Why is there no critique of Obama's latest wildly optimistic Federal Budget?

I just reviewed Obama's Federal Budget for 2011, including projections through 2020. Here are the findings;

Obama has projected Federal spending of about $45.8 Trillion over the ten years ending in 2020. This is more than double the $22.58 Trillion spent during the 10 years of Bush/Clinton that ended in Fiscal Year 2008.

He projects that Federal Revenues will increase by over 8% per year, when the average growth rate in Federal Revenues over the last 20 years was only 3.9% per year.

He projects that interest rates on the debt will remain artificially low over the next 10 years, which is very unrealistic, since interest rates have averaged 3.6% over the last 20 years.

Using Obama's artificially optimistic assumptions on economic growth and interest rates, he shows the National Debt increasing from the $10.025 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2008 to $25.777 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2020.

If we kept Obama's spending projections but put in a realistic historical growth rate of 3.9% and an interest rate averaging 3.6%, the actual National Debt would increase to over $39 Trillion by 2020.

Interest alone on the National Debt would increase from an average of $199 Billion per year under G W Bush to over $1.5 Trillion per year in 2020. THE INCREASE FOR INTEREST ALONE by 2020 would require increased taxes of over $15,000 per year ($1,250 per month) for the typical family of 4.

The huge increases in spending by Obama are the problem with these huge Deficits, but Obama has increased his spending over the next 9 years by almost $2 Trillion even over his last projection, which was a HUGE increase over Bush's projection.

SPENDING IS BANKRUPTING THE COUNTRY.

Politicians and big business had ample amount of surplus money to spend for the recent campaign ads and donations; but don't seem to have enough for hiring new workers. So why are they not using some of their huge profits or foregoing their big bonuses to hire more people, who were the supporters of those businesses through the production and purchasing and now are seriously affected in this Recession? Where is their societal obligation now to help support our economy and people needing work after the people contributed to their wealth?

Roy Wilson...it's good to see that someone is paying attention.

My question is...

WHEN IS CONGRESS GOING TO INTRODUCE REAL LEGISLATION TO CUT MANDATORY SPENDING.

An Independent Thinker "Politicians and big business had ample amount of surplus money to spend for the recent campaign ads and donations; but don't seem to have enough for hiring new workers. So why are they not using some of their huge profits or foregoing their big bonuses to hire more people"

Companies hire workers when they have increased demand for goods and services. Take an economics 101 class.

The former Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, who now represents Rapiscan, which is the very same company selling the scanners to his previous job when he served as the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such a sweet deal for someone, who stands a chance for a lucrative kickback, not to mention a conflict of interest within the Govt. Usually there is a 2 to 3 year ban or hold on taking jobs after leaving the military and Govt. that possibly represents potential conflict of interest. Should there be an investigation into that deal? Should the Govt. allow for such conflicts of interest to exist that allows a former Govt. employee to profit from the selection of such contracts or business deals? How many other companies, esp. small ones had the opportunity to compete unprejudiced for that contract? And who did the selection without any connected bias?

An Independent Thinker...there has to be a need for new workers. It doesn't matter how much money big business or politicians have if there is no increased demand for their products or services.

Germs spread very easily and fast in the hospitals, who practice good sanitation. However, have you noticed the BLUE GLOVES that the TSA uses for the Pat Downs??? And have you noticed that THEY DO NOT CHANGE THE GLOVES after frisking the previous passenger, who just might have some germs that are bad for you???? All other professionals change gloves along with the proper sanitary disposal after finishing working with every individual. So why should TSA be required to apply any less than acceptable standards of health practice??? Obviously, the gloves are for protecting themselves, and gives us the impression that they could care less about their passengers' health. We should start demanding better health standards of practice requirements from the TSA when conducting the Pat Downs, especially with young children and the elderly, whose immune systems may not be as strong. Maybe the Health Dept. needs to be notified about our concerns about the TSA not changing gloves after checking each individual along with the proper disposal of the unsanitary gloves into a safe hazards container. IT IS VERY EASY TO SPREAD DISEASES THEIR CURRENT PRACTICE!!!

ROY WILSON-336103

An Independent Thinker "Politicians and big business had ample amount of surplus money to spend for the recent campaign ads and donations; but don't seem to have enough for hiring new workers. So why are they not using some of their huge profits or foregoing their big bonuses to hire more people"

Companies hire workers when they have increased demand for goods and services. Take an economics 101 class.

Any one with the slightest bit of intelligence should be able to comprehend by now the Tea Baggers were wrong. Republican demagogues are not listening. Republicans oppose just about everything that might reduce structural deficits. They want no tax breaks for the middle class; just millionaires which btw are essential to any attempts to get the budget under control.

I think the tea Baggers would have seen the Republican's blocking an extension of unemployment benefits was an immense wake up call to smell the coffee. It must be a tremendous hardship for them.

It's like tea baggers have no Misery Index. The widening income inequality and how it jeopardizes equal opportunity and democracy has been fueled by FOX NOISE'S word doctor (read spin doctor) Frank Luntz's rhetoric. Socialist, communist, "government take over ", Obabla, Obummer, Odumbo is taking my country away and any word that starts with an "O" and ends in an oh so cleverly crafted words to stop President Obama.

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

ROY WILSON-336103

Why is there no critique of Obama's latest wildly optimistic Federal Budget?

SPENDING IS BANKRUPTING THE COUNTRY.

How can post anything credulous from a website that blantly lies?

I went to the website where you got you info. This is the what I saw...

I was born in Cuba, and know the language of Communism, Obama speaks it well.

