"By the way, the woman who made the statement about being "exhausted," Velma Hart, later said she was "100%" in support of the president."

Well, DUH.

It was an 'invitation only' event where only his supporters were invited. Unfortunately for Obama, even his supporters are disenchanted, and they have some serious questions that the main stream media won't ask.

The 'new reality' is that Obama's far-left, anti-business liberal policies just don't work, and this 'social experiment in wealth redistribution' is a total flop.

Mortgaging our children's and grandchildren's future will mean a DRASTIC decline in their lives for generations to come.

Jimmy Carter just claimed his was a 'superior' Presidency. The only thing it might be 'superior' to is Obama's Presidency. Look up 'Misery Index' on wikipedia for how 'superior' it was - also take note of GW Bush vs Clinton.

I feel "exhausted from defending the President" some days too. My exhaustion stems more from weathering the onslaught of rightwing propaganda I get every day than from actual disappointment on this administration. I hear Velma's plea as a plea to the Democratic establishment to get out there, and make the case for healthcare reform, for our improving economy, for the money saved in the draw down of troops, about the restoration of America in the eyes of the world. I need to see Warren Buffet getting airtime with his support of the President, and physicians and nurses on Meet The Press talking about benefits to us of healthcare reform. I get exhausted, posting comments on this site, some days, knowing I don't have the expertise to argue cogently about economic factors ( took me days of googling to find reliable information about healthcare statistics during that debate.) I am exhausted defending democratic policies when the facts aren't getting out that help to make the case, and the rightwingers are ginning up emotion over fact. It's exhausting dealing with that. (The Tea Party is on the news and in the papers every day of the week.)

Ron Indiana

Then there were the 2009 town hall meetings with Tea Partiers carrying guns and derogatory signs calling our President a socialist and a communist. And during all this time there was the steady marching beat of Fox news twisting and revising history.

As usual you bring sanity to this board. The 2009 town hall meetings with the Tea Partiers were quite disturbing to me. I think what was even more disturbing is the why the hypocrites employed Saul Alinsky tactics. I have posted a video for those who missed Rachel Maddow's show explaining the "Alinsky-cons" flummox. Tea Baggers were told to chant and make attempts to shout down the speakers at town hall meetings.

In an interview with TPM, FreedomWorks press secretary Adam Brandon said the group is aware of this symbol's traditional meaning. "Well, when you start working here at FreedomWorks, the first book you read is Saul Alinsky's Rules For Radicals.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/tea-party-group-co-opts-communist-symbol.php

The growth of the “Tea Party” movement has seen "Alinsky morph" from a bogeyman to an inspiration to conservative activists well-funded top-down organizations like FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity from the crime family of the Koch Brothers.

here is a video proving Tea Baggers are being used (pun intended)!!

http://video.aol.co.uk/video-detail/beck-with-david-horowitz-discuss-conservatives-using-saul-alinsky-tatics/2754126252

'Pick the Target, Freeze It, Personalize It and Polarize It.'
- Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals.

Yes, that is what crime Koch Brothers family have done to our President and our country.

Isn't it more than ironic, that TEA Baggers organization are "right" out of the Alinsky playbook and President Obama is an avatar of a scary new world?

Or that multiply personality disorder guru Glenn Beck renounced Saul Alinsky last night and linked it to Satan. Good Night Irene don’t let Glenn Beck’s nightmare’s bite ya in the butt.

If US give Republicans the keys for another 2 yrs, US will be bankrupt; for real!
Tea Baggers you are the scapegoats.

One more thing, Ron that gets me fired up and ready to go is FOX NOISE (Republican headquarters)

BTW: Hannity let Micheal Steele plug "Fire" Anti-Pelosi website on his FOX NOISE show and promised Hannity a "red" autographed "Fire Pelosi hat; if Sean would just get on the bus.

Bev: Thank you for your comments. You and I are reading from the same hymnal, same page, same verse. Problem is I don't sing so well, but you sing like a bird.

Tyler why do keep allowing the righties to collapse my posts. It's not my fault they can't stand the truth. Please fair and restore my column.

Roy,

Reading comprehension does not appear to be a strong suit of yours. Carter proclaimed his POST presidency as Superior to his peers.

And you are confusing your presidents there; W required the loyalty pledges and let no dissent into a 'town' hall. President Obama's venues are open to the public.

Ron, Excellent - as always!

Bev - you have to e-mail him to restore your post and copy in:

#4.6 @ http://tyler.newsvine.com/_more/users/contact

GOOD LUCK - as ol Tyler is pretty quick with the delete button, as for restoring... eh NOT so much!

Think of it this way...as a WISE and much respected friend told me last week:

It's better to have a bullseye on your back than a boot on your THROAT!

I'm exhausted from defending the President, also too:)

However, as a benefactor of the the hard fought battles of the Civil Rights warriors I know change does not happen overnight! So I will not bash the President or expect miracles.

The mess he found on his desk 01/21/2009 can only be imagined by mere 9 -5'ers like me. What with national security issues and the economy in the ditch I'm sure he found some other bull_hit that "we the people" will never know about.

I wake up every day convinced with every fiber of my being that President Barack Obama is working hard to keep America safe and is continually working to bring America back from financial ruin brought you by the fiscally irresponsible members of both Congress and the prior administration.

I have not lost faith, knowing that His vision is not about just what we can see in the natural.

Clara KCMO "Roy, Reading comprehension does not appear to be a strong suit of yours. Carter proclaimed his POST presidency as Superior to his peers."

You obviously didn't hear his initial remarks, where he clearly said his 'Presidency' was superior.

His later comments that your refer to were just trying to cover his tracks.

I'm going to dissent - how can anyone still give Obama a pass on everything his administration pushes?

Let's talk about the stimulus; let's talk about the bank bailouts. Why in the name of God - if the idea was to oversee those financial concerns (AIG, Lehman Bros., Countrywide Financial) that scripted the lending policy that duped so many - were the executives of these companies allowed to retain their positions? Why were they allowed to receive their pay bonuses? Why were they allowed to get away with a hand-slap while HEARTH forced every taxpayer who had sense enough not to buy into these sub-prime loans to foot the bill for those who did?

Concerning healthcare: why aren't we given the choice to opt out of buying insurance? Why was giving mandatory business to a PRIVATE FIRM legislated? Where did that much-lauded public option go? Why are millions of wage-earners finding themselves in a position where they'll be losing thousands of their personal income to a non-subsidized expense they may not even need? Why couldn't bans on denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions go through without robbing everyone blind? Isn't highway robbery what the insurance companies were already doing to us - why now does the government sanction it? Was the tactic to instill guilt in the tax-paying base; fork over your money lest Timmy here leave naught but a lonely crutch before next Christmas day? Wouldn't the thing to do, in fact, have been to legislate a required standard of care be provided by insurance companies and forced them to slash executive pay while stipulating it couldn't adversely affect these same firms' rank-and-file employees?

Or better yet, most sensibly yet, shouldn't we have just scrapped the whole damn thing the moment a viable public option fell through and the best alternative anyone could come up with was pouring more dough into the hands of those that make too goddamned much money proportional to what they do already? Wouldn't it have been wiser to start over instead of blithely commenting that because it's now "on the books, it'll be easier to change?" SAY WHAT?

Any of Obama's base who has complaints about him has a fair reason to do so, in my eyes. Anyone who feels sleighted and betrayed is standing on solid footing and I can't just give the guy as many free throws as he likes. This is as tough for me as having to admit seven years ago that Bush screwed up royal when he made the decision to go after Iraq and shifted our focus from Afghanistan. I wanted to believe Obama the same way I wanted to believe Bush and I feel more ill-at-ease and more anxious about the future than I did at any time during the last administration.

Well, ED,be prepared to lose most of your friends. I may disagreewith your reasons, but you and I are in the majority in opposing HCR.

The problem with the HCR is, quite simply, Obama misunderstood the problem. People wanted something done about the rising costs-they did not want a government takeover. He got that part-'public option' was a loser-but he misunderstood the rest. The quick, simple way to cut costs would have been to cut state mandates-those charming rules that have 90 year olds carrying maternity coverage, among other things. It would have opened municipal policies to residents of those municipalities-perhaps, even, opened the Federal coverage to citizens.

None of that was done-instead, an incredibly expensive 2000plus page bill was passed, (the full ramifications of which are still not understood by the very people who voted for it), and the electorate is more unhappy than it was in the immediate aftermath of its passage.

Obama still does not get it. He does not get the increased anger over the passage of his stimulous bill-cannot understand why folks aren't cheering. Does not get why voters are against cap and trade. Or any of the other pork laden bills he's signed.

Democrats faced major losses in1946 and 1994-the last two times they attempted to take over healthcare in this country. This year, the losses will be much,much worse. And HCR will be just as dead as it was post those other elections.

The main difference that I see is that this time, Dems will probably not recover for a generation.

@no joe, no bo, nj: Newsflash - people can disagree politically and remain not only civil, but friends as well. That's something we seem to have forgotten at-large as Americans, despite it being central to our strength as a country.

I was willing to overlook - even with clenched jaws - ARRA and HEARTH. I tried to rationalize those bills away as necessary to elevate the country out of the Republican-provoked financial crisis. Then along came the festering, pustulant mutant that turned into HCR and there he lost me. There I had to throw my hands up and ask what in the hell is going on in the White House and the halls of Congress to think such a thing was ever a good idea.

That bill should've protected patients alone and only that, if funding for a cheap, affordable and government-sponsored insurance alternative couldn't be found. But ohhhhhh no. We couldn't continue to be the one industrial nation that doesn't have virtual coverage for all it's citizens, no. We couldn't have simply made it easier for the individual to acquire affordable coverage if they wished to, no. We had to guarantee boosted profits to another gang of corporate thugs who'd already spent decades profiting on the literal life-or-death misery of people seeking help.

That is why I cannot stand this damn bill.

I don't agree with your assertion that the Democrats can't recover from this. The American voter is a fickle beast - content at times to stand and graze in silence, charging otherwise when provoked - and all the Republicans need do is bone up in Congress between now and 2012 to ensure the Democrats benefit from the stampede of an already-spooked herd.

