Fellow Travelers:

I keep hearing Dems say they need to personalize some of the accomplishments of the current Congress and the President. This may not be about education in this morning's context, but when you learn, well, that's education. Try this on for size.

My wife and I have just returned from our daughter's wedding......quite a beautiful affair. While the wedding was wonderful, it was the gift-giving that was most stunning. We were grandly upstaged by her uncle........Uncle Sam.

Over the last two years we have lived through a period where we were reminded that children can indeed die before their parents. Our daughter had a rather serious medical condition, which was very fortunately diagnosed in time. She now has a clean bill of health, but the threat of re-emergence is always there.

Her young husband has medical insurance and now, as his wife, so does our daughter. Uncle Sam's gift showed up Thursday. You see, what we consider to be a terrible threat to our daughter is called a "pre-existing condition" by her husband's insurer. President Obama and a majority of Congress have clarified this for the insurers and said they can't weasel out of their responsibilities.

The insurers screamed and squawked and spent millions upon millions of dollars to avoid having to pay one lousy dime should our daughter fall ill again. There were even some Representatives and Senators who agreed with the insurance companies that our daughter shouldn't have coverage. I try as hard as I can to be a nice guy, but I really hate those Senators and Representatives. They're mostly Republican. I can't help but wonder why they think it's more important that a CEO of an insurance company should stuff millions of dollars in his pocket rather than use that money to provide medical care for people who need it.

The kids are off on their honeymoon and won't be sending out thank you's quite yet, and even though I'm a bit put out that Uncle Sam's gift was so much better than ours, I'd like to say thank you very much for that gift.

I do have one question though. Why are you Democrats who voted for this wonderful gift embarrassed to tell voters about it?

One of the major corner stones of the Republican “Pledge to America” is the continuing claim that Tax Cuts is the answer all to our economic problems (that the republicans created by the way under the reign of GW Bush). It is not, as indicated by this article written by David Johnson, former NYT Tax Reporter.

If have copied his opening summary here and the whole article may be found on www.tax.com as indicated by the URL. (http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/CHAS-89LPZ9?OpenDocument

“The 2008 income tax data are now in, so we can assess the fulfillment of the Republican promise that tax cuts would produce widespread prosperity by looking at all the years of the George W. Bush presidency”.

“Just as they did in 2000, the Republicans are running this year on an economic platform of tax cuts; especially making the tax cuts permanent for the richest among us. So how did the tax cuts work out? My analysis of the new data, with all figures in 2008 dollars”:

“Total income was $2.74 trillion less during the eight Bush years than if incomes had stayed at 2000 levels.

That much additional income would have more than made up for the lack of demand that keeps us mired in the Great Recession. That would mean no need for a stimulus, although it would not have affected the last administration's interfering with market capitalism by bailing out irresponsible Wall Streeters instead of letting the market determine their fortunes”.

“In only two years was total income up, but even when those years are combined they exceed the declines in only one of the other six years”.

“Even if we limit the analysis by starting in 2003, when the dividend and capital gains tax cuts began, through the peak year of 2007, the result is still less income than at the 2000 level. Total income was down $951 billion during those four years”.

“Average incomes fell. Average taxpayer income was down $3,512, or 5.7 percent, in 2008 compared with 2000, President Bush's own benchmark year for his promises of prosperity through tax cuts. Had incomes stayed at 2000 levels, the average taxpayer would have earned almost $21,000 more over those eight years. That's almost $50 per week”.

The whole article 9/24/2010 written by David Johnson, former NYT Tax Reporter is on line at

http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/CHAS-89LPZ9?OpenDocument

Some other excerpts from this article.

The hard, empirical facts demonstrate that:

“The tax cuts did not spur investment. Job growth in the George W. Bush years was one-seventh that of the Clinton years. Nixon and Ford did better than Bush on jobs. Wages fell during the last administration. Average incomes fell. The number of Americans in poverty, as officially measured, hit a 16-year high last year of 43.6 million, though a National Academy of Sciences study says that the real poverty figure is closer to 51 million. Food banks are swamped. Foreclosure signs are everywhere. Americans and their governments are drowning in debt. And at the nexus of tax and healthcare, Republican ideas perpetuate a cruel and immoral system that rations healthcare -- while consuming every sixth dollar in the economy and making businesses, especially small businesses, less efficient and less profitable”.

Opinion: And the Republicans continue to say they helped the Small Business with their tax policy. The middle class and small businesses did not get the benefits of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts as promised. They did, in some cases, get some benefits but nowhere near what the Republicans claim or promised. But we know who did. The economic divide is at record levels. The top 2% are increasing their wealth at record rates while the rest of us are stagnant or standing in the unemployment line. The top 1% now controls over 34% of the wealth and that percentage is growing.

“This is economic madness. It is policy divorced from empirical evidence. It is insanity because the policies are illusory and delusional. The evidence is in, and it shows beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts failed to achieve the promised goals”.

Opinion: There it is in a nutshell. The success claimed by the Republicans never matured. In fact using the 2000 Income Level we are currently at $0.94 on every dollar. In 2000 the average income was stated at $ 61,517. By the end of 2007 it dropped to $ 58,005. The Bush reign put his country into reverse and almost bankrupt it along the way. They took a budget surplus and turned it into a record deficit in 8 years. It is going to take President Obama and future Presidents years to dig us out of this hole. Putting the Republicans back in the drivers seat will not only delay the recovery, it will dig us in even deeper than where we are now.

How much more evidence do we need about the ongoing lies that the Republicans are telling us? The Tax Cuts were highly leveraged for the benefit of the top 2% of the people that received a disproportionate percentage of the benefits (over 50%). The Tax cuts did not create jobs. Under the reign of GW Bush only 3.5 Million jobs were created and when President Obama took office, we were loosing over 700,000 jobs per month. President GW Bush has one of the poorest job creation records of any President. Tax Cuts do not pay for themselves either.

Why is nobody pointing out the very basic fact, that these Tax Cuts have been in play for over 9 years now, and there are still no jobs? That’s right, the tax cuts that the Republican’s want are still in effect today, and they are NOT working, so why would we want to continue with a program that we already no does not work??????

Is this the model that we want to go back to? If you put the Republicans back in the driver’s seat, this is exactly what you are going to get and worst. This is why I am not going to vote for a Republican.

Good Morning Navy: Excellent post!! Your comment from Friday's post was so good, I just had to use it. Maybe again and again.

Ron Indiana

Great post filled with chunks of truth-i-ness. Thanks for emphasizing the facts. My favorite of your truthful fact is this one...

"The GOP Pledge to repeal health care is a red herring. Repealing health care simply is not going to happen. Republicans will not become the majority in the Senate and President Obama would veto any bill that would weaken Health Care. Republicans are pandering to their Tea Party base by following an old John McCain ploy…”Shouting at Clouds.”

Can anyone tell me is John McCain managed by remote control?

Ron;

Great post to start off the week. I was watching the pundits this weekend and they just are not answering any questions on this so called "Pledge to America". No answers on how they are going to really pay for any of their agenda. No comment when asked if this is the same GW Bush Agenda that has proven to be a failure. Boehner wants the people to make the call. What he does not tell us that it is the Billionaires that are writing the Republican/Tea Party agenda now. Rachael had a great piece on this Friday.

These people just have no shame even when their mistruths are exposed.

That is just one reason why I will not vote Republican, period. No new ideas, no real plan to pay for anything except to take the deficit to new record highs. Vote down everything that helps the Middle Class and turns around and holds tax cuts for the middle class hostage so they can get a tax cut for the richest 2% that already control most of the wealth in this country.

Navy,

I understand that you think that the American Peoples Money is the Govts to spend as they Wish, and that you Want the Govt to take Peoples Money away from them Based on your Line of Thinking. You still come here everyday trying to Claim that the American people are going to get some kind of Tax cut when they are Either going to get a TAX HIKE. or Taxes will stay the Same.. You for some reason cant get it into your Thought Process that Govt is the problem. Govt overspending is the Problem, Your solution to the Problem of the Govt Overspending is To Tax 2 Percent of the Poplulation for the Overspending of the Democrats..

Your line of thinking is why the Democrats will lose the House, and possibly the Senate. the Majority of the American people gave you liberals a shot, and it failed. just like Obama..

Ron:

Please feel free to use it as often as you wish. The "Pledge to America" is a cruel joke on the American People and should be exposed as nothing more than the republican/tea party's "Roadmap to the destruction of the Middle Class". This is exactly what it is, I do not care how they try to spin it.

Ron: I am always amused at how the right wing likes to remind us that Kennedy cut taxes. What they fail to say is that in Eisenhower's time, the top rate was at about 90%. Pretty reasonable solution. Those folks would think the current rates to be a gift. Look, you can't expect services you don't pay for. We tried that in the Cheney/Bush administration, witness the bill for a war that was kept off budget. That certainly helped the current malaise the country is in. David: May I congratulate you, both on your daughter's return to good health, and her wedding? You have shown by your own story how HCR can help one family. I am also helped since my youngest, who is graduating college, and must wait til next year for grad school, can stay on our insurance. Many families who are in bankruptcy are there due to medical reasons and their inability to pay the massive bills they receive. Like you, I believe the Democratic party and the President in particular, ought to tout how this bill is helping individual families. Clara, a very happy birthday to you!

David Walker;

Outstanding post. Nothing like a real life story to drive home a very good point. I wish your family continued good health. If it was up to the republicans, well we can imagine the results.

Thanks, Ron - Great Post!

And FR, thanks for sending me some Lawrence O for my birthday - now if you'd just announce that David G was taking a sabbatical until after the election,...well that would make my day COMPLETE!

(Newday, thanks - It will be jam packed!)

Navy Vet, Thanks so much for that post. It supports the article I just put on the 'Vine about the issue of Stimulus employment and the need for even more action on that front. If any of you wish to see it, here's the link:

http://langewinckler.newsvine.com/_news/2010/09/27/5187340-more-stimulus-jobs-efforts-needed-now

I think the President in the last few days before this election needs to articulate what other actions he wants to take to rebuild employment and preserve jobs. He'll attract tons of fire for it, but that will only serve to set him in contrast with the nay-sayers and give voters a clearer idea of just what they'll end up with if they buy into the GOP/Tea Party nonsense.

David Walker -

My congrats and best wishes to your daughter as well. I had a doctor's appointment of my own the other day and much to my "surprise", there were no Death Panelists lurking about, no government forms to fill out, and I still saw my same doctor and paid the same co-pay I always have. In fact, I only noticed two differences since my last visit - now that they've switched over to electronic medical records, he didn't have to write me out paper prescriptions for the chronic meds I'm on (pre-existing conditions here, too), just click, click and and the pharmacy I use was already putting them together before I left. And when I got to the pharmacy, they were offering to sign me up for a new generic plan that will be saving me $44 plus change a month. Hmmm.....same doctor, faster service, and lower costs......yeah, let's repeal this sucker before it gets any better!

P.S. - Clara - I'm starving - will you be cutting the cake anytime soon? Enjoy your day!

Ron:

Great post.

I am disappointed that the MSM (that would be you Chuck Todd) does not call the GOP leadership out on this hypocrisy when they are interviewing them.

The media should be pointing out that cutting discretionary spending would include massive cuts to Head Start! Imagine that when NBC is highlighting the need for Education Reform this week.

Just so much to ponder about the state of affairs of all things political.

The whole apparatus is beginning to feel like a joke and it's on us.

Steve,

Spin it like you consistently do but this was a planned tax increase passed by Congress and signed into law over 9 years ago. The Democrats intend to stop this planned increase if Republicans will support a bill for 98% of earners.

Republicans will filibuster any bill that does not include the top 2% even when Bill Gates says a higher tax rate for the wealthy is the right thing to do and will not hurt the economy or job growth.

As for the Democratic overspending let us not forget that President Obama spent $1 trillion on America while President George W. Bush spent $1 trillion on Iraq.

Yes, it's wonderful to hear Bill Gates calling for higher taxes! This despite the fact that a) nothing is dtopping him from paying more than he owes-and it wouldn't have that ring of hypocricy if he actually did that; and b)he has sheltered most of his wealth in a foundatiopn.

Yes, it's so nice to hear people calling for higher taxes-for other people, never themselves.

All that is irrelevant. BOTH parties will do absolutely nothing about cheap imports flooding the country and taking away American jobs. It is the foreign trade deficit that is ruining this country. China should be forced to pay 30% tarrif on the balance of trade between US and that country. Both parties completely sold out to multinational corporations.