An Independent Thinker "Germs spread very easily and fast in the hospitals, who practice good sanitation. However, have you noticed the BLUE GLOVES that the TSA uses for the Pat Downs??? And have you noticed that THEY DO NOT CHANGE THE GLOVES after frisking the previous passenger, who just might have some germs that are bad for you????"

Good point. If they 'grope' the private parts of passengers, and then use the same gloves to grope the next passenger, they could be spreading diseases.

At least in the hospital they change gloves with each patient.

And do they screen the TSA people for homosexuals, who would get a kick out of groping people of the same sex? Or child molesters who might grope children? All sanctioned by the government - in fact, if the people or children object, they could be arrested.

Beverly in Chicago "How can post anything credulous from a website that blantly lies?"

What are you talking about, and why did you try to change the topic to the 'Tea Party"?

I did not post a link to any 'website', but just for your reference, here is the one I used for my information;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/

PS - It's put out by the White House and Obama's OMB, and it's under Obama's name.

So you're from Chicago too. Hmmmmmmmmmmm - that explains it.

ROY WILSON-336103

Beverly in Chicago "How can post anything credulous from a website that blantly lies?"

What are you talking about, and why did you try to change the topic to the 'Tea Party"?

I did not post a link to any 'website', but just for your reference, here is the one I used for my information;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/

PS - It's put out by the White House and Obama's OMB, and it's under Obama's name.

So you're from Chicago too. Hmmmmmmmmmmm - that explains it.

Because I googled it so I could understand your post. The freerupblic website came up first. It's a Tea Bagger website.

Roy Wison:

Get a reality check with your extremely naive statements!! There won't be demands for products or expansion of services when people don't have jobs to spend their income. If you don't have jobs, then they don't buy cars, etc. And that sir, is the plain and simple economics with the current Recession. Even a preschooler can understand that simple concept of economics. Arrogant and naive statements such as yours, is just an excuse for big business using trillions of dollars to spend on politics versus jobs. Such manipulations of arrogant statements is not a justification for self-centered and self-serving greed.

Your comment on germs spreading, also, shows your lack of knowledge and education with regards as to how germs spread. One needs not to place their hands inside pants or on private parts in order to spread diseases. If "Clueless You" ever attended even one medical visit, gloves are used and disposed of properly with no where close to the invasive tactics as you claimed in your illiterate statement.

One more comment for the one, who thinks he knows all with everything: If according to your contradictory statement that "spending bankrupts our nation", then how come big businesses are spending billions and more for campaign ads filled with twisted misinformation such as you put out, not to mention for the power of controlling to maintain the wealth? Go back to Cuba and take the beginning high school economics and history classes. The U.S. doesn't need more of your twisted Right Wing economics or the lack thereof filled with contradictions, since far too much of it exists in D.C. already.

Roy Wislon,

Your right wing concept of "Confuse to Diffuse" does not fool or deceive everyone as you seem to think it does. Try something more productive for the real problem!!!

Hey Roy Wilson--

"SPENDING IS BANKRUPTING THE COUNTRY."

So is ignorance and stupidity (lauded attributes of the modern-day GOP), that threaten compromise and progress!

Mad in CT, let me ask you a question. Who won the 2010 midterm elections? Who did the electorate throw out of office? Are the electorate the stupid people you are referring to? They seem to be pretty smart to me. They threw out of office the leftists that have been destroying our economy and our freedoms. Democratic run-away spending IS bankrupting our country. But we, the people, are doing something about it.

Gee, Mad in CT, since you and Beverly in Chicago claim that you libs are superior to us 'stupid and ignorant' conservatives, could you kindly tell us how you got so damned intelligent? Is there some web site you could refer us to that will verify that you are indeed right all of the time? I mean, I have a considerable amount of education and have been quite successful in life, yet you lefties remind me time and again how inferior I and my fellow righties are. Help me out here and show me how I too can be as smart as you are.

The increase in spending is not due to Obama's policies, really.

It is due mostly to lost federal revenue and increased manditory outlays due to the recession, and leftover spending from the last administration.

This is why when asked which policies and how much from the Obama administration have contributed to this rise, you do not get much from the right wing.

One thing you will be able to attribute to Obama, but also to every other polititian, is the debt added due to the extention of the tax cuts.

While it may not be a bad idea in the short term, I wish someone would have the political balls to recognize they ALL need to be stepped back if we are to tackle the debt. In addition, our elected officials will have to have the balls to cut spending as well.

Companies hire workers when they have increased demand for goods and services. Take an economics 101 class.

Trickle down/supply side economics doesn't work. And how is demand supposed to increase when we can't afford to spend? Wages for the middle class (and lower) have stagnated. When the top 2% holds even more of the wealth, it leaves less for us. Hence lower demand. Once again, trickle down does not work.

Roy Wilson,

Where was your critiquing during the Regan and esp., the Bush years? What a short memory some people have? And of course it is ALWAYS the Democrats faults just as everything happening since 2001 is now Obama's fault. Wake up and smell the roses,; because the errors lie with both parties not working together for the sake of the economy or the people. Politicians are more interested in supporting their party's policies regardless of whether it is bad or good for our society. Their self-centered, inflated egos have hindered their ability to listen to the constituents, who placed them in office. And unfortunately we can't impeach all of them as we did with the corrupt conduct of former Pres. R. Nixon (Rep.) and should have done so with Bush (Rep.) during his first term before totally destroying our nation's reputation and economy (not too mention the use of nation wide recognized illegal interrogations with war prisoners. But then, I seriously doubt that not all complainers on this site have spent a single day serving on the FRONT LINES of WAR to know what it is really like. Try serving 25 years plus to protect these same condescending whiners, who find nothing but fault with little to no suggestions or solutions. It is so much easier to point the the blame at the other party, than it is to work together for a solution with a me first attitude and you last if ever at all.

