Good Morning GBM: Mind if I tag along.

Message? I Don’t Need a Message!

Both Republican and Democratic pollsters are reporting huge wins for Republicans this November. MSN reports “As Democrats message lags, GOP awaits win”. Fear and anger over unemployment and deep deficits are energizing conservatives and demoralizing liberals. Republicans can ride on people’s anger all the way to the ballot box. Huffington Post reports that Nate Silver thinks the Republicans could win up to 50 seats, maybe more. Fear grips House Democrats that control of the House is lost.

The above comments may be true; we will not know for sure until November 3^rd when the election results are in. Every House seat has its own story. I live in Indiana’s bloody 8^th district. It’s called the bloody 8^th because about every 4 years the incumbent is voted out, replaced by a candidate from the other party. Brad Ellsworth held this seat and now he is running for Senate. Pundits say it is likely that Ellsworth will lose.

In the primaries the Tea Party ran a conservative candidate for this House seat and he won. Now, of course, this candidate is running ads that say things like, “Food doesn’t grow in grocery stores. Money does not grow on trees.” He is against Obamacare and will repeal it.

When I stop and analyze his message, it says NOTHING. We all know food doesn’t grow in grocery stores and money does not grow on trees. I also know he will not repeal the Health Care Law. But that is his message.

The Tea Party’s opponent is also running ads giving information about the candidate and what he wants to accomplish. Quite frankly, it is an ad that is falling on deaf ears.

How can it be that a candidate with no message, saying inane things, could possibly win an election? And it is not only in this district. I see it in Senatorial elections in Nevada, California, and Kentucky. It is likely that Americans are riding on the lies and anger generated by Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, and Fox News.

America could very possibly get what they vote for…candidates with vapid, meaningless messages; totally lacking in substance.

We have a little over two weeks until the election. What we are seeing in this election cycle appears to have little to due with candidates and political parties and more to do with the deliberate and calculated attack from the republican/tea party on the very fabric of our democracy. We are witnessing the destruction of over 35 years of progress toward an open and transparent government that was brought about by the Watergate Scandal. The “Citizens United” decision by the SCOTUS has opened the floodgates to record campaign financing from both domestic and foreign entities through these so call “Special Interest Groups” and there is no disclosure as to who is buying America.

The US Chamber of Commerce, American Crossroads and a bevy of other “Special Interest Groups - SIG” are comprised mostly of the following: Long time Democratic Adversaries and Bush Loyalists (as per a Politico Report) such as those that;

Oppose Financial Reform

Oppose Health Care Reform

Oppose a Minimum Wage

Oppose Regulation of Wall Street, Big Businesses, Insurance Companies and the Big Banks

Oppose Education Reform

Oppose Most Social Programs (except when they need them) like unemployment, food stamps

Oppose Social Security, Medicare and Health Benefits for our Veterans and 9/11 First Responders

They Support Tax Cuts where the majority of the benefits go to the top 2% of the people

They Support Outsourcing of Jobs

They support re-writing the US Constitution for their benefit at the expense of everybody else setting up a class based society where select classes will have all the rights and the rest will be slaves to them.

When questioned if these groups will provide a list of who is buying up America, the universal response is NO. 84% of the people want to know who these people are, 56% claim they will not vote for a candidate that accepts special interest money. Only 9% said they would vote for them.

These groups are not just buying votes but they are guaranteeing that there will be fewer challenges to their quest for more power and control. This deceitful and morally repugnant agenda will change the economic landscape of this country to one of where we have two classes of people. Those that have the wealth and power and those that do not. The economic divide is currently at record levels and has been growing as per the CBO.

The top 1% have 35% of the Net Worth and 43% of the Financial Wealth

The next 4% have 27% of the Net Worth and 29% of the Financial Wealth

That means the top 5% control 62% of the Net Worth and 72% of the Financial Wealth

The next 5% have 11% of the Net Worth and 11% of the Financial Wealth, which means 83% of the wealth in America is in the hands of 10% of the population. The fastest growing segment is the top 1%

Appearing on CNN this Sunday morning, Candy Crowley challenged Gary Bauer, a board member of the neoconservative Emergency Committee for Israel (ECI), to reveal the names of the donors funding ECI’s attack ads in Pennsylvania against Democrat senate candidate Joe Sestak. Bauer refused (“of course not!”), and then explained that his pro-Israel donors might face harassment if their names were known:

At an annual shareholders meeting, News Corp chairman Rupert Murdoch said that his political donations to Republican political entities like the Chamber of Commerce and the Republican Governors Association are “in the best interest of the country.” He also claimed that the donations have “nothing to do with the editorial policies or the journalism” that his company provides. What BS and his shareholders are now asking why?

When the US CoC was asked the same question last week, their spokespeople said no. Every SIG says No.

Why is this such a closely held secret? Why did the Republican/Tea Party vote against the Disclosure Bill? Because the Republican/Tea Party is ashamed for us to know who these people/companies are and who they are now giving the car keys to. These businesses are also trying to duck any responsibility for the laws that they are paying politicians to write. CYA, they will sit back and say not me, and we will have no way of knowing any different.

Hundreds of Millions of Dollars are being spent by these “Special Interest Groups” on attack ads against Democratic challengers ( a 9 to 1 ratio) and these cowards do not have the guts to identify themselves claiming they may face some sort of negative response from the American People. There is a plan for you, why should they be afraid, what is it that they do not want us to know, what is their real agenda?

Just look at the last 20 months at the type of bills that the republican/tea party has opposed for the answer and it is not good with over 420 Bills stalled in the Senate and Presidential appointments all being held hostage by the right. They have been systematically bought off by these SIG’S and this will continue unless the people say enough.

If we keep on sitting with our heads in the sand the vast majority of the American People (republicans, independents and democrats alike) are all going to be in the same boat. Unless you are Wall Street, Big Business, or in the top 2% the republican agenda has nothing to offer you. Their “Pledge to America” offers no new ideas, no solutions other than a re-birth of the previous Administration’s failed policies, many of which are still in effect today and we all see how well those are working.

Good Morning Ron

Happy to have you tag along as we travel the road of bumps and lumps, we are in this together and couldn't have better company.

Good post Ron. Enjoy your day.

Thank you GBM: A very well written, thought provoding post. I like the Johnathan Swift poem at the end. I also once traveled to Ireland. A beautiful green country.

Misinformation? You mean like the unemployment rate? It is actually lower than 9.6%, but we are misinformed about it?

You mean that the stimulus bill actually did fund shovel ready jobs, despite Obama's admission that they do not exist?

DADT has been overturned in a federal court, but Obama instructed his justice department to appeal the decision. That is misinformation?

The deficit is not, actually, about ten per cent of GDP, despite reports to the contrary, with nothing to show for it but high unemployment and a staggering recovery?

That is all misinformation? Really?

The sky really IS plaid in Obamaland.

Forgive me for "piling on" GBMama; but I MUST send a Birthday Shout Out to our very own Feistmeister!

Hope it is a FABULOUS Birthday, GF Feisty! Many, Many, Many returns!

And, yes, I often read the news from Foreign sources because I firmly believe "news" in America is the result of spin and advertising dollars. The 'truth' can be bought and it goes to the highest bidder, pretty much like our elections are becoming, as well. And to think, many 'believe' this all just happened under a Kenyan, Socialist, Marxist dictator. It would be funny if it weren't so SAD.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Misinformation, njnbnj, like what the tea bagger said on Bill Maher Friday night; about the Stimulus Package costing MORE than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Talk about SPIN,...America's truly getting dizzy (for you Nash!)

So what it's boils down to for Obama is that he's asking people to "Vote for me because I'm me."

Fellow travelers:

It is becoming quite clear that Republicans are going to make serious inroads into the current Democratic majority in Congress, perhaps even taking control of both the Senate and the House. There are two very important lessons we must learn from this.

The first is that many of the "independents" are not independent at all. To the contrary, they are very dependent. President Obama's message of hope and change resonated with a huge number of people in this country. However, for many "independents", change meant the Democrats were going to repair the economy such that it would heap benefits on them and this miracle would occur the day after inauguration.

Unfortunately, the momentum of red-ink budgets dating back to the 60's accelerated dramatically during the Bush Administration, and the consequences of that profligacy demanded drastic remedies: TARP and the stimulus among them. The tenuousness of the economy was not completely lost on the citizens and spending contracted, leading to a vicious spiral downward, the results of which meant even higher unemployment. Citizens are scared and with the very short collective memory of America, they are looking for another easy and painless fix, which takes us to the second lesson.

The American voter, in the main, is math-illiterate. When John Boehner trotted out the 13-page federal budget for our multi-trillion-dollar economy, he should have been laughed out of Washington. When we discovered there were no numbers - you know, that 1, 2, 3 stuff - he should have been run out of the country.

Yet, this nonsense goes on in only slightly altered forms. Republicans say they must balance the budget. They're right of course, but they will not identify the necessary cuts. That is because budget cuts, however draconian, will not make up the budget shortfall. It is impossible to balance the budget without increasing taxes.

Yet, Republicans insist that continuing tax cuts for the wealthy will stimulate employment. That is pure, unadulterated hogwash. There are no data anywhere that support that assertion. The truth is quite the opposite. Unemployment has climbed and the deficit has increased concurrently. That is an arithmetical fact.

Even as we are trying to get a handle on the devastation of the economy at the hands of Wall Street "capitalists", Republicans tell us of the wonders of privatization. How stupid must one be to listen to that kind of crap? The bankers, hedge fund managers, and their like just showed us how incredibly inept they are. And Republicans want to talk about privatizing Social Security.

For a sterling example of privatization, check what has happened at Arlington Cemetery. The costs have skyrocketed under private enterprise, and no one knows the extent of mismarked graves, but most estimates put it in the hundreds, approaching a thousand. For more out-of-control privatization, see Blackwater.

There is no shortage of examples where the right wing demands mutually exclusive solutions. Couple that kind of ignorance with "independents", who in truth are dependents, and we have a recipe for disaster.

Awesome first post GBM. Contrary to their rhetoric Conservatives seem to be positively amoral, from refusing to apologize or even quit telling known lies to big business, which increasingly functions under the concept "what you can get away with isn't wrong." That is the root of the fever for deregulation, and certainly rears its head in the Citizens United decision designed specifically to take transparency OUT of the electoral process.

You forgot to mention the fact that MILLIONS of Americans (the ones who don't agree with you politically) are going to vote against their own "self interests" as you people love to say. Which reminds me; usually you all mean that they are voting against their own monetary self interests. Isn't that supposed to be a good thing, according to you libs? People toss their money concerns aside and vote based on cultural and social issues. They apparently believe that there are more important things going on at election time than their own financial situations. Isn't that admirable? Bwahahahahaha. Of course not, Farley! Their not voting for Dems. That makes them idiots!

Terrific posts to start the week.

Gingerbread Mamma. Interesting observation from across the ocean. We must be a real puzzle for other civilized countries since our politics has become anything but civilized and it is wallowing in big money.

Ron. It makes a thoughtful person wonder how anyone would vote for TPer extremists, let alone what they voted out in 2006 and 2008 such short memories and short attention spans.

US Navy. What I find interesting in watching the GOP/TPers defend the anonymous money is they accuse democrats of not being honest about the foreign money in our campaigns but provide no proof; they also make little effort to explain the sheer magnitude of anonymous money from US donors to buy an election. They tell us the donors do not want backlash from citizens. That in itself is an admission that they want to hide something from the American voter because they know voters will be angry, very angry.

The sky really IS plaid in Obamaland.

Does that mean the nation's moving ahead at ludicrous speed?

Anyhoo, the only post in this thread I really agree with wholeheartedly is GM's - I think very much that the truth is under assault in modern America and that conservatives as much as liberals are at fault for trying to 'win' arguments.

