

Maybe it's about time somebody asked the REAL question and get the REAL answer...

How many people out there don't care what religion the President is?

Me, myself and I - there's three votes already!

MB, why do you find it necessary to leap to the defense of a lie? Is it because the truth doesn't serve you well enough? The truth stands on its own. Only lies need to be propped up.

On which side do you stand?

John B, Des Moines, IA-

I'm not defending anything, John...I'm simply offering some perspective about the Pew Research poll findings that First Read chooses to misstate or misrepresent.

Only 46% of the Democrat respondents to Pew's polling believe that President Obama is a Christian. A total of 51% of Democrats either don't know what the President's faith is, or actually think he's a Muslim. Those are the findings of Pew Research...I didn't make those numbers up out of thin air.

Further, since Pew Research had already done polling on this issue in March of this year, the central theme of their analysis was summed up in the title of the release of their new data:

"Growing Number of Americans Say Obama is a Muslim".

This defies conventional wisdom, and that is the point Pew is trying to make. Generally speaking, as time goes by during the course of a Presidency, Americans become more, not less, certain about who the man they've elected President actually is.

I recommend you actually read the survey, John, and then address your concerns about its findings to Pew Research.

As for me, I've already said that I don't believe that President Obama is a Muslim...I've further stated that I don't believe that he's particularly religious at all.

How you've come to the conclusion that I'm somehow defending a lie is a mystery...unless you have a reading comprehension problem.

So you're not defending the lie, you merely find it useful in advancing a narrative you favor.

Potayto, Potahto.

John B, Des Moines, IA-

Um...no, John.

Read Pew Research's analysis of its polling data .

When you feel that you've understood what they're saying...you'll understand what I've said.

MB, I also think it's safe to say that if 46% of democrats don't know what religion or 10% thought he was muslim and it's probably also safe to say that it took well over 90 % of democrats to elect him, that 46% of democrats could probably could care less either way.

OK MB, what's your point? The only thing I see here is that the Big Lie works.

John B, Des Moines, IA-

Seriously, John? That's what you believe the point of Pew's analysis was, even after they tipped you off with "Growing Number of Americans Say Obama is a Muslim"?

Re what you refer to as the "Big Lie":

Why John, do you personally believe that, if the Pew Research data is accurate, 41% of Democrats don't know what faith President Obama adheres to while an additional 10% think he's a Muslim? And, why are "growing" numbers of DEMOCRATS (as well as Republicans and independent voters), again according to Pew Research, uncertain about President Obama's religious beliefs?

Who is making DEMOCRATS believe the "Big Lie"?

Any thoughts?

MB, are you really going to be that disingenuous?

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/franklin-graham-president-obama-born-muslim-pew-poll/story?id=11446462

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wajahat-ali/barack-obama-muslim-presi_b_689254.html

http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/08/17/president_obama_muslim_missionary

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/2750/barack-hussein-obama-once-a-muslim-always-a-muslim/

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/04/spencer-interview-is-obama-a-muslim.html

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1053338

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/06/-obama-tells-egyptian-foreign-minister-i-am-a-muslim-stealth-coup-on-the-white-house.html

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_obama.html

http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/christian

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0408/pipes042908.php3

http://www.danielpipes.org/5286/was-barack-obama-a-muslim

http://redblueamerica.com/truthornot/2008-02-13/barack-obama-secret-muslim-933

http://redblueamerica.com/truthornot/2008-02-13/barack-obama-secret-muslim-933

http://hnn.us/articles/56359.html

Now, are you going to continue pretending there isn't an entire industry out there devoted to deceiving people about the background and beliefs of Barack Obama?

But John...

WHY are DEMOCRATS believing it?

OK, you're going to continue pretending. Please, don't let me stop you from looking silly.

John B, Des Moines, IA-

I think it's silly that a majority of DEMOCRATS can no longer correctly identify President Obama's faith...of those, most simply aren't certain anymore.

How is that possible?

President Obama was elected nearly two years ago, and presumably, these are the people who voted for him.

Who is pretending here, John...?

I'm a conservative...and, I don't believe that President Obama is a Muslim.