Here's my question: why do pundits and commentators like Chuck Todd, Savannah Guthrie and others consistently allow these republicans to speak outright lies - no matter how bizarre and never call them out on it. I frequently watch David Gregory who hammers the President but yet allows John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and company consistently say "stimulus created no jobs (numbers readily available to dispute this), Death panels (never a word questioning the validity of this nonsense) etc. I agree the dems and President Obama need to step up and tell these republicans and corporations to go to hell - pay higher taxes and stop sending jobs overseas - but I also wish our news commentators would do the same when these jerks spew their lies.

I frequently watch David Gregory who hammers the President

Hear Hear! They don't call him GOTCHA Gregory for nothing...

An Independent Thinker
My oh my, how testy we have become. I guess you can't stand criticism.

So you think companies should hire people they don't need in hopes that some of them will buy their goods and services. You should work for the government, because you would be a real flop as a businessman. I'll repeat my comment above, because it is so obviously true that perhaps you should think about it;
"Companies hire workers when they have increased demand for goods and services."

As for the 'germs' issue, maybe you're OK with some TSA official using the same rubber gloves to grope the private parts of several passengers in succession, but I think it's potentially unsanitary. Actually, I was agreeing with your comments on germs at Post #1.7. Why are you now discounting it?

Repulicants "The increase in spending is not due to Obama's policies, really."

REALLY?

Let's take a look at the Budgets proposed by Bush and Obama for the years 2009 - 2013;

Bush proposed spending Budget for 2009 - 2013 = $15.990 Trillion.

Obama proposed spending Budget for 2009 - 2013 = $18.743 Trillion.

My calculator says that's an increase of $2.753 Trillion over 5 years, or an average INCREASE of $551 Billion per year proposed by Obama. That's an extra $2.753 Trillion added to the National Debt for Obama.

Hey Spider--

Wanna get educated? Start by using facts and stop making s**t up. You Republicans and Tea Baggers always have some fear agenda in your political arsenal. You did the "Willie Horton" thing; then it was the Iraq war-promoting thing; then the Acorn, Black Panther thing; the muslim scare tactic mosque thing; then its the Black Kenyan president, lock-the-doors-beware-the-Black-Boogey-man-coming-to-take-your-wife-and-children thing. Booo! (Or is that BO?); then its the reverse discrimination Shirley Sherrod thing; fear of gays in the military thing; rising tide of illegal immigrants giving birth in the US thing, and on and on and on. Its as if you've got some Kwasimoto Tea Party hunchback slaving away in the basement just dreaming up the next fear du-jour BS with a direct hardline to Hannity, DeMint, Palin, Bachmann and Beck. They'd let Steele in on the plan but he's too stupid to keep a secret! How about stop scaring people and do some-THING positive, oh, like developing and implementing a plan to address America's ills. Try that for starters. Then rejoin the intelligent dialog after you've learned something. Anything.

Mad in CT "Try that for starters. Then rejoin the intelligent dialog after you've learned something. Anything."

So you call anybody that disagrees with you 'stupid', and you consider that an 'intelligent' comment?

Thanks, I needed a good laugh today.

Ron Wilson,

I see a play with words and number to make the GOP look good. Allow me to show a clearer picture.

1) You stated: (Interest alone on the National Debt ... average of $199 Billion per year under G W Bush). Bush's Interest on Debt was $549 Billion as of September 30, 2008. Also as you stated as interest rates increase the yearly National Debt Interest amount from the End of Bush’s Presidency would increase to nearly $700 Billion in the next 10 years.

(Ref: Bush appointed: Joint Statement of Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Secretary of the Treasury, and Jim Nussle, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, on Budget Results for Fiscal Year 2008 ( Fiscal year ends September 30, 2008). http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/hp1213.htm )

2) Reasons for Deficits are mostly due to decrease Federal Receipts and Wall Street and Banks Bailouts to date. The decrease Federal receipts, (total Cash Inflows), is due mostly to the distribution of Growth of the GDP and increase income ratios has gone to the upper Elite while the lower classes income had been decreased among taxpayers, which will also be the reasons for Deficits in the future unless we get back to a stronger middleclass with a fair cut of the American Pie.

Since the Elite upper 1% pays less a percentage on their income than the middleclass. Plus the New Middleclass range of people have been decrease by about 25% and the real income levels of less than the 1960s.

During Clinton Presidency Federal Receipts reach 20.6% of GDP and the Deficit were decreasing. Since 2003 to 2010 Federal Receipts Average only 16.7% of GDP and reached lows of 14.8%. The 40 year historical average of Federal spending outlays is 20.6%.

To stop the deficit from getting out of control we need to get back our Middleclass in size and income and increase taxes so all people are paying near the tax table’s rates. That means to start to plan on reducing the different on Capital Gains that most Rich Elite pay only about 1/3 of the tax table rate percentage of their income level.

Yes we have to reduce Federal Outlays to about 20% of the GDP and increase Receipts to about 20.6% when the middleclass goes back to norm % of people with income based on real income level for the period in time they are earning. Otherwise we will need about 31% tax inflows to match the 30% outlays and 1% of the inflows to pay down on the deficit, of which most of these funds would come from the 3% upper levels.

To provide a little background the following is provided.

I am disgusted of the GOP and Tea Party member’s untruths and just out-right lies and Hate Remark’s postings from the Republican spin play book. We now know that Fox UnNews & Friends, Palin, Beck and others are Far Right Wing Nuts of the GOP tool kit paid by Elite Republicans to support their views of an Elitists America.

As Mr. Buffett Stated, Tax breaks for the rich don't help the economy, will NOT trickle down to the rest of you and has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on.