The lot of us are guilty of that too, IMHO. We're not so willing to concede when people who disagree with us have a good point and we seem to lack the ability to find the middle ground when presented with two (or three or four) sets of evidence. Unwittingly or not, we tend to spin what information is given us to suit our individual a priori biases, which is as unhealthy for our own minds as it is the national discourse.

I've a governor and a national representative to elect on the second. I've researched those running and have made my choice, barring any unforseen revelations (i.e., witchcraft, forged birth certificates, etc.) and suggest everyone else do the same. What else can we do?

Misinformation like;

HCR has Death Panels, Social Security in busted (fully funded until 2037 per CB0, Tax Cuts pay for themselves, Tax Cuts for the richest 2% create jobs, the Unemployed are hobo's, unclean, lazy, Stimulus did not work (even though over 100 who voted against it, all tookthe money and some even asked for more), and by the way, most economists republican and democrats say the stimulus did work.

Or maybe you mean misinformation that the US COC did not take in any foreign funds, changed the story to about 100K and ThinkProgress reports that it is closer to 1 Million, and that is only the o

Spin it all you want - we're not dumb as liberals portray us in their make-believe world, and we are not angry because of the words of others. We are angry because of the actions of this administration and four years of democrat leadership that cannot control federal government spending, Take a number and get in the back of the line.

Left-wing panic attack. The rinse cycle starts in a couple of weeks.

Good Morning Jody,

Thanks to you and all for the kind words. The journalist, Una Mullaly, in writing the piece which was drawing contrasts between recession problems in Ireland and here. Said:

"But curiously, despite the financial calamity and public indignation, there has been less here of the unfocused and often ill-informed fury typified by the Tea Party movement in America; in fact, most Irish with whom I spoke were perplexed by what's happening in the United States".

Around the world we have always been thought of not only as the Land of Opportunity, but the land of freedom, the land where dreams were possible, the land where they looked for the way to make all this happen, the can do and overcome all adversities type of attitude that has made us great.

Now with all the TP noise the image is badly cracked and I for one, believe that will affect how we are viewed in the diplomatic world as well as in everyday happenings in the lives of ordinary people. This perception, was important to our welfare as a nation, whether one realized it or not and even if the TP succeeds beyod their wildest dreams, we as a nation are the losers. Who ever thought the day would come when we would be considered a nation of losers?

Handgunner, it ain't no rinse cycle if people like those of the previous adminstration and previous legislature wind up holding the reins again. This isn't a question of liberal vs. conservative. This is a question of leadership vs. posturing and I don't know what you've been paying attention to for the past decade, but I've seen entirely too much of the latter and not enough of the former on both sides of the aisle.

US Navy:

Misinformation like;

10% unemployment, 25% under-employment. $1.3 trillion dollar deficit spending this year. So called stimulus package after stimulus package that stimulates nothing (but does line the pockets of the unions), "Shovel-ready" jobs, that now even Obama denies exists. Additionally, Democratically controlled Congress neglects to create a budget, goes home without voting on Bush tax cut extensions, Democratic leadership openly buys votes to pass ObamaCareand financial reform, no embarrassing ethics trials for Waters and Rangel until after the election.

No misinformation there. These are the real truths as to why the Democrats have been such failures.

Obama accused America of being an "ARROGANT" nation as he apologized for our exceptionalism on the world stage.

NOV 2, WE SHOW HOW ARROGANT HE HAS MADE US.......PHASE ONE!

Exodite Dragon...since I think most people missed it, please allow me to give you props for the "SpaceBalls" reference. Well done!

I see the party of blame shills are heavily striking their blame mechanism on First Read this morning. The one thing I notice is that the same talking points are being regurgitated yet again. Nothing new... only the same old tired blame of the Tea Party, the faults with the republicans and blah, blah blah blah blah!

It is so totally amazing that the posters here try to boost each other up in the same manner... tossing high fives at each other but there's one thing missing.

I notice no mention of what the democrats have done to screw things up. I only see one sided commentary that clearly exposes the hatred for anything conservative and republican. No real substance... only talking points that have been so overused that there is no meaning in them anymore.

False pretext abounds. Making tired old statements that the republicans are going to do this.. the republicans did that... etc etc etc.

My advice to this group of individuals... look inward to the total BS the democrats have left us with. Record deficits... uncontrolled spending... government expansion like no other time in history.... but the blame crowd is all for it. Idiotic at best.

Thanks, Frank. I'm glad someone recognized it. XD

And the MSM continues to blame the President for not getting his message out about all that has been accomplished in the past 20 months. That is what I heard this morning on Morning Joe.

Huh?

All they talk about incessantly is how the Dems are going to get trounced in November no matter what their message is and no matter what legistlative successes the President has had. We keep hearing it is about jobs, jobs, jobs.

If that is so, then why don't I know what the Republicans and/or Tebaggers (redundant actually) are going to do to create jobs.

The MSM has failed miserably this election cycle. Touting polls that show 20% the people who voted for the President in 2008 say he has not kept his promise. What about the other 80%? Chopped liver...

I know what Sarah Palin has for breakfast , lunch, and dinner but not how the opposition party is going to create jobs , reduce the deficit and pay for a tax cut costing $700 million.

The Right has Fox News to perpetuate their agenda, to demagogue every issue and keep sh!t going about birth certificates. The President has to rely on the objectivety of the rest of media and they have been missing in action.

Is this journalism?

Just asking.

Where has the progressive/democrat leadership left us? Deeper in debt and one day closer to death.

I'm beginning to think progressives actually like this idea. Of course Pink Floyd expressed it in true harmonics. The progressives sing off tune and have actually harmed our economic growth. It's telling that they blame everyone else and take zero responsibility for the state of affairs we are in today. Democrats have only been in charge of Congress for 40 of the past 50 years, but who's really keeping track? It's much easier to blame the republicans.

Hello, everyone, and by all means natal fest greetings to Feisty! Y'all realize what birthday wishes are, right? Sure - we're glad you were born!

Although I am a very strong Democratic voter and party supporter, I am going to vote for Crist. Marco Rubio was a corrupt state senator and GOP leader, a crude opportunist, and I find it almost incredible he's getting so much support from people who claim they want ethical officeholders. Kendrick Meek has so many different negatives that from the beginning he was unelectable.

Crist, on the other hand, took principled positions as governor, knowing full well some would hurt his chances in this election. He's done a good job of holding back the worst of the cavemen in the GOP in Florida who dominate the legislature. I suspect there are going to be a great many like me defying the poll results.

Several MSNBC articles today have addressed the problems likely to result from a strong Tea Party result. The TP folk claim they are essentially political anarchists, without much formal structure or any leadership. Others have already commented on how in fact GOP operatives have skillfully manipulated the "leaderless" Tea Party - much as the Democratic Party in the 1890's essentially absorbed the Populist Party. (A shameful period for the Democrats, I might add.)

If the Tea Party candidates embed themselves in the GOP, they will either have to moderate some of their positions, thus disaffecting themselves with their voters, or the GOP will become a party so hampered by "purity" tests and extremist positions that it will be unable to maintain a substantial following. Certainly it seems that come January, the national legislature is unlikely to overcome multiple divisons to function at all. That is certain to cause even greater outrage among frustrated Americans.

Folks, I am extremely concerned about the well-being of our Republic.

Shiela MD - wow! What good points you make! I was asking the same question before the elections in 08. I kept on asking what "Change and Hope" was all about... seems no one had an answer, especially Obama. I kept on asking what "yes we can" meant... but no one could give an answer. The MSM is nothing for their lack of digging in deep.

Brianb:

Cute but not substantive.

You validate my points with your negativity. Hope and Change were about attitude not about policy issues. You do recognize a slogan is a little bit different from actual governance.

However, we do have CHANGE. That is why the Teabaggers keep screaming about "wanting their country back".

The scary Black man in the Oval Office has changed Health Care, changed the Auto Industry, changed the Financial and Banking industry, changed Equal Pay for Women and is going to change DADT among other agenda items.

He was also hoping for some bi-partisan help from the opposition to come together and fix our broken economy. He has since learned they are not interested in helping him fix a damn thing. So he will have to go it alone and continue to piss off the opposition who shout that he is ramming the changes down the throat of the American people.

That is change that you cannot abide and that's ok. But to suggest that there has been no change is just plain disingenous.

John A.-400474

Although I am a very strong Democratic voter and party supporter, I am going to vote for Crist.

I'd do the same if I were a Floridian. If I were an Alaskan, I'd even vote for Murksowski if the Democrat had no real chance of winning. Better a corporatist like her than a kook like Miller. Even some of the big corporations seem to be getting worried that the Tea Party monster they've created may be out of their control.

Excellent post Gingerbread Momma. However saying we are "becoming" a nation of liars is not historically accurate.

Our founding fathers signed and broke treaties with the original inhabitants of this country constantly in our early years and continued the practice into the early 20th century with those lies. We are a nation born on greed and deception. We have to work hard to remain a "civilized" nation. It isn't industrialization that makes you civilized. It is how you treat the widows and orphans and your neighbors.

Shiela MD - I never said I didn't know what the change was. Please don't put words into my mouth. That's very assumptive. I was asking this BEFORE the election in 08.

Now to respond to your quick jump down my throat reply,

The changes that have occurred, in the long run will destroy our republic. Government intervention into the private sector is not what the Constitution was set up to do. The Constitution was set up to control government, not to have government control us. Of course the progressives have been chomping at the bit to see our Constitution destroyed. They can't have anything get in the way of letting the government provide cradle to grave benefits for all people... even at the cost of loss of liberty, freedom and creativity.

Here's a thought about what the republicans have done... something I'm sure hasn't even entered into your progressive mind. They decided to stop uncontrolled spending. Everything they voted no on had more spending attached to it. Do you think for one minute the republicans are against increasing the benefits to the unemployed? The answer to that is a resounding NO. What they were against was all the extra spending provisions attached to the bill. The same played out for each and every bill they said no to. Maybe in your progressive mind, spending is good... and in some cases it is.. but not when you don't have the money to cover the debt.

So is that the platform you want to take? To allow the government uncontrolled spending with nothing to pay the bills? I know.. being progressive means to pass the debt to your children and grand children.

To me that sparks of ignorance and not a progressive idea at all.

Same tired old republican talking points yet again today. At least we know what the republicans on this site are going to say before we ever log on. Nothing new just the same old BS day after day. Get with the program guys come up with something new please. The only ones listening to you anymore is republicans like you.

Here is some depressing news for Democrats.

In 2010, the Democrats will likely lose about half of their Senate seats up for election, while the Republicans lose none of theirs.

In 2012, the Democrats (& 2 ind) will have to defend 23 seats, vs only 11 for the Republicans.

In 2014, a similar scenario unfolds, where Democrats have to defend 17 seats, vs only 12 for Republicans.

Their "Once in a lifetime" filibuster proof Senate that they held for over a year was wasted, and may well turn into a filibuster proof Republican Senate soon.

Great job, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid.

Good post. And, well stated advice. The standard of objective truth seems to have been replaced with the idea of "truthiness". Or, people making statements that sound like they could be true presented as absolute truth.

There have been some efforts by some of the news services to fact check statements and publish them. However, in our internet driven world, the truth doesn't ever seem to get caught up with disinformation.

This is very consistent with Joseph Goebbels who was the Reichsminister for propaganda and national enlightenment in 1933 Germany. I've extracted a couple relevent items. For the full list you can check out: http://www.psywarrior.com/Goebbels.html There are 19 of them.

6. To be perceived, propaganda must evoke the interest of an audience and must be transmitted through an attention-getting communications medium.

Exodite Dragon,

2 Things...

1) I also commend you on the SpaceBalls reference! Funny stuff.

2) As far as both sides being guilty of spinning, I've heard this argument numerous times. And while I concur with this sentiment, I get irritated at the perspective that is lost by that argument. Too often, it's used to discredit both sides of the isle without engaging in honest research or honest debate. Furthermore, it lacks any notion that the different sides could be engaging in different degrees of "spinning." Thus, if one side is moderate left, while the other is extreme right, an outside viewer is left to condemn both sides equally or think the moderate view is a compromise between the two views. It's the effect of the world we live in where the loudest voice gets the bully pulpit, and certain groups have been better at exploiting this than others.