Fellow Travelers:

Every time I hear a Teabagger go on about wild and horrific government spending, I am moved to ask, "And would like some context with your tea?"

Without going into great detail, it is generally acknowledged that the majority of teabaggers are older and white. (There is a vocal and mindless contingent that simply opposes ALL taxes, but they simply don't understand that roads don't pave themselves, that G.I.'s should not be expected to work for free, and that schools actually need money to run. These guys don't get it and never will. They have never lived in a teachable moment.)

In any case, the older contingent - the largest cohort - has this mantra that goes something like this: "But how can we pile all this odious debt on our children and grandchildren?" (Insert appropriate snivels, whines, and disingenuous platitudes here.)

The answer is that it's nothing more than a continuation of government spending policies that have been in place for, oh, I don't know - THE LAST HALF-CENTURY. These on-the-ball teabaggers are just now discovering this. For the last few years, interest ALONE on the national debt runs about FOUR-HUNDRED-BILLION DOLLARS. Suddenly, the teabaggers find themselves concerned about debt.

BS! Their concern is that they are now going to have to pay the piper, and here they were planning on a cushy retirement that was bought and paid for with debt. They don't want to pay for it. It's TRILLIONS, folks. Try this link on for size. http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

When the pundits start talking about identifying these guys, they say it's kinda difficult, they just don't seem to be able to get a handle on who they are. Yeah? Let me help. They are the folks who have a mantra they don't chant in public. It goes like this: "I got mine baby, and I ain't gonna help pay for yours."

They hate it when they get busted for being the selfish pigs they are. They hate being exposed for the bloodsuckers they are. Most certainly, they are NOT what made America great.

Obama is victim of Bush's failed promises
Greener Pastures Column -- 5/ 15/10

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting number of records during his first year in office.
Largest budget ever.

Largest deficit ever.

Largest number of broken promises ever.

Most self-serving speeches ever.

Largest number of agenda-setting failures ever.

Fastest dive in popularity ever.

Wow! Talk about change.

Just one year ago, fresh from his inauguration celebrations, President Obama was flying high. After one of the nation's most inspiring political campaigns, the election of America's first black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they don't see it as self-imposed. It's all George Bush's fault.

George Bush, who doesn't have a vote in congress and who no longer occupies the White House, is to blame for it all.

He broke Obama's promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obama's promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He broke Obama's promise to end earmarks.

He broke Obama's promise to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obama's promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke Obama's promise to make peace with direct, no precondition talks with America's most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

He broke Obama's promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obama's promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obama's promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

He broke Obama's promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

He broke Obama's promise to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter of last year.

Yes, it's all George Bush's fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending failed Bush administration.
If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of President Obama's problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel. North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it would be like if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, didn't have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks? There would be no ear marks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying (Nebraska, Louisiana).

If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's fault.

Take for example the decision of Eric Holder, the president's attorney general, to hold terrorists' trials in New York City. Or his decision to try the Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian.

Two disastrous decisions.

Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from George Bush.

Need more proof?

You might recall that when Scott Brown won the election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts , capturing "the Ted Kennedy seat", President Obama said that Brown's victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. And they wanted change.

Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts was George Bush's fault.

Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats. It is all George Bush's fault.

Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive?

Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something... - anything?

(Chuck Green is a veteran Colorado journalist and former editor-in-chief of The Denver Post.) And a Liberal.

Ron, the republican party has been hijacked by the teabaggers and they are so terrified they will not be elected without their support they are bowing to the teabaggers like they were the kings and queens of sheba. I feel that will be their undoing, lets not forget Ross Perot. Many independent voters are not going to vote for teabaggers, they are way to in the middle to go to that extreme and some republicans are not going to vote for those candidates either - they are pretty insulted by this shift in their party. I know a lot of republicans who are republicans because of money, plain and simple, they do not care one thing about social or religious issues and when the republican party harps on social or religious issues thy simply do not vote. That is what I'm hoping, working, and praying for this November.

Roy,

I know facts and truth are foreign concepts to you; but please, a transcript for you:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/09/20/5143877-carter-probably-superior-to-other-ex-presidents?pc=25&sp=25

from this VERY website, yesterday. "...

BRIAN WILLIAMS: The last photo of you with your-- fellow former presidents, you were well off to the side on the right. And I thought to myself, well, there's-- there's a possible metaphor. What is it-- about you, you think, the way you've-- decided to conduct your life and post-presidency? Do you feel listened to? Do you feel-- that you receive your due? Or do you feel, in fact, apart from the crowd?

JIMMY CARTER: No. I-- I feel that my role as a former president is probably superior to that of other presidents. Primarily because of the activism and the-- and the injection of working at the Carter Center and in international affairs, and to some degree, domestic affairs, on energy conservation, on-- on environment, and things of that kind. We're right in the midst of the-- of the constant daily debate."

There is a video, too. I can't play it at work; but typically when something is labeled a transcript - it is pretty much verbatim. So, yeah, I'll go ahead and stand by my original comment. Obviously this episode was run through the Faux 'News' context salad shooter and you've been given your talking points. So do continue to MARCH ON!

They are the folks who have a mantra they don't chant in public. It goes like this: "I got mine baby, and I ain't gonna help pay for yours."

I'll chant it all day. I am proud to not want to pay for you. I don't work hard to provide for you. I work hard to provide for MY family. Why are you so selfish as to think you deserve what I earn instead of my children? Who the hell are you?

See, liberals will talk about how americans need to learn to 'sacrifice', but that only really applies in their minds to people like me who earn a decent living. I am suppossed to sacrifice so people can be on welfare, get unemployment benefits for almost 2 years and have free health care. There is no 'sacrifice' from anyone else - no raise in ss retirement age, no cutoff of welfare benefits, no reduction in any sort of government handout. It's always MORE MORE MORE.

And btw, I am not old. 39 year old business owner. And I am fine with paying my share for roads, national defense and schools. It's everything else you keep asking for that I get sick of.

And you are also wrong about who made America great - it was boot strapping self-starters just like me who tamed the west, began the industrial age, built railroads, etc. Just like me, they helped people who wanted to better themselves, but had no use for people who don't put in an effort. You are a thief who wants to steal from those of us that do and give to those who don't. THAT is un-American.

Bob-1440886,

Why Tyler does not "cite" you for regurgitating an ENTIRE opinion piece without any narration or personal contribution is puzzling.

PLEASE read this response to Chuck Green's "Obama is a victim of Bush's failed policies" article the right loves to SPAM.

http://newsblaze.com/story/20100604144400eddy.nb/topstory.html

------------------

ltp,

Your arguement only confirms that many "hard working" americans are "self-serving". A person who lives in a specific suburb, works in that suburb, goes to school in that suburb, never goes "Downtown", and couldnt care less about anything unless it directly affects them... are self serving or living in a bubble.

Recently I heard a radio commentator suggest americans should give to charity instead of buying custom wheels lol.

If various social programs at the local, state, and federal level did not exist, who would help the poor? A handful of philanthopists, tree huggers, bleeding hearts and PETA volunteers?

Everyone is focusing on Businesses, Free Enterprise, Capitalism, and PROFITS. My question is.. what do you say to the young high school student who wants to be a marine biologist or, God Forbid, a Social Worker???

Tell them to go into Business or else you will be a loser Public Sector employee taking my hard earned money to help lazy people?

Why Tyler does not "cite" you for regurgitating an ENTIRE opinion piece without any narration or personal contribution is puzzling.

Ever hear of double standards? Adidas you need to come around here more often...

If nothing else... Tyler has an itchy trigger finger that's directed at progressives...

TRUST ME... I speak from experience... lol

Adidas don’t get your panties all bunched up. I wasn’t making a point. Just sharing a rather comical article I received written by a lifetime Democrat who writes for the Denver Post Aurora Sentinel which some would argue is one of the most liberal papers in the U.S... Even his minions are tired of hearing it.

And all I did was what you first dweeb regulars do everyday. Copy and paste.

Good day now.

Fiesty, I am late to arrive on scene (first thoughts) due to being on the west coast but know that your efforts and the efforts of others on the front line do not go unappreciated by those who look at all perspectives (aka the Reasonables).

Bob, since you have finally provided the narrative for your original spam errr post, and in effect making your point that you were originally not making, here is the counter piece to your "comical" article by a disenfranchised Republican moderate.

Op-Ed Contributor
Chuck Green on Obama

By Tracy Tomlinson

Today I opened a forwarded copy of the Chuck Green article condemning Pres. Obama on every level of his political record.

Admittedly, I am a disenfranchised Republican moderate, who in his fury to depose the neoconservative wing, has unwittingly thrust his nation into still another boiling pot of the same party politics.

Nevertheless, the Chuck Green article is a one dimensional approach that represents just another expression of public frustration lacking insight...

...Chuck Green is a journalist who writes a column for the Aurora Sentinel. His critique of Pres. Obama's performance emphasizes failure through a procession of statements sarcastically employing the blame tactic this administration has used against its Republican predecessor.

It looks like intelligence cooked by a right wing conservative think tank, rather than the work of an objective investigative writer with a degree in journalism. In any case the point stands as a matter of perception depending on how the reader is politically aligned. Subjectively, whatever Green really represents in this unbearable rant (if anything) is a moot point and simply detracts from the nature of the issues.

When my eyes are ravaged by shoddy, uninspired articles like this one, I defensively fall back on the logical assumption that most people who have opinions are trapped within a mindset limited by what is perceived as reality. In other words, the parameters for accepting or rejecting information are filtered through a static personal belief system. Thus, if a fact doesn't fit into those preset parameters it is left out of the equation. If it jives, it is integrated as a truth supporting elements of a set belief.

To be frank, most of us aren't looking for truth, reality or fact. We are simply applying a set of rules to build upon something we already think or believe as truth, reality. One obvious example is how many of my friends, neighbors, co-workers and family members have acquiesced to the patriotic notion that America is fighting a war on terrorism. In fact there is a plethora of information and evidence illustrating that our government has been covertly giving material support, organizing and expanding the rise of terrorist groups within regions that US policy places its highest economic and energy interests.