Now I see the Republican posters trying to put more storytelling, untruths and dumb logic Spins to support their Bull.

I am an owner of a small Business with a projected 2010 Gross Income of $4.6 Million and a net Business Income of $402,000.

I am a father and not a Dem and had the honor to serve America in one war. I am a red blooded America who says to Allow the GOP/Bush Tax Cuts to Expire on people making greater than $250,000 to help reduce the Deficit and maybe can be directed to help fund SS for all Americans benefit.

My Accountant had calculated my additional tax if Bush’s tax cuts for over $250,000 are allowed to expire on my projected Gross Business income of $4,600,000 and personal gross income of $402,000 to be ONLY $1,740 as follows:

Gross taxable Income…………………………………………………………….$ 402,000

Personal Deductions & write-offs…………………….…………………..($ 108,500)

Net 2010 Taxable income…………………………………………………….…$ 293,500

ADDITIONAL tax if GOP tax cuts over $250,000 expired………..$ 1,740

If my Gross Taxable income should be less than $358,000 there would be no increased tax from allowing Bush tax cut for taxable income over $250,000 to expire.

My vote if asked as a Small Business owned with a Gross Business income of $ 4,600,000 is to allow the GOP/Bush’s tax cuts over $250,000 to Expire since paying an extra $ 1,740 in tax to support America would create no hardships for my Business or my Family.

Also if needed to support my Country AND help my follow American it would be agreeable to increase the over $250,000 tax rate by an additional 4% to 43% which would only increase my and most others tax liability by $3,480 on a Taxable Income of $ 402,000 and Gross Business Income of $ 4,600,000 just using the average of all personal deduction taken in 2009 for people with about $400,000 in Taxable Income.

Also note that most all people with Gross Income of less than $350,000 would have zero increase in Federal Income Tax increases if GOP/Bush’s tax cuts expirer for income levels greater than $250,000.

Also as any Small Business owner or Large Corporation CEO, (if not a Liar), will tell you that to expand and/or hire more Employees is based on Sales Increasing or projected to the point of needing more Employees to meet the demand, Not a Tax Break or Cut or Increase of a few percentages. My customer based to-date included people with incomes from $30,000 to $300,000 a year, as 98.5% of all other Business customers.

In Additional my business and all other Small Businesses would expand if people making less than $150,000 a year made about 25% plus more income with better Medical Coverage since they would have more expendable income to purchase my and other small businesses services and products.

Pay is not completely proportionate to productivity, never has been. It has more to do with ownership of the right to make the rules for Big businesses, Wall Street and Banks. Those who control the laws of Big businesses, control the monopoly of earnings. Also elites like Bernie Madoff. Those large Corporations or Elites who aren't willing to directly screw other people like Bernie simply let their lawyers and paid for Washington Electives do it for them, to milk the grey areas and feed off of other people's labor.

The role of government should in fact be to insure that human tendency does not go too far, and when it does, to use taxation to manage the distortions in the economy produced by enormous dispersions of income and wealth.

Giving tax breaks to the Elite do not create jobs. The GOP/Bush tax cuts to the elite over the last 10 years that totaled near a TRILLION DOLLARS was used to move/start operations oversea plus taking out more working Capital from Corporation via dividends and stock transactions. The Elite had a mad dash to take out mass amounts of capital out of Corporations due to the GOP 15% tax rate. Any future Elite tax reductions will more than likely be put into stocks, and unless the person is buying newly issued stock which far less than 1/10 of 1% of transactions, it just goes to another stockholder, it will not go into a company capitol account to fund business expansion - that comes from profits not being paid out via dividends to the Elite Owners or CEO bonus, pensions and the like..

In Addition most of the 80% of all income and now 90% of America wealth owned by the top 2% are in the control of just a few Elite, the upper ¼%. The majority of these Elite did not work to earn this wealth, but came to them from past family hand-downs from real Americans---Like Mr. Ford, DuPont and Hilton. Remember Mr. Fords words and actions, pay the employee high salaries and give good bennies so they have the funds to buy Ford products. Today we have the likes of Beck, Palin, Paris Hilton, and the Wal-Mart family owners who care only about themselves and the hell with the American people and their company employees. The few who made it big starting with nothing and worked hard like Mr. Buffett & Gates and say we should be paying federal tax at a higher tax rate and think that the GOP is crazy and American voters are out to lunch and tea.. But the GOP is not crazy, they just sold-out Most Americans for money and power given to them by the Elites.

Stop listing to the Washington republican bullshxt that we are not expanding and hiring because of uncertain tax levels. Do you right-wing-nuts think that any company would not expand to meet sale’s needs---YES they would, but American salaries, jobs and bennies have been cut so deep that 85% of the people do not have the funds to purchase and they were hurt by companies and our Government so they will ever go back into debt to buy corporation junk or services any more at prior levels. WELCOME to the NEW ELITE CORPORATE of AMERICA.

It was political strategist James Carville who is credited with the phrase "It's the economy stupid." Conventional wisdom may agree, but I'm not so sure. The Republicans have done everything possible to keep the economy in the dumps, including voting against the stimulus bill, voting against tax breaks for small businesses and voting against financial reform which created this financial mess (the list goes on).

It's not about our large deficit either. GOP/TP say they want to lower the debt but they also want to give tax breaks to the very rich, thus INCREASING our national debt. Those are two mutually exclusive opposite notions.

It's not about job creation either. Republicans say they want to create jobs, but they have voted against every bill designed to create jobs. Some, like Republican Senator-elect Dan Coats (Indiana) have actually lobbied for US jobs to be sent to other countries. Tea Party candidates say they want to create jobs, but what they really want is to reduce the size of government, cut government projects, thus reducing the number of jobs.