Joanne, please don't be misleading. Sending your prescriptions to the pharmacist electronically is NOT part of Obamacare. My dr's been doing that for years now. And, those pharmacists were doing you a favor to offer generics. That's not part of OBAMAcare. Whether or not your co-pay goes up will depend on several factors. Our agency's benefits are being re-negotiated now. We'll know the impact in Nov during open enrollment. We're not expecting good news.

Ron Indiana"The GOP Pledge to permanently extend the Bush tax cuts for everybody is a sham. You simply cannot have it both ways by arguing to lower the national debt AND extend the Bush tax cuts which only increase the national debt."

Since extending the Bush tax cuts to the 'rich' would only cost $700 Billion, but extending the tax cuts to the middle class would cost $3,100 Billion ($3.1 Trillion), would you favor not extending the cuts to ANYONE? That $3.8 Trillion could be used to reduce the debt.

Why not try to get the Democrats to let ALL of the tax cuts expire, since they are in control?

David Walker

Nice tout for Obamacare, but even under the previous insurance setup, pre-existing conditions don't apply to group policies, so your daughter didn't need Obamacare to qualify for coverage.

Dennis;

Touche', they just keep on spinning and spinning. I am surprised some of their heads just don't twist off. Bottom line, the Republicans made this mess with the two unfunded wars, two unfunded tax cuts and a prescription bill to boot, also unfunded. We Americans are still paying these bills, how soon the republicans forget. They also drive up the National Debt and deficit year in and year out. Selective memory is a good thing when the only memories you have are bad ones (like a failed economic agenda).

Max^108,

All that is irrelevant. BOTH parties will do absolutely nothing about cheap imports flooding the country and taking away American jobs. It is the foreign trade deficit that is ruining this country. China should be forced to pay 30% tarrif on the balance of trade between US and that country. Both parties completely sold out to multinational corporations

I beleive that it was former Secretary Paulson that assisted the last administration with getting us in debt with China, just as Reagan did with Japan...

Paulson conducted a lot of business with China when he was employed with Goldman Sachs...

I disagree with your posting that both parties will do absolutely nothing...that's a rather pessimistic view since we're a democracy...when we cast our votes we do so trusting that we've made the right decisions...personally...I happen to think that we are on the mend with this administration...

Will it happen over night?...No it wont, because we didn't get to where we are presently overnight...

Pledge or Education? Read the article and comment on the article, please.

Great points Ron - Thanks

First Read (more on the Pledge):

“What we’re really talking about is a 20 percent deduction immediately on the bottom line of every small- business owner and family farmer in America,” said Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN).

However, as CAP economist Christian Weller found, “the proposal is an ‘upside-down’ tax break that gives the largest benefits to those who already have the highest incomes”:

A deduction reduces the taxable income and thus the taxes that somebody has to pay. A business owner with lots of business and other income will thus get a government subsidy of 35 cents for each dollar in deduction, while a small business owner in the 15 percent tax bracket will get 15 cents for each dollar in deductions…Larger businesses could easily use this windfall to outcompete smaller businesses. A larger business owner with a 35 percent marginal tax rate will get a benefit that is 133 percent greater than the benefit that a smaller business owner with a 15 percent marginal tax rate gets for each dollar in tax deduction.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/09/27/not-so-small-biz/

Again we have Republicans watching out for the wealthy and the biggest businesses.

roy wilson-you were expecting honesty? Haven't the last two years shown you that honesty is not the strong suit of the obama worshipper?

You are dealing with people who would believe that the sky was plaid, if that's what Obama told them. The truth is something they can live without, so long as their dear leader gets what he wants.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired "“Total income was $2.74 trillion less during the eight Bush years than if incomes had stayed at 2000 levels"

Your analysis ignores the probability that the Bush tax cuts stimulated the economy, and led to strong economic growth and INCREASED Federal Revenues.

For example, the full tax cuts were effective in 2003. Compared with 3 years earlier under the old tax rates, Federal Revenues actually DECLINED by 12% in 2003.

Three years later (2006), under the Bush tax rates, total Federal Revenues actually INCREASED by 35% over 2003, while the GDP increased by 23% during those 3 years.

Blindly accepting that tax cuts or tax increases do not have any effect on the economy is foolish, as any economist will tell you.

PS - Why not use REAL numbers instead of 'adjusted' numbers? Using 'adjusted' numbers will change, depending on what 'base year' you use, but REAL numbers don't change.

dirt - I never said those items were part of the healthcare reform package - my point was that after all the misleading that's already been going on about it for months (well, some might call it "misleading" - I'd go with "lies" myself), the only changes I could see on my first visit after it began to take effect were positive ones, not negative, and that maybe people should actually give it time to see what shakes out before making some of the ridiculous assumptions they did. At least one Republican candidate around here is still hissing about it being "The Government Healthcare Takeover" in his campaign ads - now THAT's what I'd call misleading.....

Another voice that confuses cause and effect. you arguement has been debunked several times now. STTS.

"Yes, it's wonderful to hear Bill Gates calling for higher taxes! This despite the fact that a) nothing is dtopping him from paying more than he owes-and it wouldn't have that ring of hypocricy if he actually did that"

Another round please, of the Conservative narrative that rich people who have concern for those less fortunate are hypocrites. Rich people aren't able to speak to the needs of society unless it's to make a case that they need PERSONALLY to have higher profits which then can trickle down to others.

This argument is an attack on reason and language. The argument itself is hypocritical but projects hypocrisy onto those who are actually trying to better society and others. The correct argument would in fact be to say that Bill Gates position is REASONABLE and HONEST. More honest in fact because he's willing to look beyond his own interests to that of the nation that made his fortune possible.

Where, after all, did Bill Gates first learn about computers? In the same public schools that Conservatives seek to destroy.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired "Another voice that confuses cause and effect. you arguement has been debunked several times now."

I'm not sure if you are referring to me, but which of my FACTS do you disagree with, since they all come from the government's own records?

Here are a few more FACTS;

Under Bill Clinton, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was $3.4 Trillion higher in 2000 than in 1992 (After 8 years).


Under G W Bush, GDP was $4.7 Trillion higher in 2008 than in 2000 (After 8 years), even though his last year was a 'recession year'.

Here is information on job growth under Bush and Obama - with a link to the government source.

These are the numbers for jobs created from the government's own Bureau of Labor Statistics;

Average number of people employed in 2000 (Clinton's last year) = 136,891,000
Average number of people employed in 2008 (Bush's last year) = 145,362,000
Net GAIN under Bush = 8,471,000 jobs.

Average number of people employed in 2010 (after Obama's first 2 years) = 138,687,000
Net LOSS under Obama = 6,675,000 jobs.

Here is the link;

http://www.nidataplus.com/lfeus1.htm#annl

Of course, many people will say;

Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's already made up” LOL

Roy Wilson

but even under the previous insurance setup, pre-existing conditions don't apply to group policies

Do you know all the facts about his daughter's situation? To be a member of a group policy you have to be employed by an employeer who has the group coverage. Also she could have been unable to work due to her illness.

Pre-existing conditions and the MANY stipulations that allowed and still allow people to be excluded from coverage is not a trivial matter.

Dirt-303814: Joanne, please don't be misleading. Sending your prescriptions to the pharmacist electronically is NOT part of Obamacare.

This is too funny. The Libs must also think penicillin, the polio vaccine, and ambulances are part of Obamacare. Talk about brain-washed.

Joanne in PA: dirt - I never said those items were part of the healthcare reform package -

Yes you did. You directly described and implied that electronic prescription transfer was part of the new health care system. It is not. In fact, all these innovations you've gotten used to up until ObamaCare will be curtailed as the health care dollar moves from R&D to support more and more uninsured people.

Ron,

What does this whole drivel have to do with education?

nice attempt at changing the argument, John. The fact remains that Gates is perfectly free to pay the government as much as he wants-but not only chooses not to do so, but puts his money in a tax sheltered foundation so that he is not FORCED to pay more.

As to yellowdog-I don't need to know his daughter's condition. It is enough to know the LAW. Since her husband has employer provided insurance, SHE IS COVERED.

You could try your malakey on someone who does not have a birth defect which causes a 'pre-existing condition' such as I have-kidney disease-but since I have never been turned down for insurance, although my rates are much higher than yours- I know a bit more about it than you do.

John B., Des Moines,IA: Where after all, did Bill Gates first learn about computers? In the same public schools that Conservatives seek to destroy.

Bill Gates was educated at Lakeside School in the northern suburbs of Seattle. Lakeside is a private school.

No Joe - I'm glad to hear you have never been denied due to your pre-existing conditon.

My wife also has pre-existing conditions. I'm also glad to say that my wife before we were married, while unemployed was able to keep making the exorbitant COBRA premiums until she was able to find her present employment.

I know that you find it fair that the insurance companies get to set all the rules to qualify; have to be married to a spouse with health coverage, can't have pre-existing conditions, if you have pre-existing conditions must be a child to be elgible for coverage (as of last week).

I don't .

John B., Des Moines,IA: Where after all, did Bill Gates first learn about computers? In the same public schools that Conservatives seek to destroy.

Wow. This really sums up the liberal "argument". Schools have been being reformed now for what, 50 years, and we really don't see much improvement. And the word "destroy", now that is harsh. Almost sounds like the Left is trying to demonize Conservatives. They wouldn't do that, would they?

No John, Conservatives are not interested in "destroying" the public education system. We are interested in doing a few things though that have not been tried, like hold the schools accountable to the people they serve, like introduce competition and diversity to improve and explore new and better ways to educate students, like move the funding of schools from the federal government to the state and local governments.

Most if not all of these federal education programs proposed through the years by politicians, who know about as much about education as they do about banking, health care, budgets, etc. (i.e., nothing) have been expensive failures. It's time to fund schools at the state/local level and let the people in those communities hold those schools accountable for their actions.

ITM: I guess the GOP Pledge didn't say much about education. So I can only conclude the GOP Tea Party is against it. They would prefer voters to be dim-witted.

The problem was never the Bush tax cuts. It is GOVERNMENT SPENDING!

Math and science are great if you are interested and familiar with reading and writing. We must start there first and we must remember not all are scientists and are more suited to less brain strain jobs.

Roy

Those numbers on tax for the 2% don't jive and you know it. It has long been the stance of republicans that the "rich" pay most or more of the total percent of the income taxes in this country. So how is it extending the income tax cut to those who pay less of a percentage will cost more? I am not an economist but that math is impossible. Well let's say we bend time and space and make that possible. History still tells us the middle class will put the tax cut back into the economy almost immediately.

Please stop rewashing old numbers until they fit your point of view.

I agree "old fat guy" the government spends way too much. But unlike most I would suggest we look at companies that hold government contracts before we cut services to citizens.

Yellowdog-Mark D "Roy Wilson...Do you know all the facts about his daughter's situation?"

You are correct. The story did not clarify that point, so I presumed her husband had group coverage since that is the norm.

Whether his daughter is working or not shouldn't affect coverage under his plan.

And no, I never said or implied that pre-existing conditions are a 'trivial matter'. It is extremely important to those affected, including my wife.

All through the debate over HCR, I consistently supported a health care system like that of France or Taiwan, who have what is generally considered the best health care systems in the World (not government run), covering EVERY citizen, and costing only about half of what we pay per capita.

Unfortunately, what we got was a mishmash that is going to cost a lot MORE, not less.

to: Anita, Birmingham, Alabama

Anita, American voters only have a choice between two parties, and both are sitting in the pocket of special interest groups. It is really not that hard to see. Every time one set of crooks upsets the voters, they give power to the other gang. And the people who rigged this game, the international capital, the industrial military complex, and all the other parasites, they win every time. That is why American people keep getting screwed more and more. The last honest guy runnig for the President was Ross Perot.

Tom Reston, VA "Roy Those numbers on tax for the 2% don't jive and you know it."

I'm not sure what you're referring to. I don't recall making any representations about 2% of anything on this topic.

If the Democrats are so serious about making sure the middle Class and poor continue to Benifit from the Bush Tax cuts and only want to sock it to the rich 2 percent. Why have the Democrats not Proposed any Bills that would infact extend these these cuts that would Accomplish nothing but keeping peoples Taxes the Same.. except for the 2 percent of the People that Democrats Wish to Pay for their Overspending

Tom Reston, VA

If you were referring to the 'tax cuts for the rich' costing $700 Billion, vs the 'tax cuts for the middle class' costing $3.1 Trillion, these are not my numbers - they have been widely reported in various media.

The reality is that over 80% of the Bush tax cuts actually benefitted the middle class, not the 'rich'.

Conversely, letting ALL of the tax cuts expire would result in the middle class paying over 80% of the extra taxes.

There's just a lot more 'middle class' taxpayers than 'rich' taxpayers, even though the 'rich' do pay a majority of the total income taxes paid.