I think it's silly that a majority of DEMOCRATS can no longer correctly identify President Obama's faith...of those, most simply aren't certain anymore.

How is that possible?

I am surprised you all of people are asking this question...

The answer is... if you say some LONG enough and LOUD enough... eventually the stuck on stupid crowd begins to believe it... NO matter what party they belong too...

What EVER happened to intellectual curiosity in this country?

Wait... wait... I know the answer... after 8 years of the Dummy & the Dick... that question kinda answers itself!

I think it is more pernicious than that, Feisty, you are being kind. President Obama is attacked for two reasons: he is a Democratic President, duly elected by a majority who voted, and he looks different than do the "tea baggers" that slander him. The Republican leadership, and minions think the Presidency is theirs by right. It is akin to the old feudal system, where there are those who are landowners, and there are the peasants. The Republicans look on anyone outside of their own group as the peasants, not entitled to hold leadership in this country. When you add that President Obama's skin color is different, his name sounds foreign, he represents the (gasp!) Democratic party, paranoia begins to take hold. I have said before and I will repeat, this is tribalism, and at the heart of that is always racism. Things have changed in America, and while we will not go back to having old white men in charge of this country, the old white men are reacting in fear and anger as they lose their grip on power.

Amy - I too heard Sufi. We have a lot of Americans around where I live that practice the Sufi religion. I had never heard of them before and did a little research (about 10 years ago). They are extremely peaceful, always willing to give a helping hand. I have witnessed all of this and by the way they were all originally Christians!

"Republicans and small business over the last two years could have been hiring and investing while these tax cuts were in place thus proving to the American public and this administration why these tax cuts were so important during a recession and necessary to keep in place."

Good point. I had to laugh when McConnell said "but this has been tax law for a decade." Ah, yeah, and how has that worked out?

American Joe-1603040

What a great attestment to republican fiscal ir-resonsibility. Let's not forget corporatists like Mort Zuckerman’s and their predilection to not hire people for jobs because they say the President is bashing them (read greed and the desire to have this country and Prez fail), lies about the stimulus package and healthcare, and all the other things they won’t do .

Amy B Portland, ME Good point. I had to laugh when McConnell said "but this has been tax law for a decade." Ah, yeah, and how has that worked out?

So Amy, you seem real happy about taxes going up in January. What kind of projections are you on the left looking at as far as these tax increases creating jobs? 1 million? 2 million? Just what is your side saying with regards businesses being in a position to hire more people while at the same time paying additional taxes to the government?

Amy, Beverly, Thanks for your response and FR for allowing my post. You guys and gals are very generous, Thanks

Jo Anna, you evidently missed my narrative above. The republicans and businesses had the chance to prove these tax cuts helped and were worthy of keeping in place. It appears they failed miserably.

American Joe - Jo Anna, you evidently missed my narrative above. The republicans and businesses had the chance to prove these tax cuts helped and were worthy of keeping in place. It appears they failed miserably.

So what you're saying American Joe is that you don't care if the tax increases cause jobs to be lost, because, well, "the republicans and businesses had their chance". And what about the "democrat" businesses American? Did they hire?

JoAnnaSmith1

You are one twisted sister.

JoAnne is not trying to 'get it', so do not waste your time. She doesn't realize that most Rep. tax cuts DO NOT APPLY TO HER. Most do not realize that tax cuts for rich do not guarantee job creation. Corporations exist to create wealth, not jobs!!!!! If creating jobs helps create wealth, fine. If cutting jobs increases wealth, fine. Thats the way it is,PERIOD

WE know that tax cuts for

Amy B., Portland , ME : JoAnnaSmith1 You are one twisted sister

Why don't you want to answer the question Amy? It's not hard, even for simple minded Libs like you. You've been saying how terrible the Bush tax cuts are, so fine, they expire in several months, that should make you happy. So how many jobs will those tax increases create Amy?

" they expire in several months, that should make you happy. So how many jobs will those tax increases create Amy?"

Gee, I dunno, JoanneSmith1. But you tell me, if tax cuts generate jobs, why did the tax cuts made during Bush's administration result in the worst recession since the Great Depression?