So what is it about? Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell said it best. It's about Obama being a one-term president. Republicans are willing to do whatever is necessary to take down our President. It's not about cooperation and compromise, it just isn't. If Republicans show any inclination to find solutions, their own Tea Party will put moderate Republicans on a "hit list" and will not support them in the next election (i.e. Scott Brown and possibly Richard Lugar). Fear of the Tea Party trumps doing the right thing for the country.

What the Democrats and President Obama must keep in mind is that the only goal of the opposition party is to defeat them in 2012. To counter this goal Democrats need to do at least two things.

1.Stop caving in before the negotiations even begins. Giving up early without a fight gives away your bargaining chips and creates the perception of being weak.

2.Address the media problems of not being able to carry out the message. IT"S ABOUT THE MESSAGE. Clearly, the GOP/TP via Fox News distorted the truth; oftentimes they flat out lied. There is no Democratic counter-balance to present their own message. It is the responsibility of the DNC to get out the message. What I am sure about is that some group of individuals needs to go beyond just fact-checking and find the voice of the Democratic Party. It is imperative, it is crucial to their success.

All I hear from Republicans and teabaggers are rhetoric with no solutions being offered by the Republican/Teabagger elective’s, or the Republican establishment. All of their answers are non-specific and don't address the issues.

1. Which programs enacted in the last 2 years have not worked, or are not working? If you are an astute observer of our political scene and how things work, you must know that it takes a while for new programs to take effect.

2. Keeping the tax reduction for over $250,000 will not translate into more jobs or more factories and manufacturing. The savings will more than likely be put into stocks, and unless the person is buying newly issued stock which far less than 1/10 of 1%, it just goes to another stockholder, it will not go into a company’s capital account to fund business expansion - that comes from profits not being paid out via dividends.

3. Cutting the size of government will certainly increase unemployment. Is government too big? Possibly. I would like to know which significant government programs you would like to see cut and why?

4. I don't recall the President saying he could fix the economy. He did say we need to put considerable efforts towards fixing it. Again, if you have been a past observer of our political process in regards to the economy, you would know there is only so much that can be done when so much capital almost instantly disappear from the economy and the middleclass tax base has been killed. I have yet to see one proposal from the Republican side that did not related to tearing down good faith efforts. I very much doubt the Republicans can do much to affect unemployment, and I think they know it, which is completely disingenuous.

I see nothing positive coming from the Republicans. You can't govern with constant negatives. There has to be positive proposals that specify what the end result will be and how it will get us there. Unless they can come up with some Republicans will have no credence with me.

Nice try Roy Boy. I don't call opposing viewpoints "stupid" as a matter of course. I certainly wouldn't do that if they are factual, reasonable and not based on irrational fear-mongering and bias. Now, go back over, oh, say, the last 2 election cycles and you will find that the vast majority of the Republican mantras are not factual. Indeed many of them are either made up out of whole cloth or just trial balloons to see what resonates with a fickle electorate. They are usually irrational in nature. (Cue the death panels, so-called "market self-correction" in the wake of a devastating recession or unspecified spending cuts, blah, blah, blah). And, when all else fails, pull out the fear card (fear of radical Black Panthers, fear of Brownies (aka pseudo Asians) crossing the border, fear of citizenship granted to babies born to non-US parents on US soil, fear of Acorn, fear of Muslims, fear of the gays, fear of "elites" or what the rest of the world refers to as educated people, fear of--dare I say it--a black president, fear of your own damn shadow 'cause Lord knows that could be a terrorist). So add all that up and the Republican mantra amounts to nothing more than stupid drivel. And, yes, anybody who touts or believes that nonsense is STUPID. Again, start with the truth. Learn something. Read history rather than rewrite it. And for God sakes, stop scaring people with your BS! Nuff said!

Additional Facts and Data to my posting above:

1) Under President Clinton who increased the upper class real taxes paid had 22.3 Million new Jobs created.

2) Under a Full 8 years of GOP/Bushs tax cuts for the upper class had only 1.1 Million Jobs created.

3) a) Also CEO types take most of their yearly many Millions of income via stock transaction and are tax at Capital gain rates of only 15% thanks to the GOP.

3) b) Wall Street Money Managers yearly incomes of $100s of Millions to Billions get their income tax at Capital Gains rates of 15% thanks to the GOP.

3) c) The Elite make most of their $100 of Millions to Billions on stock type transactions and are tax at Capital Gain rates of 15% thanks to the GOP.

d) Stop these plus many other unfair free give-a-ways to the Elite. Change the tax code that Capital gains rates apply only up to the first yearly Million Dollar per year or fix a life-time max on Capital gain tax rates to $10 Million, and all amounts greater are tax at the current tax table rate.

4) Each time in History that Upper Class and Corporate got reduced tax rates or other items to reduce their taxes the Poor and Middleclass real taxes increased. Federals gave less funds to States, so States gave less to Counties and Counties gave less to Cities, plus programs once paid by the Federal Government got pass to States to fund and pay.----So States, Counties and City added or increase local taxes on income, sales tax, Property tax, road fees/taxes, water, sewer, cable, phone, gas, permits, and so-on.

Do not think that the poor or 47% that pay no Federal income taxes pay no taxes unless they do not travel by car, bus, subway, or eat, or rent/own a place to live or drink water, or watch TV or use Electric, or buy cloth new/use.

The Evidence shows that the Wealthy, Elites, pay less of a tax rate % than the middleclass-----The GDP has increased and most, nearly all, of the Growth in income when to the wealthy and total Federal Income tax inflows decreased in 2002 to 2010! Note: 1 years decreased .

100% Proof that the Wealthy and Corporations pay less of their fair share of all taxes as compared to the Middleclass.