As for the pro-Bush, anti-Obama rhetoric by Chuck Green, it is a view that really doesn't consider the elemental, multi-level factionalism which has encroached upon the intentions of the White House.

The conditions that exist within the internal power struggle between parties and corporate power brokers, has had adverse consequences for the former Bush administration, as it now exerts upon the Obama agenda.

The growing influences of money mongering, power brokering corporate enterprise and the political inroads of foreign interests (political organizations acting as agents of foreign interests) has since WWII compromised national security interests and individual rights, and has reduced the constitutional superstructure which traditionally served as a foundation for the rule of law, the balance of justice and fair-handed foreign policies. As a result, political endeavor has also lost its place in protecting the hopes and aspirations of economic opportunity.

The private, strategic interests of wealthy and powerful people (domestic and foreign) have increasingly taken precedence over the economic welfare and security of the average American, and there is very little evidence of Washington representation of the voter. Simply stated, congress is bought and owned by a higher power.

In the midst of this morally corrosive, fascist collective we call a Congress; Americans are naively charmed by controversial articles that do little more than reiterate frustrations, while avoiding dialogue that identifies core issues and events that have brought us to the brink of social chaos.

I ask you, what are the possibilities of an altruistic first term president surviving a crucible where a defunct body of officials, which has effectively outlived its intended purpose, holds the keys to the failure or success of every beneficial agenda?

Even in the face of this enraging crisis, most Americans are intelligibly preoccupied by debates about the divisive nature of party politics, rather than the historical causation of this internal conflict.

Perhaps it is easier for people like Green and other gossip columnists to succumb to the mantras of the time rather than offering to interface the people with information pertinent to their needs. Let's concede the fact that those writers are as interested in keeping their jobs as anyone and are therefore unwilling to swim against the tide of corporate power and controls shaping public perception. After all, this is a web that is sown into every corner of American life and thought. And how about the fact that the average person is so conditioned by media traps like this that they have forgotten the discordant state of affairs they have helped to create?

Does anyone here know that a Republic is a form of government run by the people?

This means that folks are involved with politics from their neighborhoods to the White House. Citizens represent their neighborhoods in regular town meetings. They connect through the community with mayors and city council members, state representatives. Common people are the ones responsible for rearing their congressional representatives according to the Republic system.

The fact is that the voter is out of touch with Washington, not the other way around. This is the sad fact of a once great nation that has lost its vision. Those with the prime responsibility for saving the nation (the people) are no longer involved in the process.

The values which once reassured the national interests of the whole have been replaced by expressions of self-gratification and material individualism.

Freedom, which is based on decision-making, has been left to the unreachable bureaucrat and untouchable privileged...

Tracy can be reached at earthproject@inorbit.com

Jody: Excellent and timely. Glad you decided to post on this important issue.

Jody--I hadn't remembered that General Powell had assured President Clinton that the private lives of gay/lesbian service members would be respected. That certainly hasn't happened, especially in the past few years.

I agree with you that the military has had 17 years to "study" the issue and the repeal of DADT. I find it disingenuous that they ask for more time for their "study". The comparison to desegragation is an apt one. I won't be surprised if their study is a recitation of their reasons against the change in policy. Well--it didn't work with desegegation and it shouldn't work now.

How sad that the politicians lack the courage to do what is right.

"We claim the USA is a beacon of freedom to the world, a shining example of a place where everyone is guaranteed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But for our military personnel, we stick a caveat on freedom--DADT"

Our Military is not a beacon of freedom, the service men and women are not free, they follow the orders of thier officers.

No doubt, the politicians are hoping for similar survey negative results as those that were done when Truman simply said, desegregate. I believe President Obama would have told Gates and the military, just do it except he could not because DADT is law.

so, tell me, Jody-how do you feel about the Obama Justice department 'vigorously' defending DADT in Federal Court? I've posted on this previously, (since the decision came down in favor of the Log Cabin Republican challenge to the law)-oddly, no one on the left has had one blessed word to say about it.

Does it not fit your narrative?

no joe:

The President took an oath to uphold the law of the land, and DADT is currently the law of the land. His administration is working to change that, but until it is changed, the Justice Department should enforce the laws as they are currently written.

That is the difference between being a nation of laws versus a nation that changes everything to meet our personal preferences.

Do you really want an Administration that just ignores laws that are inconvenient like the Bush Administration?

I'm not sure how 'vigorously' they defended DADT when the judge not only ruled against them, but commented how bad their arguments were. It appeared pretty pro-forma to me.

No Joe. Contrary to your assertion, the DOJ did NOT vigorously defend against the Log Cabin suit. In fact, the judge said the Government provided no real defense of DADT.

My narrative was that the military and Congress has had 17 years to evaluate it and that the US cannot claim to be for freedom while denying freedom to some.

Good Morning Feisty: Yes I would rather live my life on HOPE instead of FEAR. And don't forget to put on your new D bumper sticker.

Good Morning,

We are not living in fear. The anger comes from this administration and congress not listening to the people who sent them to office. We did not send them to pass stimulus 1, which was only payback for thier friends and cronies, and we did not send them there to pass TARP, cap and trade, or pass Health Care reform that removed individual freedoms.

My LOL moment yesterday was when the President asked the Tea Party for specifics. Where were his specifics in 2008? "Hope and Change". "We are the ones we've being waiting for".

When asked for specifics we were pointed to his campaign website. Well, now that he's been in office for 21 months what specifics have been fulfilled? I don't remember seeing the mandate for health insurance on the website. In fact there was an argument against it.

What is his vision for the country because even after this time I have no idea. He keeps talking about long-term structural issues and then offers short-term band aid solutions, that always involve government spending. What are his long term solutions for the economy? So far all I see is being able to write-off R&D and buying new equipment. To be frank that is not very inspiring or substantial enough to affect the structural issues. This is why there is the confusion. We haven't been shown the vision of the future or how we are going to get there.

Both parties are now using FEAR as their main motivator in the Nov. elections...yay! it's bi-partisan...

gee, Fiesty, isn't hope also an emotion?

Frankusa and Alan, NJ

I am truly trying to understand your point of view, since I feel pretty happy with Obama administration and disgusted with the Republican opposition at this point, and you obviously aren't.

You would have preferred to see the automotive industry in Detroit go belly up, with the resulting ripple effect across related industries, resulting in massive unemployment? I mean, seriously, that is what you would have preferred to happen? I just want to make clear, in my head, if you think that wouldn't have happened, or if you think it would have been better if the country had slide into the Great Depression II. I am serious.

gee, Fiesty, isn't hope also an emotion?

Why... yes it is NJ thanks for pointing that out... and the point is?

I'll take HOPE over ANGER and FEAR any day and twice on Sundays...

Alan, You are 100% correct. His specifics were "yes we can", "Change we can belive in". And the 1 thing he had a record on was the Surge in Iraq will not work. And thank God it did, of course he broke his promise to bring our boys home on the time line he said.

You would have preferred to see the automotive industry in Detroit go belly up, with the resulting ripple effect across related industries, resulting in massive unemployment? I mean, seriously, that is what you would have preferred to happen? I just want to make clear, in my head, if you think that wouldn't have happened, or if you think it would have been better if the country had slide into the Great Depression II. I am serious.

So lets look at your argument. Was 60B a good investment. We now have tax payers funding a failed auto company at the expense of other auto companies that do not receive tax payer money. This has effectively lowered the profits of Ford, Toyota, Honda, Nissan etc. Although all are not American owned they employ a substantial number of Americans. What do you say if Nissan for example have to cut jobs because their market share is cut by GM. Now you have the Federal Government picking who has jobs who doesn't. It's not just companies who are picked as winners it's also their employees. How do you know that the other auto companies would not have picked up the slack and increased employment? Maybe there would have been less jobs overall but they would be profitable jobs that increase wealth. I assume you have no problem with AIG being bailed out the same way, and it's counter-parties like Goldman and European banks. When I was laid off in 2001 why did the government not save my job? Why are these workers different? This is why there is anger at the stimulus. It was used to save jobs picked by the government. As citizens in the private sector were losing their jobs, the government decided that it's employees at federal and state level would be protected, and in many cases awarded salary increases. All this was paid for with borrowed money.

So at the end of the day it would have been better to let GM and AIG fail. Whether it would have led to a depression neither you, me nor the President knows. All you have is an opinion.

Obama's specifics beyond "hope and change" included a tax cut for 97% of Americans -- done. Combat troops out of Iraq and continuing progress toward making them once again self sufficient -- done. Health care reform -- done. In fact here http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ is a list of 122 promises kept, 238 more in process, and most of the few that are "broken" were dashed on the rocks of Republican obstruction.

But that's OK, every time you claim Barack Obama didn't have a platform on which he ran, or that he hid that agenda, or that he hasn't accomplished anything I'll be happy to point out that your Conservative talking points are lies.

Have ANY other companies had to cut workforce because GM obtained the LOANS they BEGGED the Federal government for, Alan? Since the answer is "no" then your argument is purely a straw man. Oh, and GM is paying off its loans AHEAD OF SCHEDULE so this isn't looking like a bad investment of the public's money. Yes, investment. GM might have gotten private financing if the rest of the banking economy hadn't been imploding at the time. Conservatives are working really hard to spin the GM bail out as some sort of "option" that just didn't have to happen. Keep trying to rewrite history, someone will always be around to remind everyone just how wrong that view is. http://www.countercurrents.org/engdahl261108.htm

Feisty,

The Tea Party movement is not about fear. It is represented by middle class America, which is fed up with the ridiculous spending, that has accomplished nothing. The movement we should fear is the bleeding heart liberal movement, which is hurriedly trying to race us down a path on which there is no return. The path towards Socialism. The majority of the people in this great Country don't want it and if thats a problem for you, you can always leave. Isn't that what Babs Streisand and her snotty group threatened to do, the last time Republicans threatened your party?