Amy B., Portland,ME " Gee, I dunno, JoanneSmith1. But you tell me, if tax cuts generate jobs, why did the tax cuts made during Bush's administration result in the worst recession since the Great Depression?

Gee you dunno? That's your answer? So you don't know if the tax increases will generate new jobs or not, correct? And you really couldn't care less, correct? Well that sounds just about right for the Left these days where it's all about using the tax code as revenge more then anything else. Is that your true nature Amy? Sure sounds like it. And you seem to know about everything else, like how ObamaCare will be so wonderful for all of America, but you don't know about raising taxes creating job growth. Hmmm.

And if you want to talk about Bush, then go ahead, the Left hasn't any successes they can talk about, so why not give that a go.

Mitch McConnell was a disgrace on MTP! He never answered David Gregory's question about how to pay for the Bush Tax Cuts.

How is it possible this man can be an elected official at the top of his party and is a complete an utter fool. Or not. He thinks the public is made up of fools!

Playing stupid is right in JoAnnaSmith's wheelhouse. Avoidance of questions runs a close second.

Jo Anna, you evidently missed my narrative above. The republicans and businesses had the chance to prove these tax cuts helped and were worthy of keeping in place. It appears they failed miserably.

Just answer the damn question Joanna! How is doing the same thing that failed to meet expectations AGAIN, going to help anything but increasing the Deficit you rail on and on about?

JUST. ANSWER. THE. QUESTION!

Hey Teddy. Take a chill-pill. It's okay, no need have a stroke over it.

Your side is in control of the tax situation Ted. They'll do what they'll do. You seem to be in the camp that the tax cuts should expire. Okay, fine by me. So tell us Teddy, when the tax cuts expire, what type of job creation we should expect in the coming years because of the higher taxes? What do you think Ted, 1 million jobs created? 2 million jobs created? It's obvious cutting taxes did not work to create jobs, so raising them must be the answer.

Let us all know what'cha thinking Teddy.

"So you don't know if the tax increases will generate new jobs or not, correct?"

I know letting Bush's tax cuts on the wealthiest expire will help reduce the enonormous deficit he left us.

As for creating jobs, that's up to the ingenuity of the America people, isn't it? In Maine we are creating an off shore wind energy industry using the skills and resources we developed for boat building. We're not sitting around waiting for Obama to create jobs for us (althiugh the federal grant money is a big help!)

Great post, Nashville Fan. I think this is why the discussion of President Obama's faith is so troubling. First of all, it shouldn't matter what his faith is, so it bothers me that somehow it would be bad if he were a Muslim. But putting that aside, his opponents know he is not a Muslim and yet lack the courage or integrity to tell the truth.

"In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane" Oscar Wilde

The problem is, most Teabaggers generally don't read First Read. Too literate, I guess. I run into the craziest people commenting on the President's channel on You Tube, and other sites. Their arguments are irrational, uninformed and emotionally charged. They are willing to vote against their best interests just to show Obama he's not "the man." They are willing to shred our freedom of religion in order to cling to their fear and hatred of Muslims. It makes them feel powerful to act like belligerant bullies. Their posts are usually way, way out of line, unlike anything we've seen before in terms of personal attacks on Democrats, filled with lewd and disgusting language. Rational discourse is not on their agenda.

That explains why 47% of people not only DO NOT PAY income taxes, but get welfare in the form of 'refundable tax credits' from those of us who do pay income taxes.

Why should you pay income tax if you don't make enough income to be taxed?

Why are you okay with corporations paying zero tax when they are making billions in income and hiding their profits overseas?

Businesses want to horde all the money, not pay taxes on it, not pay a living wage, and then complain because folks aren't earning enough to pay income taxes?

Talk about having your cake and eating it too.

There you go no joe all blow, your a have not paying the way for the haves. Hope you enjoy paying their far share so they don't have to. So your one of those teabaggers that have been hood winked into supporting the haves.

no joe,

Don’t forget that it would only be 38% if it weren’t for the tax cuts in the stimulus bill for 2009 & 2010. Those tax cuts were one-third of the stimulus bill.

