LouisJ

Yet, the latest NBC/WSJ poll shows a majority of the country wants Congress to take the lead on setting the policy agenda, not the president.

Let's just call it the media 's Affirmative Action

Mitch McConnell and John Boehner remains in continual support of withdrawing support of the President and the American people. Their most recent shun not only has shown how serious they are about crippling the President of the United States; but also their desire to defend and maintain the debt they so rapidly skyrocketed under George W Bush.

Mitch McConnell went so far to call in a very divisive meeting aimed at implementing their dysfunctional strategy to just say “NO”. The strategy that has brought Senate Republicans where they are today began when they gathered, beaten and dispirited, at the Library of Congress two weeks before Mr. Obama’s inauguration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/17/us/politics/17mcconnell.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Needless to say the stop the President comes straight from the top at FOX NOISE. Fox News chairman Roger Ailes gave a statement which his network, the default channel for repeatedly beating the drums for Anti-Obamaisim. This fits the view of those who are trying to paint the President as being outside the mainstream.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-11-16/fox-news-chairman-roger-ailes-slams-white-house-in-exclusive-interview/full/

It should be thought-provoking to every American because it is so” irrational. Even a Republican Party leader says that kind of posture will be punish Republicans in two years, because people are sick of partisanship. Suddenly in further attempts to make the President a one term one they are putting America’s security at risk by rejecting the New START nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia. Their resurrected hero Ronald Reagan wanted it.

Just like talented Brandy, was robbed when Sarah Palin’s lead feet daughter who can barely keep a beat. Tea Bagger supporters cast an infinite number of email votes, it surely will come to pass for America the exact very same thing if Sarah Palin becomes President. Most American people think she is utterly unqualified. We know how Republicans steal and rig elections. Hint Hint: They don't have to be VALID email addresses to register them with ABC.com, there is apparently no validation process. you must use a valid zip code and a birthdate that makes you old enough to vote.

Read more: http://jezebel.com/5691445/how-palin-conservatives-are-cheating-the-dwts-voting-system#ixzz15Xjlm2CR

Now if this can happen with a politician’s daughter being used as a pawn to elevate her mother Presidential candidacy; surely it can happen again. Bush stole rather was put in office by the Supreme Court. Karl Rover being the principal perpetrator in an Ohio racketeering conspiracy." The complaint goes on to explain that: "in the current election cycle the election corruption enterprise of Rove and [Tom] Donahue [head of the US Chamber of Commerce] is being manifested through the influx of billionaire/global corporate money where the actual source of the funding and speech is concealed." The complaint also discloses new information about the December 19, 2008, air crash death of Michael Connell, Rove's computer guru. Connell was deposed one day prior to the November, 2008, presidential election. He has been linked to construction of a computer apparatus that was tied directly to Rove and was capable of election manipulations

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/election-attorneys-file-racketeering-complaint-against-karl-rove-and-tom-donohues-elections-operations-106303993.html

Let me just say this. Barack Hussein Obama is thhe President of the United States of American a loving husband and father. I have watched him and seen him mistakes; despite insurmountable critics, he still keeps trying to reach across the aisle. In case let me ask you this what human being is perfect?

oh, i almost forget Today is John Boehner's birtday that way they couldn't meet with the President.

Louis J/ Bev;

America is watching now. They want congress to stop their sh!t and get to work to move this country forward. The first week that they are back in session they

Block the Fair Pay for Women bill. Every republican/tea party voted NO. Even Stowe and Collins.

They blocked the New Start Treaty

They are stalling the DADT and Dream Act

And are still holding the Tax Cuts for the Middle Class hostage so they can pass the Tax Cuts for the richest 2% that will get over 50% of the total benefits, just like the last administration.

The republican/tea party are going to continue the gridlock and trash this economy. They even had the gall to bail out from a meeting with the President to discuss jobs, economy, the 2 wars, tax cuts claiming a schedule conflict. These people have NO shame and once again slapped the President. How much more do we need to see to understand that this party is just going to do nothing, cry they want to have meetings with the President, they want to work with him then vow to make him a one term President, NO compromise, etc.

Bev, you should get your facts straight about voting on DWTS. It's phone voting. Each couple has their own phone number. But, I'm not surprised you'd be criticizing a young girl for taking a chance at something. That goes with your usual Saul Alinsky tactics. I'd say you should be ashamed but we know you have no shame. If being nasty and ugly makes you happy, then I guess go for it. Maybe, sometime, you will stop and think about why it is people won't agree with you.

Navy,,

Not sure why you continue to misrepresent the Facts on these pages and claim that anyone is getting a Tax cut. they are not. Their taxes are going to stay the Same or go up for every American. Period. Now i understand that what you want is for 2 percent of America to pay for the over spending by Barack Obama and the Democrats that used to have Full Control of congress.

Not true, Steve. When Republicans passed the cuts they were designed to be temporary cuts which were programmed to expire at this time, returning taxpayers to their permanent tax rates which never were eliminated. Even their deficit projections were based on that assumption.

The only responsible reaction to our need to reduce the debt is the President's plan to give renew this temporary tax break for EVERY AMERICAN, while allowing the special tax break for incomes above $250,000 to expire.

Steve-505729:

Not sure why you continue to misrepresent the Facts on these pages and claim that anyone is getting a Tax cut. they are not. Their taxes are going to stay the Same or go up for every American

The middle class is certain to get a tax hike thanks to the Republicans who are blocking extension of the Obama tax cut that was part of the stimulus bill. If the Democrats have any spine at all (a big "if"), they will force the Republicans to vote on the extension of Bush's middle class tax cut separately from the tax cut for the rich. Unfortunately, this lame duck Congress seems lamer than usual.

http://projects.ajc.com/gallery/view/opinion/luckovichnov10/5.html

The republican promise.

John B,

You are correct, they are set to expire after Dec 31, raising the rate back to when Clinton was in office. My opinion is, we either let them expire for everyone, and really, it is only going to effect 53% of the people considering that last year 47% of the people didn't even pay taxes, or we extend them for a certain number of years or until unemployment is below 5%.

Until the tax system is reformed and simplified, either we all pay more, or none of us pays more. I would think that the left would love that solution, because it would be "fair" to everyone.

Hmmm...

Why no mention of Keith Olbermann's reporting of the not-so-veiled threat made to President Obama by George Soros?

Olbermann says that Soros, speaking to what K.O. described as a group of "big-money Democratic donors" offered this:

"If this president can't do what we need, it is time to start looking someplace else."

Kinda messes with the First Read "the Republicans are in turmoil because of the Tea Party" narrative, doesn't it?

This is just another manifestation of the "elections have consequences" theme...someone has to pay for the Democrats' midterm catastrophe.

It would appear that George Soros is suggesting that President Obama is not indispensable.

Interesting too, that Keith and Glenn both have Soros on the radar screen.

Olbermann is a hack.

Steve;

You are wrong again. The republicans passed the tax cuts through reconciliation and put the time limit at 10 Years, that was as high as they could go under reconciliation. The 2001 cuts were going to expire this December by design and had nothing to do with President Obama. Now we have a choice to reinstate them all, which I am against, or some other plan. I agree with President Obama in that we need to keep the Tax Cuts for those with Taxable Income less than $250,000 for a family. I would even support raising this $250,000 to maybe $500,000 or even a Million and let all the rest expire.

I like say the tax cuts will now apply to all families with a Taxable Income of $1,000,000 or less and everybody above that goes to the Clinton Tax Table. That would really pi$$ off the republican/tea party because it would force them to choose between Millionaires and non-Millionaires.

Fellow Travelers:

There is actually GOOD news out there.

But first a couple of questions: Do we accomplish something positive by calling each other names like Republithugs and Libtards, or do we further polarize ourselves? Do the Republicans ALWAYS have it right and the Democrats ALWAYS have it wrong, vice-versa, or maybe, just maybe it's a combination of both?

Now the good news. Senator Richard Lugar, a Republican, has actually taken his fellow Republicans to task for trying to block the START treaty. (You may have noticed that John Kyl (R) has completely reversed his position on START based on the notion that if Obama's fer it, I'm agin it.) In any case, Lugar has, in large part, made his bones in the world of foreign policy and he is quite dismayed that START is being held hostage to grade school antics.

START is about American and, by extension, planet Earth's security. Nuclear weapons are incredibly destabilizing on two fronts - military and economic. We can't afford to kill everyone five times with bombs and/or kill everybody one time by plunging the world into economic chaos. No rational person can oppose START. (However, for entertainment, you can watch Kyl perform contortions of logic that would be the envy of a three-year-old. Kyl unabashedly borrow his tactics from the "Yer not the boss of me" and "I'm going to hold my breath until I turn blue" schools of non-thought.)