Ron,

Get a life. You are another left-wing economic idiot. Tax 'rate reductions' and massive deficits are not interdependent. The Bush 'cuts'-FOR ALL BRACKETS-led to much greater economic activity and vastly increased revenues. The problem is that spending has insanely risen well beyond those revenues, especially under Obama, Reid, and Pelosi. Even with the bad recession, any decent business person could balance the budget tomorrow. The only problem is that politicians don't have the guts and decency to do the right thing and make that happen. And class envy hypocrites like you only make things easier for them when you buy into and continue to post their lies.

Roy Wilson-336103

Since extending the Bush tax cuts to the 'rich' would only cost $700 Billion, but extending the tax cuts to the middle class would cost $3,100 Billion ($3.1 Trillion), would you favor not extending the cuts to ANYONE? That $3.8 Trillion could be used to reduce the debt.

Who are you talking about here? I thought you mentioning the "rich" and "$700 Billion" you were speaking about the top 2%. Which means you are saying the middle class pays a much higher percentage of the total percent of income tax collected. But doesn't that contradict the entire "the rich pay more income taxes than everyone else" argument we have been hearing.

Economists say that we need nearly 200K new jobs a month to keep up with population growth. Let's figrue that into someones job posting numbers:

Average number of people employed in 2000 (Clinton's last year) = 136,891,000
Average number of people employed in 2008 (Bush's last year) = 145,362,000
Net GAIN under Bush = 8,471,000 jobs.

The Net gain to keep up with population growth for 8 years is close to 20 million. Bush lost jobs after that is figured in.

Average number of people employed in 2010 (after Obama's first 2 years) = 138,687,000
Net LOSS under Obama = 6,675,000 jobs.

Most of these jobs were lost in the first year of Obama's administration and are attributed to the recession that began under Bush. Bush lost even more jobs.

It's about volume, Tom.

As you note, the "rich" are only 2% of the population - lets say 6 million people for the sake of argument. That leaves 300 million people in the "middle class".

Better yet, here's a CBO analysis that clearly spells out the tax distrubution of the tax burden across income ranges. The top 1% pay 40% of the income taxes in in this country. The top quintile pays 86%, bottom quintile pays -3%. Yes, that's right, that means they get back more money in refunds than they pay in. In fact, it was Bush's tax cuts that created the ridiculous situation that we're currently in where 47% of the workforce pays NO income tax at all.

http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2010/tax_liability_shares.pdf

First, apologies for having my facts wrong on Bill Gates education.

Second, it isn't changing the argument to refute someone's accusation of hypocrisy. Conservatives accuse rich people of being hypocritical EVERY TIME a rich person speaks in support of a level playing field. Conservatives, on the other hand CONSTANTLY claim that the playing field is already level even when they "made my money the old fashioned way; I inherited it" http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/24/raese-money-inheritanc/ or "bought two apples and sold them for then...until my Dad died and left me 300 million dollars." THAT is hypocrisy.

Finally, if Conservatives don't seek to destroy public education why do people like Sean Hannity and Mike Huckabee say regularly that public education should be shut down? Why are Conservative think tanks making cases for exactly that? http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/public-schools-abolished.html Here's another guy who's right in the mainstream of Conservative thought who says public schools should be abolished. http://www.care2.com/causes/education/blog/abolish-public-schools-glenn-beck-thinks-so/

So that's fine, Conservatives can lie to people about their intentions every day. Just be aware that there are people out here who know others and will make sure the truth gets out.

The fact that you think those links prove what you think they prove is actually hilarious, John.

You have a problem with a conservative opinion piece, but you think an opinion piece rant against Glenn Beck is evidence of some vast right wing conspiracy against public school? Apparently you're proving once again how prognozzles are entitled to THEIR opinions and said opinions are oh so truth-i, but Conservatives are not entitled to their opinions.

What's really pathetic is how sold down the river of prognozzletude you really are, that you believe this crap is actually representative of anything, beyond one person's opinion.

Do you even listen to yourself and your partisan hackery? Or do you think just including links is evidence enough and that people are going to automatically believe what you claim is true, because you have a LINK!!!

Liberals, prognozzles AND conservative politicians have made such a dogs lunch out of public schools that demolishing them and starting over via a charter program probably does make the most sense at this point, since that's the only way to get the unions out of the picture.

Those of us trying to get on with life - on both sides of the aisle - aren't trying to make this a partisanhackery fest. The prime time special last night on MSNBC was pretty clear evidence of that. Now if some you could just get over your damn selves and understand this isn't about party anymore, it would really be helpful.

meh. Not people who think past the end of their nose, pal.

John you can Post all the Drivel you wish on these boards and none of it will make a Difference to the General Public .. 99.9 Percent of the American public dont visit these boards so they will never read your lies..

I dont come here to change Anyones Mind . I come here to tell the Truth about the Lies you Liberals are spouting on these pages, I know it wont change any of your minds. .but i feel much better about myself Knowing that i am coming here to at least Educate you a bit. What you choose to do with the Education i am Giving you is your choice.. But hey.. I know you will just Continue to drink the koolaid that the Democrats are serving you..

Max^108

to: Anita, Birmingham, Alabama

Anita, American voters only have a choice between two parties, and both are sitting in the pocket of special interest groups. It is really not that hard to see. Every time one set of crooks upsets the voters, they give power to the other gang. And the people who rigged this game, the international capital, the industrial military complex, and all the other parasites, they win every time. That is why American people keep getting screwed more and more. The last honest guy runnig for the President was Ross Perot.

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ross Perot hu? Now that's a real scream...I thought that you actually had some valueable discourse to offer for posting what you did....

You think that Ross Perot is HONEST?! ROTFLMAO!!!ROTFLMAO!!!ROTFLMAO!!!ROTFLMAO!!!

OK, you can't refute what I said so you attack the sources and dismiss the evidence as immaterial. If you had a point you might try backing it up with something besides "because I said so". Instead you'll take my evidence as being worth less than your lack of evidence.

Thanks for playing, you can go now.

No, YOU can go, your sources aren't worth attacking - they're OPINION PIECES.

You're trying to build a straw man claim that ALL conservatives want to demolish public education based on two opinion pieces and make sweeping generalizations about what ALL conservatives say when rich people, blah blah blah supported by a piece of garbage from thinkprogress.org.

Provide some ACTUAL proof of any movement among conservatives of ANY significance to shut down entirely the public school system? Then I'll discuss actual issues with you.

Until then, you're just bloviating and hoping no one calls you on it. As I said, come better prepared, or YOU may go. This is boring.

To U.S. Navy.

First of all, thank you for your service. I spent a couple hours over the weekend going through my dad’s Navy annuals, boxes of letters and photos he collected while he served during the Korean War. I have a special place in my heart for ships, the sea and the U.S. Navy.

This morning you posted a quote: “Average incomes fell. Average taxpayer income was down $3,512,or 5.7%, in 2008 compared with 2000.” That middle class America is making less money than in years past is a common point brought up here on First Read. “Had incomes stayed at 2000 levels, the average taxpayer would have earned almost $21,000 more over those eight years.”

Let’s remember what was happening in the year 2000.

1995 to 2000 was a boom to bust period fueled by Dot-Com and internet based technology companies. The period was marked by the founding of a slew of new internet based start ups. If your company name had a dot com suffix, you had investment bankers and venture capitalists clammering at your door to take your company public and your stock increased 50-fold on its first day of trading. Engineers and software designers were recruited and switched from company to company with salary and pay packages like those of professional athletes. Companies less than a year old bought corporate jets, massive office complexes and lined their desk chairs with mink. Much of the income earned by employees of technology companies came in the form of stock options and that was quite lucrative at the time. Prices of the stocks of these companies could no longer be justified by usual ways of valuing the fundamentals of a company (ie: price/earnings) so new indicators were developed – (price/sales; price/growth, price/goodwill) and prices skyrocketed – all artificially. Inflated stock prices and inflated pay packages inflated income.

The bubble driven by frenzied speculation and over-exhuberation was due to bust and it did. The peak of this cycle and subsequent bust came in March of 2000.

I will argue that using the income levels of the peak of an unsustainable business cycle as a benchmark is disingenuous, manipulative and deceiving.

I’ve read the “declining income” comment many times here and just wanted to revisit the truth.

Respectfully.

Candice

______________________________

By the way, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, during the period of 2001 and 2007 (which encompassed the implementation of the 2 rounds of “Bush Tax Cuts”) 4.8 million jobs were created.

Money alone won't fix public education? Gee, Obama threw billions at the Wall Street, who destroyed the economy. Money seemed to work there (and he didn't demand any "reform" first either). He throws billions into wars and armaments, moneys seems to "work" pretty well there, too.

But anything they want to destroy, like public education "money" won't fix.

Obama is a big pusher of "Charter Schools". Charter schools are a back alley way to privatize education and when education is privatized there will be a two tiered system (much like our private healthcare system) for rich folks vs. middle class and poor people. Guess which one will be well funded and very good and which will be poorly funded and mediocre.

It's funny the public education just "doesn't seem to work" anymore isn't it? And all of a sudden how "bad" teachers are.

The U.S. beat the Great Depression, won WWII, went to the moon and invented the micro chip and the computer with a well funded public educational system but now for some strange reason, so says Bill Gates, the Republicans and many Democrats like Obama, it just just doesn't work and we need a stealth privatization through "charter Schools".

It's also strange that all of the countries we are hiring engineers from and outsourcing high tech manufacturing too, like China and India have public educational system that unlike ours even includes an education through college.

Here's an article I found on line about the attack on one of the bedrocks of any democratic society, a quality public education.

Obama escalates assault on public education

By Tom Eley
25 July 2009

On Friday, President Barack Obama announced an assault on public education that would go beyond the Bush administration's "No Child Left Behind" program. He outlined an education "reform" that would link teacher pay to the test performance of students and force state governments to shift funding from established public schools to so-called charter schools.

Obama spoke on Friday at the Department of Education, unveiling a $4.3 billion "competition" among the states for federal grants, named "Race to the Top." Money from the fund would be awarded to only a handful of states that best promote "innovation"— charter schools and merit-based pay among teachers. States that forbid these policies, such as California, New York, and Wisconsin—home of the nation's highest-ranked education system—would be barred from consideration.

Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan presented the $4.3 billion as if it were an extraordinary amount of money. But it is tens of billions less than has been doled out to individual banks, such as Goldman Sachs, in Obama's bailout of the finance industry. It is also less than the personal fortunes of about 90 Americans, according to the Forbes 400 list of 2008. Nor does it meet the desperate needs of cash-starved public education; the Detroit public school system alone has a deficit of $400 million....

....Obama and Duncan implicitly laid the blame for the problems of public education at the feet of "bad" teachers.

While it is certainly the case that the US has among the worst public education systems in the industrialized nations—with high drop-out rates and poor accomplishment in key subject areas—this is not the fault of teachers. It is the outcome of decades in which public education has been starved of resources, while the wealth of the country has been channeled ever more openly into the coffers of the very rich.

Merit-based pay for teachers will only discourage educators from taking positions at disadvantaged schools and among students who need the most help. Its practical effect, like No Child Left Behind, will be to shift funding out of the schools that need it most. It is a giant step toward the privatization of public education in America and the formalization of a two-tier, class-based education system.

Already, the quality of eduction for American children depends largely on the affluence of the area in which any given school is located. Much of US school funding is based on property taxes and other forms of local revenue, and certain states make available far more money per student than others. In this set-up, the public schools in the wealthy neighborhoods and suburbs are vastly superior to those in the inner cities, small towns, reservations, and other financially starved areas. Rich and upper-middle class families may also bypass public education altogether by sending their children to expensive private or parochial schools. Obama's policies will serve to deepen, and make official, these disparities....

....Obama's education proposals demonstrate that social inequality in America is so advanced, and the power of the financial aristocracy so immense, that no public service or program, including education, that is not openly based on class privilege and status can long survive....

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jul2009/educ-j25.shtml

Dude, I posted examples of Conservatives who believe public education should be eliminated, but you insist Conservatives don't believe public education should be eliminated. Face it, you want the story to be whatever you want it to be. Try living in the reality-based community some time.

STTS

TWO conservatives MIGHT believe that public education should be eliminated.

You are really trying to claim that ALL conservatives want that?

You're lying - again.

I didn't claim that at all. I AM claiming that with prominent Conservatives including Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Mike Huckabee and a ready supply of talking papers online all calling for abolition of public schools, plus numerous examples in state and national party platforms, plus concentrated efforts on school vouchers and other means of disengenuously trying to make schools better by starving them, the actions of the Conservative establishment speak for themselves. That's without even discussing the extent to which running public colleges has shifted from state funding onto the backs of students, efforts to make sure public preschool isn't available to all how need it, and other issues related to education.