Retired,

Aren't you tired of spilling out the words of Obama. I am kind of like the old lady in the Wendy's commercial--"Where the evidence" (Where's the Beef). The only thing that the democrats have going right now is that the President can go on TV and lie about people. He should be ashamed of himself for using his office to slander people and organizations. Your problem is that the democrats have done it the past 2 election cycles and the tables have turned.

But at least the reporter in Ireland had it correct. Read, learn, vote for the best person that will govern the way that you as an individual would like it to be. Not just because someone is from a particular party. But as usual, you come on here and complain, just like your President, that it is just not fair.

Maybe you should un-retire and learn the how to keep from whining:)

Brianb:

So let me get this straight...

It is only Democrat spending that will destroy our country.

The 30 years of out-of control spending before January 20, 2009 does not count towards the deficit.

OK. I get it. Only Obama spending is bad for the country. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush spending was good for the country.

You are not serious!

@NinersFan49:

Conceded, surely, but at the same time I think the first step in correcting a problem is identifying and accepting that the problem exists - that problem, in my eyes, is that we have two very large, very powerful groups that both elevate themselves as the only truth-sayers while antagonizing each other as the epitome of whatever the evil-of-the-week is.

By accepting this problem, I opine that such a view opens the door to debate by dispelling the myth each 'side' holds - that either is somehow more righteous than the other. The wrench in the gears, of course, is the human factor. Rarely will you find people willing to objectively stop and go, "okay, yeah, you're right. We do it, too!" and then come to the table looking to participate in the aforementioned constructive debate. All of our minds are collectively under seige by that bully pulpit, those loudest voices, which as you're no doubt aware, drown out our own voices. By repeating that, "yes, hey! You do it as much as the other guy!" I hope to remind people often enough that what they're doing is wrong so they will stop and have a think on things.

But you know, just my opinion - and you know what they say about opinions...

If the Irish had any experience governing themselves and any trust of their own roots this reporter would be pushing packages at UPS or FEDEX instead blathering. From an Irish person.

@ Exodite Dragon:

Fair enough. However, I would like to point out that it requires all participants to "come to the table." Last I checked, that wasn't happening.

The sad part is that politically, the republicans figured it was better to stop everything and not negotiate with the dems...AND IT'S WORKING! It's hard to argue for all sides to come to the table when it doesn't win you seats. Sad, really...

As far as opinions go, I think they say they're like children..."Everybody has them, but yours suck and mine are AWESOME!"

Who has the President slandered, Big Bear?

Tom343.......I believe you are missing the point. So if I have to explain I will.

The point is not that the Irish can do it better or have, that had nothing to do with it, the reporter never made that suggestion. It was that the the Irish are more perplexed at the reactions of the noisy people here who are not doing anything to help solve our problems.

For the record, I was born and raised there so you dont have any advantage over my opinion in that respect.

Come Novermber 2nd The American people will vote to Clean the Pipes of a Clogged Toilet that the Democrats have created

@NinersFan49:

Now that's a much neater analogy than the typical one and certainly more reflective of the usual debates you see here and elsewhere.

Regarding the Republicans, well. I think that strategy would've worked to their favor had they bothered to provide a counter to the present administration's plans. Had they come up with their own solutions and ideas instead of waiting a month before the mid-terms to offer a regurgitation of the same mantra they've touted since 1994, people wouldn't be as polarized as they presently are.

Consider that there was decidedly greater consensus and support for Obama leading into 2008 than there'd been for Kerry in 2004. Regardless of the present outcome, two years ago plenty of moderates and centrists felt then-Senator Obama had a viable message and plan.

The Republicans really dropped the ball simply by sitting about twiddling their thumbs so they aren't reaping the kind of public support they could for this election cycle. Likewise, the Democrats did an extremely piss-poor job of staying on their message and illustrating why they should be believed over the Republicans, hence their waning support.

But you're right - not everyone is coming to the table. I'd much prefer to see the rank-and-file American citizen find common ground because I don't think the majority of Americans are actually of the mind to put party before country. If you could get people away from the groupthink endemic to various online forums and cable networks, if you could actually bring people together, I think there you might find a greater willingness to seek consensus and significantly less misguided bravado and obstinance.

There is that whole other thing they say, you know: divided we stand, 'n all. Part of me feels we're being pitted against each other because the powers-that-be understand that so long as we remain at one another's throats, we present no threat to the ongoing corruption of the status quo.

Shiela MD - Considering that the President isn't permitted to spend one penny of government funding, to blame the president is rather a nonpoint. The spending arm of government is congress. They are the ones that appropriate the funds, set up committees and allow the checks to be written. The president approves the budget, but congress does the overspending.

Considering a full democrat controlled house, senate and presidency, spending has gone unfettered for the last 18 months. Prior to Obama, congress held control for 2 years. So... in essence our current out of control spending is because of the democrats.

Now... to answer your retort, consider this: Out of the past 50 years, democrats have held control over congress for 40 of them. Yet you want to blame the republicans for our deficit. I blame the republicans for a lot of things, but overspending is not one of them. They haven't had the amount of time in control to correct the budget... and the reason is because democrats want to give the treasury to special interests, welfare programs, food stamps, illegal immigrants and appropriate funds for stimulus that didn't stimulate. They generate votes from people that are dependent on these programs.

I'm terribly sorry if what I say hurts, but those are the facts. You can continue thinking that republicans are bad... conservatives are radicals and only progressives are good... but you are disillusioned.

Concern over how changes have harmed our nation aren't your concern. All you care about is defending your position regardless of how much harm is caused to this country. Your defense over the change created by Obama is weak because you haven't witnessed the end result yet. Try researching history to see what the effects will be. Or would awaking your sleeping brain be too hard for you to fathom?

Brian,

You are 100 percent correct on who spends the money.. your a bit off on your numbers on total control of congress... in some years congress was split...

Here is a graph that proves your point as to who is the Real party of Defict spending..

http://i44.tinypic.com/34g1xu1.jpg

Note this doens't even take into account the full year of 2009 or 2010 that the Democrats controled all of congress also..

Who has the President slandered? Let's try the Tea Party and most recently the Chamber of Commerce. Charges with zero evidence. I for one think you should have some evidence of a charge before making it. Instead the left says prove it isn't correct. Guilty until proven innocent.

John B in Iowa,

I think that he has slandered Carl Rove for one.

Definition:

Slander is the oral communication of false statements that are harmful to a person's reputation. If the statements are proven to be true, it is a complete defense to a charge of slander. Oral opinions that don't contain statements of fact don't constitute slander. Slander is an act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation. Slander is a subcategory of defamation.

So far, I all I see Obama doing is accusing Carl Rove and others of spreading lies and taking foreign money. None of which has be proven or not proven. Yet those in question are innocent until proven guilty, unless you are the president or vp of the US and say these things. So you tell me that Obama is not using his office and air time not spreading things that he has no proof of.

And don't give me this crap about they should turn over their donors voluntary. When the democrats turn theirs over first, then I will expect everyone to do it also. But until the law changes, they don't have to and neither do the Democrats, who used the same tactics in 2006 and 2008, and are using those same things today, they just haven't received as much money. But I know from personally watching commercials that the democrats are using the NEA advocacy group to run ads.

And I don't even like Rove, but I am ashamed that the president blames everyone but his policies, or his inability to listen to the American people. He'd have been better off getting people employed instead of ramming health care or stimulus's down our throat.

.....Jody......Your right, it is all about the money nowdays. Personally, I pay little attention to the rhetoric but watch the money flow to help me decide who I am for. If the money flow is primarily from sources I consider friendly, that's my man or woman......While we know both parties recieve huge sums of money from special interests, the telling tale is which special interest.

..A recent report said republicans were outspending democrats 9 to 1 on campaign ads nation wide. Question: If republicans were not in the pockets of Wall street, big business, oil companies and multi-national corporations, how could they raise nine times the money ? Would you suppose it may have something to do with democrats effort to regulate and rein in corporate greed and corruption while republicans have stood fast against any such regulations or government interference in how big business conducts business?

Yes, this is so much more than a standard midterm election. It is an election for survival, it is a battle for liberty between middle, working class America and corporate world domination. If American voters do not stop this great push for unbridled corporate domination, we will soon have returned to a mid-evil times culture of Lords, Barons and subjects.........If we are not there already

@Exodite Dragon:

I think we agree on most points. I disagree with your analysis of the Republicans situation, however. They are situated to make bigger than normal gains this election. While they may not have the "backing" of the public, people still blame the dems. By all accounts, this was the right play to make politically, since the dems are awful at messaging and the reps can play the "we're not them" card. It also allows them time in case they don't gain both chambers this cycle, since economic recoveries take time.

Considering that the President isn't permitted to spend one penny of government funding, to blame the president is rather a nonpoint. The spending arm of government is congress. They are the ones that appropriate the funds, set up committees and allow the checks to be written. The president approves the budget, but congress does the overspending.

Brianb - I am REALLY trying to follow your logic here when it comes to spending. I think that you are trying - HARD - to blame the so-called 'out-of control' spending on the Democrats.

OK, fair enough.

Can you tell us what Congress passed the Medicare Act? Was it a Democratic or Republican?

Who gets the CREDIT (or ridicule) for that ACT?

What REALLY happens is that the PRESIDENT APPROVES the spending, no matter what Congress passes the legislation.

Using your logic, Brianb, it would be the CONGRESS that sets the tone and/or tenor of the spending when it is actually the PRESIDENT that does so. It is called a 'Presidential Agenda', and every President has one.

It is the PRESIDENT that APPROVES the spending. His pen signs the legislation into LAW; Congress cannot do that. Congress, on its own, CANNOT make bills into LAW, no matter how much you want it to. Congress also does not have an 'official' agenda, and it debates and legislates bills, not LAWs.

Period.

It is also the PRESIDENT that gets the CREDIT for the law, no matter what Congress debated or legislated it. This is why, in my example, President Johnson get credit for the Medicare Act, and NOT the Congress that legislated it.

Period.

What you are trying to do is to deflect the fact that President Bush was incompetent when it comes to Government spending. We have 8 years of precedence that proves you wrong.

Period.

Where was the call for smaller government them? What you are trying to do is obfuscate the point that Republican Presidents over the past 30 years are in fact the WORST offenders when it comes to deficit spending.

Period.

I'm terribly sorry if what I say hurts, but those are the facts. You can continue thinking that republicans are bad... conservatives are radicals and only progressives are good... but you are disillusioned.

Brianb, I could really care less about 'labeling' who is 'bad' or who is 'good', but you can continue to live in your own fantasy world if you like.

Period.

I know I'm not alone when I say that living in Obamanation is just frakin wonderful! This virtual eutopia of political correctness creating higher health-care premiums and copays, fears of more Islamic jihadist scum attacks, higher unemployment, black panthers unimpeded at the polls threatening death, unethical/illegal conduct by democrat legislators, etc.. just makes me want to vomit! Please vote this democrat bunch out before the damage cannot be undone!

Pietro - you are deflecting. It is congress that approves the appropriations. they don't go to the president for overspending. The president approves the bills but more often than not, overspending occurs.

I guess you lost that in your attempt to slam Bush. That is what you are doing, isn't it? I mean you totally overlook what Obama is doing but revert back to home, because home feels good. Slamming Bush is what all progressives/liberals/democrats have been doing now for over 8 years. Now that you have that habit engrained into your brain... it is naturally what works for you...

You see.... Bush isn't president any longer... when you use Bush in your argument, after 20 months of Obama... it's like me blaming Clinton for not capturing Osama. Obama has had plenty of time to change the course of our economy... I didn't say fix it, I said change the course of it. He has failed miserably to stop the bleeding. Blame Bush all you want... but you are still missing the point and refuse to allow anyone to point out the failures of your president master.