Elsewhere, it seems Senator Carl Levin, a Democrat, noticed a pain in his back. The medical diagnosis is that he seems to be developing a backbone. A salutary effect of this medical condition is that he is going to push for the inclusion of DADT in legislation, which can be passed before this Congress goes home.

So there it is; A Democrat AND a Republican actually doing the right thing. Folks, that's some damned good news.

do away with education. medication and incarcaration. then we can pay off the debt for our great, great, great grandchildren = all is well.

Not even close, gerald. The ENTIRE discretionary, nonmilitary budget is SMALLER than the deficit. What's your solution for that?

My oh my.

The liberal 'haters' on this thread complaining about how 'hateful' the Republicans are.

They seem to be the same ones that were claiming that the Republican Party was devolving into obscurity only 2 years ago.

The elections certainly must have been a huge disappointment to them, just as Obama has become a huge disappointment to the majority of Americans.

john b. you got me now. i suggested do away with the navy and have been called names, bad names. can america be fixed? no bull!

It's a tough one, gerald. Everything has a constituency--including receiving services but being against taxes.

US Navy,

Why the sudden Lame Duck rush with START.

Many Americans (and the Kremlin) seem to interpret START as restricting America's ability to deploy missile defenses. Obama says that is not correct. Sentors say OK, can we see the negotiating record? Obama says nah, you don't need to see that - just trust us. And we need to do it right now, can't wait a few months.

Isn't this how we got the health care disaster, stimulus that didn't, and FinRef. We don't know what is in it, but let's rush it through. Same cast and crew that just got spanked by the American people for doing the exact same thing.

So when did Russia all of a sudden become such an immediate national nuclear threat and how come nobody told us.

Block it. Say no.

Wait for the new guys. Let's do it the right way, the way the American people want it to be done.

LouisJ:

I cannot say this for a fact, but I am fairly confident that I have been closer to the political scene over the years than most. I have seen it from virtually every perspective and been hands-on in a number of roles.

I can tell you without reservation that your characterization of many Republicans as thugs is categorically wrong. Many of them are far worse. They are vicious drones, rabid dogs, misogynists, bigots, and worse. They are all about victory at any cost.

The extreme right wing wishes only for the defeat of some sort of nebulous threat they call progressive, liberal, socialist, or whatever word their masters have told them is the suitable epithet for the day. Please trust me when I tell you they thrive on the name-calling, when they are hurling epithets and when they are the targets of epithets.

They are nothing more than cannon fodder and make no mistake they have their counterparts on the left. The approach of the left-wing extremists is a bit different, but it is no more a well-reasoned approach to a problem than is that of the right-wing.

There are solutions to the problems facing this country. They are not to be found in insults. Ignore the extremists, don't join them.

Duly noted David.

David, I belive you're correct. Yesterday on his radio show Glenn Beck gave one of his stock rants -- a lecture about how ONLY people who believe in the Constitution or Progressives (within both parties) will be left standing. It's a fight to the death and our nation will only survive if Conservatives treat it that way.

Food for thought as we ask ourselves why there's no cooperation, no bipartisanship in our political process.

US Navy, why the sudden rush to start pushing through legislation about equal pay? Why didn't we see this before the campaign break? Could it be political posturing?

This was another bill with good intentions and ill-conceived language. With the female population being roughly half the voter base what good would it do either party just to vote it down? Did you read the bill? If you did you will notice that some of the factors for equal pay are very subjective (experience, workload) and therefore ripe for lawsuit. Do you realize the costs that each of us pays for goods and services is directly affected by lawsuits or the potential for lawsuits.

Could it have failed because of the $15B pricetag?

We did see legislation dealing with equal pay before the election. That would be the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, passes without Republican support.

This bill deals with different issues.

David Walker-

Interesting thoughts about those who engage in "name calling" and "hurling epithets"...

Do you use the word "teabagger"?

If the answer is no...

Why not, David?

Many, if not most, First Readers would benefit from an explanation...along the lines of what Jon Stewart had to say on the matter in his lengthy interview with Rachel Maddow.

If the answer is "yes"...well, no further demonstration of your hypocrisy is necessary, is it?

John, didn't the Lily Ledbetter Act have more to do with the "statute of limitations" so to speak? Where one has 180 days to file a wage discrimination lawsuit? It wasn't exactly a fair pay for women law.

I am not defending the Republicans. I am racking my brain to try and figure out why they unanimously opposed the bill. I already emailed Senator John Cornyn to try to find out. I expect the same "thank you for your support" letter in return.

Yes, Lily Ledbetter -- the court case AND the Act of Congress -- were all about statute of limitations.

Yeah, I get that same "thank you for your support" letter from Chuck Grassley. Somehow even when I write to complain about a position he's taken his letter concludes that I agree with him. I know HE doesn't read them, but the responses read an awful lot like NO ONE does.

Beverly, Amen to you! These tea bagging offensive sign holding people are so UN American. They have shown out right disrespect to our President and our country, and for the party of no no no, they could care less about the middle class Americans.

Bob-1805084,

I thought that was what was going on. This is why Obama wanted to "fast track" this treaty. His game is really getting old. He vowed "transparancy", well, he's gotton transparent allright. The proper course of action is to first, wait till all the newly elected senators and represenatives are seated in January. Then study each and every detail of this treaty and if there is one sentence that doesn't pass muster, reject the whole thing and move it to the circular file. Then tell the incompetent fool to go back to Russia and try try again. This is the only way he will learn. By repetition.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

And here is a kicker;

“Unsurprisingly, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has a long record of opposing women’s rights urged Congress to vote against the act, as it did with Lilly Ledbetter in 2009”.

This is the very same group that will not disclose where their campaign dollars come from. Would you not want to know what people or companies are paying politicians to deny you equal pay?? Would you not want to know what companies think you are a second class citizen?? The working women on this board should be jumping mad today, I know I would be. Are you??

Yes Navy that is a kicker. Worst, is the republican/tea party still will have that influence; unless we start calling our representatives. Especially, the 99ers Congress can go party while the 99ers suffer.

I voted for Sen. Olympia Snowe when I was young and idealistic, because she was a qualified, bright and accomplished woman and we desperately needed women in higher office. A big part of my decision to vote for her was to widen opportunities for women. Now Sen Snowe has turned her back on the goal of improving the status of women in the workplace, just as she turned her back on the rights of gay men and women serving in the military. I don't regret my initial vote for Snowe, but I regret I can no longer support her. In 2012 I will do everything in my power to replace Sen Snowe with a Democratic senator.

do away with the navy! one galx 5 can do what the whole navy can. if we need to use the marines we can use the coast guard.

gerald from gibberish georgia. WTF?

paul; careful, you could hurt my feelings!

What Is the Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA)?

• Under the current Equal Pay Act, once employees have provided prima facie evidence of sex discrimination, the burden of proof shifts to the employer to show that the difference in wages results from "any factor other than sex."
• The PFA eliminates the "any factor other than sex" defense and replaces it with a "bona fide factor other than sex" defense. Employers can only use this "bona fide factor" defense if they demonstrate that business necessity demands it.
• However, if the employee demonstrates that an alternative employment practice exists that would serve the same business purpose without producing a gender differential and that the employer has refused to adopt such alternative practice, then employers may not use this defense.
• The PFA makes employers liable for unlimited punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages in cases of sex discrimination.
• The PFA makes it easier to bring class action lawsuits in such cases.

Policy Objections

• Now employers must justify their pay practices with a "bona fide" factor other than sex and defend it in the courts. If employees can find an alternative business practice that does not result in a pay disparity, employers must adopt it. Under the PFA, government and the courts dictate business practices to employers.
• The PFA removes the Equal Pay Act's limits on punitive and compensatory damages.
• It specifies that workers are automatically members of a class action suit unless they opt out.
• Section 9 of the PFA instructs the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) to reinstitute the Equal Opportunity Survey (EOS) and use the survey to identify federal contractors for further investigation.
• The Department of Labor discontinued this survey after concluding that it failed to identify sexual discrimination. A detailed study found that the EOS had a 93 percent false-positive rate and a 33 percent false-negative rate. Most companies identified as discriminating did not, while a third of companies discriminating were missed by the survey. The EOS did little better than random chance at identifying discrimination.
• In addition to requiring the OFCCP to use a flawed survey, the PFA prevents the OFCCP from using the best science available in discrimination cases.