Individual Conservatives may disagree, but the heft of the Conservative Republican elites is behind destruction of public education.

John B.,

You guys continue to use the same people over and over again when attempting to discredit Republicans. You ARE implying that ALL Republicans feel the same way.

When you are attempting to counter someone, you have to do better than OPINION pieces and MSNBC entertainers words as evidence and validation.

At this moment, PUBLIC schools are terrible. You can't run from that fact.

I've presented my evidence. Rather than present contrary evidence you've insisted that mine is immaterial. Because you said so. You don't deny that prominent Conservatives call for public schools to be closed, then you deny that public schools will be closed if the Conservative agenda is enacted.

You can't have it both ways.

Hello Red!

Good to see you back out, you were missed...

Great posting...

Feisty,

They are REFUSING to take questions from the MSM that are not already pre-screened!

It's has a lot to do with evolution you know; just ask Christine O'Donnell.

Christine O'Donnell says, evolution is a myth. And so is the progression on the Right.

Look at what that Soprano land Gov. Chris Christie in New Jersey (Glenn Beck's new man crush) who wouldn't allow a question from the audience to be asked of Meg Whitman.

Ed Buck asked Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman at a campaign rally why she wouldn’t answer any questions, Christie grabbed the microphone, ran over to the guy, attacked him for daring to ask a question, told him to sit down and shut up and accused him of trying to “divide this country.”

The right wants "dummies " to not question, challenge, or contradiction, and carry that docility into adult life.

Grizzly Bear Mommy Dearest , Sarah Palin said so herself when she said don't talk to the media; unless it FOX NOISE aka Republican and Tea Bagger Headquarters; of course.

Disclaimer:Tea Bagger is not meant to be offensive since it earned its :word of the year" in the Oxford dictionary.

Beverly,

Great posting and excellent point on all counts...

Thanks, Feistmeister, maybe we could throw some caramel on it for the special day? ha

And a bit of Lawrence O on the side,...winky winky!

"The right wants "dummies " to not question, challenge, or contradiction, and carry that docility into adult life. "

That pretty well sums it up. Conservative leaders really are NOT egalitarian or democratic in their leanings. They want a class society in which some (they) are the leaders and the rest of us just do what we're told.

You GOT it Clara! Imagine my quandary with the Bears playing the Packers tonight and the premiere of The Last Word - with Larry O'!

What's a girl to do...? lol

Thanks Anita... Good to see you!

Bev: I saw the interview with Mr. Buck Friday night and it was what he said that got me thinking HOW in the world you can VOTE for someone who REFUSES to discuss anything! Only reinforces my thoughts about the SOS Crowd...

CLARA,KCMO:

Agree!

In addition to David Gregory, Joe Scarborough should take a sabbatical, also tooJ

Imagine Joe this morning chiding the Dems for running negative ads in trying to gain an advantage in the upcoming elections. While acknowledging that GOP’ers are guilty of running negative campaigns he asserted that the Dems, should they prevail, would have somehow sullied the “hope and change” message that President Obama ran on in 2008.

The President himself was quoted recently as saying the opposition talks about him “like a dog”. Does Joe think for one minute that President Obama cares if those Dems running for re-election negative?

Is he serious? Can he spell hypocrite?

You said it!!! You can run but you cant hide.

Vulnerable House Dems declare their independence

An interview with the msm might as well be an interview conducted by your Democratic opponent. They are sticking to local media and talking to the people they may represent - what a novel idea.

Again, you said it. You can run but you can't hide.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39369884/ns/politics-decision_2010/

Holy Cow!! You're 100% correct....................and that's why we have Obama, nobody read his resume and now we are in the mess we are in now. By all means Bush started this nut roll, but Obama made 10X worse.

Hey, it's almost 11:30, time to be a UAW member and go to the park to drink some beers and smoke a joint........"Those are the American Workers I can stand by"-Obama 2010

"If you really are a 'small' business owner(s) WOULD you hire someone without interviewing them or reviewing their resume FIRST?"

Sheila, MD

CLARA,KCMO:

Agree!

In addition to David Gregory, Joe Scarborough should take a sabbatical, also tooJ

Imagine Joe this morning chiding the Dems for running negative ads in trying to gain an advantage in the upcoming elections. While acknowledging that GOP’ers are guilty of running negative campaigns he asserted that the Dems, should they prevail, would have somehow sullied the “hope and change” message that President Obama ran on in 2008.

The President himself was quoted recently as saying the opposition talks about him “like a dog”. Does Joe think for one minute that President Obama cares if those Dems running for re-election negative?

Is he serious? Can he spell hypocrite?

Happy B-day Clara

Yes. Joe Scarbough is seriously the biggest whiner and hypocrite; I think on MSNBC .

The Right Wing Foments hate and divisiveness with this Birtherism, President Obama is a Muslim, a communist, anti-colonial Kenyan, socialist and a Marxist . The President can't be all of them since each one contradicts the other. This just shows one how many stooges there are out there on the right manipulated by remote control!!

President Obama is one of the very best presidents we have had since FDR. The President has gotten healthcare, something no other President has done. In his first year in office President Obama been marked by a series of significant achievements, including..

*Creating jobs as a result of the economic stimulus; how many did Bush create? None, that's right. Unemployment would be much higher if he hadn’t.

*Replaced Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court making her the first Hispanic justice
* Nominated Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court too.

*There have been no foreign attacks on US soil; despite what LIz-ard Cheney and other neo-cons who, btw would love to invade Iran, he has kept US safe.

*He withdrew from Iraq as promised.

*He signed his first law, in January the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which expands the rights of workers to sue employers over wage discrimination claims.

* President Obama signed a bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to cover 4 million more lower-income children.

President Obama signed into law the Credit card reform adding restrictions on interest rate increases and fees and restricting the marketing of credit cards to college students

* President Obama signed an executive order easing restrictions on the use of federal money for embryonic stem cell research.

*President Obama signed a law that makes it a federal crime to assault an individual because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity.

Just to name a few.

Happy B-day Clara...

The margaritas are standing by!!!

Feisty...simple answer...you show you are a true Bears fan and watch the game!! :-)

John B.,Des Moines, IA: That pretty well sums it up. Conservative leaders really are NOT egalitarian or democratic in their leanings. They want a class society in which some (they) are the leaders and the rest of us just do what we're told.

Yeah, kind of like having a tiny majority of Democrats in the House and Senate vote for ObamaCare and all the deficit busting so called Stimulus bills. All because they "know better" and the rest of us should just do what we're told.

President/Candidate Obama had and has all kinds of backround information on him. He was in the public spot light before he campaigned. The information was open to those who wanted to do the research. He answered questions, debated and did interviews. If you don't like him it should be because through your own research you have found something in him that you think makes him less qualified than his opponents.

Just to clear this up. Fox News is not a local media outlet and is not held to some higher code of ethics. It has become a tool/haven for candidates who do not want to answer the questions of Americans who do not agree with them.

He may be annoying but it is important MSNBC keep Joe S. around just avoid running into the same problem Fox has.

The margaritas are standing by!!!

Feisty...simple answer...you show you are a true Bears fan and watch the game!! :-)

LOL Grimey! I can always count on you! Now you know why you're referred to as the 'voice of reason'!

Thank goodness for DVR's... ;0)

Ah, see JS1 is demonstrating changing the subject! Nothing to refute the point on Conservatives not being interested in an egalitarian society, intending to establish a class system instead, so she brings up some new topic.

As Beverly in Chicago pointed out;

"

Ed Buck asked Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman at a campaign rally why she wouldn’t answer any questions, Christie grabbed the microphone, ran over to the guy, attacked him for daring to ask a question, told him to sit down and shut up and accused him of trying to “divide this country.”

The right wants "dummies " to not question, challenge, or contradiction, and carry that docility into adult life.

Grizzly Bear Mommy Dearest , Sarah Palin said so herself when she said don't talk to the media; unless it FOX NOISE aka Republican and Tea Bagger Headquarters; of course."

Happy Birthday, Clara. And many, many of them in years and years to come!

fiesty.....

Why is it necessary to subject these senatorial candidatesto more vetting that Obama received

Why should they subject themselves to "GOTCHA" journalism?

Really ofg? Have these candidates been subjected to over a year of accusations that they "pal around with terrorists", are closet extremists, maybe aren't even AMERICANS?

That is quite possibly the most ridiculous statement of the day.

That is quite possibly the most ridiculous statement of the day.

Thanks John - I didn't bother to respond to this nonsense as it's nothing more than a waste of time!

In order to change someones mind - they have to possess one first...

Nice Work! ;0)

you are so right. Reading comprehension is usefull as well. Libs are all alike when confronted with facts, use sarcasim and ignore the question while changing the subject.

I am a Lentz supporter/contributor, and he is a good guy....he's in a tough race, and I hope he can pull it out.

JoAnne in PA

I will keep your Mom and step-dad in my thoughts and wish the best of health for them.

Thanks so much, Bev - it's been a rough last couple of weeks, so I very much appreciate the support.

Dangerfield - It is going to be tough - Pat Meehan's got that instant name recognition that comes from having been a DA - but having Sestak at the top of the ticket will help Lentz a lot in this neck of the woods. Still hope I can fit a few phone calls or some canvassing in between now and November.

Joanna,PA:

You are a wonderful, thoughtful, caring human being and I wish you and your parents a great time for however long they live.

Politics is a dirty game but some of us still see the good in individual politicians and you are one of those people.

JoAnne in PA

Do whatever you can...I have spoken with Bryan on several occasions and he would be a great representative...Actually got involved in the race to STOP DA Meehan's bid...

JoAnne In PA

I will keep your Mom and step-dad in my thoughts and prayers!

Plus Happy Birthday to Clara

...but...but...but...they're going to stop spending!

...well, on everything but the military...because the GOP loves things that go "BOOM"...that and John McCain probably can't handle another one of Cindy's chills down the spine.

Do you have proof for your claims, Beverly?

Well PTAF, since you asked...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/23/AR2010092304841.html

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700069099/Biden-GOPs-Pledge-to-America-will-add-to-debt.html

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/09/pledge_to_america.html

The Washington Post article puts the increased deficit at $4 trillion over 10 years - not $11 trillion as Beverly claimed. AND.......It's another opinion piece. Is it a CBO analysis? No. Is it even an economic analysis of anything but the most top line, talking point sort? No.

And where is $3.8 trillion of that coming from (which is probably the entire thing, since this is an OPINION PIECE you're using as evidence again)?

Extending the Bush tax cuts - which Obama wants to do as well, to the tune of $3.1 trillion for the middle class.

So what exactly is the difference, except it's Republicans saying it? YOU'RE TRYING TO LIE, that's the difference. The deficit goes up by at least $3.1 trillion if Obama does what HE wants.

The Center for Progress link INCLUDES the projected $7-8 TRILLION in increased deficits that will already occur based on Obama's budgets, and adds the Post's number - which we've ALREADY DETERMINED is nearly identical to something Obama wants to do as well. This link will take you to the CBO analysis for Obama's budgets through 2020. These budgets assume the Bush tax cuts expire, because the CBO bases it's projections on the current laws and as of 1/1/11, tax rates revert.

NO MATTER WHO DOES IT, if the Bush tax cuts expire, the deficit will balloon by about $11 trillion by 2020.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/tables.pdf

You're trying to LIE, and you're failing. Stop lying, the truth is bad enough.

So, how much worse will it be with the Conservative "Pledge" cuts?

If you have numbers I'd like to see them. Perhaps this is more like the Republican budget...short and easy to read because there are no numbers.

Otherwise I see that you're accusing me of lying, but I'm trying to back up what I say. You? We're supposed to take what you tell us on faith.

Interesting.

You call a CBO analysis of Obama's budgets released in March 2010 asking you take something on "faith"? You're lying, again. I provided proof for the points I was making, based on the suppositions and opinions included in the articles you provided.

The "Pledge" is a fairly hollow document, it is not policy nor is it legislation. It is directional, at best and one of my major issues with it is it does NOT contain any of the specifics that could lead to a REAL assessment of its impact if implemented - by liars OR truth tellers. I'm not defending the "Pledge". Except from blatant misrepresentations and lies, in which you are engaging.

Are you questioning where Obama is going to get the minumum $3.1 trillion for the middle class tax cuts with as much enthusiasm as you're questioning where the funding for ALL the tax cuts would come from? Because the value of the middle class tax cuts is more than 4x the value of the tax cuts for the "wealthy".