Obama's specifics beyond "hope and change" included a tax cut for 97% of Americans -- done. Combat troops out of Iraq and continuing progress toward making them once again self sufficient -- done. Health care reform -- done. In fact here http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ is a list of 122 promises kept, 238 more in process, and most of the few that are "broken" were dashed on the rocks of Republican obstruction.

Yes I read that site too. Very impressive numbers until you look at the quality instead of the quantity. On his signature achievement, Health Care Reform, he promised no individual mandate and a Public Option. So at the end of the day how useful were his specifics? I'll leave you to form an opinion.

Yes Frankusa you are living in fear, (fear of us Democrats) you have been sense 2001. That's how you teapublicans want to live, that's why you watch FRN (Fox republican network).

Alan - yes, let's look at the situation you are referring to in greater detail.

From what I can see in your analysis, you are making some assumptions that are not necessarily true. As far as the AIG debacle is concerned, do you think that if AIG DID fail that the banks that depended on AIG for insuring their CDOs would continue to be solvent?

As much as I would agree with you that AIG SHOULD have been left to fail, the carnage from that failure would have destabilised the WORLD - not just the US, but the WORLD's banks, making many of them insolvent. I think that President Obama HAD NO CHOICE. Amy, Portland ME is right - if AIG failed, then many of the banks in the US would have failed, and we would be in a great Depression that would make the 1930's seem like a summer picnic.

Your argument in your post seems a lot more PERSONAL. I can understand that. I can understand the anguish that losing a job - of no fault of your own - can bring. I have lost PLENTY of jobs because they were outsourced to India. However, I cannot hold President Bush responsible for THAT PARTICULAR situation. I CAN hold President Bush accountable for the climate that was created for outsourcing that job in the first place.

So, at the end of the day, letting AIG fail would NOT have been a good idea, and President Obama, in his judgement and leadership, decided to spare the US from going into a depression.

That sounds like good leadership to me.

Have ANY other companies had to cut workforce because GM obtained the LOANS they BEGGED the Federal government for, Alan? Since the answer is "no" then your argument is purely a straw man. Oh, and GM is paying off its loans AHEAD OF SCHEDULE so this isn't looking like a bad investment of the public's money.

It's as much a straw man as the government's position that the stimulus saved us from a second depression.

And GM is not paying off any loans. They transferred money from one taxpayer funded account to another and claimed it was paying off 13B.

Alan, NJ. Candidate Obama listed many specific ideas, he told us his priorities--health care reform, financial regulations to protect the People, clean and renewable energy, revitalizing our electrical grid, modernizing our infrastructure, rapid transit train service, middle class tax cuts. Apparently, you just weren't listening.

What are the Tea Party ideas for moving forward? Tax cuts, small government, cut spending, the national debt but none of them tell us HOW they plan to do those things, how they plan to pay for them, how they plan to reduce the debt. Instead they discuss the cultural social issues that do not pay the bills.

From what I can see in your analysis, you are making some assumptions that are not necessarily true. As far as the AIG debacle is concerned, do you think that if AIG DID fail that the banks that depended on AIG for insuring their CDOs would continue to be solvent?

As much as I would agree with you that AIG SHOULD have been left to fail, the carnage from that failure would have destabilised the WORLD - not just the US, but the WORLD's banks, making many of them insolvent. I think that President Obama HAD NO CHOICE. Amy, Portland ME is right - if AIG failed, then many of the banks in the US would have failed, and we would be in a great Depression that would make the 1930's seem like a summer picnic.

So again lets take a closer look. AIG goes under. It still has assets but not enough to cover its liabilities. It is also the largest insurer in the world and has to go into bankruptcy protection. Their insurance business would have sold and continue elsewhere. Goldman claimed it would survive but say it doesn't. Why should a company that totally screwed up its risk management be allowed to survive? Why should they have been made whole by being paid 100 cents on the dollar by a failed company. Why should the sovereign governments of the countries of the other banks involved not bail them out rather than the US taxpayer?

Your argument in your post seems a lot more PERSONAL. I can understand that. I can understand the anguish that losing a job - of no fault of your own - can bring. I have lost PLENTY of jobs because they were outsourced to India. However, I cannot hold President Bush responsible for THAT PARTICULAR situation. I CAN hold President Bush accountable for the climate that was created for outsourcing that job in the first place.

And no it's not personal except in the sense that I screwed up by not maintaining my skill set. Not the governments fault or responsibility. I understand that I compete in a global market and therefore I have to compete with resources from India. The fact that I'm here, understand the culture and looked for a job that requires face time means that my added value is higher than someone in Bangalore.

Alan NJ:

Yes I read that site too. Very impressive numbers until you look at the quality instead of the quantity. On his signature achievement, Health Care Reform, he promised no individual mandate and a Public Option. So at the end of the day how useful were his specifics? I'll leave you to form an opinion.

As I recall, Obama was opposed to the individual mandate when he was campaigning and was for the public option. But since the Republicans in Congress blocked the public option, he settled for the mandate, which was a REPUBLICAN idea, until Obama was for it, and they were suddenly against it.

I notice Alan just ignored John B.'s statement that 97% of the people got an Obama tax cut. But people who automatically hated Obama for whatever reason before he took office are simply going to ignore all facts that don't support their carefully nurtured belief that Obama is a tyrant bent on taxing people to death and imposing a socialist dictatorship. And since none of the facts do support that belief, the Obama bashers have to keep themselves busy ignoring a whole lot of facts.

So again lets take a closer look. AIG goes under. It still has assets but not enough to cover its liabilities. It is also the largest insurer in the world and has to go into bankruptcy protection. Their insurance business would have sold and continue elsewhere. Goldman claimed it would survive but say it doesn't. Why should a company that totally screwed up its risk management be allowed to survive? Why should they have been made whole by being paid 100 cents on the dollar by a failed company. Why should the sovereign governments of the countries of the other banks involved not bail them out rather than the US taxpayer?

Alan, we do NOT disagree here. However, if AIG DID fail, and the banking of the world collapses, who is AIG going to be selling their insurance to? How are they going to transact that business if there are NO BANKING FACILITIES available?

That is what I was talking about. You 'assume' that business will go on as 'normal' when AIG would have been the actual cause of hundreds or thousands of banking failures across the world. With banks failing, people would be 'running' to the banks trying to pull their money out before the Governments of the world froze the assets in the banks (hence the term 'run on the bank'). The currencies that the banks were holding could become unstabilised, creating more misery for the populace that had NOTHING to do with CDOs in the first place.

Sounds familiar? Sounds like 1929 during the stock market crash, doesn't it?

It should.

As far as making AIG whole at 100 cents to the dollar - I am again in agreement with you that they should have been made to pay for their stupidity. However, you have to remember that AIG was the INSURANCE that the banks used for their wheeling and dealing with CDOs. For AIG to stay solvent, they had to HONOUR those obligations at the value they were written. So, the American taxpayer propped up AIG at face value. This allowed the banks to honour their obligations and keep the world economy going.

I am not happy with it either. AIG should be made to pay and pay dearly for their arrogance.

From what I have been able to acertain concerning this subject, the United States came within days of being completely bankrupt and collapsing the world economy. It is no wonder that President Bush allowed then President-elect Obama to deal with Hank Paulson and the Treasury on this issue in late 2008. What lame-duck President lets anyone do anything while he still has power? President Bush could not turn the keys of the country over to President Obama FAST ENOUGH, and it shows.

How's that for a talking point against the Republicans?

All is NOT well now with the banking industry, either, and its the full FAITH and CONFIDENCE in the American Dollar - backed by the full FAITH and CONFIDENCE in the United States - that is holding things together.

For now.

Dave D-1046643

I initially assumed the Tea Party was born in response to the disappointment (to put it mildly) of the red neck, low income, racist, Archie Bunker types to the election of an educated Democratic African American to the Presidency.

I was wrong.

Recent polling shows that Tea Party members tend to have more education and higher incomes than the average Republican voter.

As near as I can figure, Tea Partiers are people who are mad as hell that their McMansions, with granite topped counters and room in the backyard for a pony, are worth less than when they paid too much for it during the housing buble.

That's it. That's what they are mad at. That and the fact their SUV has dropped in trade in value.

These people were perfectly silent when the Bush administration didn't just spend money on re-building Iraq, they LOST money, millions and millions to fraud and mismanagment. Money that is unaccounted for. Don't hear a peep from the Tea Party about that.

We don't hear a peep from the Tea Party about the obscene bonuses paid to bankers (those guys are their neighbors, after all, the ones the Tea Partiers aspire to be.) Sarah Palin, she who quit her public service job to make millions in the private sector, millions she joyfully spends on clothes, trips, shoes and her own cheesy McMansion, is their mascot, their role model, the embodiment of their materialistic ideals.

OK Alan, you're certainly entitled to your opinion that all those businesses could have failed and it would have just been business as usual, Economists have a different opinion. http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/End-of-Great-Recession.pdf?L=HPADV2&C=ZANDIBLINDER&P=LEARNMORE

Amy,

Instead of forming an opinion, based on your far left anger, why not attend a town hall meeting. I'm pretty certain, you would be surprised. Most of the people don't show up on their ponies, they show up in chevy's and ford's. They are your neighbors, they are parents and grandparents and they still believe in what this country stands for. You on the other hand, sadly, seem to have forgotten.

"You campaign in POETRY, but you GOVERN in PROSE"

Mario Cuomo...

Dave D-1046643

Baloney.

Dave D-1046643

I know the Tea Party types personally. And yes, they are some of my relatives and neighbors.

A few years ago, I attended an honest to God Town Meeting with the elected town council, to support bringing public bus service to a wealthy, rural suburb of Portland. Supporting the bus were seniors, teens and environmental advocates. This was at the beginning of the rise of gas prices. The parking lot was stuffed with outsized SUV's. Who opposed the bus? Oh, those Tea Party types. They were fine with spending money on athletic fields for the schools, or dock improvements for boaters. But since they personally wouldn't use the public bus, they didn't support it, and besides, an undeserving poor person might use that service, and we can't have that, can we? Yeah, I know the type. And it's not a question of having money, plenty rich people are able to see past their noses, its a question of attitude.