Economic Effects

• By facilitating lawsuits:
• The PFA would give a windfall to trial lawyers, exposing employers to unlimited punitive damages.
• The PFA would encourage trial lawyers to initiate many frivolous class-action suits in hopes of winning a few large judgments.
• The successful lawsuits could transfer billions of dollars from employers to trial lawyers, bankrupting businesses and costing jobs.
• The increased legal risks would also reduce the incentive for business owners to start new business or invest in and expand their firms, thereby costing even more jobs.
• The PFA means millions of dollars for trial lawyers but fewer jobs for most Americans.
• Under the PFA the courts will micromanage businesses.
• For instance, the courts would have to decide: Does experience constitute a "bona fide factor other than sex"?
• A woman earning less than a more experienced man could argue that her employer should be required to send her to training and then pay both employees identical wages. She would have a strong case to argue that experience was not a "bona fide" factor because an alternative employment practice would eliminate the disparity.
• Government micromanaging over areas in which the courts have no business expertise would reduce business competitiveness and cost jobs.

Cardog

To Beverly, you go girl. I have been on these blogs now for almost two years and never, not once have one of these racist neanderthals stepped up and simply said I don't want a Black man in MY White House. Oh, they've said quite a few other things. Like you said, in the south for sure, but sadly it exists throughout our nation, these bigots now use "Code Words" that others like them understand full well.

What they hate is having to respond to it when the truth is told. They come back at you with you're the race baiter??? Every White person in this country over the age of 50, is aware of this country's racial past. As long as life is going along fine for them, (Jobs) people of color are tolerated. Let the economy go sour and out comes the hatred. If it's not Blacks on the end of the spear, it's Mexicans or other Latin Americans, then when it really gets bad, they start in on the Jews. Sadly as well, this year due to a few fanatical idiots that flew airplanes into the World Center towers, the entire Muslim faith fell into the category like the rest of the minority groups in this country.

The United States was built on the backs of slaves. The U.S. Constitution was written by slave owners. To millions of Americans this document is the Holy Grail, yet when it's history is put up for examination, you find that while it's purpose was a great step for mankind, it was not perfect. Over a period of almost three hundred years, 27 amendments have been attached to it to cover all people, most life circumstances as we grew as a nation. Even with those amendments (14th) this country still had to deal with Jim Crow. The country had to wait until 1968 for the Civil Rights Act. Now we have a Black President. Oh my God, some say, this has now gone to far. This young educated, attractive young Black man had the audacity to believe and acquire the presidency.

Final comment on the state of this nation and it's approach to race. If you're White, uneducated, don't have a pot to piss in, you're still better then any Black, Mexican, Asian or Jew. While that is the most idiotic mind thought, you would not believe the number of people who feel that way, they just don't broadcast it out loud anymore, like when they once had their country back.

Thank you

It feels good not to be called racist AGAIN today.

One thing my Mom taught me was treat people the way you want to be treated. I have always carried that with me. I do not make judgements based on the color of one's skin. Sadly, so many righties on this blog do when it comes to President Obama because they are just as much a coward as they are bigots.

The reason for that is, I think, they are so afraid of having to admit the stereotypes about Blacks, are no longer valid. There are so many well educated Blacks today who just don't fit the image of lazy step-it fetch Negroes. I look at the way the racist right, mainly FOX NOISE, uses all this coded language to stir the low class voters into racist notions; probably they never would even think of without FOX NOISE. Now that is taking the country back, back to Jim Crow and maybe even pre-slavery!!! Also there is another component to taking the country back. The Koch brother's father was a John Birch member. But more importantly, the the multi millionaire/billionaire club will take the country back alright, back to the last depression, back to indiscriminate soup lines during the time of Hoover days. I'm not talking Hoover as in the vacuum salesman either here. This type of mind control and covert, as well as overt racism, will keep the pockets of people like them well lined.

My mom always said you fear what you don't know. Perhaps that's why the water boys and girls at FOX NOISE distort facts with fear, intolerance, and bigotry against people who are not like them; in other words filthy rich.

Thanks to Paul I have decide to scroll down through all stories, thank you, and although I think that pay should have equality based on experience and workload, reading through Hillary's bill, the last line is what I find most disturbing.

SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act.

How much will this cost annually?

Da Noid

How on earth would Sarah Palin expect to lead this country as President if she appears to have lost her own state of Alaska?

I think she thinks her cutie-pie word salad simplicity allows her to connect to Americans. The truth is she lacks intellectual curiosity, can't keep he finances together in her Sarah-Pac, is divisive, and has no decorum.

She is too clueless and vulgar for the Oval Office. a doplomat could blow her mind in a sec

And quit as governor half way through her term.

correction for typo: She is too clueless and vulgar for the Oval Office. A diplomat could blow her mind in a nano second.

And she can see Russia from her house! lol

Remember this classic?

They're in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom." --Sarah Palin, getting the vice president's constitutional role wrong after being asked by a third grader what the vice president does, interview with NBC affiliate KUSA in Colorado, Oct. 21, 2008

She didn't lose it. It's still next to Russia.

Someone is putting A BUNCH of money into trying to turn Sarah Palin into a legitimate political figure. Her VP run didn't come out of thin air, deep-pocket Conservatives raised her into that role. Pat Buchanon was talking about her when she was an unknown, unproven, unqualified nobody. The "Dancing with the Stars" placement for Bristol and Sarah's new "reality" TV show had to be backed by someone. Fox put someone who can't form a sentence to save her life into a prominent position.

Who are Sarah Palin's benefactors, and what do they want?

*sigh* I keep rubbing my temples and hoping that she'll go away...she needs to be relegated to fundraising and GOTV activities...we need to keep her away from working microphones!

"How on earth would Sarah Palin expect to lead this country.."

More to the point, why does the media continue to portray Palin as a "kingmaker," a brilliant politician and a potential Presidential candidate? I read the most recent profile of her in the NYT yesterday, which promotes all three characterizations of her, despite polls showing even her own base seriously doubts her qualifications for higher office. So, the candidate she campaigned the most strenuously against was elected in Alaska, will that dim her reputation in the media as a powerful politician? Doubt it. It has occurred to me, however, perhaps the media promotes her as a future candidate in order to insure a Democratic victory in 2012. It's the only explanation I can think of why the press so grossly overstates her influence. Does anyone else think the press could be so Machiavellian?

The Media keeps her relevant. I forgets she even exists until someone mentions her name. Thanks Noid. j/k

:^p

Frank, I hope so too. Something could get done if the GOP were run by sensible Conservatives such as yourself, Lisa Murkowski, and some of the others. There are still a few who haven't been purged by the American Taliban.

When Sarah Palin's next plastic surgery goes horribly wrong we won't have to worry about her jerkoff supporters sticking with her brand of ignorant anymore. They'll turn their attentions to Bristol and Willow. Isn't that right, Bill "the LIAR" from FAIRFAX?

Hi Frank, good to see you hope all is well with you. I agree with you and John B. I would also like to know who is pulling her puppet strings as well. But, unfortunately we will never know. I just do not see her winning a debate with President Obama and she will haveto debate him if she has any hope at all (which I really, really doubt that she will get that far).

The republicans have been a little mum on who will be in the ring come 2012. I would have thought somebody (other than Palin) would be making a move by now.

Time will tell.

there is a plan and this is as good as it gets.

Hi USNDVR...

Things in Florida are going well. Hope all is good with you my friend.

I wouldn't count on Sarah to win a debate with my 7 year old...though, admittedly, he's pretty sharp. ;-)

OK, that's a bit unfair. Yes...in some ways, she's been unfairly portrayed in the media. But I really just don't think she's the person we want to be trotting out representing the GOP. Between her and Michael Steele, those seem to be two people you hear a lot from. We have better people that should be out there speaking on behalf of our party. There are some very smart people in our party. That's why I think if we can keep the microphones away from Sarah, we'd be better off.

please have her voice changed. two octives lower please.

what if this is the way the world is suppose to be?

Wow, Paul. What a dumb post.

I like Sara, but not for President. What I wonder, if she is such a looser, why are you guys spending so much time talking trash about her? Do I smell fear in the air?

There must be something out there on who is running this woman.

Put me in there. I'll do it (but you won't like it)!

Da Noid;

Good points. Nobody wants to be on the appropriations committee because they will get the blamefor the cuts even though they are the ones that want them. I think it is called hypocrisy. Similar to plausible denial.

Miller looses in Alaska - put that in your loss column Ms. Palin!!!

Great Post, I like the fly analogy. It started with the "Citizens United" decision and then really got set in concrete when the republicans filibustered the "Disclosure Act". Last week we have also seen that Justice Scalia is now on record wanting to repeal the 17th Amendment, stripping away the right to vote for Americans.

And yesterday the 41 republicans in the Senate went on record saying women are worth less than men in the workplace.

I wonder what working women are thinking today? They are trying to make a decent living, raising families, sending their kids to decent schools and colleges, many are the bread winners in this economy and one political party now has labeled them as substandard. If I were one of the working women is this country I would be writing some strong letters to these self serving jerks. I am a guy, and this makes me mad. To think that some clown in the Senate thinks my wife and daughter is worth less because they are females is repugnant.