Point of fact - the Republicans, in the Pledge, want to extend ALL the Bush tax cuts, which YOUR Post article values at $4 trillion.

Point of fact - based on the CBO analysis of Obama's budgets, there will already be an increase of about $8 trillion in deficit spending and therefore debt by 2020, and that assumes ALL the Bush tax cuts expire.

Point of fact - Obama want to extend the Bush tax cuts for the middle class, at an approximate value of $3.1 trillion.

Point of fact - The deficit will increase over the next 10 years by somewhere between $11 and $12 trillion, if the Bush tax cuts are extended - no matter WHO DOES IT, based on OBAMA'S budgets. The actual ONLY sticking point between what the Republicans are proposing and what Obama actually WANTS is the $700 billion for the "wealthy" - which the Democrats in Congress also support extending.

That's not opinion, that's not asking you take anything on faith. Those are facts, as they have been presented by the CBO. I can't help it if you can't connect the dots.

The results are clear enough that Conservative leaders can’t have missed that.

I'm sure they're keenly aware of it. But they know how to carefully step around land mines like this by simply repeating half-truths about public opposition to the reform law. It's too bad some Democrats in Congress are following the advice of their political consultants and running and hiding from their record rather than defending it. If they're going to go down, it would be better to show some courage, but they're going to go down anyway. If they're remembered by history at all, it will be in books about "Profiles in Cowardice."

Latest poll last week shows 61% of the population want it completely repealed. That number has increased since the Obamacare passed. People aren't that gullible, they see the few crumbs being tossed out but also see the huge tax increases that are coming next year.

Note the 61% is not about liking or not liking, it is about a complete repeal.

We'll see who's right in a few weeks.

your right as a conservative the health care plan doesn't do enough but what I isn't a public option. I want tort reform, insurance companies that can compete cross state lines that's the type of health care reform I'm looking for. I do not support a public option. I know all about not having a choice in health care been dealing with that for 26 years. Free doesn't necessarily mean good health care.

So health insurance costs less in South Carolina because doctors make less there. If I buy a South Carolina health insurance plan, I will have to fly across country to see one of the doctors on their South Carolina network. That hardly sounds cost affective since I live on the west coast. Insurance companies competing across state lines is a race to the bottom. In Washington, we have a strong Insurance Commisioner who keeps track of cheating by insurance companies. Do they have the same in South Carolina?

And tort reform? When a doctor cuts off the wrong leg in a scheduled amputation (this has happened), do you think the victim should be faced by a cap of $100,000 or $200,000 damages for losing both legs instead of one? That is the Republican tort reform proposal, capping maximum damages.

Which poll would that be, VP? Pollster.com doesn't seem to know about it. http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php

They show 49.6 opposed, 39.9 favoring. Not an ideal result yet but not bad considering the barrage of lies from the Conservative side.

Beverly,

Remember Mitchie keeps telling everyone the tax cuts are already in place. So I guess that means to him we don't have to pay for the tax cuts.

TRR Barboursville, WV

Beverly,

Remember Mitchie keeps telling everyone the tax cuts are already in place. So I guess that means to him we don't have to pay for the tax cuts.

Mitchie also said Sunday that you just don't raise taxes in a recession. Hello, that expression is a rather warm greeting for Republicans swearing and shilling allegiance to the billionaires. Mitchie doesn't even know the recession is over; does he?

The determination that the U.S. recession ended in June 2009 was made by a panel of private economists who are the arbiters of business cycles, confirms that the 18-month downturn was the longest recession of the post-World War II era. But, there is still anxiety.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/20/AR2010092006355.html

It must be all the shrills for the big corporatists and the Koch Brothers who are filled with anxiety.

USN those are staggering, staggering numbers. When Conservatives tell us we must cater to the rich because without them there will be no jobs it's clear why. They're working to set up a society in which ONLY the rich have the ability to do much of ANYTHING. The numbers you've presented are scary, and really drive home the extent to which our endangered middle class is on its last legs. If Conservatives are allowed to continue redistributing wealth upward the future couldn't be more clear. This will be the last generation of American middle class in the solid, financially secure model that made the United States a great nation.

Its time all americans started paying Federal Income tax instead of just 53 percent..

|Its time all americans started paying Federal Income tax instead of just 53 percent..

I'm sure lots more people would be happy to pay taxes if they were paid a living wage. When the top few percent have most of the money, then they are the ones that should be paying most of the taxes.

John B.

Right on. There are people that just will not face the reality of the problem. They keep blaming President Obama and say he is spending too much money. They (the republicans) have never once admitted that he is spending money because he has to to fix the economic collapse that was engineered by the previous administration. They know how bad the problems is, they are trying to stop President Obama from fixing the problems so they can claim in 2010 and 2012 that HE failed and shift the blame for almost bankrupting this country to him. I am not buying it one bit. President Obama is doing what he can to correct the republican mismanagement of this country and they afraid that he may pull it off and show the world what the republicans really stand for and it is not the Middle Class.

The republicans are the party of Wall Street over Main Street, ig Business over Small Business, the Richest 2% over the 98%. They are driven by Greed and Power not what is right. They claim to be fiscal conservatives and everything they promote will lead to record deficits.

They (the republicans) have never once admitted that he is spending money because he has to to fix the economic collapse that was engineered by the previous administration.

...because details annoy them.

I agree with you, Steve-to a point. It makes sense to exclude a minimum amount of income from federal income tax; after all, it is THEIR money.

I do, however, have serious problems with giving welfare in the form of refundable tax credits to people-particularly, those people earning up to $50,000 who have children under 17.

To read many of the posts on this board, I'd be seriously concerned if I had some of them in my home. Not only would I have to lock up the valuables, but I'd have to keep an eagle eye out-they way they post, it seems as if they feel entitled to take anything that meets their fancy, simply because I own it and they want it.

If any of you are insulted, I'd advise you to read your own posts-if you don't want to be thought of as the kind of person who will steal anything that isn't red hot or nailed down, maybe you want to re-think your position on what is rightfully 'yours'. Just because you don't steal it yourselves, but rely on the government to do it for you, makes you no less a thief.

US Navy -

You're so right that there's nothing new about this new improved Pledge - in fact, I think it's pretty much the same as the old Pledge - a nice dust-collector. It's even still got that same old "lemon" scent!

And now comes No Jo with one of the most absurd analogies I have read. How do I make this simple enough for her and the "tea baggers" reading this, let's see.....Ah, let's try this...when you go to a store or a business, do you expect them to provide a service to you that you don't pay for? Hmmmm? Of course not. So it is with what we receive in return for our tax dollars. You have to pay for what you get No Jo, that is the way it works. If you aren't willing to THAT is stealing. Since you often reference your granddaughter, and profess to care a lot about her, I am surprised that you are so willing to take away the taxes the support those young families. My children are grown, the generation previous to mine paid taxes that helped my family. I am quite willing to do the same. To do anything else is dishonest.

I hadn't thought of that Navy, but you are right. I guess it all depends on what the definition of "theft" is by people of that ilk. My home state of CA had some experience with corporate manipulation of power and the cost to the state was massive. Must be okay in NJ's world, anything to enrich the corporate elite.

Even though she's rightly been collapsed for accusing all who disagree with her of being "thieves" I'd like to hammer that point home just a bit more. NJ says;

"if you don't want to be thought of as the kind of person who will steal anything that isn't red hot or nailed down, maybe you want to re-think your position on what is rightfully 'yours'. Just because you don't steal it yourselves, but rely on the government to do it for you, makes you no less a thief."

This is where "Government isn't the solution. Government is the problem" leads. To a place where a government concieved "of the people, by the people, for the people" is stealing instead of providing public services. To a place where those who sacrifice a significant chunk of their potential earnings to teach our children are considered leeches. To a place where we have such lack of respect for what our forefathers valued that we treat it with disdain and disgust.

For the 7 years that my sons were in the same public high school I regularly sat in the auditorium there and read the words of one who knew better;

"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate—we cannot consecrate—we cannot hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom— and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

http://blueandgraytrail.com/event/Gettysburg_Address_%5BFull_Text%5D

You know as well as I do, John, that the government provides a lot more than schools, roads, military, and police and fire protection. I name them because they are the liberal litany, that gets chanted every single time there is a complaint about confiscatory taxes.

Try this one: Obama has $9billion in his budget from last year for in home visiting nurses for first time, poor mothers. At the time, and now, I ask: are they too poor to have their own mothers? And why, pray tell, am I expected to pay for this? This is one example.

How about all those jobs created in Los Angelas by the stimulous-you remember, all 55 of them, that cost $111million?

The department of Education is so bureaucrat ridden that I believe that I read somewhere that it was the least efficient of all government departments. When you consider that only about twenty cents out of every dollar actually makes its way to the project it is aimed at, that is going pretty far. Cut it, give the money to the states as block grants for the final time, and let the states keep the money instate to use for education as they deem fit. Why on earth anyone ever believed that some bureaucrat in D.C. knew more about educating a child than the teacher in the class, the principal of the school, the child's parents or local schoolboard, I will never know. Suffice to say that the schools have gotten far worse in the time this department has been interfering with education. Shut it down.

Actually, given about six weeks I could probably cut the deficit in half. So could a lot of business people. Think Obama will hire a former CEO to replace the academics leaving the White House? I do. On the very day that elephants roost in trees.

The problem is very simple, John.

There is a very significant and growing portion of the population of this country who does NOT WANT the government doing all this unConstitutional providing. And they're the ones paying the taxes that support the providing for the 47% that don't pay taxes.

And they're not going to do do it anymore without a fight.

It is NOT your money, it is NOT the government's money. If YOU want to pay more, write a bigger check. I'm sure they'll cash it.

"Actually, given about six weeks I could probably cut the deficit in half." I take you at your word, NJ. Run for office and prove it.

So, please feel free to tell us what you'd have the government stop doing to bring the budget into balance. Don't forget to include cuts equal to the $4T we'll need to cover "Pledge to America."

Joe,

Agreed, some income levels have to be excluded, but inturn they should not be getting more money back then they Paid in..

I don't see a rush to explain what Republicans plan to do to balance the budget.

Could it be that their plan is just vaporware?

Does it bother you at all that you're fighting against something Republicans are proposing - extending the Bush tax cuts for everyone - based on a budget overage.....

When Obama wants to keep the vast majority - $3.1 trillion - of those tax cuts, as well?

Are you questioning AT ALL how HE intends to pay for that?

Obama and the Democrats are in power NOW. Republicans aren't. Their "Pledge" document, unfortunately, does not have enough specifics in it to answer your stupid question - beyond the tax cuts you're trying to turn into some bullcrap partisan drek by pretending that Obama isn't pushing for virtually the SAME exact thing, with pretty much the same means of paying for it - NONE.

More prognozzle "it's okay when we do it" crap.

Oh, and since Obama increased domestic spending when he took office by about 40%, and one part of the Republican pledge is to take spending back to pre-Obama levels, that might be a good place to start looking for some of the money. I don't have the CBO link on that report, but annualized it will just about cover the Bush tax cuts.

It's also very safe to assume that when the Dems and Obama get neutered in November, the economy will start to actually grow. The anti-business, anti-success, reward failure mentality will at least have a counterbalance of stupidity in the other extreme, hopefully resulting in gridlock. That's what I'm seeing as the best case scenario - gridlock. Let the markets and the economy fix themselves, as the always do when they're allowed to, despite government meddling.

So you're going to stick with the "all or nothing" approach of Conservative leaders? Even though middle class taxpayers are under considerable stress and economists agree that the middle class can't handle the additional load? Even though the wealthy can? You still haven't bothered to defend the Republican plan, just attack the Democratic plan.

And the economy is already growing. There are still too many people hurting but as big a bubble as the Conservative policies managed to blow that's a given.

Dems and the truth are mutually exclusive. The democrats are bad joke and the peole aren't laughing.

The repulicans will in a few weeks though.

Matthew, Houston, TX

No one remembers the privations of the Great Depression. My parents were children during the Great Depression and learned very well what it was like to have nothing through no fault of your own. My Grandparents were the ones who had to try and provide for their families through those times . . . and now they are gone.

matthew, i was raised in my grandparents home after my parents divorced. they lived though to depression. they married in 1934 and my mother was born in 1935. all i heard about growing up was about how people got through the deperession with out the safty nets we have today. there was no unemployment ins, no food stamps, (sure there was relief for the most hard up) no help with heating or electric bills, rent assistance. employers did not offer health ins.

My grand ma use to tell us that people got through the depression with out help there is today, governemnt can help but governemnt is not the answer. (she was a republican). if she were here today she would say that america has become soft. before her death in 1997 she complained all the time about how selfish and weak people are today.

matthew i will always remember the storys about the depression, its makes me understand how lucky we really are today.