OK Big Bear, you're perfectly fine with huge, anonymous donations that may or may not be from foreign sources being used to buy elections. Just thought I'd clarify that. The corruption of our system of government is OK with you as long as Conservatives win.

Thanks for stating your belief in a system in which the ordinary American inherently has virtually no voice because money rules.

Brianb:

Who in the Democrat controlled Congress put the gun to the head of George W. Bush and demanded he sign anything related to spending from 2006- 2008.

If we can just find those varmints we can get to the bottom of who the Big Spenders are.

The Democrats canno tbe trusted with a pen. They just sign everything. Especially if it is an appropriation bill.

So this brings me to this point. Why are the Republicans getting paid a salary if they never introduce legislation or vote yes legislation?

Exactly what purpose do they serve?

Brianb are you inferring that the only money that gets spent in Washington is at the behest of Barack Obama or the Democrat controlled Congress.

Pietro - you are deflecting. It is congress that approves the appropriations. they don't go to the president for overspending. The president approves the bills but more often than not, overspending occurs.

Brianb - Deflecting?

Really?

Look - the bottom line is that if the PRESIDENT did not want to spend that money, he would just VETO the bill. The fact of the matter is that it does NOT MATTER what the 'appropriation' is - or who does it - but what matters is that money is NOT being spent unless the PRESIDENT approves it.

And President Bush approved a LOT of spending.

Case in point - there is $1.5 Million dollars that was collected for the Haiti earthquake. This money was put in an appropriations bill that has been passed by the House. There is a hold on this bill by Sen. Tom Coburn (Republican). That money is sitting - waiting - until the PRESIDENT signs the bill.

Using your logic, if a Democratic Congress appropriates the money, then it is overspending. That is not true. The money CANNOT be spent UNTIL there is PRESIDENTAL signature. THEN - and only then - is the spending 'active'.

I see you have a hard time accepting that President Bush COULD have said 'NO' to the Congress and sent the spending bills back. He did not do that.

As far as your accusation of me using 'Bush as my argument', I have no choice. President Bush set HISTORICAL PRECEDENT in his 8 years, as did President Reagan, President George HW Bush, and President Clinton, and President Carter, and so on. When we are researching (as you should be doing) we use what a predecessor does as PRECEDENT to gauge the direction of the country and who is driving it.

I am sorry that your precious President Bush was deficient when it comes to deficient spending, amongst other things. You want to blame Congress, and that's fine.

The facts are facts, no matter how much you want to spin it.

There's no denying a correlation between FOX Political Organization (hardly "news" let alone "fair and balanced") that was launched in the 1990s and the extreme polarization that started at that time--And then took off at full speed during Bush/Cheney, in particular the invasion of Iraq based on lies.

But FOX, including the ever evangelical Glenn Beck, and Hate radio (Limbaugh, Savage) are also symptoms of the Jerry Springer/Reality TV trend. Add that to the anti-intellectualism movement among social conservatives (with a literal belief in the Bible) and you have no Rule of Reason remaining. Folks no longer know research methodology, starting with not know what a credible source is, and this includes college graduates. Truly, this is a sad commentary on our society, and why we as a nation continue to fall behind other countries in the world.

Back to the topic at hand, from the article: "Republicans probably wish Election Day was today, because they're unsure if some of their candidates -- Joe Miller (whose security guards detained an Alaska reporter), Ken Buck (who compared homosexuality with alcoholism on "Meet the Press"), Rand Paul (who refused to shake opponent Jack Conway's hand after Conway question his religion), and Florida House candidate Allen West (who NBC's Lisa Myers reported has ties to an outlaw motorcycle gang, which West denies) -- can survive another two weeks."

Here is another problem--that of sweeping the skeletons under the rug in hopes that the American people will not find out--at least not until it is too late. What kind of twisted concept is this? The far-right has gone so far as to take us all off a cliff.

Pietro and Shiela - I admit that Bush did too much spending. That wasn't my point. Now that I've admitted that I agree he wasn't a conservative... he wasn't fiscally responsible... now lets cut through to the chase.

Obama.

What has Obama done to curb the spending? What has he done to take control of our debt? Uh... what was that? Did I hear the word... nothing? Ummm.. maybe I'm a bit premature. Let me digress.

Why do democrats always say it's OK for Obama to spend like he doesn't know the meaning of money? I know.. because they say Bush did it. Does that make it right? Does it give you justification for our country to fall into the abyss because someone else did it? What leadership potential is that for Obama? He blames Bush for everything under the sun, but yet he does the exact same thing only worse.

See, this is the set-up. If Obama is this great leader, how come he's not leading? How come he is making matters worse? Why is he given a pass by democrats to approve the spending of trillions of dollars but, given the same time frame, Bush didn't approve but a fraction of Obama expenditures.

Answer that with credibility and I might listen.

@Nancy-2487006: Way to go! You've just enumerated the most piss-poor reasons in existence to vote someone into office.

Nancy

Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA): “The American people are about to give Republicans a second chance that we know we don’t deserve, that we haven’t earned. … The American people have every right, and every reason, to blame a Republican president and a Republican Congress for the mess that confronted the Obama administration on January 20, 2009 — let us be honest about this.”

Thanks ED – well said.

Pietro and Shiela - I admit that Bush did too much spending. That wasn't my point. Now that I've admitted that I agree he wasn't a conservative... he wasn't fiscally responsible... now lets cut through to the chase.

Brianb - I cannot speak for Sheila, but I can say this - the snippet I posted above speaks VOLUMES. You have just admitted that President Bush was NOT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE.

Fair enough.

When a person is NOT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE, then there is an OBVIOUS problem with finances, is there not? That means our financial house is NOT in order. We have deficits. we have unfunded mandates. We have unfunded wars. We have crumbling infrastructure. We have a financial system that WAS on the verge of collapse.

What has Obama done to curb the spending? What has he done to take control of our debt? Uh... what was that? Did I hear the word... nothing? Ummm.. maybe I'm a bit premature. Let me digress.

Brianb, you have JUST admitted that we have had a fiscally irresponsible President. I will add that he was that for 8 years he was President. So tell me - how do you expect EIGHT years of fiscal irresponsibility, which you have just admitted - to be corrected in 20 months?

I will assume that you are married or have a girlfriend. Let's suppose that you gave your mortgage money to your significant other to take care of. You assumed that she would. However, you got notice that the bank was going to foreclose on your house for non-payment of your mortgage.

You paid the mortgage, you would think. Why are they sending me this?

Upon querying your significant other, you found out that she was using that money to buy shoes. Lots of them. A whole closet full.

You would have a problem, would you not?

Not only would you have to come up with the money you gave your significant other to pay your mortgage that she blew on shoes, but you would have to pay penalties & interest on top of that, would you not?

Would you 'stop spending' at this point? How could you? You still have to live. You still have to pat your mortgage. you still have to feed and clothe your significant other that got you into that mess.

So what would you do?

The answer is this: You and your significant other would have to work hard to make up the DEFICIT.

This is my point.

President Obama - correctly - added the 'off-budget' items (the wars, the Medicare Part D) to the budget - on book - so that we would have a TRUE picture of our financial situation. Seems the me that President Obama is controlling the debt because he IDENTIFIED debt that was 'off the books' and added it back to where it belongs.

Seems to me that was the RESPONSIBLE thing to do.

And about 'curbing spending' - how can the President 'curb spending' when spending is NECESSARY for the country to operate? Now, you have just ADMITTED that President Bush was fiscally irresponsible; does that mean that the spending that WAS done under President Bush was all of a sudden 'responsible'?

Why do democrats always say it's OK for Obama to spend like he doesn't know the meaning of money? I know.. because they say Bush did it. Does that make it right? Does it give you justification for our country to fall into the abyss because someone else did it? What leadership potential is that for Obama? He blames Bush for everything under the sun, but yet he does the exact same thing only worse.

The fact of the matter is that President Obama does not have a choice to STOP spending, even if he wanted to. If he did 'stop spending', America would be ripping itself apart right now. If 8 years of money went where it was SUPPOSED to go, then we would not have such deep deficits, would we? We would not need $1.2 TRILLION to repair our infrastructure. We would not have to retroactively FUND Medicare Part D. We would not be spending $15 BILLION a MONTH (for ten years) on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Its funny we can find the money to fund 2 wars at $15 BILLION a MONTH for 10 years but we cannot find any money to repair our infrastructure. Go Figure.

This is why President Bush gets the blame. It is because he created the problem. We are ALREADY at the abyss and the situation is getting worse!

See, this is the set-up. If Obama is this great leader, how come he's not leading? How come he is making matters worse? Why is he given a pass by democrats to approve the spending of trillions of dollars but, given the same time frame, Bush didn't approve but a fraction of Obama expenditures.

Brianb, like any situation that has been neglected, it is ALWAYS going to get worse before it starts getting better. Once the 'accounting tricks' and 'pitfalls' have been found, policies can be crafted to fix the problem, but you have to KNOW what the PROBLEM IS before you can FIX IT.

As far as giving Democrats a pass to 'spend', you can thank your incompetent GOP leadership for that. Yes - the spending we are seeing now is on President Obama - no one else. Because of the GOP's ineptness, they have done NOTHING for the Republicans and Conservatives out there. Literally. All they ahve done is yell 'NO' and obstruct legislation that people need.

• Why is it that there are 420 bills in the Senate on 'hold' and who is holding them?
• Why is it that Senators like Jim Bunning (R-KY) were holding up Unemployment Benefits to those who desperately need them?
• Why is it that Republicans are filibustering bills that end tax credits to companies that outsource AMERICAN jobs?
• Why are you not outraged at the incompetence of the GOP leadership that could not even protect your from the Heath care Law during the debate?

Brianb, I think that you have bigger problems with your GOP leadership, which SUCKS, IMHO. It seems to me that your GOP leadership has abdicated its responsibility to provide YOU a VOICE in the governing process.

And yet you CONTINUE to support their positions. Why is that?

Brianb, thisis just a snippet of what we are dealing with. We need to pull together as a COUNTRY with ALL AMERICANS pulling for and looking out for one another.

That's what's important right now.

Just want to leave a message to those who think that the Tea party and Republicans are going to fix what ails you. My guess is that the repubs will take the House. Not the Senate. The House will start to investigate whatever they can. They not be successful in rescinding any laws re: healthcare or financial regulations. The Tea Party will be shown for what it is, mainly ignorant people with a skewed version of the constitution. When they find that the things that have been done are constitutional, they will want to overturn them. Then they will read the constitution.......and find that they can't overturn them as easily as they thought. Then the fun begins. Just leave California alone, let us elect Brown and Boxer, people who have read the constitution, we will be ahead of the game and bring America back from the brink.

David, I could not resist your last sentance. Leave California alone, let us elect Brown and Boxer. Seems to me California is a microcasm of what ails the Federal government. Excessive social programs and deficit spending that has the once great state of California suffering from the most massive budget deficit in US history. As California goes, so does the rest of the Country. I guess that is why for the first time in history California will show a net loss of population as entrepreneurs and skilled workers depart looking for a better future in other parts of the country.

...Pietro...........Actually, Congress can make laws even though the president objects, with a 2/3rds vote in both chambers, Congress can override the president and create a law ( see section 7, subparagraph 2 of the Constitution)........otherwise, I am on your side. After 14 straight years of creating the circumstances that brought about this great economic crisis, and 4 years of doing nothing but obstructing, republicans have done nothing whatsoever to deserve control of Congress. And have offered no solutions at all except steady ahead on the same course.

Ellis Baumgarner - you are correct, sir, and I did not include that in my post. Thank you for supporting my premise and argument.

I hope that the many people here saying that people will be voting republican and dont care about anything else realize the hypocrisy in that statement.

I know there are/will be exceptions, but many of you - by your own statements, are die-hard left wing liberals. I would be willing to bet that many of you would NEVER vote republican, regardless of anything.