As I said before the election, I'd rather have a corporatist like Murkowski in the Senate than a kook like Joe Miller. I was really glad that she won. She's at least a rational human being, unlike her opponent. Even when I diagree with what she's saying, I can listen to her speak without getting the overwhelming urge to change the channel, or worse, committing an act of violence on my TV set the way I did when I heard Miller, Sharron Angle, or the various other Tea Party kooks blathering.

I long for the days when there were true statesmen in the Republican party. I rarely agreed with them but I respected their positions. Plus, they thought nothing of telling the party to pound salt and did what was right for the American people. What we have now is a gaggle of hacks, at best.

On another note. How does wanting the President to fail, even if it means the country fails, make you a true patriot? I just can't do that math. Must mean I actually love my country.

Dennis -

We could use true statesmen in BOTH parties. Pelosi, Obama, and Reid are just partisan hacks. At least they have been for the last couple of years. Pelosi has never had a record of reaching across the aisle.

Before I say anything about Boehner and McConnell, I want to see what they do with the republican majority in the House as of the beginning of the year, although there is still a democrat Senate majority.

Wanna see something funny? Write anything about Nancy Pelosi and watch the Conservatives foam at the mouth.

Da Noid. Except its not very funny. It is a concerted effort by the conservatives and the "liberal media" to drive this country to the right. The Republican Tea Party winner in Utah publicly stated he wanted to take the country back to the 30s.

Bill,

There was one about AZ SB1070 that attracted over 2000 comments. When the numbers are high what I have found is that the article (not all of First Read) is linked from the MSN home page as a top article. It attracts a lot of trolls from all idealistic points of view and most of them post ugly comments resulting in many collapses.

Mark my words Bill... it's not the left that's going to bring Grama Grizzly down if she is in fact delusional enough to think she can beat President Obama in 2012!

It will be the good old boys club lead by none other than the turd blossom Karl Rove!

There is NO WAY they will allow her to take the nomination!

You can take that to the BANK!

PS: I never took you for the paranoid type! ;0) Now NJNB on the other hand... lol

PPS: Agreed DaNoid!

Bill, Fairfax VA: The leftists around here fancy themselves as an enlightened bunch that engages in fact-based, civilized debate. But present them with a villain they love to hate, and they show their true colors: a bunch of vile, venomous creatures who will spare no insult to viciously tear apart anyone they don't like. But the hate filled acrimony was so intense, there must be something more in play here and I wonder if it could it be fear.

What's interesting is that the very same leftists, the ones the decry the making of women being "second class citizens" in some leftist rag, as in: "“Women are half of all U.S. workers and mothers are the primary breadwinners or co-breadwinners in nearly two-thirds of American families. The Paycheck Fairness Act would be critical to strengthening the economic security of these families." These same Leftists will attack a woman, conservative women, with every vile and insane terminology they can create in their own little minds.

It is the Left in the country that don't want to give women an equal chance. At least not women who they disagree with politically. To the Left, the so called woman coalition is just the same as is the African-American coalition, the Hispanic coalition, and the Gay Coalition - the Left says "Vote for us Lefties, and we'll give you something". What that means is that the Left wants these coalitions to depend on them for their livelihood. The Left proclaims that women can't get ahead, unless the government passes a law that lets them get ahead. African-Americans can't get a head unless the government assists them in doing so. Hispanics can't get ahead, unless the government passes immigrations laws to their benefit. Notice the common-denominator, government must help the Lefts coalitions get ahead because the Left believes they can't do it on their own.

And that is why the left hates conservatives, and hates Sarah Palin. Palin depended on no one but herself to get where she is today. And that can't happen in the world of the Leftists. To them, only the government can help women achieve their goals. The idea that a woman can do it herself, on her own, is foreign to them.

JoAnnaSmith1

What's interesting is that the very same leftists, the ones the decry the making of women being "second class citizens" in some leftist rag, as in: "“Women are half of all U.S. workers and mothers are the primary breadwinners or co-breadwinners in nearly two-thirds of American families. The Paycheck Fairness Act would be critical to strengthening the economic security of these families." These same Leftists will attack a woman, conservative women, with every vile and insane terminology they can create in their own little minds.

It is the Left in the country that don't want to give women an equal chance. At least not women who they disagree with politically. To the Left, the so called woman coalition is just the same as is the African-American coalition, the Hispanic coalition, and the Gay Coalition - the Left says "Vote for us Lefties, and we'll give you something".

And that is why the left hates conservatives, and hates Sarah Palin. Palin depended on no one but herself to get where she is today. And that can't happen in the world of the Leftists. To them, only the government can help women achieve their goals. The idea that a woman can do it herself, on her own, is foreign to them.

You sure have some way out hypothesis. Do you agree to raising a family with less money without a man. Some men walk out and are free to do whatever with money; while the mother struggles with less money.

For the record I'm not a misogynist. Sarah is a dummy.

danoid: Wanna see something funny? Write anything about Nancy Pelosi and watch the Conservatives foam at the mouth.

Conservatives love Nancy Pelosi. We ran against her in 2010, and we see the results. Now as a bonus, we get to run against her again in 2012. Nancy Pelsoi, a San Francisco liberal, a Democrat leader with an 11% approval rating, someone that is universally despised by the voters outside of the liberal hot-beds of California and New York, is the perfect poster child for what is wrong with the Democratic party.

The Democrats could not have been more stupid to re-elect her as their leader in the House.

It would not matter if the democrats picked a saint as their leader, the conservative hate machine would still be on the offensive. All this phony nonsense from the wacky right wing that they are happy to have Nancy stay is as transparent as hell, they fear her.

That should show you shes not what America wants .....shes a weirdo ...i wouldn't even trust her around my children .....America has spoken !

Once again the right is making up their own facts. The fact is that 58 democratic Senators voted for the Fair Pay Act and that includes all the progressive and liberal dems as well. Every Single Republican, all of them even Stowe and Collins who supported something similar in the past voted NO. Every single Democrat voted YES.

It is not the left calling working women worth less. It is the rebublicans that just did that in their vote along party lines. That is the fact.

The Republican/Tea Party has said the women in the work force are worth less than men. The democrats fought to make them equal and have been fighting for them. Look at the previous women's right bill that Stowe and Collins supported that actually got passed with their help. It is the republicans that with their self-centered egos, the idea that they are born into this world with everybody owing them something is what is wrong.

It is complete hypocrisy and in my opinion repugnant what the republican/tea party has done.

So how many bills do the Democrats have to pass before women achieve "equality"? Every bill from Lilly Ledbetter to the "Fair Pay Act", never seems to achieve what ever goal the liberals are attempting to achieve.

That's the false promise of the Democrats. They promise so many things that government can do for them, but deliver on so few. And people/voters are starting to notice that pattern with the Democrats.

JoAnna---stop and think for a minute-----many of us on the left are women---are we against ourselves? And I've rarely heard a sexist comment from the men on our side. I see our disagreement with Sarah Palin as a huge step for women's rights----we don't have to support her just because she is a woman and there aren't enough of us in government. We can not support her for any and all of the reasons one wouldn't support a male candidate---disagree with positions on issues, don't like governing philosophy, don't feel they have the intelligence to do the job, plain just don't like them, etc.

JoAnna:

You are quite the philosopher.

lol

Your take on Democrats and government is like a bad comedy sketch. You conveniently ignore the history of less pay and discrimination that many groups have sufferered and continue to suffer. You conveniently pretend that all have had a level playing field when in actuality what fairness exists was FOUGHT FOR and EARNED through years of hard work and sacrifice.

So I will leave you to your idealic world view where all are equal and free to compete. Those who dwell in reality know better.

Steeler-fan - it's not a matter of liberal women supporting Sarah Palin just because she is a woman. It's the matter of the Leftists acknowledging that Palin has achieved success, not because of some law the government passed, but because she worked hard and made it on her own. Anyone can always reserve the right to disagree with her politics.

But instead of having this disagreement about Palin's politics, we get this vile parade of hate from the Left focused on Palin, and focused on her at a personal level. A constant drum-beat of hate towards her and her family. That's not disagreement, that's some of the most hateful speech ever seen directed at one woman. You don't see the Right doing the same with somone like Pelosi. The disagreement from the Right on Pelosi is about her politics, and rarely if ever attacks her on a personal and/or family level.

NF - how many laws does the government have to pass before women are equal?

You don't see the Right doing the same with somone like Pelosi. The disagreement from the Right on Pelosi is about her politics, and rarely if ever attacks her on a personal and/or family level.

WTF???

That comment has to be by far the most idiotic thing I have ever read out of you!

Hint to JS1... wander on over to the Pelosi thread from just yesterday and get back to us will ya?

Stupidity is indeed terminal and from the sound of JS1... her days are numbered!

Good Grief!

Steeler-Fan - this is an example of what I'm talking about - once again, going after Palin's children.