I've been reading about the Great Depression lately, and I hear what you are saying. Americans have no sense of history.

And, we don't even have to look as far back as the 1930's for perspective on today's polictical climate. The Republicans are attacking President Obama over jobs, however, in October 1982, two years into Reagan's presidency, unemployment hit 10.4 percent. And Reagan had a net approval rating of 36% in October, 1986. Of course, his approval ratings went up, and, we know, Obama, who has already achieved so much more than Reagan, will see his approval rating go up as well.

It will be interesting to see if the Fates can conspire to work that, Amy.

Here's something I've been pondering all weekend:

there are millions unemployed in this country; (the 'real' unemployment rate is close to 20%, when those who are underemployed and those who have given up looking for work are factored in); and

there are millions of illegal aliens working jobs that "Americans don't want".

Both of those things are true; the fact that so many come across our borders because there are jobs available for them is proof the the latter, and the BLS provides the proof of the former.

So, is anyone else out there wondering what is wrong with this picture?

NJ, what is wrong with this picture is the wages those illegal immigrants are forced to take because they are illegal. What is wrong with this picture is the lack of enforcement against the employers (although the Obama administration has increased this, one reason businesses are saying he is anti-business) who hire the illegal immigrants.

Try this out for size: you go out and pick vegetables or clean toilets at the same wages as your illegal co-worker and see just how long you last, how hard it is to live on those wages or what happens when you get sick. Once you do that, then come back here and see if you can, in all honesty, ask that question again.

And before you go on about them not paying taxes, just remember this: the employer still pays social security, unemployment insurance and Medicare/Medicaid taxes for every individual working for them, legal or illegal. Where they make their money is on the difference between what they report as paying them and what they actually pay. So the illegal immigrant pays into these programs that they will never get any benefit from. They may not pay income taxes but at their rate of pay, they probably wouldn't make enough to have to pay those taxes anyway.

For you, and me, to have cheap food and clean toilets, the illegal immigrant is getting less than a living wage, paying into government programs they can never collect from and being vilified by the uninformed. Meanwhile their employer gets tax breaks on the 'wages' they pay them, plus the difference in pay from what they actually pay them, gets work done at extremely low rates and they don't get prosecuted for breaking the law.

So I ask you, NJ: What is wrong with this picture?

We're a bunch of fat, lazy home-bodies, Joe?

EDIT: Nvm, Matt had a better answer that's got the benefit of not being petulant.

First of all, Matt, I am on the record as proposing a compromise on those workers who are here illegally: do the background check, then give them a card other than green so that they can work legally, get all the protections enshrined in law-but preclude them from attaining citizenship unless and until they go back to their home countries and get in line with everyone else.

THAT was not the point. The point is that we have a high unemployment rate-yet there are jobs that only those here illegally will take. I can tell you that THAT situation did not exist during our grandparents' time, during the Depression.

No, I haven't picked vegetables, other than the ones I grow in my own garden. I have, in fact, cleaned toilets-during high school, when I worked in the homes of the summer people. My husband worked in a car wash during high school, for similar reasons: you see, all those liberal elite wealthy people were huge proponents of labor laws, but it did not stop them from hiring people who were under-age-with no working papers. Once we 'aged out'-we had to find new jobs. Do I need to mention that minimum wage was not high on their list of priorities?

I never minded working-there was a pay-off, in terms of money. I wonder, though, how we got to the point in this nation that people will collect unemployment for almost two years, because there are jobs they will not deign to do.

no joe, no bo, nj

So, is anyone else out there wondering what is wrong with this picture?

YES, I'm wondering why we are too good to do jobs our grand parents did 70 years ago. why are we too good to get our hands dirty unless we are making 30 bucks a hour. why are we too good to sweep floors if we have to, put food on the table. we would rather collect than lower our selves in bad times.

No Jo i wish that a doc about just how people made it through the depression would be shown, and we will find out what my grand ma was telling me before her death, and that is we are soft.

Matthew, i get what your saying, but lets remember if we did not turn our noses up at jobs Illegals or migrant workers do, just maybe those wages would be more, but there not because 4 generations removed from the depression we have forgotten what made the great generation, what they were. people will to do what ever to put food on the table. we Americans could learn something from the illegal or migrant.

i got layed off in january, instead of waiting for a job with the wages i use to make, i took a job making 1/3 less. i know that a job is a job, and its better to have on than not have. time are still hard for me but, i get up everyday and know i'm working.

No Jo, last week my post about HCR and i used your grand daughter as a example, i hope i did not upset you with that. i wanted to show that some provisions in HCR have made a difference and how that hit home with everybody. if i upset you i apologize!!

Three people signed up to UFW’s “Take Our Jobs”

by Julia Landau

http://www.slowfoodusa.org/index.php/slow_food/blog_post/three_people_signed_up_to_ufws_take_our_jobs/

Despite the insanity that Colbert brought to his appearance at Capital Hill, it is interesting that he is one of the few, albeit in jest, that took up the call/dare from the United Farm Workers union.

If people are shouting that undocumented immigrants are taking jobs away from Americans, then why aren't more Americans taking up this pledge for work?

http://www.ufw.org/toj_play/TOJNEW_12_JAL.html

I agree with Matthew, Houston,Tx - there is something wrong with this picture. People have to realize that immigration reform is more important than fodder for a wedge issue.

Jeff-there are things we agree on, and things we disagree on, but let me tell you something: I doubt, very much, tht anything you wrote could ever upset me.

Your writings expose your dear, good heart. So, no Jeff, I could never be upset about anything you write.

Matt, if the employer is paying workers in cash, which many do, then there are none of the normal payroll taxes paid. The employer gets off the hook and the illegal never pays into the system.

If only that were true, dirt. The illegal is getting paid in cash but the book keeping still has to account for that cash flow and 'payroll'. Just because the illegal is getting cash that does not mean the 'wages' are not being reported. The federal and state governments require accounting for tax purposes and this is where those taxes are paid. So you see, dirt, the government is still getting the payroll taxes but the employer gets to keep the difference from what they reported as paying and what the illegal actually got paid in cash.

IF people follow the "rules", Matthew, that would be true. However, they're already not following the rules by paying illegals. Happens everyday, Matthew.

Amy B. Portland, ME

If the Tea Party candidate wins the governorship in Maine, it will be because the voters didn't bother to watch the debates.

Bill Clinton has that uncanny ability especially since he has the Southern drawl; kinda like Jeff Foxworthy. President Obama on the other hand, if he spoke ebonies or colloquialism the right would accuse him of being an Under Cover Bother with a Black Power agenda. The doing that with the lies about the New Black Panther Party who are fringe nut job wackos.

Also I think, if the Tea Party in Maine wins it'll have a lot to do with them stealing the election by “Voter caging”

“Voter caging” is a means of voter suppression and intimidation that involves sending mail to a list of voters, compiling a list of mail pieces returned as undeliverable, and then challenging those voters at the polls or otherwise attempting to remove them from the voter rolls

In the alleged conspiracy uncovered in Wisconsin, Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity, whose Wisconsin state chair was previously banned from politics in Wisconsin for three years, would finance a test mailing and other costs associated with compiling the caging list and then coordinate with the Wisconsin Republican Party to undertake an elaborate process to remove voters from the rolls ahead of the election, if possible, or at the polls on Election Day. Tea party groups were to provide the volunteer labor and cover for the activity — with all participants signing an extensive non-disclosure agreement under which they agreed to publicly operate in the name of Wisconsin GrandSons for Liberty, who would also provide some funding for the plan. The Wisconsin GOP would also provide additional funds, trainers for the tea party volunteers and would have a team of lawyers “standing by” on Election Day to respond to tea party volunteers and “bring the police” if necessary. As is typically the case in voter caging operations, the plotters appeared intent on targeting minorities, students, and others from heavily-Democratic areas of the state.

Audio recordings of the tea party meeting where the alleged voter suppression plot was discussed.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/21/wisconsin-voter-caging/

The King Street Patrio's "True the Vote" initiative was taken down for a few days for re-editing, before being re-rendered and resposted a few days later, not long after the fire, when it had been discovered, as Glenn W. Smith detailed at Huffington Post, the original video had itself included fraudulent, photo-shopped photos in making the case for "fraud" at the polling place.

DON'T FORGET THAT suspicious fire, in Houston. Thousands of borrowed e-voting machines made by Austin-based Hart Intercivic have begun arriving in Harris County (Houston), TX, this week in the wake of last month's massive warehouse fire which destroyed all 10,000 of the county's 100% unverifiable Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting systems in advance of early voting for the mid-term elections. Some 3,000 machines are being loaned to Harris County from 15 different counties around Texas and one in Colorado.

Democratic former Mayor Bill White will need solid turnout in his hometown to defeat the incumbent Republican Rick Perry in their race for Governor. Ditto Russ Feingold in Wisconsin. Though Perry is still leading in pre-election polls, White is within striking distance. Democrats have justifiable concerns that a shortage of voting machines or confusion over paper ballots --- which haven't been used for years at the polls in Houston --- could lead to long lines on Election Day, dampening turnout for White in his stronghold.

Using Fraud to Declare Fraud. One can say Katherine Harris gave Georgie boy the election in Florida. Tens of thousands of voters were incorrectly removed (mostly Blacks)from the voting rolls by then Gov. Jeb Bush and his Secretary of State Katherine Harris, before voters were denied a full and fair count of the ballots the by U.S. Supreme Court...

They want to repeat their history on 2 fronts; continue the same policies and steal elections.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8082

It is the democrats that are the kings of voter fraud. Where is voter fraud famous? New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle. What do they all have in common? Democrat run.

Any time you see recount after recount with each one increasing the democrat count, what do you think is happening?

Obama is the only president in history to take the census from commerce into the white house. Why do you think he is doing that? If elections were truly honest democrats wouldn't be elected dog catcher.

OK Valhalla, try to follow along. Commerce is part of the Administrative branch and has ALWAYS WORKED FOR THE WHITE HOUSE. GW Bush made a member of his campaign management team head of Commerce until after all the redistricting was done to help Republicans draw safe districts, so don't pretend the Republicans are squeaky clean, either.

And thought Conservatives like to attack the legitimacy of any election they lose voter fraud is almost nonexistent. http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_the_truth_about_voter_fraud/

>I wanted to say...Miss since when has "any" First Daughter's" been enrolled in the public school system?

Amy Carter.

Rich S-1900127,

And it was President Jimmy Carters CHOICE too...President Obama doesn't have to enroll his daughters in public schools--if had children of school age I wouldn't send mine there...my niece has placed my great nieces in private school...they've been there since pre-school...

I have another neice that's home schooling her child...the quality of education in America sucks and nothing has been done to address it that amounts to seriously fixing it until now...

It took a "real person" with school age children to address it....I want it to be successful for all of our children's sake...

You do not have to have children in public school to support them. You can volunteer and get involved in your local public school without having children in them. You can vote FOR every funding initiative that comes your way.

I have never had a child but every time a funding initiative is on the ballot, I vote for it. Everyone does better when the population is more educated. It is in my best economic and security interests that we have an educated population.

Sure, go ahead and send your children to a private school, if you want to but do not short change the public schools. They are the only places the poor can get an education and the only way out of poverty is through education. A less educated population creates a less prosperous economy which requires more government services and expenses to support the poor.

Education is THE key to economic security for the US.

Support your local public school.

I used to be on the rotation as a sub at my old district up in Spring and regularly followed the UIL and NFL debate circuits acting as a volunteer judge on the weekends.

Get involved any way you can, especially if you've got skills what can be put to use.

Personally...I'm involved NOW...we have a SERIOUS issue in this State with the teacher's union and far too few gifted programs to address "special education classes...verses "gifted students"...

Unrealistic Goals

"There's a fallacy in the law and everybody knows it," said Alabama State Superintendent Joe Morton on Wednesday, August 11, 2010. According to the No Child Left Behind Act, by 2014 every child is supposed to test on grade level in reading and math. "That can't happen," said Morton. "You have too many variables and you have too many scenarios, and everybody knows that would never happen." Alabama State Board Member Mary Jane Caylor said, "I don't think that No Child Left Behind has benefited this state." She argued the goal of 100 percent proficiency is unobtainable

I'm currently involved with a parent that has a "gifted" child that needs medication...he's extremely intelligent and get's vexed when he doesn't have a challenge...

Alabama doesn't have "enough" of gifted classes...this has been a problem for years and especially in urban neighborhoods...

We can't allow thses types of children to fall by the wayside...we NEED them in America...