For every knock that people are throwing at the right, the same can be said for the left. People are so caught up in their partizan BS - we end up with canidates who's only stance is "im not THEM" and that seems to be ok.

The parties are moving further and further from the center - the left moving further left, the right moving further right. We either need a third party that is moderate and centrist - or - we simply need to vote for whoever isnt the majority if you want anything meaningful to get done in this country.

I personally am an idependant - Due to the fact that neither party actually represents me, and the fact that the Democrats from NE OH are crawling out of the woodwork with corruption charges, and the republicans answered my questions that the Dems wouldnt - ill be voting republican across the board to bring some balance back.

Unless the parties start to migrate back to the center - and neither one of them are anywhere NEAR the center, i am just going to be voting for whoever isnt the majority - and MAYBE we can actually get parties/canidates that represent the people, and the the minority fringes that live on the left and right.

...Pietro.....in post #1.51, you said, "Congress, cannot on it's own make laws"

Keep up the good fight though, republicans are in for a surprise. We need people like you who are willing to call them out on twisting and spinning the facts. Democrats in general try to avoid confrontation, but when you are dealing with a bully, you have to speak a language they understand, words will not get their attention as much as a punch in the mouth sometimes

Joe in Albany-1902257

Here's the Hillaryous part: There is now a question about whether a finding that the mandate is unconstitutional would invalidate the entire law. Why? Because the Dumb morons that drafted the bill considered, and then rejected including a "severability" clause in the bill. A "severability" clause says that, if any individual part of a law is found to be invalid, the other parts remain valid and in force. As any law school student can tell you, a "severability" clause is a basic, standard part of any contract or law

Wrong again, Joe

The hilarious part is that the moronic lawyers in the right wing circus make sh!t up as they go along. They like to confuse people like you, who btw, know very little about the Constitution or what is even in the Constitution.

Joe, I heard one of the lawyers on that case on NPR one afternoon last week. Her contention was that the sever ability clause was DELIBERATELY left out. The consensus was that if the mandate was stricken, the entire bill would have to collapse, as it would be too monumentally expensive without forced insurance on the healthy.

And, no, you cannot make this stuff up.

If they can invalidate HCR in one fell swoop that's cause a-plenty for drunken revelry.

I may have to start a bonfire and dance naked about it in such an event.

E.D., much as I love and admire you, please tell me when and where.

I have someplace else where I have to be. . .

I assure you, it will likely be in a Texas pasture somewhere in the company of some very confused and disturbed bovines. Unless you've plans to drive all the way out to the hill country, I'd say your virgin eyes shall remain safe. :3

To Bev, No Jo & E D,

Can you please show me where the word "CHARITY" is written in the Constitution!!

Sure. Bend over and get a hand mirror, bro.

Typical answer from a Demy that cannot deliver.

Pfft, whatevs. XD

Yeppers, there it is........"The Eye Roll" WHATEVS!!

Give me a F'N break.

Another "CHARITY CASE" looking for a hand out!!

Please explain what the "moronic right wing lawyers" made up? They presented their view and the judge found that view to be appropriate, as did the judge in either Virginia or West Virginia where the other lawsuit was filed.

@xxFEDUPxx: Yes. I'm such a charity case. You nailed it. I suck at the teats of Lady Liberty like so much befouled and demonically-twisted Romulus and Remus.

In my off-days (and I assure you, what with being unemployed, a hobo, Harry Reid's clone-son and addicted to totally awesome sweet Alabama liquid snake I have PLENTY of off-days) I take my leisurely time banging ur mom to tapes of Nancy Pelosi in her more dramatic moments from C-SPAN.

All this I do while you're out at your white-collar job SAVIN' AMURRRRRIKA with my hand in your cookie jar.

Also: I come to your house and I kick your dog, you @!$%#ing guy just for (are you ready?) kicks every Wednesday afternoon. 8D

Beverly in Chicago,

When did you read all 2500 pages of the Obama care bill? Like any other Chicago person, probably paid someone off to read it for you:) If you know so much about the bill, then why are people having to have insurance? Isn't this the land of choice, and if I chose not to purchase health care, I have that right? But yet, our government can dictate that you purchase health care with this law, and if you don't, you can be fined? Wow that is not communism or socialism is it. When did it become the government's job to tell us what to do and purchase?

Why in the Health care law is there a portion that now makes us have to report any gold that we purchased. A 7 page form that has to be filled out if someone purchases gold. Is that really the government's business? How much gold I purchase should be my business, not the governments, or is this another attempt for the government to control our ways and means to success.

Do I believe that there should have been some regulations for health care. Yes I do, but to the extent of 1 trillion dollars or more. More could have been done for less. But when you don't have the right to speak anymore, then you will realize that you have lost your identity and freedoms.

Who cares what some bimbo reporter in Ireland thinks about our politics? We sure don't print articles about theirs. Last I looked the Irish economy was up to it's arse in alligators anyway, we don't really need advice from them.

Their press sounds just as left wing as ours.

To XD:

I love it!! You have just proven my point........You are not able to answer a simple question and all hell breaks loose, and sadly enough you have to bring someones Mom into it. How old are you?

So, to answer the question for you, the word "CHARITY" does not appear in The Constitution.

Thank You

@xxFEDUPxx: I think it's cute that you arbitrarily declare yourself "OMG WINNAR OF TEH INTARWEBZ" because you lack the ability to actually read any of my posts.

You came to this thread clearly not having bothered to consider anything I've said early on or on other discussion threads. It seems you imagined that I was agreeing with Bev's comment, which is strange given I was advocating a celebration in the event HCR is completely and wholly repealed!

Elsewhere on this article I bemoan that we don't have conservatives like William F. Buckley and repeatedly attack numerous posters for parroting leftist talking points, yet you went ahead and decried me as a Democrat - a party which I've never belonged to and never registered as a member of.

Your first post demonstrated to me that your reading comprehension and capacity for critical thought was, at best, sorely lacking. I could've opted to attempt to disuade you and validate myself with any number of things: by listing precisely what I do for a living, as an example, or recording in great detail my personal voting record. I realized, however, that doing so would only lend you credence when you are so very clearly not deserving of any. Additionally, I had no real desire to pontificate about my accomplishments in life for the sake of attempting to sway the opinion of someone who, by all rights, appears to have the collective intelligence of a bag of soda cans, hence the absurd and obscene retort.

You are beneath me. You are as nothing. I promise you this - I will not bother to respond to your posts in the future. I count myself as someone who leans right more often than not - if you consider yourself a conservative, then you shame me for being one.

..Even as a constitutional scholar who supports universal health care, I do believe this particular bill will be shot down because of the mandate to support a particular private industry, with exceptions that apply to some, and not others. If the public option had been left in I believe the law would have been constitutional.............This particular healthcare bill lacks the required uniformity such as Social Security that applies equally to everyone..............Laws which are not uniform in nature, and make exceptions usually will not fly

Shame On You For Posting!!

Go ahead, buy all the gold. You might realize that in an effort to sabotage the country using tax evasion, you sabotaged yourself. I want to see your faces when you try to sell.

I am hoping you at least didn't get conned while Beck got richer. The scammers has made millions selling so called gold.

By all means buy gold. What could go wrong with a commodity that has a sales pitch "Buy now, prices have never been higher!"

I prefer to invest in pig iron. ;p

...Joe.........correct.....If they did in fact fail to add the 'severability' clause, which I do not know, the entire bill could be in jeopardy...we will see.........I think it needs to be written over anyway and include the public option and repeal of exemption from anti-trust laws for insurance companies

Happy birthday, Fiesty, and mNy, mNy more happy, healthy ones in the years to come!

Happy birthday Feisty!

Yet I see Mark's birthday wishes collapsed. Doesn't that just say it all about the folks who collapse comments?

Happy Birthday Red!!

Happy Birthday, Feisty Redhead! Have a great day.

Unbelievable isn't it Steeler Fan?

Thanks to all for the warm & wonderful Birthday Wishes... stick around there's gonna be cake right after this post is collapsed! lmao...

Happy birthday Feisty.

Feisty: Guess that immunity theory just dropped like a rock.

Oh, cool! Happy birthday, Feisty. :D

Also: who collapsed the MSNBC dude's comment? Christ, what butt-hurt lulz is this?

(to the tune of "Happy Birthday to You")

Hippos, birdies, two ewes.

Hippos, birdies, two ewes.

Hippos, birrrrr dieeeees, dear ewe -oooos

Hippos, birdies two ewes!

(clap clap clap colapse colapse...)

What a joke, happy birthday to a fellow poster is now off limits. Shows you how repugnant and impotent some people are.

FR...Happy Birthday my friend! Here's to many, many more!! :-)

Happy Birthday Feisty! Here's hoping that your special day is wonderful and that the coming year is to your liking.

To those of you who would collapse birth greetings: GROW UP!!!!!!

LOVE it DBO! Never heard that version before... lol! Did you ever manage to hook up with 'rock girl'?

Thanks Grimey! We still have to share a couple of margaritas & some Chi-town pizza one of these days! ;0)

Thanks Julie... the best present I could get would be to hold control of Congress on the 3rd! ;0) That's my wish for when I blow out the candles...

A very, very Happy Birthday, Feisty, and I'll second Julie, Dayton's admonishment to those whose only contribution to the debate today is to collapse birthday wishes - kind of tells you everything you need to know about their "party", doesn't it?

Well, as long as just the posts get collapsed and not the cake..... :)

A Very Happy Birthday to you Feisty, I hope that your day glows as greatly as your wit!

I somehow foresee some 'flaggers' getting a severe reprimand, if not banned for their game playing here!

Happy Birthday Feisty!! Hope you have many more.

It proves the only reason their here is to spread their hate for anything Democratic. Enough said.

Happy birthday Feisty,I hope you have many more happy years.

I try to find where your group post just to read. Your arguments are usually honest and well informed. You guys never let me down and it's easy to pick out the trolls.

Feisty - 29 again?

Not to be denied the thrill of getting a post collapsed for no particular reasion: Happy Birthday to Feisty Redhead.

Thanks to all of you for taking the time & 'risk' of wishing me a Happy Birthday!

It's much appreciated... now let's have some cake shall we?

PS: Thanks Fletch... all we have to do is toss out the bait and the trolls do the rest! ;0)

Good Morning Bev,

Thanks for posting this, it was painful to watch her. Have a wonderful day.

You're welcome Gingerbread Mamma

It was painful just watching her give the standard GOPTP nonsensical ramblings (talking points) but not being able to have a grasp on on tax cuts.

I was glad to see Wallace call her out. I can't believe Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, wanted to blame the Preside for the polarization in this country. Especially after the President has reached over and over to the Party of "NOPE"

Considering Fiornia ran HP in the ground, we know now why she couldn't answer. She did make it clear, though she started out as a secretary.

Let me apologize for typing errors. it is not my forte. I'll keep trying to perfect it.

Dangerfield, it was taken by someone with one of those shovel ready jobs Obama's stimulus provided.

The poll cited by the AFL-CIO is an internal poll conducted by Washington firm BPN and the Sestak campaign, released last Wednesday.

Like virtually all internal campaign polls, it reveals more favorable results for its candidate than does independent polling.

Analyst and handicapper Nate Silver at 538 considers all poll results in his race predictions, but uses a weighting system that heavily favors independent polling over so-called "internal" polls.

Take this result with a grain of salt, dangerfield.

Mixed Bag, have you convinced you that your right yet? Well keep trying you've got 2 more weeks to convince yourself that your right.

Mo: You're barking up the wrong tree, dude.

John B, Des Moines, IA

candidates who hold unpopular positions are being coached to keep silent on those positions and only speak in generalities

Thanks for reiterating what everyone knows; including the righties who collapse posts here.

That these right wing candidates hide from the truth gives even more validity to un-educating their low information voters.

Since they have anti-government phobia what will they do when the shills continue off -sourcing of jobs and elimanation of programs brings America to her knees and lowering the minimum wage? Is 40 cents gonna be enough? LoL thanks what factory workers off shore get.