"When Sarah Palin's next plastic surgery goes horribly wrong we won't have to worry about her jerkoff supporters sticking with her brand of ignorant anymore. They'll turn their attentions to Bristol and Willow. Isn't that right, Bill "the LIAR" from FAIRFAX?"

JoAnna:

I am going to completely ignore your post as you did mine.

Have a blessed day.

Sarah Palin blasted onto the American political scene with red meat filled speech attacking President Obama with lies. She accused him of "paling around with terrorists" and we frequently heard calls for the President's death at her rallies, and she at no time indicated that she thought that was a bad idea.

She has spread lie after lie from death panels to some foolishness about the President of Iran's birthday.

Sarah Palin is nothing more than a carefully styled political hack.

Most politicians have children, including President Obama, and yet that doesn't stop the same folks who are now wailing for mercy for Sarah Palin from basically defecating on President Obama and his family daily.

So I say emphatically and without regret that any hate that Sarah Palin is now reaping is not nearly in proportion to what she has sown.

And I feel not an ounce of pity for her. Not an ounce.

Feisty, you want a conspiracy theory then try this one on for size:

Someone is putting A BUNCH of money into trying to turn Sarah Palin into a legitimate political figure. Her VP run didn't come out of thin air, deep-pocket Conservatives raised her into that role. Pat Buchanon was talking about her when she was an unknown, unproven, unqualified nobody. The "Dancing with the Stars" placement for Bristol and Sarah's new "reality" TV show had to be backed by someone. Fox put someone who can't form a sentence to save her life into a prominent position.

Palin is a popular figure among a chunk of the electorate but overall she has poor fav/unfav numbers. So it's not clear to me that it makes sense for shadowy moneybaggers to be showering her with a BUNCH of money at this time. But should she be able to demonstrate an ability to broaden her appeal, then there won't be enough buckets to hold all the money that will be pouring in. And that's her challenge. Whether Bristol can dance or not is irrelevant, what's relevant is Sarah's ability (or not) to add some gravitas to her image.

Mentioning the "fact' that Bristol and Willow will be the follow up masterbatory fodder for people like "LIAR BILL from FAIRFAX", isn't an attack on them or Sarah. It is a revelatory statement about the men and lesbians who would support her for anything above mayor of Wasilla.

Bill:

No argument out of me about Palins popularity!

Since she exploded onto the national scene she was being used by the true powers that be (being the rich old white guys) and once they are done with her they'll toss her away like a used Kleenex!

Unfortunately for Sarah and the First Dud they are to big of narcissists to realize that they were being PLAYED!

These people know there is NO way she can win the general election and is rapidly becoming a giant liability to them!

The problem is they were the ones who unleashed 'I Dream of Jeannie' and now comes the question of how do you stuff her back into the bottle and cork her once and for all!

I for one, would love to see more women in politics and have said so many times. They have a unique perspective, insight and intuition that we need to hear from. Palin's kids opened the door when they posted what they did on the web. In fact the Dancing with the Stars sister has apologized for her sister and brothers comments. It is in the public because they put it there. I would have preferred that the media just ignored it as it has no value when compared to what this country is facing. Too many distractions to try and get America focused on something other than the issues at hand.

I just cannot believe the rhetoric that tends to defend what the republicans just did to all working women. There is no defense for this and people should be screaming. Unless of course they are so brain washed they agree or they really do feel they are worth less than men in the work force even though they have the same and sometimes even better qualifications than the men.

This is just not good and demonstrates once again the agenda of the republican/tea party wantingto move this country backwards to a previous century to what they think was the good old days.

Too Bad

Two dumb posts in a row from you Paul. Unless I missed one.

Got a thing about masturbation?

If a person holds him or herself out as a proponent of family values and uses their family as a prop in their politics, then I think the public actions of their family will be noticed and commented upon. Willow Palin didn't have to make public comments containing anti-gay sentiments but having read them it tells me something about the values she was raised with.

I don't agree with politicians using their families this way, but they choose to do it and have to take the consequences.

Good morning Pat, Boston, MA

Excellent post

And speaking of Rachel, I’m glad she went after Politico. I’m glad someone did. They are stenographers only. Not journalists. And more often than not, their “journalism” is short on fact checking.

Don't you get the impression that all those who work on Rachel's show are having a blast behind the scenes? Yes, I'm quite confident they work v. hard. Putting on a program 5 days a week is hard work, yet don't you get the sense that they laugh a lot and have lots of fun?

Good for them.

__________

Remember Halloween Night? The Sunday before the elections? Here Rachel is, telling everybody how it was crunch time, how there was so much reporting to do, that everybody was stressed out. And yet here she was, sitting with her legs up on her desk with her rabbit ears on, smiling and joking.

She's awesome.

I love watching Rachel she keeps young, hip, and intellectually curious.

I hope Senator Levin is not just posturing. I want DADT. Do these people even value the security of country not ti even mention the sanctity of life?

Good morning Beverly, how are you? Let's all contact our representatives, and tell them the wealthy do not need tax cut extensions.

Bombard them. 24/7.

Pat, thanks for bringing up the General Motors IPO. That's right, "Government Motors", PROOF that our "Socialist" President was intent on "nationalizing industry" will cut its debt to the American taxpayer in HALF today. There's more work to be done, but saving the jobs of hundreds of thousands of American workers and giving a home-grown industry the chance to survive in the United States is proving to be a sound investment.

Beckistan is strangely silent on this development.

Dear John: I remember all too well the pundits on tv who never gave this a chance. That's the problem in America. No one wants to see anything through. They don't want to invest in a chance to do something worthwhile. Some things take a while to develop into a success. You can't tell many people that though. Especially the pundits. They never did labor work. And have nil appreciation for the actual workers in this country. Yet they sit back every day and dictate what industries should not be saved. Industries they know nothing about.

I am thrilled for these people who invested so much of themselves to save their industry. They worked for it. With blood, sweat and tears.

Great post, Pat. I think the Democrats are wise to bring up DADT and the Dream Act in the lame duck session---they don't involve issues of budget/spending/revenues as other bills might so the deficit v. spending question doesn't come into play. These are issues instead that define where a party stands and allow the voters to see clearly which party reflects their values.

I would love to see them make the Republicans actually hold a filibuster---would love the headline that says Republicans Filibuster Against Military Bill. I've about given up on them doing this but can always hope.

Dear Steeler Fan: I was shocked when I heard this news yesterday on both DADT & Dream Act. Evidently Senator Levin didn't want to fight for the DADT and President Obama had to give him a shove. Sometimes you have to wonder if their heart is in it. If it isn't, then they should get out and retire.

It may be a very productive lame duck session. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

Time for President OBAMA to have a short talk with Sen. Harry REID about the fake filibuster coming to an end in American politics.

It's way too soon to bring out the GM party hats. The government plans to sell about 400 million GM shares beginning six months after the IPO. That would still leave the government with a one-third interest in the company with about 500 million shares. Even if the government is able to get the $33 IPO price for the 400 million shares, it would then have to sell its remaining 500 million shares at about $53 in order to break even on the bailout. Good luck.

Obama: ""Supporting the American auto industry required tough decisions and shared sacrifices, but it helped save jobs, rescue an industry at the heart of America's manufacturing sector, and make it more competitive for the future."

Excuse me Mr. President, but a similar outcome could have ensued if GM were allowed to fail and proceed through a traditional bankruptcy. GM, as many other failed companies before them, could have emerged from that bankruptcy as a leaner company unburdened by choking debt. That's the way our system works. Your intervention was not only unnecessary, but it set a precedent that some other ideologue president might use in the future to justify massive government interference with the private sector. Your labor union buds might be thanking you for this. But the rest of us are not.

Well Bill, GM management said they'd have to close rather than file Chapter 11, but I guess you know better.

Speaking of management, in the event of a Chapter 11 filing the top management team would likely have staid in place and they didn't even have an inkling how much trouble they were even in.

Anybody who was shocked to find poor financial management within General Motors and Chrysler — as former auto czar Steve Rattner says he was — must not have been paying much attention to the U.S. auto industry.

Here’s the first clue that maybe all was not right: none of the Detroit Big Three, including GM, Chrysler and Ford, could consistently turn a profit in the midst of the greatest decade for U.S. auto sales ever, a phenomenon that auto industry analysts called “profitless prosperity.”

http://www.bnet.com/blog/auto-business/no-fooling-rattner-found-poor-management-at-gm-chrysler/818

It's also a clever rewrite of history and badly ignores the facts. HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of additional people would've been unemployed at the deepest point of the recession.