Maybe it’s just me, but I find it disheartening that voters will decide in November 2010 whether their local Congressperson deserves to be re-elected based on the job President Obama has done in the past 20 months.

My local Congressman and Senator (Cummings and Mikulski) have done a very good job for my district and I can assure you I was not thinking of the President when I cast my primary ballot. For voters to turn against their elected representatives because they are MAD is very juvenile. Especially when you consider they may be replaced with someone like Ms. O’Donnell in Delaware!

Are you serious?

BTW, the President was dealt the worst hand for a new President since Roosevelt and he is doing a good job cleaning up the messes. Miracles are not on the way so all of the whiners, Left and Right, need to grow up. As far as Ms. Velma Hart being disappointed that the President hasn’t been able to make her life more pleasant, she needs a reality check!

Sounds like she is still living a “middle class” life so what is her beef. Think of all the poor folks who were hurting before the recession and the millions who are now unemployed due to the recession. They have a right to be disappointed that the economy has not turned around more quickly.

Not Ms. Hart.

Amy,

"Yeah, I know the type".?????

That town hall meeting must have been just awful. Tsk Tsk It's no wonder you hate Republicans and Tea party people. I really didn't know they ALL had yachts and giant SUV's. It's no wonder you are so upset. Curse them all, especially the ones with ponies in their back yards.

Tha

When I was laid off in 2001 why did the government not save my job? Why are these workers different? This is why there is anger at the stimulus. It was used to save jobs picked by the government.

Dear, Alan J.

Sorry you lost your job.

I hope you get another job soon.

Don't hate the rest of the country because many of them still have jobs.

Don't wish a great depression on the United States because you lost your job.

Studies show that your attitude could add poor health to your lack of employment woes.

However, if that happens, and I hope that it does not, at least you will have access to health care.

Signed,

The rest of the United States

Right on Feisty!!! I'll be voting for sure. I too refuse to live in fear. All I hear from them is what they want - they are not the only ones living in this country. Whether they like it or not, us progressives - even moderately progressive - want to move forward, not back. Our concerns are just as legitimate as theirs. And quite frankly, their lack of social consciousness is frightening. They say they want less government but have no problem with the government telling folks how to live and who they can marry.

I, too, get exhausted from listening to all the right-wing talking points - CNN is notorious for picking up Fox points and running with it. One thing I will say about the Dems, quit being cowards and running from the Republicans. You only lend credence to their lies. Have the courage of your convictions. Get out their and fight, fight for this President. We may never get this opportunity again - go for it and do it proudly.

I, too, am 100% in support of President Obama.

Amy B. Portland, ME : "I initially assumed the Tea Party..." "That's it. That's what they are mad at..." "I know the Tea Party types..." "Yeah, I know the type..." "As near as I can figure," "I know the Tea Party types.."

Are we just going around making stuff up to fit our agenda... Again

A spade is a spade!

Good Morning Bev: John McCain is a crusty, grumpy old man who sold his soul to win his primary. He is a shell of the man he used to be.

The trouble is Beverly, that this old feeble senile homophobic McCain couldn't find his home. He'd have to wander around 13 house to find the one he lives in. I was for DADT and Immigration before I was against it. Huh? Get a life McCain. Any reputation you still have is rapidly disappearing. What we'll do to get elected.

53% of the population is on welfare of some kind. Be it paying no income tax, food stamps, Sec 8, or extended unemployment. Would you vote your freelunch out?

jed, I thought it was only 47% of Americans who are freeloaders on the people who REALLY keep the country running. No matter jed, either way you're WRONG. http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001829.htm

Thanks for demonstrating just how dedicated Conservatives are to class warfare and stomping down the middle class.

So are you counting the company you work for in that 53% jed? It's a pretty good bet your company either gets subsidies from the Government or some kind of tax break that is targeted to them and not the general public. Do you realize welfare comes in many different forms? You probably fall into the welfare category if you look hard enough jed. Quit trying to demonize the less fortunate than you and act like your so much better. Your not your just like everyone else in this country and every other country in the would.

Tyler why do keep allowing the righties to collapse my posts. It's not my fault they can't stand the truth. Please fair and restore my column. I attacked no member here on this board. I gave my opinion as I saw it to be in no unclear terms. So what is the problem?

Bev - you have to e-mail him to restore your post and copy in:

#4.6 @ http://tyler.newsvine.com/_more/users/contact

GOOD LUCK - as ol Tyler is pretty quick with the delete button, as for restoring... eh NOT so much!

Think of it this way...as a WISE and much respected friend told me last week:

It's better to have a bullseye on your back than a boot on your THROAT!

Michelle Bachman receives Federal Subsidies,...hmmm? THAT can't be RIGHT?

Enough with the collapsing of posts, already. It's one thing to collapse obscene and vicious posts, another to collapse post that refer to people who want to kick gay service people out of the military "homophobes." Homophobic is not a smear, or a swear word, it's a descriptive word for one who fears homosexuality.

1

Alan - come on man, fess up, you own stock in Toyota and Nissan don't ya? perhaps a dealership here there and yonder? wink, wink.

Pat: You have really done your homework!! I wish Indiana was a bit more purple-to-blue, but we're working on it. It ain't over, till it's over.

Ron, this isn't my work. But I think it's time to re-look at the campaigns, state by state instead of just listening to those who believe the Democrats are going to get crushed, something we've been hearing for over a year. Indiana is gone unfortunately, as is Arkansas and North Dakota.

Delaware. Not so fast.

I sure hope DADT passes. Keeping my fingers crossed today.

Very optimistic analysis.

From Real Clear Politics:

Dems 49 Repubs 45 with 6 Toss-ups all currently held by Democrats.

From Polster.com

Dems 47 Repubs 47 with 4 Toss-ups all currently held by Democrats. (Counts the 2 others as Independents Vt and Ct.)

Even if Democrats come up short, the fact that things are looking promising for Democrats on a state-by-state basis means that come November, the party is a lot more likely to experience a loss of just a couple seats than they are to experience a loss of majority control.

True but they are unlikely to retain 59 seats (or 57 not counting the Independents).

Pat--thanks for sharing this analysis--very interesting information. Here in western Pennsylvania, what the article said about Sestak seems to be true--he was relatively unknown, especially in this part of the state, but as you learn more about him he seems like a good candidate. We sometimes forget that the non-political junkies of both parties really haven't tuned in to the campaigns yet so there is still time to campaign.

I think the Ohio numbers are a little off because as of yesterday Portman led Fisher by nearly 20 points. There is still time for change but it does not look good for Fisher here.

Steeler Fan, all the Democratic candidates are better than the Republicans. The Republicans are gone as far as trying to convince them that their candidates are phonies and only out for the rich. If they haven't figured that out yet, they never will.

Or perhaps they have figured it out and don't care about the rest of Americans. Pretty typical for them. It's about getting the Democrats out to vote. That's what has to happen.

President Obama needed to face these people and listen to them. It's v. important that he does. People genuinely like him and want to talk to him personally. It's good he did this yesterday.

He's a stand up guy. He's neither a liar nor phony. He's just trying to do the best he can with only one party in DC to assist him. The other party - the GOP - is useless.

They're freeloaders. Just like the wealthy who are stomping their feet, demanding they keep their tax cuts, even though we can't pay for them.

But as we all know - they don't care. They're not fiscal conservative anything. They stand for nothing.

Thanks for pointing out why the "generic ballot" just doesn't matter. I've never gone to the polls and been given a "generic ballot." For some reason my precinct just has ballots that are specific to MY area, and that's how people in MY area decide their votes. It's the same everywhere. My Liberal leanings are no secret to regulars here, but there are specific Democrats that I vote against, in some cases in multiple elections.

The generic ballot is just an easy way to compile -- or justify -- the Conventional Wisdom.

Pat-where do I begin? You quote PPP on Colorado-but leave out the date. See, Norton got defeated by Buck-who is leading, albeit within the margin of error, in most polls. PPP has not been back there, but may poll there in the next week or two.

In Nevada, the race is tied-in every poll.

Pennsy? Toomey leads by about 8 points in almost every poll worth its salt.

Portman is ahead by double digits in Ohio.

Rand Paul is ahead by almost ten points.

California is tied.

Illinois is tied.

Rubio is ahead by double digits in Florida.

Blunt is ahead by almost 10 points in Missouri.

Connecticut is tightening, Washington is neck and neck, and I noticed you left out Wisconsin,where Feingold is looking pretty sad.

In the land of plaid skies, Obama has a permanent majority, everyone is happy with their hope and change, and the recession is over.

In the real world,none of that is true. The change people can believe in happens on November 2.

I love the way you use the phrase worth it's salt. And the way it's worth it's salt is if it agrees with you no joe all blow. Am I wright no joe all blow? I thought so.

Excellent post, Pat. Summarizing each race really points out that DC conventional wisdom may not be right. As for DeMint, perhaps his Waterloo is the Tea Party; not sure republicans will be happy to spend millions in what could be a lost cause. We will not know until the night of Nov 2 but "mojo" seems to be leaning more left because of TPers.

Real Clear Politics compiles and averages the polls...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_elections_senate_map.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/2010_elections_house_map.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/governor/2010_elections_governor_map.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/generic_congressional_vote-901.html

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

Read for yourself, be informed, form your own opinions.

I think the phrase "Read the polls, be informed, form your own opinion" is an oxymoron.....

Pat, I had NO idea you dabbled in a bit of the Poll Dancing yourself! Here's some green for your string.

From your wordprocessor to G-d's eyes!

Pat: Just one correction:

Dino Rossi is not popular in King County.

FrankH-the genius of our system of government is that it allows the people recourse when elected officials ride roughshod over the electorate. This congress has pushed through bills that were unwanted by the majority - they will pay the price at the polls.

In a representative democracy, legislators have the ability to force through legislation without the consent of the governed-and the governed have the right to replace them in the next election.

Don't like it? That's a shame. there are plenty of other places where the ruling body can push through anything, and the people have no recourse. Try one of them.