Blotting out the truth is what the GOPTP does very well.

Republicans have made the deficit a central campaign issue; well guess what? The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) that pegged the deficit at about $125 billion below last year's record for the year ended Sept. 30
.
http://www.hillpundit.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/124491-federal-budget-deficit-for-2010-nearly-hits-13-trillion

The final figure equals 8.9% of the nation's economy, DOWN from 10% last year. The Deficit Got Smaller from last year's record

Republicans in the House voted 11 times to continue rewarding corporations that create jobs and profits overseas – a policy that costs taxpayers billions of dollars every year.

http://www.dailykos.com/

The GOPTP NEEDS to come clean with the people

You liberals are so dumb and dishonest. a dangerous combination. There is not one shred of truth to your post. The deficit is most certainly not going down, it is skyrocketing. The American people are fed up with the LIBERAL LIES and you will see what I'm talking about next month!

Really gensch? We supported what we said with links that anyone is free to check. You made an accusation that we're lying. Care to prove any of that?

What is it with the "we" in your response John? Are you and Beverly in some sort of partnership or what?

Every time I come on to first read, I get a healthy dose of the opinions saying the exact same things by the same 6-8 posters over and over again. What it this, some sort of operation? You guys getting paid for these regular and recursive comments?

I said what I meant and provided back up. I've never met Bev, but her outlook is consistent in her posts and presumably she's capable of saying what she thinks. gensch responded "you Liberals." Thus "we."

Geez, paranoid much, TI?

Jody, you state that the TPers will have to govern and not say NO to everything. Why would you or I expect the TPers to do any better than the Republicants. I doubt that absolutely ANYTHING will get done as far as governing by either the Repubs or the TPers. You know the saying...all hat....

I have not heard one Republican over the past two years say anything of substance. Not one. They will not answer any question, only stick to their Luntz talking points. I truly believe that Republicans only take office to have something to do besides stay home. They take office to show how important they are, to take bribes for their votes, and to line their pockets. Not saying Dems don't do the same, but at least they are willing to look to the future and try to make this a better country.

This unwavering thought of "exceptionalism" that the Repubs are now using as a talking point (last week's was "uncertainty") is not even wishful thinking. We are an exceptional people, but we are selling America to the highest bidder, we are not keeping up in any way shape or form, and we still want to toot our own horn because it makes us feel better....but exceptionalism is just a word....there has to be something behind it. That's the sad part of all the sloganeering and talking points, they actually mean nothing without the substance to go with them. At least the Democrats are willing to stake their jobs on trying to accomplish something which cannot be said of Boehner, McConnell, or any of the corporate mouthpieces, ie. TPers.

Cathy, as proud as I am to be an American, it's with increasing sadness that I watch what's going on and think of England in its declining years. DECADES after the the peak of the English empire Britains proudly proclaimed "the sun never sets on the English empire." As a nation we do the same thing every time we beat ouf chests about American Exceptionalism while doing things that destroy our future. Every time we pump up the upper class at the expense of everyone else. Every time we short change education. Every time we let politics trump science and sense. Every time we allow our democracy to be bought and sold. Every time we treat our middle class as nothing but an overpriced labor pool that needs to be beaten down.

The sad part is, just as with England those who are the most proud of American Exceptionalism are the Conservatives who most rapidly sow our demise.

How would AA voters in Florida feel about that?

Not going to happen...shouldn't happen.

Florida Democrats will learn to live with Senator Rubio instead.

As a former Floridian and a registered Democrat I would say put country ahead of party, and have Meeks step down.

GOP Rubio and the Tea Party are nothing more than radical facist.

Well, Farley, I agree with most of what you said except I don't think the bi-sexuals situation is as cut and dried as you make it sound, it is more complicated than that and I don't believe it has anything to do with being fashionable. Good to see you recognize that most gays are born that way.

Some people are trisexual, they will try anything!

CU,

Why is it any of your business or concern who has sex with who?

Nash, don't feed the trolls!

Great point Nashville. Why DOES our so-called "Liberal Press" run with ridiculous and proven lies while ignoring legitimate stories.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-weiler/liberal-media-again-serve_b_485829.html

http://mediamatters.org/columns/201002190040

Keep asking those tough questions Nash...

As of today not a single member from the other side of the aisle has...

PS: Happy Anniversary!

Nash, it is because that particular Alinskyesque diversionary tactic has no substance, no matter how hard the DNC try to push it.

There is no 'there' there.

Take some comfort in the fact that this same media ignored the source of the bulk of Obama's funding.

The electorate cannot be diverted from the fact of Obama's abject failure in an office he was not, and is not, qualified to hold. Since he is not on the ballot, the electorate is left with the "choice" to remove from office the party that enabled him to triple the debt with no corresponding economic improvement, and impose HCR over the vociferous objections of the electorate.

These are only two of the problems. There is the failure of charming the Iranians and North Koreans into abandoning their nuclear aspirations, which are closer than ever to being achieved. There is is completely ridiculous, totally failed, Afghanistan war policy, which is based solely on retaining support from his party. His inept energy policy.

Lately, there is his campaign strategy. Telling people they are too dumb to appreciate how wonderful he is is bad enough, but over the weekend he said something along the lines of, well he has the science and technology on his side, but people are too fearful, and that prevents them from thinking rationally. Say what?

You are still among his chief cheerleaders, which means that he has convinced you that he has succeeded wildly, despite the fact that, well, he hasn't. What is hAppening is that the majority of those who supported him while drunk on hope, change, and yes we can have woken up with a truly bad hangover.

And they know who is to blame.

Good morning Nashville_fan

You raise very pertinent points we all should concern ourselves with rather than non factual evidence and ridiculous innuendoes of the MSM.

When will the media stop feigning "concern" about the President's "ineffective message" and go out and FIND THE EVIDENCE of what is going on?

Nash, I think it may be coming to realization

New Hampshire Chamber Leaves U.S. Chamber, Says It Can’t Find ‘One Positive Thing To Say’

“We didn’t like the fact that the U.S. Chamber was supporting particular candidates,” Mayotte said. “We don’t think it’s good business practice to do so.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/17/local-chamber-vs-national-chamber/

That Glenn Beck was encouraging his audience to raise money for the Chamber of Commerce. Glenn certainly knows cannibalism very well.

Did you notice that sensational story in the right leaning Washington Post the President took money from foreigners and didn't have safe guards for credit cards?

All of which is not true. That is an example of corporations paying the media to fill spaces for their benefit.

Thanks Feisty . . . you are amazing with remembering dates!

Oh yeah . . .

HAPPY BIRTHDAY! :o)

Please do not blame the lack of civility in our society on the Tea Party. That lack of civility began years ago. Its only worsened, and you can't blame it on any political party. The only people it can be blamed on are the people who have raised children (now young adults) to be so mean and hateful. You see it everyday, people have no manners and no respect for anything anymore. As a society we care only about ourselves and nothing more. At the mall people are just as likely to slam the door in you face as hold it open for you. No one says please or thank you anymore. I think some of the people "who want our country back" want those days back where people could at least display some manners in public.

no joe:

As always, you want to talk about President Obama, and I want to talk about solutions to problems.

Perhaps it is you who is obsessed with the President.

Anonymous entities trying to buy our elections and our government is the issue at hand, no matter how badly you wish it was not.

Perhaps instead of focusing so much energy on terrorizing law abiding Muslims seeking to build a place of worship, you should turn your watchful gaze to who is buying the keys to our "representative government", where the "corporate people" have been awarded "free speech" . . . yet they are willing to pay millions for it. . . thinking people wonder why.

Great post Nash, no one can quite cut to the chase as you can. You say it so well.

There was a time when we looked to the media for the facts, now the lies and erroneous statements are presented as such. We become so emotional about the issues, the media just plays us and most of us fall for it. Sad, for us that care about the nation and not just winning.

You're welcome Nash... how can I EVER forget that you chose to marry the love of your life on this particular day! ;0)

Nashville-Fan:

Cogent. On point. To the point.

I want to scream every time some talking head on cable news (David Gregory, Joe Scarborough, Chuck Todd, et al) bad mouth the President about not getting his message out. Then they spend 15 minutes talking about non-sense and not one second talking about how successful the bank bailout or auto rescue has worked out to the benefit of the American people.

They would prefer to wallow in the muck and mire of what Christine O’Donnell did or said that was stupid or how the “angry” voters are flocking to the Tea Party as if that is a good thing.

Pathetic!

BTW:

co-signing Feisty Redhead, "Happy Anniversary"

Bev,
If you go back to research the 2008 election. Those accusations were made by Hillary Clinton and they were found to be true. The Obama campaign was told to return the funds. All of this information is widely available on the internet.

no joe - Hope you don't expect an intelligent answer, all the libbies here are busily engaged baking cakes for each other and singing in a circle.

They'll hear us loud and clear on Nov.2. Until then I guess they'll linger in denial.

Proggies are now just twisting in the wind waiting for the sword to fall on all Obama's "hopey changey" crap. Thanks, Nancy & Harry!!

In other words you're using something long ago and handled previously to excuse something that's NEW, happening NOW, and fantastically greater in magnitude. Anything to avoid the fact that our electoral landscape has been fundamentally changed by this legalized bribery.

The fact that Conservatives worked in coordination to corrupt the political process in a new and dangerous way. Our democracy is being subverted by massive amounts of anonymous campaign cash. Donors who provide those large amounts of cash will have no problem expecting repayment. We're witnessing the next step in changing our egalitarian society into an aristocracy of haves and have nots.

janet,

The example you present makes my point. You can't identify problems with donations if you don't know who did the donating.

Sheila:

Thanks for the kind words and well wishes!

A Tea Bagger from St. Louis was on Bill Maher Friday Night, and she didn't 'refudiate' the term,...so your poutrage seems a little manufactured,...sorry to say.

And, when Linda McMahon kicked the ref in the testicles,...did you wish that she would 'grow up', as well? Some forms of radicalism deserve the immaturity they reap, in kind. But, feel free to disregard. It is your right. The Kenyan Socialist hasn't taken that from you, yet.

Greg,

I do apologize if the word "teabagger" offends your delicate sensibilities more than our country being sold to the highest bidder, and the folks doing the selling attempting to buy this election.

If in your world, calling someone a teabagger is equivalent with calling the President a Nazi, marxist, socialist traitor, and showing up at political rallies armed, and encouraging folks to purse "second amendment remedies", well then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

This "both sides do it" narrative is contributing to the death of our democracy Greg.

One side lies about every policy proposal and refuses to govern in good faith.

One sides policies have been proven not to work.

One side is in bed with the corporate people and puts their needs ahead of the countries.

So really, it is not about manners Greg. It is about good government, truth in advertising, and learing from the mistakes of the past, not turning them into glib talking points and retrying them every few years.

I'm all for civility, but if that doesn't work, I'm for what ever works.

Pretty please be honest and play fair just hasn't been effective thus far.

There are a number of First Read regulars who choose not to use the obscene epithet to describe those with whom they disagree.

I find it a useful distinction...and a revealing insight into the character of the individuals posting here.

Helps to sort people out.

Greg-2523410

Every time I read the word "Teabagger" in your post, I am tempted to disregard the substance of your opinion. Name-calling and negativity is just as prevalent on the left as it is on the right. And as an independant, It makes me sick.

Greg, it was you people who labeled yourselves "Tea Baggers."

This may sound condescending, but I feel inclined to say: "Grow UP!"

How about you learning something?

Sounds to me like your another one of those conservatives trying to claim your an independent (NOT). But I don't blame you for that, no one wants to claim their a teabagging republican. Besides it was you and your friends who coined teabaggers. (REMEMBER)

...@!$%# a bunch of that, MB. :p

Clara

Actually she did complain about the reference to the Term "Teabagger", but what is funny the term did originate from the group itself and didn't become an issue until i was brought to their attention that it had a negative sexual reference and by now we all know what that is.