On Monday, an auto industry consulting firm, Planning Perspectives Inc., reported that 68% of participants in a survey of executives for industry suppliers said their companies would have to downsize if General Motors declared bankruptcy, while 12% said their businesses would likely close or would definitely do so. In the Midwest alone, some 275,000 jobs would be lost as a result of a GM bankruptcy. "If they go into bankruptcy, it's going to have a catastrophic effect on businesses across the board," says John W. Henke Jr., president of PPI, based in Birmingham, Mich.

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1862737,00.html

Is this thing done yet? No, but the worst fears of detractors are out of the realm of possibility, and a lot of people are working because it was done. Keep looking at the cloud, but the silver lining isn't hard to find.

"The point is not whether government can revive, at least temporarily, a floundering company by sinking into it billions of taxpayer dollars and trampling hundreds of years of contract law. As with TARP, it's all about opportunity cost and unintended consequences. What else could have been done with that money? How does it incentivize companies to treat risk? What sort of uncertainty does it create among business and bondholders? The answers: Much, recklessly and vast."

But I guess you know better.

http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2010/11/18/gm-ipo-gives-little-reason-for-celebration/

So your position is that letting the Great Recession turn into Great Depression 2.0 is preferable to propping up a company on a short term basis to limit the harm that comes to We the People. Thanks for setting me straight on that.

Someone should have let George W. Bush know. http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/Morning-Vid-Bush-Says-TARP-Saved-the-Economy-5657

Or Ronald Reagan. http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/04/the-1980-chrysler-bailout/

People don't seem to be able to see the big picture.

Lets say we let GM fail. Right away there are 244,000 people out of work.

All of the companies that supply parts to GM range from large to small specialty shops. They would either close completely or have drastic reductions in their workforce.

Next up...all of the stores where all those people USED to shop. What happens to them. More layoffs? More closures?

Now we go to the hit the states take to their unemployment funds, PLUS, the loss of tax revenue generated by all those people.

You see, it's just not the auto industry that would be hurt. It's only the tip of the iceberg.

This is the true trickle down theory in practice.

We can't afford to be short sighted about these things.

The ironic thing is that we're expected to believe as a matter of faith that wealth directed at the already wealthy will trickle down to the middle class. At the same time we're expectd to just absorb hits DIRECTLY ON the middle class because "it's just business."

To recap: Expecting the wealthy to pay their share is hurting the middle class. Actually hurting the middle class is NOT hurting the middle class.

Right on. And this is only going to get worse when the full republican/tea party agenda is exposed. Why do you think the republicans bailed out of the meeting with our President at the last minute, when they are the ones that wanted the meeting?

It is because the republican/tea party has no new ideas to bring to the table and the ones the have have already been failures in the previous adminstration. The majority of America wants the congress to make decisions, not President Obama.

Come January 2011, we will see what happens. The republican/tea party will have the ball in the House and lets see how they are going to create jobs here in the U.S.A., lower the deficit, balance the budget, improve education, and all the other rhetoric they regurgitated during the election cycle.

America in watching and the republican/tea party is going to be held responsible.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

Right on. And this is only going to get worse when the full republican/tea party agenda is exposed. Why do you think the republicans bailed out of the meeting with our President at the last minute, when they are the ones that wanted the meeting?

America in watching and the republican/tea party is going to be held responsible.

I think I know

CNN reported there was a first face-to-face session since the Nov. 2 election, but there was no announcement beforehand, no read-out afterward as to what was discussed. If Reid treated Boehner to birthday cake, the gesture was not revealed.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/17/harry-reid-and-john-boehner-have-first-post-election-meeting/

And because the republican/tea party has no new ideas to bring to the table and the ones the have already been failures in the previous adminstration.

See, John didn't want a slurpee on his B-day

Dreaming,

What would you call Social Security? It may not be the same ponzi scheme Madoff used, but it sure looks similiar.

Taking from today's workers, and giving to yesterday's workers or today's retirees. And then we hope that there will be money for us, today's workers, as long as our children are working. Doesn't that sound about right.

Big Bear:

The word that eludes you is "safety net".

If Social Security is a ponzi scheme so is for-profit health insurance.

Nash,

A "safety net". I call Social Security a supplement, but it could also be a safety net I guess. But it is only a safety net if people actually save for their own retirement. Many people use it as their only retirement. Therefore, it can't be a safety net.

I would think that all insurance would fall under a ponzi scheme in some manners. You purchase insurance to protect against bad things happening in the future. But you usually don't get that money back, making it "for-profit". But Social Security and Madoff, take money from people, pay others with that money, hoping to get more people to pay, so that the second round of people can be paid. And so and so on. Many people say that Social Security is money you have put in and just getting back. That is not true. Although many people have paid all their lives into Social Security, they have not put in as much as today's retirees are drawing out, and to top it off, there are a lot less workers for each retiree today. And that doesn't even include those on Social Security that aren't retired.

Great post Nashville_fan:

I am going after my Senators Kerry and Brown on the tax cut extensions for the rich. I will be furious if they get extended. We're hearing so many stories that it's hard to know what's what anymore. But this is where I stand firm. No tax cut extensions for the wealthy. We need to push Congress, both parties, on this. As well as President Obama.

DailyKos:

Wall Street may earn $19 billion in 2010, its fourth-most profitable year, even as regulatory changes and a weakened economy limit its ability to generate profit, New York state's comptroller said.

The comptroller, Thomas DiNapoli, also said that while it is too soon to predict bonuses, the average payout may rise because banks are shedding jobs and a smaller pool of people wll be eligible to get bonuses.

In a report released on Tuesday, DiNapoli said total profit may slide 69 percent from $61.4 billion in 2009 as Wall Street boosts capital reserves, curbs riskier transactions and focuses on long-term performance more than short-term gains.

DiNapoli said Wall Street has nonetheless benefited from federal bailouts and low interest rates, and may see profitability settle near levels that prevailed prior to 2007 and 2008, when it lost $54 billion overall.

Good morning Pat. I agree with you about the tax cuts, but the mid term elections have given me a new perspective on things, i.e. t"hems thats gots" decide what is going to happen in this country.

And something tells me that the first payoff of all those "inconsequetial" millions of dollars invested in Congressional candidates in the midterms is gonna be the extension of the deficit busting tax cuts.

Because that is what the corporate people want. And even though it is easy to lash out at the Obama Administration and wonder why they don't "fight" for more things, the simple truth is that the "corporate people" own the Congress and the Supreme Court, and President Obama is just trying to steal crumbs off their table for the rest of us.

Our political process has pretty much been usurped, and those in power use their control of the media to create dissent and manipulate us.

But all that being said, I would much rather all the tax cuts expire than to have billionaires get a tax break that we can't afford. But I have accepted the fact that I don't bring enough cash to the table to be heard in modern day America.

Sad but true.

Nashville_fan

Thanks for doing what was best for America and saving GM President Obama.

Thousands of jobs have been created and saved right here in Tennessee because you had the foresight not to let more American manufacturing jobs go up in smoke. And Senator Bob Corker, who was against you every step of the way, is now stepping up to take credit for your leadership. He can have the credit . . . we the people appreciate the jobs and having a President who does what is best for the country, not what is best for his poll numbers.

Even if you never get credit for the things that you have helped get done, I for one am appreciative.

http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2010/09/20/bob_corker_booed_at_spring_hill

http://detnews.com/article/20100917/AUTO01/9170411/GM-adding-engine-jobs-at-Tennessee-plant

Nash

excellent post

I love the way you are always optimistic and able to break the issues down in simple English.

Thank you

Thanks Bev! :o)

No CU, under the ignorant rants of Conservatives Nazism, Socialism, and Communism are the same thing and anyone who dares to dissent should have been rounded up by ACORN operatives and sent to FEMA detention camps by now.

And you seem unusually angry today. Why all this anger from Conservatives when supposedly the world is yours to rule now?

I think you and I are on the same page, Nash----Congress is bought and paid for, and not by the American people. Same with the Supreme Court. The last person in Washington fighting for you and me and the rest of the ordinary people is President Obama and he can only do so much. So I, too, thank him for doing the best he can against extraordinary odds and urge him to keep up the fight.

Steeler Fan/Nashville,

I will agree with you that Washington is bought and paid for by various factions in our society, but to think that our president is the only one fighting for ordinary people is humorous. He speaks well, he talks a good game, but in the end, he is bought and paid for also. Just a different faction.

If he is truly a man of the people for the people, why does he continually go against the majority of people on major issues? Does he know better than the majority of regular Americans? Is his education any better than your education? And if he backs down on the extension of tax cuts, what does that make him, especially if he is standing up for the ordinary guy?

All of Washington is bought and paid for, I will continue to agree, but there hasn't been a real honest person there in decades. As much as I dislike Jimmy Carter, he is probably the most honest person we've had in the White House since Honest Abe himself.

Big Bear:

Who is it exactly that you think owns President Obama? What evidence do you have that he has motives other than what is best for the country?