Amy Carter went to public school when her father was president. I'm not fan of President Carter but he did practice what he preached.

Who cares about what you think of REPUBLICANS...You do not vote for them anyway.

Democrats are not the most sacred cows either. There was only one PERFECT being and I don't think he was either Republican nor Democrat.

Oh I have in the past. So don't tell me I don't vote for them.

But for future reference I won't....for what they have done to this country!

If you want a real sense of what the mood of the country is today, go read the Politico article on the GW Battleground poll they commissioned. This is the third, and latest, poll to show that Obama has no chance at all of getting re-elected in '12.

He garners 38% of the vote, when leaners are figured in.

You are absolutely right, Pat. Why on earth should people whose children are being ill-served in failing public schools have any choice as to where to send their children? If the teachers are that poor, and do such a lousy job of educating their children, well, why should you or any other good liberal care? The teachers are protected by both tenure and union representation, which means that they have earned the right to hold their jobs for life! If the children don't learn anything in chaotic classrooms, and the teachers neither care nor have any incentive to even try to educate their students, well, that's someone else's problem, not yours.

After all, most of the children in those failing schools are minorities, and you don't actually care about them as individuals, but as a protected class of people. You will yell at the top of your lungs if someone suggests cutting entitlement programs that help them-but doing something to fix the education system? Don't be ridiculous!

Once again Conservatives are completely careless in their disregard for one of the institutions that made America great. Public schools gave the United States the best educated, best performing workforces throughout most of the 20th century, vaulting us to the top of the economic pile.

Conservative Republicans are willing to throw all of that away and with it the greatness of America in return for the ability to be elected to a few more posts within the government they despise. It isn't about the society, it isn't about government that works. It's about lust for power.

We can't keep looking to the past, John. Sure, there was a time when little schoolboys and girls all across America were compelled to excel and succeed in the arts and sciences, but hearkening to the glories of the middle 20th century is in no way, shape or form a substitution for looking at the problems within the schools now and going forward.

I think you're getting caught up a bit too much in the paranoia about the GOP and the Republicans. Much as conservatives are wont to say that the Democrats are looking to annihilate America, I think that's as foolhardy as implying the Republicans want the same thing. Fools they may all be, but the wholesale devastation of the nation is pushing things a bit far.

I'm asking you this, John, without malice - can you and/or will you identify problems within the modern American public school system, as you see it, with your own two eyes?

John B;

It is the republican/tea party people that want to do away with the Department of Education. President Obama gave a real good interview this morning with Matt L. that people should listen to.

Sure ED, there are issues. My own district has had excessive costs due to managing to the next year instead of looking at things in a long term way. Most districts seem to be managed in a top down fashion with little regard for the highly educated, experienced, and dedicated personnel in the buildings. There are huge unfunded mandates ranging across the expense of properly dealing with challenges like learning disabilities, English as a second language, the failed No Child Left Behind, and more.

The biggest issue, however, is a society that no longer values education.

John B at 17.2, you mentioned the contribution of public schools to society. I agree with that; however, the model for our system was to support a manufacturing, industrial society that no longer exists.

For decades, the experts have predicted that we would become a two-tiered society where employees would be either very technical in their work or in the lower tier the employees would be in service-based positions. They warned that we needed to be rethinking education and training to prepare for those changes. Of course, we did not and have not done that.

I believe in education; I believe the more educated we become, we become a better society. However, some translate "better" into meaning the workers will earn more. That is not and has not ever been true. The bottom line is it certainly won't be true in the future. Technology has eliminated and will continue to eliminate many of the middle level positions.

Think about "new" employment opportunities mentioned by Obama. How many of those require a college education? Of the jobs supposedly created by the stimulus, what type of jobs were they? When they say the manufacturing jobs aren't coming back, they're being honest but it's not because of the country's economic state; it's because of a change in demand. If I own a business and a robot can do with perfection the work of four error-prone humans, which option will I choose if I'm thinking of profits? Look around your world. How many transactions do you enter into that a person used to do but now it's handled electronically? You don't have to pay benefits to those "machines" and they don't call in sick! Sometimes, though, they do break down and need repaired. Whose going to fix those: a college graduate or a service type person?

I read an interesting article recently about the "case against college". It supports the notion that if you're looking for college as a vehicle to "make money" that simply isn't true. And, if you're looking to college to ensure you make "More money", the return for investment just isn't there.

Now, we still need educate our children. However, we must truly rethink what we're training them for. We have to be honest about what employment opportunities are available and will be available in the future and tailor our educational programs based on those expectations, not on the idea that "everybody has to go to college" and "college means I'll make a lot of money".

As much as I hate to look to the Europeans for guidance, we may have to adopt something like many of their systems where not everybody is put on the college path. When the educational big dogs are honest with the American people about what to expect for employment then the educational system can be redesigned to meet those expectations and society can begin re-adjusting it's thinking about employment.

For decades, the experts have predicted that we would become a two-tiered society where employees would be either very technical in their work or in the lower tier the employees would be in service-based positions. They warned that we needed to be rethinking education and training to prepare for those changes. Of course, we did not and have not done that.

Dirt - I highlighted this excerpt from your post because I believe that America has been misled about what to expect in the future for American workers and the education that SHOULD be available to them.

I disagree with the 'experts' because it seems to me that those same 'experts' were preparing for a POLITICAL experiment - namely shipping our manufacturing jobs overseas - and they were dishonest at best in preparing America for the future. What gave me pause about your post is that the 'experts' wanted to prepare us for a TWO-tiered societal structure, when there should be at least FOUR tiers, IMHO.

I think that President Obama has it right. We are not STRICTLY a technical/service oriented society; however, we need to be an academic/white-collar/blue-collar/technical society. Not only does this expand the 'calssifications' of jobs that are available, but it will allow a broad spectrum of skillsets that people can employ for employment to move America forward. We have a need for THINKERS in our society, and those thinkers - visionaries - are what spawn new industries which create more jobs and employment opportunities.

Not everyone responds to or is able to grasp academia; some people are better with their hands and there is a large population of people that are a mix of all four 'categories'.

I agree that we may need to adopt some of the European societal systems (like making higher education available to all at little or no cost as long as they are citizens); educators need to be realistic in their goals for American society. If we have a CLEAR direction, then the educational system can be redesigned to meet the educational expectations as related to employment.

Thanks for the nice post, Dirt. It made me think about what direction our educational system should be taking.

Thanks for your comments, Pietro. I agree with you that we can never be two-tiered but that's where the bulk of people will be. I'm one who has benefited from our educational system and gotten to do things I never dreamed of because of it. What I still appreciate most about my education, though, is that it broadened my scope, my worldview. I learned how to think on my own!

I think we both agree it's time to have an honest conversation with the American people about the "world of work". Times have changed and the society will have change, too. I hope we NEVER stop valuing education and what it can mean in ways of enriching one's world. But, we have to face what opportunities are there.

I agree with you 100% that not all people are the same; their skills do differ. Our educational system misses the mark when they don't recognize that. That old saying "You can fit a square peg in a round hole is so true." One of the great successes I've seen in education is in magnet high schools where they focus on a specialty in addition to the three Rs. You can see a child who struggles with the normal educational system blossom when they are placed in a learning environment centered around their interests. Now, one of the negatives of those settings is, who decides where the students belong? Our system often "labels" or "marks" students and they're forever noted as such, not given opportunities. The student has to have the desire and be included in the choice.

I do have concerns about the quality of teaching. I think there's much work to be done in that area. I do think, though, if we improve the quality of education at the lower levels then we will have a possibility for better potential teachers because they themselves came from a better system. We have to set high standards for students. No more "dumbing down" schools and teaching to the lowest common denominator. It's okay to tell a child there is a higher expectation. If you don't do the work, achieve the expectations, then you don't get a gold star. Some of those methods have so damaged our children. Life isn't easy; you don't get the reward if you don't make the investment to achieve.

Later, Pietro. Thanks for the chat.

No joe wrote:

The teachers are protected by both tenure and union representation, which means that they have earned the right to hold their jobs for life! If the children don't learn anything in chaotic classrooms, and the teachers neither care nor have any incentive to even try to educate their students, well, that's someone else's problem, not yours.

Not necessarily, Joe. My wife has been tenured for three years now, and has been pink slipped in each of her three years in her school district as a result of funding cuts. Once the budget came back, she was rehired, but many of her co-workers were not as fortunate. Tenure mostly guarantees your job. Also, though I am not for tenure (or public sector unions in general), I don't think that tenure alone leads to complacency in the profession. I've seen plenty of tenured teachers go the extra mile for their students.

As for what can be done: many districts don't need more funding, they need a reallocation of it. In CA, for instance, there are now slightly more support staff and administrators than there are actual teachers. That's ridiculous. Teachers can't do it all on their own, but there are clearly some unnecessary positions that, if cut, would put more money in our classrooms. Second: pensions, which are relatively high and level off after 30 years of service in the state. It's a long time, but permits many to retire 10-15 years before their private-sector counterparts, and those pension payments can add up. Third: performance based evaluations of teachers, probably based on standardized tests. I'd rather have another measure, but this one is the most realistic. These either need to be based on students' improvement over the previous year, improvement in the class year over year, or the class average year to year, depending on the district. My wife, for instance, works in a very poor area with a large number of migrant workers, whose children underperform; class averages would be a poor measure of her work.

I wasn't talking about RIF's Anon, but about incompetent teachers who remain on the job, or who get kicked up the ladder, because the only way to get rid of them completely is to hope they take early retirement.

That is what the tenure/union system has done to teaching.

"Excuse me Mary Sunshine (soldier), I don't know what country you're living in, but my country, The United States of America has NOT been destroyed...it has and will endure."

________

?

I have never in my life met more insincere stupid people than I have in the last 20 years. The GOP are full of "all talk" politicians. They can't even discuss their Pledge. They don't know what it says. They have zero answers. Zero. They can't govern. They can only do what the wealthy tell them to do.

And they think they take after The Founding Fathers? The Founding Fathers?

And people buy this nonsense?

This country will be destroyed if the GOP have power. They don't know what they're doing as they have demonstrated over and over and over and over.

Michelle Bachmann. Rand Paul. Christine ODonnell. McMahon. Boehner. McConnell. DeMint. Sharron Angel. Is this what this country has to offer our children?

They are puppets for the rich. That's all they have to offer. The rich, who don't care where this country is going.

There isn’t anything in this country that the GOP has not destroyed. Not one single thing.

This country will be destroyed if the GOP have power.

At least you downgraded us from "destroyed" to "will be destroyed"...

I would suggest switching channels for a few hours. Boardwalk Empire is fabulous, for example. Watching the 24 hour news channels and hyperventilating over their pronouncements of impending DOOM is not productive.

America will endure, survive and continue to be the "last best hope on earth" for a long, long time...

Pat, Boston:

Great insight as usual...

John Boehner asserted on the Sunday funnies (aka News Shows) that he has been in Congress for 20 years and has never seen anything as “reckless” as the Dems allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire on December 31, 2010.

When is someone in the MSM going to ask Mr. Boehner where he was 9 years ago when the legislation was passed with a sunset date of December 31, 2010.

Surely he was not present for that vote.

If Mr. Boehner was present and voted then he is as culpable as the Dems since this was his party leader’s masterpiece.

Mr. Boehner should tone down the hyperbole.

Reckless indeed!

Pat,

You have outdone yourself. That is some of the most ignorant Democrat hype I have ever read.

This country will never be DESTROYED by a political party. Are you that naive?

Like the man said: Leave those damn 24 hr (MSNBC) entertainment channels alone. There is about 3-400 other channels on the menu. You let those idiots get you all hyped up and it isn't a damn thing you can do about anything they are talking about.

This is and always has been a divided country 48-48 with about 4% confused. This country will always have the wealthy and the poor. You can complain forever about the wealthy, but you show me a poor man that does not desire to be wealthy.

InTheMiddle, why would I have a problem with someone being wealthy?

What I have a problem with is the wealthy blaming everybody else for all the ills in this country, simply because they don't want to give back. They have admitted it. They have had their precious tax cuts for ten years.

It's time for them to do their share and stop being so unbelievably selfish.

Wow kate that's exactly right. How do you educate people when even the basic ideas of science are under attack?