But what was more interesting about the self proclaimed tea party supporter on that show is how she started her argument using the CBO stats as her references but when John Legend and Bill Maher used CBO stats they were disputable!

She would spout off things like we spent more on the Stimulus than the Iraq war when confronted with the actual dollar figures she said they were disputable but her figures are irrefutable? If the nonpartisan CBO figures are good enough to use when they present bad news for the administration, why when they present positive news are their facts not credible?

That makes the Tea party arguement suspect to me. When confronted with items that a sensible reasonable person would have to say yes it did some good. The lame arguement about the Government choosing which companies should suceed and which should fail seems very Anti American when the choice is between American companies failing and foriegn companies dominating one complete sector of our business.

Where's the flag waving and support our national pride and American exceptionalism in these cases? Your arguements against what Government has done seems to me like a red herring because of who's running the Government.

Where's the Compassionate Christians when their brother has need would you pefer they starve or go to breadlines, live under bridges and old vehicles, than receive unemployment compensation provided by our government?

I am at a loss for where we are socially in the wealthiest nation on earth. Some Americam exceptionalism.

Mixed Bag, I have nothing at all to add to your concise statement.

It is fact, folks. Think about it, if you want to be taken seriously.

Mixed Bag:

I find it a useful distinction...and a revealing insight into the character of the individuals posting here.

Helps to sort people out.

Sure does help sort out the wheat from the chaff. Not much wheat to speak of either.

I dunno, Joe. I think a well-placed obscenity or two can be useful in an argument depending on intent and context. It can be a powerful tool in the correct hands (or is that mouth...?).

Greg..... to thee I say, Physician heal thyself. If you are truly the independent you claim, you wouldn't be on here anyway as you would't want your choices tainted.

Bu then again, I am inclined to look at Independents as prima donnas who think they are above the fray. (with apologies to my friend IR.....who I know is not afraid to voice his independent opinion)

E.D., it depends on both the argument, and the participants. Sparingly used, to denote extreme emotion, it may well have an impact, if only to underscore the depth of the user's commitment or rejection, of an argument.

It is used here the way fifth graders use name calling-the typewritten form of sticking ones tongue out.

In other words, by their juvenile language shall we know them. ..

Truth. In no way do I disagree with your clarified assertions.

I do not call Teabaggers name out of hate, I do it out of sport.

One gains nothing from debating a fool.

Debating a Teabagger or Fundametalist is like teaching a pig to sing, it frustrates you and annoys the Pig.

Sorry that words offend you so badly. Maybe one of those tri-corner hats might fit you afterall???

Birdman2010: From the context of your posts, it sounds like attempting to debate you would be putting the hog on stage, as well.

Likewise Dragon if your on the stage we know it is the State Fair.

I don't mind listening to a different opinion that can be supported without using radical Blogs or other extreme biased resources.

If you could have an intelligent conversation with a "Tea Bagger", then I'd be glad to recognize their "mental acuity".

Then maybe, Birdman, you should consider making posts that don't immediately paint your opposition in such drastic and dire colors. Perhaps you should exercise a bit more civility and calm, lest you be taken for a parrot.

Dragon your posts are so enlightening to us all. In fact they have a Palin babble quality about them.

I said I do not mine listening to a different opinion. BUT please let me paint me as I am. I hate the teabitches and everything they stand for.

Sure, sure, Birdman. Keep proving my earlier point about you - way to demonstrate the barest glimmer of human intellect I thought I saw in you was, perhaps, swamp gas reflecting off a weather balloon. <3

The left claim that Tea Party members first called themselves "Teabaggers" is, simply stated, not true.

The Tea Party movement used the term "Tea Bag" as a reference to sending a tea bag to congressional members. They, however, did not ever refer to themselves in this manner and in fact did not actually use the term "teabagger" and certainly never to describe themselves. At least not in the beginning. One of the first uses of the pejorative "teabagger" was first made, believe it or not, by President Obama himself when he made a reference in an interview to "teabaggers." After this Rachel Maddow introduced the term to a more widespread audience via an episode she called "Stop the Insani-Tea." Immediately after that Keith Olbermann used the term in a special episode of his show along with some other colorful references that I probably would be banned from Newsvine for using.

Since then it has been used extensively by the left media as a derogatory term to describe tea party members.

Incidentally, the Tea Party movement idea was born out an on-air rant from CNBC market analyst Rick Santelli while he was doing a live report from the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade, asking whether the electorate liked the idea of bailing out the irresponsible buyers who had purchased houses they could not afford by using the tax money (a.k.a. "Stimulus") of those who had made sure they could afford the home they owned. Rick suggested having a "Chicago tea party in July" to demonstrate how dissatisfied everyone was with the idea of using tax payer money to reward bad behavior.

Good day.

I may be naive, but weren't they called tea baggers because they wore tea bags on their hats and shirts? Suddenly it's a derogatory slur. I suppose we should never use the word 'gay' if we aren't referring to homosexuals.

I may be naive, but weren't they called tea baggers because they wore tea bags on their hats and shirts?

Yes Fletch. Rachel Maddow showed video of Tea Party protesters wearing tea bags and made several references to getting "Teabagged" by these people, using the term in a veiled sexual reference. Since then the name has stuck like glue in the left-leaning media.

On a final note. The "teabagging" term was culled by Maddow and Olbermann from an episode of "Curb Your Enthusiasm" in which Larry David and his wife were invited to a party being given at the house of a porn actor. It was during this episode that the term "teabagging" was used and several MSNBC commentators have even used this very scene to explain the term.

slimsignet-

Rick Santelli's comments about a modern-day Tea Party were made in Feb, 2009 at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.

I remember that very early on, Anderson Cooper made a giggling reference to "teabaggers" when speaking about members of the Tea Party movement:

"It's hard to talk when you're teabagging".

-Anderson Cooper, speaking to David Gergen on Anderson Cooper 360, April 2009-

I regard Cooper's comment as expert testimony.

As I remember the term bagger was pickuped during demostrations at the Whitehouse where teabags were thrown or laid at the gates of the whitehouse, I remembered an interview with a lady having tea bags hanging from her hat during that demostration where they were throwing tea bags and she used the term teabagging oblivious to the real meaning of this term it was on fox.

http://reason.com/blog/2009/10/07/dont-call-me-teabagger-whitey

http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=Mjk1YmRjNzIxNmUwMTI0ZWYxZWU4OWU2MzFiOWJmNDE=

They brought it on themselves with full knowlege of what it meant by thretening to "Teabag the White House" and holding signs saying "Teabag them before they teabag you."

The left did not make this up. Did they take it and run with it? Well...

The Curb Your Enthusiasm episode pre-dates all of that.

I know that was my first exposure to the term. After that I heard Rick Santelli's rant, then heard about the Tea Party movement, then saw references to it on MSNBC.

That's how I saw the timeline of it's inception.

Rich S.

Yes. They used the term to "tea bag" someone. My point was that they did not use the term to refer to themselves. That was started by the media.

spitting hairs perhaps but...

Dear Greg: Why would you consider it to be negativity and namecalling to use the name the "teabaggers' gave themselves? They own it. One cannot use the honorific "Tea Party" which belongs to the heroes who challenged both the might of the British Government as well as a MegaCorporation leading to the Revolutionary War. See, the "teabaggers" have it just the opposite, they want to sell the country out to the highest bidder, they are just too, well, I guess the kindest term is naive to know what they are doing.

See, the "teabaggers" have it just the opposite, they want to sell the country out to the highest bidder

Speaking as a Republican, we're actually trying to sell it to the highest EVIL bidder. Before we consider an offer we always make sure to check the buyer's "evil" quotient.

slimsignet,

Actually I saw a local group decked out with tea bags. I have never seen any explanation of the term. I am not much of a tv person and have never seen 'curb your enthusiasm'.

I started reading the protests on the vine.

Fletch. Not being a "Tea Party" member, the term doesn't really matter to me. I just think it's kind of gross to hear. Plus being a Republican I have already been called every name you can imagine by other posters so I'm used to it after several years. From what I heard on CYE The term refers to a male standing naked over another person's face while that person licks his testicles.

Pretty sick stuff. These are the kind of wonderful things that are being spouted on television during prime time when even children can hear them.

Welcome to the New America.

Bet you're sorry you asked now, Fletch...

I am really sorry I asked. Since I don't really know these people, I will avoid using the term.

Thanks for the explanation anyway.

I think I'm beginning to feel my real age. Hoping I had memory problems, but knowing better than to wish for it.

No; but I assure you - I don't want ANY Republican (tea bag or otherwise) making ANY decisions for me or the country. Their last attempt has left an indelible stain,...and they just want US to forget.

Chutzpah doesn't begin to cover it!

NO ONE in government republican OR democrat should make your decisions FOR YOU.

THAT is the overriding point.

Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the progressives want to grow government and control your lives from their lofty thrones in Washington, D.C.

Anybody NOT want to be captain of their ship, master of their fate?

Madison:

You ask: "Do you want Obama and his cronies to make all your decisions for you?"

Don't you people ever think before you start pounding on your keyboards? Look at voting results. It is Mitch McConnell (R - Hog Wallow) and his cronies who consistently put up unanimous "no" votes. His contemporary crony, John Boehner (R - Big Money) leads the "Just say no" crowd in the House.

How quickly you forget Madison, it's republicans like you that fall in line and like to be led around by the nose ring. Democrats don't just go along we actually think for ourselves. I know you guys are jealous but you made your chose to be a republican.

Madison

Demure all you want, the party in charge Makes the Decisions. And they AFFECT me. Pretend it was nuance; but my position is clear. I think for myself AND don't agree with Republicans that Corporate Welfare trumps Social Welfare, that Corporations should also have VOTING rights, that Corporate Money can be used to BUY elections and elected officials. Republicans don't even try to HIDE the fact that they are bought and sold - Boehner felt completely emboldened to pass out Lobbyist Money on the House floor. MY HOUSE FLOOR. So, no thanks, you can keep the Corporate Slave class. I'll vote Democratic until something MORE progressive comes along - and I'll have water rather than TEA ANY day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Mo, don't you realize you've managed to disprove your own point with your post? By declaring all Republicans brainless zombies you're selling a common leftist talking point - that only liberals are educated, thinkers, etc. Have you bothered getting to know any conservatives? Bothered debating them? Heaven forbid, making friends with them?

Geez, dude.

I was a young leftie when the late William F. Buckley exploded that particular liberal myth for me, E.D..

I disagreed with virtually every argument he offered...while being stunned at how effectively he made his arguments.

I would kill to see conservatives in the mold of Buckley prevalent in modern American politics. I only got a taste of the man before he soldiered off the mortal coil.

I would kill to see conservatives in the mold of Buckley prevalent in modern American politics. I only got a taste of the man before he soldiered off the mortal coil.

Buckley would be slammed by the Tea Partiers as a RINO and "not conservative enough".

Sadly, if Ronald Reagan were running for office today they'd say the same thing about him.

Not that I'm unaware of that fact, Da Noid. If only, if only...

>I would kill to see conservatives in the mold of Buckley prevalent in modern American politics. I only got a taste of the man before he soldiered off the mortal coil.

It takes a rare mind to be that smart and ignore so many contradictions of thought at the same time.

The rank and file of conservatives (by definition) are those afraid of change. Those who must be dragged kicking and screaming into the future. That isn't to say that they are always wrong, but I know which side I like to hang out with more.

Sadly, if Ronald Reagan were running for office today they'd say the same thing about him.

Actually, if Ronald Reagan were running for office today I think his biggest concern would be clawing his way out of his casket.

If only Ronnie hadn't bounced that check to Dr. Orpheus...

Being a Republican, I'm sure by now it's well known on the left that we have a direct phone line to Satan which we comically referred to as the "hot" line.

I'll just make a call to ol' Scratch and Ronnie should be fine. A little liquefied, but fine.

Are there call-in donations? XD

But seriously, I was trying to make a vague Venture Bros. reference...