How do you substantiate your claim that he is going against the will of the people?

He ran for two years telling the American people what he wanted to do, and that is what he has done.

You say you agree that our government is bought and paid for, and yet you continue to support those doing the buying. Strange.

Big Bear - If he is truly a man of the people for the people, why does he continually go against the majority of people on major issues?

I've said it before but sometimes doing the right thing is bad policy and plays poorly in the polls. If Obama as you claim continues to go against the will of the majority of the people he will not win a second term. The majority will vote for someone else in 2012.

I agree with Nash that he ran and won on a certain set of ideas and policies. He has attempted to push those policies during his term. It has been debated over and over how successful those policies are. I suggest that he is not so much owned by corporate interests in his failings in things like energy reform and health care reform, rather he is too willing to compromise. In my opinion that is his weakness. He has offered his hand to the GOP on various occasions, let them provide input on legislation only to have them vote against the very provisions they proposed. Whether it is HCR legislation or the START treaty if Obama is for it they eventually are going to be against it.

Case in point if he wilts about the extension of the tax cuts for the rich, it won't be because he wants to enrich corporate America; it will be because he foolishly let himself be snookered again by the republicans. I have every respect for him, but there is a saying - Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, thrice... and counting shame on me.

I agree with you about President Carter, IMO he has been and continues to be our best and most relevant former president on social justice and world issues.

Nashville,

So you don't think that Obama doesn't have favors to pay back while in office? I could ask you the same question, who do you think owns any congressman or congresswoman? What evidence do you have?

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/toppacs.php

Go Check out the contributions to the democratic campaign.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers--98%--of $2.6 million

American Association for Justice--97%--of $2.4 million

Operating Engineering Union--90% of $2.1 million

American Federation of Teachers--100%--$1.8 million

Laborers Union--96%--$1.8 million

American Federation of ST/CNTY/MUN Employees--99%--of $1.9 million

Teamsters Union--98%--$1.9 million

You don't think they will call in for their favors when they think things are not going right for them. And really, even though some parts of the HCR are justified, 2/3's of the people dislike the mandated parts, yet, that doesn't go against the will of the people?

Well, in answering your last statement, the only way not to support those being bought in our government is to not vote. But I am not going to quit voting, because that is a 1st Amendment right. And since all of our government, including the President, is bought and paid for by some faction, I sometimes have to hold my nose and just vote.

Yellowdog Mark:

I understand what you are saying about President Obama and his willingness to compromise, however, what I can't figure out is what other options the President has.

I mean, he can draw a line in the sand and refuse to cross it, but if he does not have the votes to get what he wants, and he refuses to consider other offers, the resulting stalemate is still a win for the corporate people.

Why?

Because they are doing just fine under the status quo, and if nothing gets done they will continue to.

For this reason, I don't see President Obama's willingness to compromise as a sign of his personal weakness, but rather a symptom of the weakness of the Executive Branch in our current corporate owned system.

Really, the only option is the corporate way or the highway.

Big Bear:

I'm glad you brought up unions because I want to ask you a question:

What is it about unions that you find so offensive?

Currently labor unions make up only 12% of the workforce. The things they are asking for, like better wages and benefits, can hardly be considered exotic or unusual. Corporations negotiate all the time to get more favorable tax rates and laws, so why should workers be excluded?

Many of the workplace protections we enjoy today came as a result of the union movement.

So what is the problem?

P.S. The amounts of money that you list as union contributions to President Obama pale in comparison to the total amount he took in, just as the influence of labor unions pale in comparison to the financial control corporate people exercise over every aspect of our lives. If government is bad and unions are bad, then the only good force in our society is for profit corporations? You really believe that?

Nashville

You bring up a good point about the limits of the executive branch. It is good that we have it that way with the checks and balances per the Constitution especially in case we get another Bush level occupant of the White House. Unfortunately Obama acts as if he is willing to become the GOP's unequal partner.

Most Western democracies utilize a parlimentary system of governance. Don't take me for one that wants to switch our two hundred plus year experiment here, but those countries seem to get things done by forming coalitions to create ruling parties. They can compromise because it is in everyone's interest to do so. It has always been that way, compromise is needed to get anything done, even to nominate a PM. (I'm expecting a rightie to jump in that I am a socialist loving commie). Case in point I could never see what happened in England happen in the US where the Liberal democrats opted to caucus with the Tories in lieu of the labor party.

Here in the US compromise shouldn't be a bad word either, but each side has to give and get a little bit in the process. Lately it has been a one way street. In the case of the Tax cuts I suggest Congress do nothing and let all the temporary cuts expire. I will not like claiming only $600 vs. $1000 for my child deduction and I won't be enthused that the standard deduction will be reduced or that I will be taxed at a 3% higher rate. However, I agree with the Conservatives that the debt needs to be dealt with. No more extensions and definately no permanency to these temporary cuts. From your past posts I gather you agree.

One note to Big Bear and his point about Obama's Union support; for all their support you would have thought he would have helped them out a bit when it came to HCR. Not one to believe I know all the intricacies, but another thing besides the mandate that I disliked was the plan to cut back on suppposedly 'cadillac' bloated union health care benefits. Why is it that something that the unions fought and paid for in their contracts be removed?

I also agree with Big Bear to a point, Obama is beholden to others, although I perhaps naively believe he is beholden to his democratic supporter's policies and ideals.

Yellowdog Dem:

I agree that all the tax cuts should expire. I think the only reason that some are hesitant is because the economy is still fragile.

But I think it is time and it would save us from a whole lot of political posturing, which is an added perk! :o)

Big Bear--the President was elected with a majority of the votes cast on a platform that he clearly articulated so to me he is acting as we elected him to do and thus following the wishes of the majority. The voters will have a chance in 2012 to decide if they want him to continue; until then his mandate is to do what he thinks best for the country. I for one will be working hard to re-elect him.

Nashville,

What do I dislike about Unions, the fact that many of them have been as corrupt as corporations. Not all corporations are bad, and not all unions are bad. In fact, 100 years ago, to even 50 years ago, they were wonderful things and the helped the workers out. I just believe that many of them have overpriced themselves in this economy and technological era. Especially manufacturing areas.

At the same time, I see corporations only worried about their bottom line, mainly because more Americans have money in the stock market, and profits equal dividends, which equals money for the stockholders.

One company I use to work for allowed its employees to purchase company stock. I still like that idea. Now not only were your stockholders the employees, but had a bigger stake in the company and seeing it profit. In fact the company I worked for was non-union, yet they matched our contribution towards stock, dollar for dollar--up to 6 percent, yet I was able to put in 12%. So each month, I was really putting back 18% of my earning toward their stock. Of course that company still makes money, since I left, my stock, which I have not spent yet, has split twice and tripled. It doesn't make me rich, just lucky to be there at the right time.

Most of my family, non immediate, are union members, with great pensions, but still, some of the things that I have seen just don't make sense. I believe that there are tons of laws to protect the workers, and that most unions are no longer needed. I disagree that government contracts have to go to union based contractors, why shouldn't non-union contractors get a shot at government contracts, especially in states like NY, OH, and other areas. Is it wrong to use a non union contract because you get a better bid on a job?

And just because I listed more unions than other contributors doesn't mean he doesn't owe more favors.

The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates. Because of contribution limits, organizations that bundle together many individual contributions are often among the top donors to presidential candidates. These contributions can come from the organization's members or employees (and their families). The organization may support one candidate, or hedge its bets by supporting multiple candidates.

Obama's Top Contributors

University of California--$1.5 million

Goldman Sachs--$.99 million

Harvard University--$854K

Mircosoft--$834K

Google--$803K--and they only paid about 2.4% in taxes last year--Think they expect a break

Citigroup--$701K

JP Morgan Chase & Company--$695K

Seems like some corporations have donated handsomely to Obama--and they won't expect favors also.

I believe all of Washington is corrupt--but I still vote, not by party, but by my own selfish interests. Or as I said, by holding my nose and pulling a lever:)

no joe:

You are a "regular" and you are not ignoring it, so what are you whining about?

You know just like I do that many of the folks being held at Guantanamo don't have any evidence against them because of the way that they were captured. So no matter where we try them, there is pretty thin gruel for any type of trial, military or civilian.

Which is a big reason why the Bush Administration didn't have the trials and kicked the can down the road.

So stop your griping . . . if there was an easy solution to the problem, President Bush and the militiary genius/draft dodger Dick Cheney would have found it, don't you think?

Once again, you find a way to blame old, left over Bush era boondoggles on the Obama Administration.

Whatever.

One could say conservatism is a mental disorder, relying, as it does, on fantasy over reality. The more I lived under the Presidency of George W. Bush and the GOP Congress, the massive unfunded spending, the doubling of the National debt, the more I am inclined to agree that conservatism is a mental disorder--it speaks of fiscal responsibility as fact but it is indeed fantasy over the reality. One only has to look at the fiscal irresponsibility of every republican president beginning with Reagan.