Always look at Effective rates of taxes paid, not listed table rates----Learn about tax law. In American the middleclass pays nears the tax table rates and the Wealthy and Corporations pay far less, with a lot of Corporations paying 4% and below!

Frank Fama

As to your 'points', I don't know where you get your information, but according to government records, here is the amount paid by the Federal government for interest for both Clinton and Bush;

Clinton for his 8 Fiscal Years from 1993 - 2000 = $1.813 Trillion = $226.6Billion/Yr.

Bush for his 8 Fiscal Years from 2001-2008 = $1.590 Trillion = $198.9 Billion/Yr.

For Fiscal Year 2008 it was $252.8 Billion.

As to point #2, the Deficit for 2009 increased from $459 Billion in Bush's last year (2008) to $1,413 Billion in Obama's first year (2009). That's an increase of $954 Billion.

Of that $954 Billion, $419 Billion (44%) was from reduced Revenues, and $535 Billion (56%) was from increased Spending under Obama.

PS - Bush proposed a Spending increase of only 4.1% for FY 2009, but after Obama took office, he increased it by 18%.

As for Obama never 'promising to fix the economy', I seem to recall his saying that if he got his "Stimulus" bill, he would keep unemployment under 8%. And what about all of his other 'promises' that he didn't keep, such as closing GITMO, ending Patriot Act, public option, millions of new jobs, immigration 'reform', etc., etc., etc.?

As for the increased taxes on a 'rich' person from letting the Bush tax cuts expire for them, I agree that for some at the tipping point it would be relatively small, but these are the people that create 70% of the new jobs (Obama's words), and most economists say it's a bad idea in a recession. A short term extension for everyone would probably be best.

I completely agree with your comment "Also as any Small Business owner or Large Corporation CEO, (if not a Liar), will tell you that to expand and/or hire more Employees is based on Sales Increasing or projected to the point of needing more Employees to meet the demand"

Please explain that to An Independent Thinker, since he doesn't seem to get that point.

Frank Fama

You apparently posted another comment while I was composing my last comment above, so I will address them here;

1 - Were the jobs 'created' under Clinton the result of Clinton's policies, or perhaps the result of policies of the Republican Congress that controlled the legislative agenda for the last 6 years under Clinton. I doubt that any responsible economist would agree that it resulted from increased taxes. Also, the huge Dot.Com bubble helped 'create' jobs before it burst just before Bush was elected.

2 - Let's not 'cherry pick' dates to make an artificial point. Here are the average jobs created or lost under Bush and Obama - with the link;

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

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

Average number of people employed in 2010 (after Obama's first 2 years) = 138,938,000
Net LOSS under Obama = 6,424,000 jobs.

Here is the link;

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

As for the greedy Wall Street types, I have no sympathy for them and any illegal 'manipulations' should be punished in accordance with the law, but high salaries and bonuses are the price we pay for a free market economy. I notice that nobody seems to complain about the $Billions made by Warren Buffett from trading stocks (which creates no jobs) and by George Soros who manipulates currencies (which actually loses jobs).

Frank Fama

One last comment before I take my 5 year old daughter to Disneyland.

I don't think that corporate income taxes make any sense. The stockholders already pay income taxes on the corporate income when dividends are paid, and making the cost of doing business in this country more expensive vis-a-vis foreign corporations just causes us to lose more jobs to our foreign competitors.

Anyway, have a nice day.

Mad in CT

I don't see much difference between the 'lies and distortions' of both the Democrats and Republicans. I belong to neither.

ROY WILSON,

Your numbers may not be correct and that is making your logic off base. It looks like you are not going to the source but to a Republican sites that make up numbers and tells untruths. Let me correct your sources and give you my reasoning on the subjects in question.

1) You stated: These are the numbers for jobs created from the government's own Bureau of Labor Statistics;

Average number of people employed in 2000 (Clinton's last year) = 136,891,000
Average number of people employed in 2008 (Bush's last year) = 145,362,000

Net GAIN under Bush = 8,471,000 jobs. Here is the link; but you did not list the BLS site as ref, you listed a GOP controlled Web-site of: http://www.nidataplus.com/lfeus1.htm#annl

Mr. Wilson, the Correct site for the Bureau of Labor Statistics for Employed and full- and part-time workers average for 2008 is located at: ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aa2008/pdf/cpsaat8.pdf

Employed and unemployed full- and part-time workers average for 2008 is 139,824, 000 total for Full-time and Part-time employed---Just add the four columns on my above link provided.

Now I will correct Bush's job creation record:

Average number of people employed in 2000 (Clinton's last year) = 136,891,000 (Used your Number)
Average number of people employed in 2008 (Bush's last year) = 139,824,000 (Corrected)

Net GAIN under Bush = 2,933,000 jobs.

Not your reported 8,471,000 jobs. Plus if I go back in history in the BLS site to year 2000 Clinton's total would be another 2 million higher as the site I checked. But

I do not know how you got the Average number of people employed 2010 from the BLS web-site since they are not released yet.

But if your go to BLS web-site page for 2007 you would see that the Average number of people employed in 2007 was higher than 2008. 2007 had a total of 140,328,000 employed.

That means America loss 504,000 jobs from 2007 to 2008 while not only Bush was President but before any Dems in Washington could have caused the start of the tanking of the economy. This tells me that the GOP started the free fall of the Economy that the Dems and Obama got from Bush. If you are an astute observer of our political scene and how things work, you must know that it takes a while for new programs to take effect.

Ref: ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aa2007/pdf/cpsaat8.pdf

2) As you’re point, you stated: but according to government records, here is the amount paid by the Federal government for interest for Clinton and Bush, (Deficit);

Clinton for his 8 Fiscal Years from 1993 - 2000 = $1.813 Trillion = $226.6Billion/Yr.