I know. I was just giving some of those to the hard left here what they like to hear. That Republicans and Satan are BFFs.

Gotta admit...

I never suspected Da Noid was a Reagan or William F. Buckley fan...didn't think the net was cast that far.

Must be a "Reagan" Democrat...

Houston, it shows the extent to which the MSM just repeats the Conservative narrative without due consideration. Consider that in the Right-wing world Barack Obama is an "illegitimate" leader with a 7% margin of victory. GW Bush, on the other hand, lost the popular vote the first time and didn't do a lot better the second time around, but his "mandate to govern" was never questioned.

They did comment...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/10/18/msnbc_dems_received_1_million_in_foreign_donations.html

But it probably isn't what you expected...

MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski receives an email from the White House only one hour after she reported Democrats have received over $1 million in donations from foreign sources.

Brzezinski tells the audience, verbatim, what the White House emailed to her about the "campaign contributions thing":

"It's not their [Democrats'] entire message, it's an attempt to shine a bright and unmistakable light on the fight that these corporate interests have an ability to participate anonymously in our democracy ultimately to the severe detriment of Americans," she read.

"To the degree that it underscores what is an unholy alliance between Washington and the Republicans and these big corporate special interests, it's an important voting issue for millions of Americans," she finished.

Posted on October 18, 2010

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/10/18/wh_emails_msnbc_over_reporting_foreign_donations_to_democrats.html

Say, Nash, this is your hobby horse. . .

Are you going to call for the media to fully exploit this story? You do know, do you not, that foreign campaign contributions are illegal, so I am waiting for you to jump in and demand that the media immediately drop everything and investigate those corrupt, crooked democrats.

I will not, however, be holding my breath.

You've done it again, dangerfield.

I'm truly impressed.

You've provided yet another example of why you are unchallenged in your role as official, resident First Read iconoclast.

Heaven knows the site desperately needed one.

Of course, you're called other things as well...

It's wrong, whichever party is doing it. The NY Times article reviews the "dirty tricks" Nixon used, taking in bags of illegal cash donations, circumventing laws, and lo and behold the same people who worked for him (Fred Malek) are doing it again now that the Supreme Court has allowed for anonymous donations. It is not a question of which party is worse at doing it, it is a question of whether or not we want free and open elections.

But in the case of Mr. Malek, many people would agree that Richard Nixon's brand of Republicanism would be considered way too liberal today. Does Fred Malek want to keep Nixon's Republican legacy (ERA, Roe v Wade, EPA) or does he just he just lust after power?

Wow, thought it was bad enough to hear Dems repeatedly blame Bush. Now, here's Kate who wasn't to go back and blame it in on Nixon. Kate, why don't you do some reading on Clintons for a start? I don't think dirty, corrupt politics comes wrapped only in Republican paper.

The answer is public financing of campaigns.

Can we not bestow the title of "FR Pariah" upon dangerfield as well?

It comes with higher prize money - much like Zinc Saucier.

Don't expect him to give up "horned rat" without a fight, E.D..

Thanks Dude...just what I needed to totally $%#& the Homecoming King campaign...

Wait a minute...I get a be zinc saucier?...hmmmm....:) Better than IRON CHEF any day!

This sounds like old news that's been gone over before. The Democrats get support from labor unions, some of which have chapters in foreign countries. The labor unions were also required to disclose their donors. Since the Roberts Court Citizens United decision has radically changed the rules of the game, maybe they aren't disclosing their sources anymore, either.

But in any case, I'm not completely sure that's what Mika was talking about since she gave few details.

Just don't bend that sword, dangerfield. It cost five mirrion DORRU.

No, this isn't "bad news everybody already knows"...

MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski points out that amid the White House's attack on the Chamber of Commerce, Democrats have taken in at least $1 million from "political action committees affiliated with foreign companies."

As to the lack of details

Dems have raised more than $1 million this cycle from foreign-affiliated PACs

By Michael O'Brien and Hayleigh Colombo - 10/17/10 11:32 AM ET

Democratic leaders in the House and Senate criticizing GOP groups for allegedly funneling foreign money into campaign ads have seen their party raise more than $1 million from political action committees affiliated with foreign companies.

House and Senate Democrats have received approximately $1.02 million this cycle from such PACs, according to an analysis compiled for The Hill by the Center for Responsive Politics. House and Senate GOP leaders have taken almost $510,000 from PACs on the same list.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/124565-democrats-have-raised-1-million-from-foreign-affiliated-pacs

Hope that helps...

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain . . .

Look! Over there! Someone else doing a questionable thing . . . let us discuss that instead!

Anonymous donations are not a form of free speech . . . its a form of paid propoganda.

Nothing anyone finds in anyone else's closet is going to change that.

I will not allow "corporate people" to distract me from their role is destroying the U.S. economy to improve their own.

P.S. Mika's sad display this morning on Morning Joe-ke is the perfect example of what I am talking about, instead of following the story of where all this money is coming from, she wants to "scold" the President for having the AUDACITY to point out this CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER to our democracy.

Corporate personhood is new. Anonymous political donations is new. Any attempt to smooth this all over with the "both sides do it, business as usual" game is absolute and utter bullsh!t.

Is this million dollars she found being used by a non-political non-profit to run political ads?

The answer would be no.

Dems have raised more than $1 million this cycle from foreign-affiliated PACs

WOW!!!! A WHOLE million dollars vs $75 million you say?

Couldn't find anywhere in your argument that the money is being used to finance attack ads!

Also can't find where the Democrats are on record promoting the outsourcing of jobs like the COC:

"There are legitimate values in outsourcing, not only jobs but work. The president of the Chamber of Commerce in his capacity as the president of the Chamber of Commerce endorsing outsourcing, endorsing the practice of American companies shipping jobs overseas so those jobs can be done by people in foreign countries instead of by Americans.

Quote, “U.S. Chamber of Commerce president and CEO Thomas Donohue urged American companies on Wednesday to send jobs overseas. Donohue said people affected by offshoring should, quote, ‘stop whining.‘ The benefits of offshoring jobs outweighs the costs.”

During a trip to India around the same time, Tom Donohue assures business leaders, quote, “We are very confident that outsourcing is here to say. It would be absolutely foolish to try and stop the phenomenon.”

-The Rachel Maddow Show, 10/14/2010

And lastly, I also missed where the authors note that the money is anonymous!

I don't care what party does it.... This country is not for SALE to the highest bidder!

Wait "til David Axelrod hears about this...!

Read the article from "The Hill"...She was just commenting on it...and it's FOREIGN MONEY...not anonymous donations...

NF:

Corporate personhood is new. Anonymous political donations is new. Any attempt to smooth this all over with the "both sides do it, business as usual" game is absolute and utter bullsh!t.

This pretty much kills off NF's only gig around here. Guess you'll just have to go back to wailing about how evil corporations are.

It's tough smearing the other side, when your side is doing the same things.

Nash: Pointing out that both sides do it should be taken as a call for both sides to cease doing it immediately.

I'd level the threat of Second Amendment remedies at both sides given the severity of the situation.

And again, the answer is public financing of campaigns. Every attempt at campaign reform and "transparency" ends up creating a new "Frankenstein"...

The moral equivalency arguments (well, your side does it too) are bogus, nonproductive and only serve to perpetuate the dilemma..

The Wizard of Oz is President Obama, Nash...and, the "man behind the curtain has proved to be very ordinary" indeed.

That's the real reason (bright, shiny objects aside) that it's come to this, and the reason why most political handicappers are forecasting significant...even historic Democratic midterm losses.

With the economy uppermost on voters minds, it's odd that you, of all people, would begin to rail against "bright, shiny objects"...sort of like a clanging dissonance in the middle of a symphony, Nash.

Still more irony...

Nashville_fan

P.S. Mika's sad display this morning on Morning Joe-ke is the perfect example of what I am talking about, instead of following the story of where all this money is coming from, she wants to "scold" the President for having the AUDACITY to point out this CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER to our democracy.

I was annoyed that Meager would not stick to objective of the e-mail.

Meager could have mentioned none of those funds went to Democrats.

My guess, Bev, is that this story breaking didn't fit the narrative for the next three months and the powers-that-be are doing whatever they can to bury it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/weekinreview/17abramson.html

Mixed Bag:

If you think who is buying our government officials and elections anonymously is a bright and shiny object, well then I guess there really is nothing more to say.

Enjoy your reality where polls and politics are all that matters.

I read the Hill article. It says:

The PACS are funded entirely by contributions from U.S. employees of subsidiaries of foreign companies.

It's really a stretch calling this "foreign" money if it's contributions from American citizens who are employees of foreign companies. The money going to the Chamber of Commerce isn't from Americans; it's from the foreign corporations themselves. And when they say "employees" it still sounds like they're talking about unions.

Dangerfield:

And again, the answer is public financing of campaigns. Every attempt at campaign reform and "transparency" ends up creating a new "Frankenstein"...

I agree. But neither political party would be likely to go along with that. In any case, the Citizens United ruling probably makes it impossible because restricting campaign funding to public financing would be considered a violation of the "free speech" rights of private organizations to finance campaign ads.

Just so we're clear, Nash, your contention is that, anonymous donors, who are operating strictly within the confines of the law, are worse than foreign donors, who are breaking the law.

Only makes sense in the Obama cult.

Your outrage would be so much more sincere if only it weren't so darned selective, Nash.

This is my opinion on the whole dirty mess:

Whomever gives money to a political campaign, I want to know about. As a voter, I demand to know which candidate is receiving what amount in funds from whom and where. No one who looks to donate to a campaign should be granted anonymity. This is not the time for Guy Fawkes masks.

As a voter, I demand that money coming from overseas to a candidate be barred from use. I do NOT want foreign money influencing domestic elections.

As a voter, I reject the idea of corporate "personhood" - a for-profit organization looking to donate to any political campaign strikes me as an attempt to buy elections and influence legislation potentially counter to the will of the people. Indeed, it seems to supercede the people themselves and I highly doubt that was the intent when the Constitution was framed.

Of those of you in this thread biting each other's heads off over the CoC issue - who among you agree with my views? Why? Who among you disagrees and if so, why?

Houston!

The opposition party is so hell-bent on destroying the Obama Presidency that they never let the truth get in the way of their agenda. They don't care that the "truth" is at variance with the "headlines".

I was so disappointed in Meka and everybody else on Morning Joe today except for Lesley Stahl who seem to keep her journalist hat on while the other guests were acting like they just came out of the cabbage patch.

What a country... We have uninformed entertainers bringing important issues to the attention of the electorate.

Heaven help us!

As a proponent of public financing, I agree wholeheartedly...

Exodite Dragon:

I agree 100%.

As a matter of fact, I can't imagine any reason why anyone would disagree.

P.S. To no joe and Mixed Bag: This is not about me, it is about our democracy. You are free to be concerned or outraged as you see fit. I will do the same.

Exodite Dragon:

I agree as well. To turn it into a reality, one has to handle the revenue stream that the media derives from the political ads. This is perhaps the hardest part as now you have an industry, one that has had difficulty adjusting to the Internet economy having a major league source of funding closed down.

Urge to kill rising...

I watched Rove blubbering protest about the evil POTUS asking them to list the foreign companies giving them money to buy the elections. Saying that they have no reason to hide what they are hiding.

This is the same Rove, who was also blubbering about wanting to know who was funding the Mosque in NY.

As usual, the double standard GOP.

It's not the "Liberal media" attacks Bob. It's the radical candidates doing it to themselves. At least read the article before you start posting.

Wm., they may not have Barney Frank, either. Scott Brown won his district, and the polling there is really tight.

In a sign of how desperate the situation is, Rep. frank sent his partner out to heckle his opponent. He was not good at it, since all he came up with was that he thought the candidate's jokes were not funny.

We are in Bizarroworld. . .

Thanks Skip! Good to see you this morning!

Voted for him for MAYOR! lol...gotta love the name, which is also the party's slogan...:)