5 Trillion Dollars that Nancy Pelos and the democrats have Added to the national debt since they took control of congress in 2007.. Nice try Jody of trying to put the Spending of the Democrats on Republicans. Your lies dont sit well... It Amazes me that Democrats admit now the republicans have Conotrol of the spending in this country and Want to know what they are gonna do about the Debt and Deficts.. But still fail to put the Blame on the Democrats when they control the House and they spend to no end.. you can't have it both ways...

Steve,

You post that same stastistic almost everyday. Yet, you continue to pretend like President Bush didn't turn a budget surplus into a budget deficit with unpaid for tax cuts, unfunded wars, and unfunded entitlements, all with the help of a Republican controlled House and Senate.

Happy spinning Steve.

20 to life is only a failure in the Conservative world, where anything done by anyone but Conservatives is a failure.

A dangerous man is locked up. The system worked. Get over it.

John B. - Not only did the system work, but according to the full story on MSNBC's main page:

"Ghailani now faces 20 years to life in prison, longer than three of the four sentences handed down by military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay."

And according to the WSJ, the witness' testimony was not excluded (as NoJoe claims) because "he wasn't read his Miranda rights":

"Prior to the start of the five-week trial, the government faced an early setback when U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan barred prosecutors from using a key witness, because the witness's identity was discovered through harsh interrogation techniques, which his lawyers have said equated to torture, while in CIA custody".

And finally, the Washington Post quotes the presiding judge in the case as follows:

"You deserve a lot of credit," U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan told the jurors after the verdicts were announced. "You have demonstrated also that American justice can be delivered calmly, deliberately and fairly, by ordinary people - people who are not beholden to any government, including this one."

"You deserve a lot of credit," U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan told the jurors after the verdicts were announced. "You have demonstrated also that American justice can be delivered calmly, deliberately and fairly, by ordinary people - people who are not beholden to any government, including this one."

That's probably the best part. Conservatives don't trust anyone beyond their tribe, and fear that the American people will get it wrong. So Daddy Government needs to step in and prevent that by violating the Constitution. The President believes in the American people, and it shouldn't surprise any reasonable person to find that we're up to the task...just about any task.

Thanks No Jo, I do not have to listen to Rush today.

I don't know, John - I kind of thought "ordinary people who are not beholden to any government, including this one" was the current Republican/Tea party mantra..... their mission statement.....their entire way of life. Guess there couldn't have been any liberals on this jury, then, huh? :)

Nojonobo in her selective outrage conveniently forgets to mention that the reason this guy wasn't convicted on more counts is because much of the evidence of thrown out because it had been testimony extracted under torture. The perversion of the American justice system by the former Torturer-in-Chief, George W. Bush, is responsible for the outcome of this trial.

Houston is right. At least Obama lets other countrys do the torture for us. That way we (he)can keep our (his) hands clean.

Of all the things that the conservatives say, the one about how the unemployed are too lazy to get a job is the most maddening. I am sure there are some unemployed who game the system, avoid jobs and prefer to collect that unemployment check---there always have been and there may be more now. But there are so many people who would give anything for a job and all that it means---of course the salary but also health care for their families, the self-respect that comes from earning your way and providing for your loved ones, the pride in accomplishment and the camaraderie of working in an organization. To imply that these folks are lazy and dumb is so hurtful and wrong. And the conservatives' inability to even consider that there are people like that---desperate for jobs but locked out---speaks to a meanness of spirit that is telling.

Steeler Fan:

You know, I think you hit on the thing that bothers me the most - mean spiritedness.

There is a certain entitled air of superiority that underlies much of what passes for "conservatism" these days.

And yet, when these same folks face hard times, the first thing out of their mouths is "Where's the government to bail me out?"

Insane.

No one likes social programs until they need one.

I wonder how many of those good conservative Americans are just a paycheck or two away from needing unemployment.

You really can't afford to get so smug in this climate.

So true, Dennis. The storylines are carefully constructed so that you get to continue assuming that everyone else is a loser while believing that your own misfortune is undeserved.

Houston:

How true. Just look at the posts today. The republicans are convinced that the road to the White House is paved with the bodies of the Middle Class.

We will get over it. Just like teabaggers got over 06/08.

soazDan: Rachel is awesome. She's fun, she's smart. She's a hard worker. And she, you know, FACT CHECKS. EVERYTHING!!!!! As does Keith Olbermann and Lawrence O'Donnell.

Yes, fact checks. Music to my ears.

Besides your blanket and mindless attack, can you name one thing that Rachel has said that you disagree with?

Your post reads like really bad fiction.

I agree with you. Rachel is too honest for the corporate media to handle. Despite the fact that more time is giving to conservative viewpoints over progressives on MSNBC by a factor of four. The right wingers will not be happy untill MSNBC resembles Faux News.

Dear Patrick: Not many people can handle the truth. Facts? Who wants facts? They want emotion and a negative spin on just about everything.

You know what is sad? We never really get to know these legislators, both parties. I bet a lot of them do a lot of good things behind the scenes, especially over the holidays. But we never ever hear about it. Our local newspapers may print the stories, but the national media as a whole I don't believe does. We hear when they go over to Iraq and Afghanistan, which is good, but I'd like to know what they do in their communities. How they reach out to just normal hard working Americans.

You know the best thing about Rachel Maddow?

She can conduct her show WITHOUT YELLING AT ANYBODY AND EVERYBODY TO ATTEMPT TO GET HER POINT ACROSS!!!!

CU,

To anyone other than hate-filled bigots, yes.

soazDan

Rachel Maddow is typical of the left wing desease that has afflicted the media. Stubborn, radical, disgusting in her views....she'll last a couple more months at MSNBS before she's booted. You two are close to being the only ones watching this vile imposter of a journalist.

soazDan

Rachel celebrated her 2nd year on MSNBC a litle while back. She is a Rhodes Scholar, hip, knows a lot about pop culture and the world, unlike those buffoons on FOX especially, the mad tin- foil hatter, paranoid, Glenn Beck.

You oughta watch her. In addition to learning from her debucktion junction [fact checking] you wouldn't be so grumpy.

Too bad the revered Maddow did not check these statements before putting them on the air.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/rachel-maddow/statements/byruling/false/

I think she is a very smart person, but entirely slanted towards the far left. This is no different than the far right commentators so I have no problem with it. But to declare her as "honest." I think not. She is in the business of getting ratings just like all the rest and will do what she has to do to obtain them. No different than Beck, Hannity, etc. They are all birds of a feather than all present lies and half truths over and over again on a dialy basis. If you find yourself on either end of this arguement, and cannot acknowledge that these are just TV entertainers, chances are you are either far left or far right yourself.

The Independent-2245816:

So Maddow got two relatively minor statements wrong over a year ago. She's made other mistakes, too, and usually corrects them herself on the next show if she finds out she's wrong. She's human. She makes mistakes. But how can you pretend to be outraged over that when Fox News talking heads are spewing a constant stream of increbible lies like their recent whopper about President Obama spending $200 million per day on his last overseas trip and taking 1/10 of the US Navy fleet along with him? You're outrage seems amazingly selective.

CU,

Did your 'partner' go on vacation? Should someone call the ASPCA, since you probably kicked the dog and cat to near dearth? Seems like you have no one at home to beat up, so you are taking out your frustration on the females on the vine.

Get some help dear boy. Your partner probably checked into a shelter for battered people.

Racheal maddow...ah yes I think I may have saw her on tv once, but I don't go for carpet munchers as newspeople, so I turned on a cartoon or something.

Most male news people are carpet munchers, what difference does it make in their journalistic credibility?

Edward, thanks for letting us know that you allow bigotry to determine your measurement of credibility. It says much about you.

Seriously,

You all sit here and use this $700 Billion dollar thing day in and day out.

The real number is $70 billion per year. You try and sell your points using a 10 year number. And on top of that it is a estimate, it might not really happen. It is a guess. What if the Rich find more ways to cheat on their taxes, remove their money from American shores. Say after this year, 10% move down into the 97%--How much more will we lose? And what if you lose 10% per year? Next year, maybe get the $70 billion, 2nd year, maybe $63 Billion, the next...

As you throw out your $700 billion, remember it can change, and I will bet it will, especially when people start getting better deals in offshore accounts or can move their money through other countries without having to pay as much. Check our Google's 2.4% tax rate.

Skip, first you talk about civil discourse and then, in the next paragraph call Republicans stupid. If all you're going to do is blather, why waste your time, or more importantly, ours?

"Hilarious", ain't it? "Anti-Socialists" clinging for dear life to the socialist entitlements.

The people have stuttered.