So you believe funding is the only different between a ghetto school and suburban school system. I live in Western MA . Holyoke is a minority city here with over 50% Hispanic and spends over $9,000 a year on each of their students. Longmeadow a wealthy town located 20 minutes from Holyoke spend about the same per student. Longmeadow graduates 99% per of their students with most of them going on to college where as Holyoke graduates rate is around 75%. I dont believe funding is the answer to our problems. I believe a big part of the problem starts at home. If you live in Longmeadow you come from an middle class family with both parents being present and probably college graduates who stress the important of school and are their to support you. If your a child from Holyoke the chances are you are being raised by a single Mom on welfare who probably didn;t graduate from high school this is your roll model. I'm tired of hearing we need to spent in our high school - all parents to take an interest in their children's education and we need to stop welfare as a way of life. Holyoke is going on their 3rd generation of welfare receipants and you wonder why taxpayers are mad.

downwith...... Excellent post You are right, bring in degreed engineers, MD's, smart people from India and keep Americans dimwitted. While we are at it, lower taxes, remove social security, stop repairing highways. BTW, can you spell Banana Republic. STTS

As a former teacher, Forest, I can give you two very good reasons for the difference:

first and foremost is parental involvement. You say that your parents didn't notice that you weren't doing homework in the eighth grade you spent in public school; I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they would have snapped to attention had your grades suffered.

That is related to the second reason, which is discipline. In private schools, it is understood that there will be detentions, punish lessons, and the like for behavior that is unacceptable, and if a student's parent does not like it, that child can go elsewhere. Often, the parents themselves are seeking a school environment that mirrors the environment in their homes, so the 'fit' is important to them, as well as the education.

None of this is to let the public schools off the hook. I taught with people who cared not at all if their students achieved-that was up to the student. It bears remembering that I taught an elementary school grade in the town I was in-6th grade-so some of these teachers had that attitude about first graders.

It also bears remembering that, for the most part, private schools do not have tenure. If a teacher cannot control a classroom, or has students who do not achieve, that teacher can be terminated. Not so in public schools. Once tenured, it is all but impossible to remove a teacher from the payroll, so, as a 'last resort', those teachers are moved into managerial positions. It gets them out of the classroom, yes, but puts them in the position of forcing their 'expertise' on the teachers they are supervising. Thus, in even the youngest grades, 'teaching' amounts to handing out work sheets. Actual instruction is rare.

I could go on, but my bitterness about the education system is this country would lead me to just spout negativity. I loved the kids, and enjoyed the challenge of getting them enthused about subjects they had never really had an interest in-but the administration, the parents, (many of them), and the other teachers? Not so much.

While I believe that parental involvement (or more accurately, the lack thereof) is one of the largest - if not the largest - problems facing the public schools, I can attest to Joe's assertion that awful teachers are often 'promoted' into areas where they'll do less harm because firing them is next to impossible.

When I was much younger I had the ear of my creative writing teacher, who was head of the English department at the time. My English teacher was particularly loathesome and I am not stating that from the perspective of a student who abhorred English class. To the contrary, it was all too apparent that our instructor was obsessed with one thing and one thing only - her advancement within the district. More of her time was spent on training seminars for administration positions than working her curriculum.

If tests were missed, tests were missed. If assignments went without review for a grading period, so be it. She was short, tempermental and lackadaisical in her instruction; the worst part about this woman is that she was overseeing what was supposed to have been a G&T program.

What I heard from my CW teacher was that the English teacher repeatedly harped, after hours and on break, about how she despised teaching and how she didn't want to have to put up with running a curriculum but it was her only way to get where she wanted to go.

Horror stories'n all.

Of course, NJ leaves out several most important points: the largest one being that our schools test all students and all information is reported. My son, who has a serious developmental disability was tested as was my daughter who has a high IQ. Children who do not have English as their first language are also tested. In other countries, this is simply not true. Also, it is a myth that schools want parental involvement. Ask any parent of a disabled child. We are told that we are "too involved" that coming up most often when we are holding them to an IEP that they signed. I found that to be the most true with the really marginal teachers, who will next turn around and complain about lack of involvement. But, my experience is that schools are not all that happy with parents like me that hold teachers and schools accountable for their end of the bargain.

would lead me to just spout negativity.

Funny... it's NEVER stopped you in the past... lmao

I tried to reply but lost my post before I could send it, I will reply in couple of hours, I hate when this happens.

no joe, no bo, nj

As a former teacher, Forest, I can give you two very good reasons for the difference:

first and foremost is parental involvement. You say that your parents didn't notice that you weren't doing homework in the eighth grade you spent in public school; I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they would have snapped to attention had your grades suffered.

No Jo, you hit the nail on the head, parental involvement!!!!!!!!!. if parents were more involved in there kids education, there you have a real check system. parents. i have said too many time on this blog that parents make the difference between kids making grades, kids being challanges, and parents not giving there kids to a school. schools should not be given the soles responsibilty by parents to teach, and dispiline. that must come from home. but in our society of fatherless homes and drug addicted parents have turned schools in the sitters from K-12.

No Jo i wish coprial punishment was still in schools. i remember in grade school, if you acted up, the teacher knocked the crap out of you, then they told your parents and you got a second knock down. but today parents thinks that there kids above punishment of any kind.

No Jo my son who is in college was not a good student, but with my and his mother behind him, checking with his teachers on a weekly basis about his progress, making he did his extra credit work, making sure one of us was at every parent teacher confrence, no matter what he said about his grades. No Jo, before each time i went for parent teacher confrences, i made him come clean on any thing i may not know. Any most important, i did not let a school administrator deternine what he should or would take. i made alot of people at Evanston township HS(boarder of the north side of chicago) very mad because i was not going to let them determine his future, thats a parents job.

his english class in his junior year, i showned up and sat in, unannounced, the next day i got that department head on the phone and told her if she did not get him out of that class, i was going to the district superintendent. why, No Jo, the teacher had no control, None at all. my son was complaining to me that he was not learing anything because (the teacher who should have retired) was not advancing them in that class like his other teachers were. classic example for manditory retirement. he was moved and his grades got worse because he was working much harder for that C than for the A he was getting.

Parental involvement No Jo. you hit it. too many children having children.

I agree if I was doing badly my parents would have noticed, as it turns out I was doing so well they should have been alarmed! ( HA,HA,HA, Jokes on them). I also agree about some of the discipline issues, I had never heard of a suspension until I went to public school, I could not believe that if you screwed up big time they gave you 3 days off of school, - Sweet! In my Catholic school if you screwed up big time you had to come to school on SATURDAY, just you and Sister Mary Holywater, and anybody else that screwed up enough. You did school-work all day while your buddies watched cartoons and played wiffle ball, that will get your act straightened out in a hurry. However I don't know if a Nun can be fired, and if they can who has the guts to do it.

One of the factors that no one is discussing is the issue of poverty.  When a child is in poverty and is hungry, how can that child concentrate in school?  If that child has to take care of their siblings or has to take care of their drunk/drug addicted parent, how can that chile succeed?  Poverty is one of the causes of failure in our school systems.  The children of poverty do not know those secret rules of how to behave in society or in school because they were never taught them.  How is that child who at home is the parent supposed to be a child in the school room? 

We have many difficulties with the public schools system, poverty being a major factor.  Many of the failing schools are in areas where there is lots of poverty.  Remember, just last week poverty rates have increased dramatically over the last few years. 

Poverty stricken families aren't all filled with drug addicted/drunken parents as you suggested, sonokursh, but it is a problem our educational system must overcome. Most poverty stricken families don't have active support systems for the development of their children - they're working too often or don't put as much stock in it as they should. These children go to school underdeveloped and already behind, without any respect for the educational system, or some combination of the two.

sonokursh2

while a agree with you that poverty has alot to do with failing schools, i remember when i was a kid and i had nothing, that did not keep me from coming to school ready to learn. on the other hand, my parent were not addicted to drugs and that has alot to do with kids coming to school ready to learn.

Anon Monster!

Poverty stricken families aren't all filled with drug addicted/drunken parents as you suggested, sonokursh, but it is a problem our educational system must overcome.

If the education system has to overcome personal problems that kids have, then when does the learning start.

Again as No Jo said, Parental involvement i think is the main reason why our schools are failings.

I've long said that parental involvement is the main failure of our public schools.

That isn't as politically useful as blaming it on the NEA, though.

When I first heard about Obamas comments My first thiught was "the guy finally got something right". Most nations have longer school years then the US, and the need for school students for farm labor are about gone. The US is no longer an ag ecomony.

Then I kicked into the "what are they up to " mode. Sure enough its another payoff to the unions. Got to expand that Dem voter base. Get more dem welfare voters. The more nonproducers on the govt dole the more happy dem voters.

Heres an interesting thought. How about doing away with all the PC crap and make competition a driving force in education? If one of those worthless Socialist educators cant perform , fire them. A little insecurity improves job performance. You will here the educators crying about crowded classes and unmotivated students. A good teacher has the ability to keep their courses interesting.

The crowded class rooms? We all recognise that all people do not perform the at the same level. Japan has an interesting system. If a student doesnt perform at certain levels, then they are branched off into vocational training at some point in their tenure. This allows the herd to be thined and a better education for those who want it. This also puts competition back in the school system. If your falling behind and want to do something other then a labor vocation, you will work a little harder to achieve.

The up side is that even what would have been dropouts leave school with a vocation that they can support theirselves with and be a productive member of society.

In my honest opinion...the GOP has no interest in Public Education...

Anita - in my honest opinion the GNOP has NO interest in education - PERIOD!

Just look at the dimwits they are supporting... it would be funny if it weren't so freakin scary!

'Evolution is a Myth'... Christine O'Donnell - 1998

Red,

The G-NOP's are mearly attempting to "sell" American's another lie and this one "'Evolution is a Myth'... Christine O'Donnell - 1998" is a prime example of ignorance...

In so much that she doesn't have sense enough to conduct a frigging "press conference" while running for office...

I suppose that Rush has advised them NOT to hold press conferences because they don't have common sense enough to answer simple questions...

I THANK him for being the leader of the G-NOP...because he's helped the Democrats...

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama

"'Evolution is a Myth'... Christine O'Donnell - 1998" is a prime example of ignorance...

In so much that she doesn't have sense enough to conduct a frigging "press conference" while running for office.

____________________________________

it's more to her not giving a interview than her ignorance. It's because she is an un-convicted criminal who stole her campaign funds.

Republican Mike Pence on Meet the Press couldn't name a single program the Republicans would cut from the federal budget the other day after the Republicans released their new "Pledge to America".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/24/stewart-gop-pledge-america_n_737812.html

Jon Stewart was ever so right; those idea are not bold, fresh new ideas since a Bush Lobbyist wrote the ideas. Rachel Maddow did her home work; the republicans in the coalition of Orange didn't.

The Republican released their pledge as a PDF document. A simple "right click" on the document allows anyone to see who the author is behind it. The "Pledge to America" was written by a man named Brian Wild, who is a staffer for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH). Just one year ago Wild was a lobbyist for a famous D.C. firm that lobbies on behald of Exxon-Mobil and AIG among other companies.

http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/video-former-exxon-and-aig-lobbyist-wrote-the-gop-pledge-to-america

Thanks for paying attention to my post even though it got collapsed. I find it so ironic "Tea bagger" is offensive to them. They should be proud. It earned a place in the Oxford dictionary. What's worst tell the left libtards, demos, democ- rats et cetera et cetera and talk about the President like he is a dog.

InsaniTY screening

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/28/gop-website-brings-out-th_n_591937.html

Beverly,

I find this collapsing of comment VERY juvenile and offensive-- the moderators should be able to control this better than what I've been seeing...

Thanks for answering because the Republicans have scraped the bottom of the barrel and came up short and shoddy with the element of people they've got running for public office...it's Rush Limbaugh's world...cheap and dirty....

With any luck the Republican party will become the party of financial responsibility and common sense. The candidates put forward by the TEA PARTY are grass roots candidates. They are not professional politicians. The professional politicians are only concerned with retaining power and lining their pockets. Its time for the crap to stop.

The people who have a problem with Christine ODonnell must have never went through the adversity's of life. More likely they have never been put under the microscope by a group of liberal lyers who will do anything to destroy a person in the quest for power.

I have read about somebody whining about their daughters health insurance. Guess what. Insurance is portable. Its the law. If you have insurance, you can move to any provider and they can not deny you, as long as your old policy hasnt lapsed more than 60 days. You may not like the rate, but trust me, rates are going to get a lot worse with Obama Care. Its engineered that way so that people cry for single payer health care. Never mind that it is failing world wide.

This is for the Indiana Idiot. Medicare and SS are not considered descetionary spending.

Actually, a graph marking the rise of women in the work place can be trended toward schools slipping in achievement. Not that there aren't plenty of great teachers; but the TREND toward women who brought their talents toward excellence in the classroom and then left the field when more lucrative opportunities arose, could - possibly have something to do with the current stats. This was a recent article,...I can't remember where I heard/saw it.