Bush for his 8 Fiscal Years from 2001-2008 = $1.590 Trillion = $198.9 Billion/Yr.

For Fiscal Year 2008 it was $252.8 Billion.

I Ref the Bush era Government web-site on Bush's 2008 yearly Interest payment for the Deficit was $549 Billion as of September 30, 2008. I suggest your value are not from an Government sites but another Republican lying and changing historical facts. We all know the Deficit DOUBLED from when Bush took office to the time he left office, so the interest payment at the end of the Bush era would have to be greater than Clinton unless the Interest payments were NOT made during the Bush’s era and he left the non-payments for Obama to pay.

But Bush and Company did Double the total amount taken out of the SS and Medicare trust fund account from all prior years total together----Could this be are different?

The Ref web-site that states the $ 549 Billion interest due on the Deficit as of 9/30/2008 is:

http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/hp1213.htm

With a report title of Joint Statement of Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Secretary of the Treasury, and Jim Nussle, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, on Budget Results for Fiscal Year 2008 (Fiscal year ends September 30, 2008).

3) My other words are as I stated them. But if you think that keeping unemployment under 8% is fixing the Economy, you would be totally wrong. But Obama was crazy to say the "Stimulus" bill would keep unemployment under 8%. But a lot of Republican States held the money or used it for non selected projects to harm the Dems and they did not care about the American people. Now Ron, you say what about all of his other 'promises' that he didn't keep. Do you want a list of what promises he keep—many to date but he ever stated he was GOD and could do all with a 2 year window or with the GOP voting as the NO NO NO group of do nothing to help America. Obama did state at a later date that they did not know the true condition of the Economy he got from Bush. But let’s look at the Public Option you stated that he did not try to get. Ever Republican said NO and a few, very few Dems who get large sums from the Health Insurance industry also said NO. The Republics had better get-off of the No, No and No votes and start supporting America and the needs of most Americans. The public option is the only hope of getting America’s health cost reduce to something that is manageable for America and the American people.

As far as your Statements about giving tax cuts for the greater than an $250,000 taxable income level. I made the point very clear with many facts that does cuts due not increase jobs and will only increase the deficit for people who are already paying far less than the current Income tax table rates for their income level—see my earlier detailed writing. Also most economists did say it was a good idea to hold back Bush’s tax cuts for the $250,000 and greater levels of income and said it should be passed for the Middleclass.

4) Roy you said: Of that $954 Billion, $419 Billion (44%) was from reduced Revenues, and $535 Billion (56%) was from increased Spending under Obama.

The $535 Billion that Obama increase spending included about $50 Billion to GM which saved about 1.5 Million jobs of which those people are paying Income tax and a lot of them not collecting unemployment with about $20 Billion being re-paid shortly and the rest coming in the future. Plus let’s not forget the Unfunded tax cuts and 2 unfunded Wars/country rebuilding and saving the economy with some of the bail-out. Plus the fact that the Dems have taken various measures to get re-payment of most of the bail-out money given .

Now let me address one of the main reasons that Federal Revenue was reduced and a lot of Americans are out of good paying jobs.

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY supported moving American Jobs oversea for the benefit of their Elite Corporation supporters!

THE GOP Elites Started the GROUP CALLED: ‘US’ Chamber Of Commerce Hosts Seminars With Chinese Gov Officials To Teach American Firms How To Outsource and are funding Republican elections.

Among the many lies told by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently, chief Chamber lobbyist Bruce Jostens said that his organization’s foreign affiliates, called AmChams, are only “comprised of American companies doing business abroad in those countries.” In fact, the Chinese AmCham is comprised of Chinese firms like Northern Light Venture Capital; the AmCham in Russia is comprised of Russian state-run companies like VTB Bank; and, the AmCham of Abu Dhabi is comprised of UAE state-run oil companies.

The ties between the AmChams and the U.S. Chamber are deep. In addition to sharing staff members, the Chinese AmCham has worked closely with the U.S. Chamber and the Chinese government to sponsor a series of seminars in America to teach American businesses how to outsource jobs to China (called the China Grassroots Program). Below is an invite to an event sponsored by the right-wing billionaire Sheldon Adelson, inviting local businesses in Florida to come to Jacksonville and learn about outsourcing from Chinese government officials like Li Haiyan, the Counselor for Economic Affairs for the People’s Republic of China, U.S. Chamber lobbyist Joseph Fawkner, and BChinaB, a firm that specializes in helping American firms outsource their manufacturing jobs to China. Click the screenshot below for the invitation:

Similar events like the one above continued into 2009 and beyond.

The Chamber’s CEO, Tom Donohue, frequently defends outsourcing: for example, in 2004, he said “there are legitimate values in outsourcing — not only jobs, but work.” Recently, the Chamber came out against a Senate bill that would have discouraged outsourcing. As Campaign Money Watch report found that more than 1.4 million jobs were outsourced since 1994 in the nine states in which the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending significant money.

Separately from their relationship with the AmCham affiliates, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce receives direct foreign donations to the same 501(c)(6) political accounts the Chamber is using to run an unprecedented $75 million attack ad campaign against progressives. In an exclusive investigation, Think-Progress documented over 80 foreign firms donating at least $885,000 to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6) account. As Think-Progress’ Brad Johnson noted, many of these foreign supporters of the Chamber financing its 501(c)(6) are also some of the world’s largest outsourcing companies.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/19/chamber-chinese-seminar/

Still wondering why this is such a ‘secret’ amongst the MSM and GOP!