I am not a thief-therefore, I do not take money out of the pockets of those who earn more than I. it is their money, not mine.

I give generously to charities, a lot more than our 'compassionate' vice president, for example.

I do not want to support those who earn less than I do. That is their responsibility, not mine. So while I have no problem giving generously to my local food pantry, I OBJECT to having the government take MY MONEY to give it to others. While I am happy to help a neighbor or family member who needs a babysitter, I OBJECT to the government forcing me to pay for day care centers. While I give generously to St. Judes hospital, the Shriners, and others who provide health care for children, I OBJECT to the government taking my money and giving it away for that prupose.

I see charity as a personal decision-not one the government should be forcing me, or anyone else, to make.

I want to keep my money, and let others keep theirs. Mine is not theirs - nor is theirs mine.

Liberals too often see Robin Hood as a tale of charitable heroism, and not as it was-a political fight. That's what comes of tunnel vision, a truly liberal disease.

How do you spell S E L F I S H & self absorbed?

I spell it N O J O N O B O...

no joe:

I object to the government taking MY MONEY and giving it in subsidies to corporations that then pay ZERO taxes back into the U.S. economy.

I object to the government taking MY MONEY to fund private contractors in war zones where the money cannot be accounted for.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/a-fraud-bigger-than-madoff-1622987.html

Funny how folks who "earn" their money by taking advantage of folks want to be celebrated as some type of heros . . . more capitalist fairy tales.

Rationing people's access to healthcare for a profit is not "earning".

Creating junk financial products to sell to folks is not "earning".

Moving factories to third world countries so you can exploit folks there and not pay a living wage here is not "earning".

Never increasing the wages of front line workers while paying executives huge bonuses is not "earning".

When did the definition of "work" in the country become so skewed?

Nash, great post, I was about to say pretty much the same thing, except most Americans would rather have a decent wage rather than trade their dignity in to accepting charity from the likes of No Jo. You see Jo wages have remained flat for damn near 20 years or so for the working class (while cost of living increased) and Ceo's pay and their managemnt pay has risen almost 800% since the same time. So go take your charity and shove it! I'm sure no one will miss your minimum compassion or minimum charity.

Great point American Joe, and where did the money come from to produce such a dramatic rise in upper class income? Seems the numbers speak for themselves http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/09/gdp-per-capita.html .

People are convinced the cause is that a 60-year low in tax collections is too high when in fact it's a massive redistribution in wealth toward the top.

Excellent post, Babina. Thanks for the link!

That's your argument against HCR? That it may lead to rationing?

Healthcare is already rationed. If your company doesn't offer health insurance, you either go broke trying to pay for it yourself or go with out. My nephew has a heart condition, his company stopped offering insurance, he pays thousands of dollars to COBRA to keep his insurance. Why would you deny health care to my 30 year old nephew just because he's a carpenter and not a bank clerk? Why is it OK to ration healthcare so that only people in certain jobs are covered?

Jim-2246319

I agree that Death Panels is way-over the top. But, heath care will be rationed. No question about that. Under the guide-lines there will be a Federal Bureau assessing what health care should be given to a paitent under certain guide lines. Age being one of those guide lines.

Federal Bureau assessing what health care should be given to a paitent under certain guide lines

Jim

Are you you speaking of the undevoled reptialian brains of the Sarah Palin-oltogists?

Because the plan looks a lot like what Obama promised. The new requirements for hospitals to report on health care-associated infections that develop in hospitals and demographic information are associated with such infections.

The secretary of Health and Human Services is also authorized to make the information publicly available over the Internet. The secretary should also make an annual report to Congress with recommendations for reducing such infections.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/62/require-providers-to-report-measures-of-health-c/

You are aware that the eldely and newborns as well as children are more prone to disease; aren't you? That's a good thing not only for their health but also for the spread of dideases in America.

Gotta problem with that thinking, Jim....

He doesn't have to go to church to be a christian. All he needs is to have it in his heart

You are already paying for healthcare for the uninsured, as their unpaid bills are passed on to you by hospitals and physicians who have to charge more because uninsured people don't pay them. Under HCR, everyone will be required to carry health insurance, and if they can't afford it they will get help doing so.