I'm a little confused here NJ. Are you saying Democrats don't have the right to block legislation they don't like by using the same tools Republicans used to block legislation they didn't like?

FrankH-you are confused all right. What, exactly, were the republicans successful at blocking? HCR? the Stimulous? How about that long forgotten, pork laden continuing resolution from 2009-the one that shot the budget deficit from $450billion to $1.3trillion?

The only thing they have managed to block has been cap and trade in the senate, and they had plenty of help there-from the democrats.

Sure, the dems have the same opportunity to block the defunding of HCR, if it manages to get past its court challenges, which I doubt. They can try to block spending cuts, extending the Bush tax cuts during a recession, (no matter what Obama's happy mouth little economic cheerleaders say, this recovery is on life support, which most people know), cutting the ranks of government employees and bringing their salaries into line with the private sector, among other things that the republicans are committed to doing. . .

of course, they will be committing party suicide, if they do, and will face an electorate even angrier than this one in 2012. Then, the electorate gets to have its say. Again.

Seems as if confusion is running rampant on the board today. I do remember Republicans filibustering (or using the threat of one) to remove the public option from HCR and then still not voting for it.

And yes there were more but I doubt you will admit it.

The question of the Democrats and Republicans filibustering is similar to the question of what came first, the chicken or the egg.

It's there for both and their constituents better receive satisfaction for spending their vote on them. So, what's good for the donkey is indeed good for the elephant, and vice-versa.

They attempt to convince him that it is ok... the other guy does it too (Wink). He replies that he cannot be a part of that! Smiles as he walks away... knowing that he is still a whole man.

52% of the people polled put their own needs and desires ahead of their children's best interests, or the responsiblity to finish the job they were elected to do? Wow. Nation of narcissists.

I hate polls, and I really doubt 52% of the people in this country actually align their beliefs with Sarah Palin, of all people.

If it actually is true, then we're in for a greater world of hurt than our last three administrations combined - and we'll deserve it.

Don't get to excited ED, Farley and the other teapublican trolls get up early and search for a poll that phrases a question so it gets the response they are looking for.

Exodite, regarding polls, let me ask everyone here - Democrat and Republican - how many times have you actually been included in a poll? If a pollster does call, do you answer? I thought so. Polls don't mean anything. No matter who does them, the questions and the sample are skewed, and what are the chances that the people responding actually know anything about the issues and/or will actually vote? And yet, the media lives and dies by polls. Make up your own mind people! And go to the polls and vote your conscience!

I intentionally screw with polls. I've actually received a goodly number of calls over the years and have given some exceptionally off-the-wall answers.

I agree with you Nashville Fan--people are tired. If you have lost your job you have been dealing with a staggering weight of responsibility and worry. If you haven't lost your job you may be worried about your future or you are overworked due to other layoffs and afraid to say anything about it. Even if things are great for you personally, most people are worried about family, friends and simply our fellow citizens. It has been a wearing time and I think the President recognizes that. I believe he understands that the healing of our economy will be slow. I'm sure he finds it frustrating--who doesn't--but he is working hard for us and we are better off than we were two years ago.

Yea. because we know that 9.6 percent unemployment was better then the 7 percent when he took office. and that the 1.3 Trillion dollar Deficit is better then the 450 billion . and More people are depending on Govt Assistance is better then Less.. .. We understand that you believe that in your Eyes These things are better. But hey you are a Liberal. we expect this from you

Steve,

YOU LIE!

"The simple fact is that Obama inherited a federal deficit of $1.2 trillion on the day he was sworn in last year. Barely two weeks earlier, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office issued its regular "Budget and Economic Outlook" document, stating:

CBO, Jan. 2009: The federal fiscal situation in 2009 will be dramatically worse than it was in 2008. Under the assumption that current laws and policies remain in place (that is, not accounting for any new legislation), CBO estimates that the deficit this year will total $1.2 trillion, more than two and a half times the size of last year’s.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/02/a-texas-size-whopper/

George W. Bush ran up the deficit to 1.2 trillion before he left office.

And to be clear, the unemployment rate was 7.6% in January 2009, which is damn close to the 8% that folks continue to falsely claim the President "promised" the stimulus would keep it from reaching.

Now how could that be true, when unemplyment was already that before the doggone bill was even signed?

And, what's more, unemployment was trending UP for all of 2008 . . . wonder who was the President then?

Check out this chart:

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2009/feb/wk2/art02.htm

Pull yourself together Steve . . . your slip is showing.

Nashville.

Obama and the rest of you LIberals already tried to Blame everything on Bush. That didnt work. So you switched to Boehnor.. That didnt Work , so now you are gonna try and blame it on O'donnell, That wont work Either.. Hey . Care to blame me next?

Steve,

Are you admitting you lied or are you changing the subject?

Are you responsible for the lies you tell or is that the "libruls" fault too?

Did Obama make you tell that big deficit lie?

Did you really believe that was true, or were you just parroting something you heard on the radio?

Nashville_Fan:

Amen!

Talk about "bite the hand that feeds you". Were it not for President Obama, America would be going backwards under the leadership of McCain and Palin. I use the term "leadersip" loosely.

As others have stipulated today, a lot of us are disappointed that the economy did not turn around faster but to blame that on the President is just foolishness. I want just one Mainstream journalist to ask someone in the Republican leadership what they would have done differently to stimulate the economy (other than cut taxes).

I have heard the question asked, but never answered.

Am I disappointed? You betcha! Do I blame the President? Absolutely not!

Nashville

No what i am saying is all you do is Blame everyone but the person and people that are Responsible.

Obama and the Democrats. I know you wish to try and lie to people about what i said.. but that wont work. . I am Tired of your Lies. I know they are not truth, but hey if it makes you feel better to spout them Feel free, I am all for your Free speech rights..

Steve,

You are tired of my lies about what?

The person and the people that are responsible are you and George W. Bush.

What you said is in writing, Steve.

It is not true Steve.

Give it up.

Nashville,

again, the persons that are responsible is Obama and The Democrats.. I am sorry that you can't accept this. and still wish to blame Bush, Obama and the Rest of the Democrats have given up on this line of attack. Perhaps its time you do as well, but hey if you dont thats your choice.. Sometimes Reality is a hard pill to swallow.. But i am sure if you keep trying you will get it done..

Is it just me or what??????? When the host ask a conservative guest a question, they NEVER answer the question. Case in point, last night the guest was asked what would they do differently to turn the economy around and he NEVER answered the question. Joe Madison called him straight out!!! Joe said, "This is waht angers and frustrates me.... they NEVER answer the questions!!!!!

They want their country back????? Let me get this straight...They would prefer to have the country fail, because of what???? Because we have a Black President???? You have got to be kidding me. If they don't like it here then go back to Europe. They came here and became "illegal immigrants", changed everything to benefit them. Now, they want to whine because our President is highly intelligent, not easily swayed, has a beautiful family, has lived the "American DReam", etc.

So what they are telling me is that they would prefer leaders from the low or lowest level of intelligence to lead our country? Seems like it to me. I DON'T THINK SO!!!!!!!!

I blame Bush for the recession but I do blame president Obama for putting the HC bill before working on the economy. He should have put the economy first and really rolled his sleeves up. With the successes from that he could have used the momentum to pass HC. I really like our president but...I'm just sayin.

Great post. Yes, Iowa has an excellent method for both redestricting and court justice appointees. GOP candidate Terry Branstad wants to change both. That's idiotic. A number of articles have been written about how Iowa gets it right, other states should look at the system, and the GOPers want to get rid of it because it gets in the way of their social issues and their desire to manipulate the power of the people for conservatives only.

The "Captain" of this ship of state was a republican when the iceberg was struck.

The current "Captain" is doing a yeomans job with the rescue operation.

Steven, The problem is that Captain Bama doesn't have a life belt or a lifeboat. He is sinking like the Titanic, still banging his drums and yelling for help.

CU,

If you cannot tell the difference between criticizing a person based on the policies they administer as opposed to criticizing a person based on where they were born, what their name is, or what their religion is, then the sad fact is that YOU are a "low information" voter.

Leave it to CU to hammer the Conservative talking points instead of looking for a substantive discussion.

Of course Conservative goals don't stand up to a substantive conversation. If they did then Conservatives would be telling us what they'd like to do instead of just making up lies about what's been done.

CU.. Of course . Anyone that Disagrees with anything Obama Says is a Racist.. by the liberal Standard..

Steve,

Did you major in "librul" in college?

You are such an expert on "libruls" . . . you should send Morning Joe-ke your resume.

Are you ready to admit that President George W. Bush left President Obama a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit yet?

Or is against the conservative creed to admit the truth when caught in a lie?

nashville,

I know you wish to keep Spewing your lies, 787 Billion dollars Stimulous was passed by obama and the Democrats and Immediately added to the 450 Billion dollar defict left by the democrats that held congress fromn 2007 till the present. I know you Still wish to blame it on Bush but it doesn't work with most Thinking People. We understand that you cant handle the Fact that it was Obama and the Democrats.. that have Given us a 1.5 Trillion Dollar Defict in 2009 and projected 1.3 Trillion dollar Defict this Year..

The Majority of Americans Are tired of Your Lies, that is why we will be Electing Many Republicans to Office come November.. Most likely Taking the House and Probably the Senate..

Steve,

The deficit in January 2009 was 1.2 trillion dollars whether you like it or not.

I posted the link and you ignored it.

President Obama wasn't sworn in until January 20, 2010, so even you must see that you don't know what you are talking about, right?

Nashville.

Again. I ignored Nothing . I put the blame right where it belongs. what you expect people to not remember is that Obama was part of the Senate that Voted for all the bills that increased the Defict.

I understand that you want us all to believe that he just all of a sudden showed up and was elected President is a joke... .. but if you read thru all my post . I put the blame right where it belong. On Obama and the Democrats.

So Steve, GW Bush doesn't get the blame for his $1.2T deficit because Barack Obama was a Senator, but Barack Obama gets the blame for his $1.3T deficit because Barack Obama was President.

Is your Hypocricy meter completely nonfunctional?