Nobody is taking anything away from you. This isn't about giving something to undeserving people. Doctors and hospitals have said our current system is unsustainable. HCR may need to be changed down the road, but at the moment, at least we've done something to address the craziness.

Right on point amy!!!

Amy PortlandME -

Portland, ME

You are already paying for healthcare for the uninsured

Then why did Obama need a trillion dollars in new taxes to fund his plan? In truth the insurance companies did little to contain costs, and now that the government has effectively taken control of the health care industry, there will be even less incentive in cost controls. The result of ObamaCare will be to have less care available to more people, and the quality of that care will also take a nose dive. Businesses are cutting their employees from their benefit packages and businesses are not hiring because they cannot afford the costs of insurance, or the penalty from the government if they choose not to insure their employees.

These are the truths to ObamaCare Amy. If you choose to ignore them, then that's your problem. Oh and:

Under HCR, everyone will be required to carry health insurance

Even Howard Dean knows the way ObamaCare is funded will be thrown out by the courts. The day that happens is the day ObamaCare (thankfully) dies.

Well said Amy!

As for you Jim:

Matthew 25: 35-40 "‘For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; 36 naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 38 ‘And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 39 ‘When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 “The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’

I'm sure you can understand this, because I'm sure you consider yourself a Christian (when it's convenient to do so).

How much further can our health care system nose-dive. We are already 37th, behind costa rica and cuba. The truth is that we must do something.

Health care is NOT A Privilege, IT IS A RIGHT. How can you turn health care into a profit making enterprise and still hope to get quality care? You can't because greed rules in this country.

Ok so we do away with the health care bill ....then what? We still have a huge problem .We are following other country's that have universal health care and the care to cost ratio is far less in their countries. Bush 2 Clinton Carter Nixon LBJ all wanted a universal health care plan. Reagan called it socialism that's why you here the term so much.I think Reagan was wrong being a country that could provide health care to our citizens.We give billions to other countries we need to take care of our own and I am ashamed of the religious right for NOT stepping up to the plate and making health care available for kids

-shrugs-

My health insurance premium has gone steadily upward every year that I have been employed. I just haven't seen it because my employers have shouldered the costs and basically ended any increases in my personal pay as a result of it. This will likely continue to be the case as long as health insurance companies exist and the United States continues to have the healthcare pricing scale it has adopted. I sincerely doubt your premiums have remained the same unless you do not get your healthcare insurance from your employer. Your employer simply hasn't mentioned it to you until the costs became so burdensome that they couldn't offset them just by not paying you more in salary.

Most people's health-care costs are rising this year, just like last year and the year before that and so on. Does it have anything to do with the Health-care Reform Bill? Yes and no, your health-care costs were going to increase if there had been no health-care legislation, and since the Senate sold out the consumer by removing any type of Public Option to keep the Insurance Industry honest they went up anyway, what got passed was a plan for the taxpayer to subsidise the Insurance Industry, nothing more, it does nothing to control costs, just mandates everyone buy it, the American worker takes another one to keep the wealthy wealthy.

Gee Michael, how many years have you had the same level of premium without an increase before President Obama came along and wrecked everything? Health insurance rates nationally increased 90% just between 2000 and 2006! http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://monthlyreview.org/images/080201singer-chart1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://monthlyreview.org/080201singer.php&usg=__oV4NjRD1t_EHmWNlDr8QJO5qg-s=&h=346&w=424&sz=25&hl=en&start=5&zoom=1&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=I6eMScHXWnk1QM:&tbnh=103&tbnw=126&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhealth%2Binsurance%2Bincreases%2Bover%2Btime%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26tbs%3Disch:1

Oh, and want to know why it's been years since you've had a raise? There might be a little clue in there for that subject as well.

My health care has gone up EVERY YEAR! No one hides the cost because I pay it as an individual since the group of Republicans that I work for do not cover any benefits but I can have one week vacation each year. I have been working for them for 11 years.

Does it sound as though I am sympathetic to employers? If so, I am not. Employers bought into this shell game in the 1970's just like everyone else did because it sounded like a nice 'benefit' to tack onto someone's salary in order to make their companies more attractive to prospective employers. At the time, they had no idea that the healthcare service providers would manage to jack up prices to the scale that even the insurance companies, (which basically print their own money for doing basically no work that adds anything of substance to our society), would actually start to have difficulty paying them.

However, in the current environment, employers have the power over labor, which means that they can arbitrarily start to label something that has become a customary part of nearly every worker's compensation package as a 'benefit' again - even though it is a 'benefit' that is so intrinsically tied into the functioning of this economy that if the employers just stopped offering it, entire sections of the economy would collapse en masse and at once. The essential truth of this is that unless some outside force manages to force correct the pricing scale of the U.S. healthcare industry into something more in line with the rest of the world, the healthcare providers and insurance companies will continue to have the leverage to hold us all hostage and there is precious little any of us can do about it, except to accept the accounting practices that tell us we 'gross' $42,000 per year, even though more than 25% of that is tied up in 'benefits' that many of us will never see and most of us might use once in a lifetime.

However accepting that I supposedly 'gross' that much and about a quarter of it is invisibly paid to private companies that I can neither choose nor control in packages that I can neither choose nor even make suggestions about and that company policy requires me to accept this 'benefit' rather than simply saying, 'no, I'd rather just have the extra salary and choose my own 'benefits'' sounds an awful lot like the involuntary sort of taxation that the right wing constantly bitches about.

I am supposed to feel better because it's the bureacrats on the company HR department making the decisions about my health insurance rather than the bureacrats in the Federal government? Screw that. The bureacrats in my HR department have a vested interest in choosing the cheapest and most worthless plan they possibly can get away with in order to preserve the company's bottom line. The bureacrats in the Federal government don't have a vested interest in anything except to do their job because they aren't really beholden to drive down costs. That is why a single payer government option is intrinsically, pragmatically better.

But don't tell the right wing that because they are too busy trying to defend 'freedoms' they don't have in the first place from government intrusion into the situation where they are paying way too much to the people that are bleeding all of us dry.

Michael Thompson-SC

So tell me how this sounds to you. ATT pays 2.1 BILLION DOLLARS a YEAR for employee health care benefits. Under your wonderful single payer plan ATT has the right to pay a $3000.00 penalty for each employee they do not cover with a medical health plan. ATT will save 400 MILLION Dollars a year by doing just that. Now if you think ATT or any other company is going to pay you additional money to buy a health care plan, think again. Michael go out and by yourself a cheap plan maybe at $300.00 a month or maybe at $700.00 a month. Wait I know why you don't care it's because I and other Americans have to pay for your plan. Health care plans are expensive because the cost of medicine is expensive. There is a way to solve this problem but socialist do not like to think in a capitalist method. Soon you and a lot of the rest of us (more than the 40 million Americans who do not have a health plan) will be receiving our medical care from armatures. The rich will always have the best because as in Europe the rich have a private plan and the best doctors are available to them.

Wow afloatinsea, you haven't cut and pasted this one in a couple of weeks. I'm surprised to see it back. Why wouldn't ATT have just stopped offering insurance years ago in order to save the entire $2.1B? Therefore HCR actually provides LESS incentive to discontinue insurance than they have already.

Ah, now I understand. Just because he was a member of the same Christian congregation for over 20 years that doesn't mean he ISN'T a Muslim. And even if it does you still don't approve of a message that America needs to behave in a Godly way to be blessed by God. Thanks for making all that clear, Ray.

Actually, I'm still wating for someone to explain what difference it makes WHAT he is. There is no constitutional test that governs his qualification to be President based on his religion, or lack of one, is there?

Sounds like another in a long string on Right Wing non-issues.

Can't disagree dbo, beyond the clear pattern that "Muslim" has become short hand for "people I dislike automatically" among the bigots.

How do YOU know what was preached in that church, Ray W. Wait..don't tell me, you're a member there! Oh my gosh, you believe in Black Liberation Theology. Do your friends know that? Does that make you a Muslim too? I'm sure we will all take your word (wink, wink) for it if you deny it.