BTW, who gets credit for the steadily increasing national debt during the 6 years that Republicans controlled the White House and BOTH houses of Congress?

"What I am bitterly disappointed in, is the bad behaviour of the GOP/TP who have made a concienous decision not to help the President thereby not helping the country."

FYI congress has been in democratic controll for 4 years, the last 2 years with 60 in the Sendate, the GOP cannot obstruct, or we sould have stopped health Care and stimulus 1 and 2.

"hate blinds us from making rational decisions." I am glad you are starting to realize this and we welcome you to the Tea Party, drop your hate and come support Sarah Palin and lets get this country moving again in the right direction.

Frankusa, you are truly out of your mind, if for one nanosecond you would think I'd vote for any teaparty member or Sarah Palin. I am not angry at either one of them, I just dont believe they are the right choice or the best for the country.

Where are your ideas, your plans, your solutions?

There is no one as blind as those who dont want to see, the gop have been obstructing since Jan. 2009. That has been and continues today, the gop will find anything, anyway, to obstruct any progress in helping get the country back on track.

This is the mission of the gop: DO NOT LET THIS PRESIDENT SUCCEED.

GBM, thanks for pointing out "For anyone paying attention to the state of the country in general, it has not been hard to see we have been sliding down a path to mediocrity for a long time,"

Elizabeth Warren was on TV this morning pointing out that she has studied the erosion of the middle class for over 20 years, and it's been going on for 30. This can't be stopped overnight in the BEST of circumstances, it's even more difficult when Conservatives continue their class warfare unabated. Their service of the elites of society is understandable given the money they spend to both promote and create the Republican agenda http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=1 but our progress in attempting to restore the middle class and with it American economic strength will be stunted as long as the GOP isn't laughed off the stage whenever they pretend to be the party of economic opportunity.

John B, I am a great admirer of Elizabeth Warren. I didn't see her this morning, but I am not surprised at her observation, it has long been mine too. By saying that, I dont, by any stretch of the imagination put myself in the same category, just that it is great to hear someone of her stature give a voice to my own observations.

This article link you posted is very interesting, I printed it out to read later. The Koch brothers have long been on my radar, partially because they live in the same area, and the local papers have often written about their less savoury antics locally. Sure they've got bundles of money, and for the most part it can buy anything, except integrity and a sense of proportion as to what are moral values.

Mamma asked Frank a question. Where is you answer Frank? Oh, you don't have an answer to the question, do you? You never have an answer to any of the salient questions asked of you.

Mamma also made very good observations and has ideas, whereas Frank has been and will always drag down any attempt of rational discourse.

John, we can thank ronnie raygun for the state of the middle class. He did not start the decline, he just applied the grease.

You hit the nail on the head John B, when ever the teapublicans start their lying rants, it is to just laugh at them. There have been several times on the talk shows while the teapublicans are in the middle of their rants the host and another guest start laughing at the teapublican they get so flustered and angry they can't finish their rant. They hate to be laughed at, they just don't realize the whole world is laughing at them.

"I am very proud of this President. Can you imagine George Bush facing "real people" and weathering the open expression of their doubts, anxieties and fears?"

Funny how all of those "real people" are supporters of him..... If the President had any guts he would face the 54% of the people who think he is doing a bad job.

Come Nov. the "Real People" as you say, will get a voice.

Frankusa

"If the President had any guts he would face the 54% of the people who think he is doing a bad job."

It would be pretty weird if unemployment were as high as it is now and people approved of President Obama's handling of his job, wouldn't it? Americans always hold their President accountable for the economy.

When unemployment rates go down, I expect you will then "approve" of Obama's job performance. Correct? I'll be watching your posts Frankusa.

Frankusa, when President Obama comes to this area the press nearly always gives out a web address where people can go to get tickets. I can't recall that happening even ONCE during GW Bush's presidency. In fact when Bush appeared in my neighborhood they ringed the entire property with dump trucks and heavy equipment so that he couldn't even be seen getting out of his car.

Who didn't have the guts to face the public?

Bush II was so scared he wouldn't even face Fox reporters. His town halls consisted of people in his administration forced to attend his town hall and ask him questions he gave them, with prewritten answers for him to read.

And yes frankusa you failed to mention the time he faced the teapublicans in a townhall setting and smacked each and everyone of them down. Did you forget or just ignore it? He'd do the same thing to your imagined 54%.

@ Mo

Seems some numbers support the 54% you claim is 'imagined...

September 21, 2010

Obama Job Approval Ratings

9/20/10

Overall
Approve 44%
Disapprove 51%
Undecided 5%

Economy
Approve 40%
Disapprove 56%
Undecided 4%

A total of 44% of Americans say they approve of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president and 51% say they disapprove of the way Obama is handling his job. When it comes to Obama's handling of the economy, 40% of Americans approve and 56% disapprove. In August, 43% of Americans approved of the job Obama was doing and 51% disapproved. When rating Obama's handling of the economy in August, 41% approved and 54% disapproved.

Among Americans registered to vote, 45% approve of the way Obama is handling his job as president and 51% disapprove. On Obama's handling of the economy, 40% of registered voters approve and 56% disapprove.

A total of 51% of Americans say the national economy is getting worse, 68% say the national economy is in a recession, 37% rate the national economy as terrible, and 50% rate their personal financial situations as excellent, very good, or good, with 49% rating their personal financial situations as bad, very bad, or terrible.

Details from the nationwide survey conducted September 17-20 are available at The National Economy.

Sorry the link didn't work on the first post

If you want to see more. http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/

So I suppose that means that when you vote for a white candidate, it is just because they were white?

How do you know what the motivation of black voters who supported the President are?

Proud republican,

Either you are a mind reader or you are full of $#@%.

One of those two.

As Nashville Fan said;

"So I suppose that means that when you vote for a white candidate, it is just because they were white?

How do you know what the motivation of black voters who supported the President are?"

Welcome to the 'collapse' club Nash! lol

You know things are not what they appear to be... when a comment like that get collapsed!

Well done John B: If they try to collapse you, others will stand in Nash and your place. This country is not about censorship and truth will continue to be spoken.

@proud republican-1888838: I really doubt someone posting with that moniker has their finger on the pulse of Black America.

Get real.

Anyone notice that it always seams to be comments on proud teapublicans posts that the responses get collapsed, and he always has 5 votes on his comment. Coincident, I don't think so.

Would we define "left wing fanatics" as anyone who thought Iraq wasn't worth the carnage and the treasure? Or, are they defined as anyone who thought DOJ was not to be turned into a political weapon?

Did people go overboard? Yeah. Was Bush a putz? You betcha!!

Just this morning I was thinking how, even atheists and the irreligious tend to see political conflict in terms of good vs evil. They may have claimed not to believe in God or the Devil, for example, but many people clearly saw Cheney as the Devil, not as a mere human being. It's human nature.

If Cheney or Bush had ever addressed the very real rage and anxiety "real people" felt during their administration, they might not being saddled with the lowest recorded approval ratings in the history of such record keeping. I always thought it was a huge mistake for Bush not to meet with Cindy Sheehan, after she started camping in Crawford. She may have been a bit of a nut job, but even nut jobs express the sentiments of thousands of people (witness the succcess of the Tea Party.) Interacting with people leads them to see you as human, and that's the only place to be for real dialogue to start. which is what Obama must continue to do.

David Lewis

Grow up. There is no moral equivalence between finding fault with the solutions that a legitimately ELECTED president has chosen to pursue through a democratic process, and faulting Bush, a president in name only, appointed by the Supreme court and then Diebold, who "ignored" all of the warnings prior to 9/11, got 7,000 Americans killed, inflicted the Patriot act upon us, Trillions in debt to depose Saddam Hussein (which we could have accomplished for only $40 million), a fake Texan, and a fake Christian, etc.

David Lewis-1897066

I am SICK to death hearing this garbage about how Tea Partiers disrespect the President with signs and pictures depicting him of this or that. I AGREE IT IS DESPICABLE!!! But the left (and especially you Feisty Red) seem to have amnesia about how Bush II was treated by the fringe left wing fanatics.

David, yes we did disparage Georgie Boy. However, David, the difference is we did not polarize the nation; nor was there talk of secession, or leaders literally advocating violence, for just 2 examples there are:

"Armed and Dangerous" like BatSh!t crazy Michelle Backmann said

If the ballot doesn't work we'll use the 2nd amendment remedy said another ding bat Sharon Angle.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why can't you just admit there are fanatics on both sides of the spectrum....for every crooked Republican out there you can easily find a Democrat who is just as dirty. The ends do not justify the means.

I will admit it when you give me a "Countdown" of fewer Republican "Crooks and Liars"; including candidates like Cristine O'donnell.

What exhausts me is folks with unrealstic expectations and complaints waiting on President Obama to "change Washington" all by himself, and don't even give him a full half term to get it done.

He could have used you there...:)

Good for you that you can determine which expectations in others are unrealistic, and what differentiates a legitimate concern with a "complaint"

So, YOUR NYT headline would read

"Unrealistic Complainers Question President"

and

"Unrealistic expectations and complaints greet Obama in town hall chat"

?

Hmmm, interesting that you assumed I was talking about the folks at the town hall meeting . . . I haven't even seen the town hall meeting in its entirety . . . try someone you know.

Nashville_fan

Hmmm, interesting that you assumed I was talking about the folks at the town hall meeting...

You used the quote from the meeting in my post didn't you?

Well, your post is in the reply thread to my post and certainly seems to be a reply, doesn't it?

Plaese...

dangerfield,

You know what they say about assuming! ;o)

dangerfield

There is a "disconnect" in many of the posts today.

Wow, I think you are parroting my collapsed post about the town hall yesterday. However, the truth is the disconnect really is the media, particularly, FOX NOISE. The media's hand is almost forced by FOX NOISE's ubiquitous propensity to make the worst of the President's Agenda to low information voters with lies, distortions and deletions.

Lets get it straight Beverly, it's low IQ voters. They don't want any information, they just want to be told what to do and say.

Mo-1852032

Lets get it straight Beverly, it's low IQ voters. They don't want any information, they just want to be told what to do and say.

Thanks MO. It's pathetic, hateful as well as a coordinated efforts to silence voices from the left.

Beverly in Chicago,

No one is trying to silence Voice from the left, All 7 or 8 of you are here on Newsvine in First Read spouting your Hatred. We just come here to laugh at you all.

Come Novermber our Laughter will be even Louder, because we told you that you were on a Sinking ship that is Obama.. But hey. I tried many times to throw you a Life Jacket.. But you all refused.

The really amazing part is to think that any reasonable person would consider Huckabee someone whose opinion the WH would consider important. If he's the face people think of when they consider the Christian Right it's no wonder Americans are unchurched at a record level. Mike Huckabee has forgotten a VERY important principle;

"Be in the world, not of the world."

Huckabee thinks he is the would.

Great post . . . that is why I am planning on watching the entire event today for myself.

Ron-Atlanta, This is why we have to do our own reading and watching and not depend on MSM to be fair in any situation. They will always pick a sentence, or a few words from a statement or question and blow that way out of proportion. Either it will make a heck of a headline or it is worth the spin for a few news cycles. This is what drives me to distraction, people take these 'hot' headlines or sound bytes and never make an effort to get the full story. It becomes their mantra and will fit it in neatly with whatever their perception of the day may be.

I liked your favorite part, mine was the fellow who whined about 'his' American dream, as in the selfish "where's mine"?

Hope all is well in one of my favorite cities.

Do you know how much you sound like Bush supporters did?

There are countries where they would accentuate the "good news" and only portray the administration in a positive light...but they aren't democracies with a free press...

Leave it to df to see "watch the whole thing, it's interesting" and hear "accentuate the good news, that's the only part that's important."

John B, Des Moines, IA

It is the theme here, not just for this thread. It is a constant theme with the hard core Obama fans here to shoot the MSM for not highlighting the "good news"

Leave it to YOU to comment on something you misunderstood...again(see, I can do that too)

Do you understand now?

There is no room for actual political debate when almost every reply is ad homenim. Everything turns into a p*&^ing contest or a shouting match. What did you contribute with your critique of my post, I mean the AUTHOR? What would the appropriate response be?

Well said. The media seems to have selectively choosen the criticism, frustration expressed rather than the positives. I taped and watched it later--and you are right, there was more to it than is being described.

Ron - Atlanta

I so no mention of the fact that his administration has cut taxes to small businesses or that the tax rates on individuals and corporations are lower now then they were under the great Republican messiah, Ronald Reagan. My favorite part, though, was when, following questions and concerns from several clearly middle-class Americans who have suffered greatly through this recession, the Wall Street hedge fund manager exihibited the 'out-of-touchiness' that seems the norm for the financially well-to-do by complaining that he and his Wall Street comrades felt like pinatas from all the mean things the President had said about them. I didn't sense a lot of sympathy in the room.

I did see clips and from what you say you didn't see I can tell you if Wall Street feels like a pinata; to some extent they deserve it. Especially, when they are sitting on money that could have helped Main Street. My first thought was to reflect on what Mort Zuckerman said.

Mort Zuckerman's claim was/is taxes and increased costs of new regulation are holding back investment and growth. Here's the implication of that statement: Businesses would hire and invest if not for Democratic policies. They have customers who want to buy, but they won't meet the demand because they're afraid of some hypothetical tax increase or new regulation.

Now they (Wall Street) are those who the public should be blaming. This Businesses' proclivity have created a scam and do need much negative connotations.

Uh, dangerfield, it's also a constant theme of the Right to shoot the MSM for claiming that there IS any good news. For some reason you never carp on that, however. And should there be some surprise that people who frequent a political message board have preferences? Read your own response carefully. You're telling Ron he should just accept whatever the press gives us even when he feels the coverage doesn't match the overall mood of the event -- which he has taken the time to seek out and watch in its entirety. In other words he's made an effort to be an informed voter. Do you think the Right is going to just sit back and watch what the media gives us and be happy with that? Of course not. They not only have an entire Conservative industry based around feeding biased narratives to the public, but also an admitted strategy of "gaming the ref" to get more favorable coverage.

That's the reality, dude. You can wish we'd all just sit around and discuss things in utter rationalism over brandy, but the world we live in doesn't resemble that in any way. Conservatives treat this as war. To ignore that is to be defeated before beginning.

How do you get this:

Read your own response carefully. You're telling Ron he should just accept whatever the press gives us even when he feels the coverage doesn't match the overall mood of the event -- which he has taken the time to seek out and watch in its entirety.

From this?;

It is the theme here, not just for this thread. It is a constant theme with the hard core Obama fans here to shoot the MSM for not highlighting the "good news"

A general comment does not lend itself to a specific complaint. I OBVIOUSLY (the word theme probably should have been a give-away)was speaking of the commentary here in general.

Thank you.

Also please ignore the many direct links I post to sites with "facts" and my encouragement to all to read a variety of sources and form your own opinion.

Dangerfield, here is an interesting article from Slate magazine with an interesting take on this.

http://www.slate.com/id/2267685/

I will refrain from lending my interpretation, but it offers a new, to me at least, explanation.

Thanks for the link...

Just like the democratic party was split by the anti-war movement in the 60's...

The chance for a right wing "McGovern" coming out of the republican convention in 2012-2016, and historic presidential electoral losses for the republican party in those years is a very real possible outcome.

Interesting comparison. Gee, where's Gov. James Rhodes and the Ohio National Guard when we really need them?

A right wing McGovern movement in '12 or '16? That worked SO well for the Democrats!

That's the POINT...sigh

The republicans fear the tea-party like the democrats feared US, and will wind up nominating a weak candidate in the presidential election, because the extremists will be the tail wagging the dog.

In "68 we supported "Clean Gene McCarthy" who was the anti-war candidate until Bobby Kennedy announced his candidacy. The 68 convention was CHAOS, and by 1972, with the anti-war/new left "tail", wagging the dem establishment we nominated a candidate who went on to an historic electoral loss.

dangerfield

That's the POINT...sigh

The republicans fear the tea-party like the democrats feared US

OK, now I'm really confused! I know that dangerfield posted that she/he was a Democrat or at leat leans left but now he/she is evidently saying she/he is a Republican or at least leans right. I guess you really cannot depend on what you read.

Reading comprehension, Frank..I was IN the ANTI-WAR movement..That was the analogy...The democratic party feared the anti-war movement...which I was in, hence US...

In "68 we supported "Clean Gene McCarthy"

You can depend on what you read if you read the whole thing..it really helps...:)

Went to the Republican convention in Miami...with several members of the the "weathermen", one of whom was my high school homeroom teacher...:)

in my most chiding voice:

so are you telling us you 'palled' around with domestic terrorists?

jk

so are you telling us you 'palled' around with domestic terrorists?

Damn right, and oh so very proud! lol

Some of the nicest, most passionate and intelligent people I have ever known...got arrested and met Jerry Rubin...Ah, memories!...

Again I ask, what qualifies you to speak with authority on what motivates black people? How do you know that what you typed is true?

Who is calling this woman a "traitor" to her race?

She is someone who works for a "social" organization. The CEO of a Veterans Service Org. That is why she is brave and honest. Because she is not working for PROFIT.

Now dont get me wrong there are many honest, brave, and wonderful people at the helm of large for-profit companies (see philanthropist) however those who wish to grow up and be a social worker or an elementary educator deserve special mention and a our gratitude.

It's true jed, the false Conservative narrative of Socialism is problematical. If there's one thing the Conservative Movement is brilliant at it's creating these narratives and disseminating them throughout the vast media apparatus they control, from Fox News to the Wall Street Journal to the pantheon of talk radio heroes. The falseness of the talking point is contained in your very wording -- that the Socialist Democratic Party has buddied up with banks and the insurance industry -- publicly traded corporations.

So yes, it's an issue and one that needs constant tending. As we see here every day, debunking a lie doesn't keep Conservatives from telling the same lie every day until it finally gains some traction. The false narratives need to be beaten back every single day, wherever they appear.

"That they are squashing the motivation to excel in business and grow personal wealth."

The Democrats are doing just that.

"The Democratic party ignores this perception to it's own peril"

They ignore it because they pereptuate it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUaY3LhJ-IQ

How, Tracy? By increasing the top marginal tax rate of those making over $250,000 by 4 percentage points? At that point they'll still get a $6,300 break from continuation of the existing tax break on everyone with lower incomes.

Is motivation really so weak that people will stop working if they keep $40 less on each additional $1,000? The math of that is absurd on its face.

"How, Tracy?"

The fact that businesses large and small are not hiring because of the policies of a president and Congress that really don't do much to help businesses. Remember it's the wealthy that do the hiring in this country, not the middle class.

Personal income tax?

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/obamas-plan-to-raise-tax-rates/

Nothing about increasing the capital gains taxes or creating multiple new layers of new bureaucracy with health care bill that will increase just about EVERYONE's healthcare costs?

"Is motivation really so weak that people will stop working if they keep $40 less on each additional $1,000?"

Well considering this tax increase on the wealthy is nothing more than a wealth transfer people who earn their money don't like it when the government tries to "spread the wealth". If you say it's anything different you are a fool.

Thanks, Tracy, I'll remember that.

I'll be a good little serf and be happy the wealthy are willing to share their crumbs with me.

Stop being "serf" and being satisfied with being mediocre.

I've never been mediocre and wouldn't be satisfied with it. 200 people depend on my decision making for their livelihoods and my results speak for themselves.

What I refuse to do is continue letting people be "better than me" just because they have more than me. I refuse to live in that sort of aristocracy. I refuse to let our society devolve into that. That's why I speak out. That's why I'm Liberal.

The less intelligent people that vote, the more powerful the Religious Right becomes. Check out the below video of Paul Weyrich if you havent already. He is the co-founder of the Heritage Foundation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw

Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome -- good government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.

Wow adidas, that's powerful stuff. It really speaks to the desire of Conservatives NOT to establish a democratic, egalitarian government but instead a class system in which the elites rule the rest.