Secrets are for those who have something to hide! And with each passing day it's becoming more & more apparent what it is the COC and GOP are hiding...

It's ironic that the Chinese Communist Party elites are in cahoots with the American corporatist elites. And the Tea Partiers are unwittingly contributing to this unholy alliance while they parade around with posters depicting President Obama as Chairman Mao. American corporations love the virtual slave labor they can get in China. The only way American workers can compete is for them to become slaves, too. Then the US will be a "workers' paradise" just like China, except it will be a Republican workers paradise.

Frank Fama “Roy Wilson - Your numbers may not be correct and that is making your logic off base”

Here is the source for most of my information – in checking these figures against other government records, they seem to be quite accurate, so that's why I use them. For example, Obama's own Budget for FY 2009 shows interest expense for the Federal government at $260 Billion for 2008 – essentially similar to the figures in the site below. Since this site details the source of their information (virtually all from government sources), I'm not sure where you got your information, but it is more than double the interest that Obama's own Budget shows for 2008;

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/numbers#usgs302

As for the site on employment, the BLS is a good source for a variety of information, but they put their data into categories that do not necessarily show the entire picture. For example, the site you referenced is “Non-Farm” employment, but that is not necessarily the entire employment picture. Also the site I referenced is from the State of Indiana, and references the BLS as a source (hardly a right-wind nut source). The author also lists his phone and Fax numbers, so if you disagree with him, you might want to contact him. Keep in mind that their figures are for AVERAGE employment for each year, and not the 'cherry picked' dates that you would like to use.

Andrew:

Wow, do you ask a great question. May I offer my take on this?

Wisconsin may not tell us anything about the next two years, but it sure seems to give us the essence of the LAST two years. Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold was the ONLY Senator with guts enough to vote against The Patriot Act, which was and continues to be an outright assault on our Constitutional guarantees. (Somehow the "Constitutional Conservatives", whatever the hell they are, must have missed that insult.) Feingold was the only Senator who truly wanted campaign reform. Turns out McCain, his legislative co-sponsor, was only kidding. (That McCain is quite the kidder. For immigration reform, for campaign reform, then against both, even as he's telling us the economy is sound.)

Andrew my friend, that's it in a nutshell. What happened in Wisconsin, happened in America. The American public has taken leave of its collective senses.

The Republicans promised absolutely nothing new. They promised a return to the policies that will continue the pillaging of the bottom 98% of the American people. They demonize Obama and promise they'll knock this two-bit chump to the canvas, because that's what is good for America.

So, the American public demonstrating its fondness for a boot on its collective neck gives control of the House of Representatives to the Republicans: Motto "Government is not the solution, it is the problem. Vote for me. I want to be part of the problem.")

Then, a poll take within three weeks of the election shows that a rather substantial majority of Americans expect gridlock in our government.

Now if you have any explanation besides a complete repudiation of reality and reasoning ability, I'd sure like to hear it.

Ike was the last repub pres. to do it. Don't know off-hand how much, but the top tax rate at the time was 90%.

My question is, "When are we going to get the flying cars I was promised when I was in the first grade?"

newdayDAWNING10 "Seems like it is all about who can make the most noise, right? So here is my question: What Republican President actually cut both the growth of govt. and spending, and by how much?"

A similar question could be asked of the Democrats. The answer, of course, is none, with the possible exception of Truman and Eisenhower after the end of the Second World and Korean Wars.

Umm, Roy? The question I asked was the one I wanted answered by the experts at MSNBC. Since you are not an expert, and my question was not addressed to you, perhaps you could let THEM answer it if the choose to. I don't need to ask MY question in a way that pleases YOU. I do realize that the right wing has trouble understanding that their interests are not the country's.

newdayDAWNING10

This is an open forum, and anyone can comment on another post (As you just did).

At least my point considered your question from all perspectives, instead of just your obviously biased perspective. "Turnabout is fair play".

Commenting on a post, and telling me what my question should have been are two different things. The partisan, is of course, you.

newdayDAWNING10

So it's partisan to consider all of the Presidents when considering their records, but it's non-partisan to limit the criticism to Republican Presidents?

Thanks for the laugh.

You really are a control freak, aren't you Roy? If you have a question about ALL Presidents YOU ask it. My question is specific to Republican Presidents. If you see that as partisan, your problem, not mine.

newdayDAWNING10 "My question is specific to Republican Presidents. If you see that as partisan, your problem, not mine."

I'll let others decide whether your "question is specific to Republican Presidents" is partisan, but I think the answer is self evident.

Please feel free to post a 'last word' if you wish.

Like I said, quite the control freak Roy, have you seen anyone about that particular problem? So let me understand this...if I ask a question about a Republican President, it cannot be a search for information, but must needs be in the mind of the mental midgets of the world, partisan. I will ask the question that I wish, I do not need your permission, but I am DELIGHTED that it bothers a cretin like you. Thanks for a good laugh today. And you may post the last word if you need to...poor soul.

Touche NDD!

There was nothing partisan about your question... having said that and reading previous posts of Roy's he does have control freak issues...

Not to mention he believes that having the last word somehow reinforces his position...

Stay warm & safe! ;0)

You too, Feisty, cherubs are headed out now.

Chandler W:

For many, many years now I have asked this simple question: Isn't the term "Investigative Reporter" redundant? The answer of course is, YES.

There exists this hallowed - and utterly ridiculous - notion that all issues have two sides. Here's how silly this can get. Look at the budget deficit. There is only one cause for this outcome. We spend more than we collect. There are two, or three, or four sides to this issue. There is just that single answer: We spend more than we collect.

Now, a reporter can go to a Republican and ask for a solution. The Republican says, cut income collection. Ask the same question of a Democrat, and he will say cut income collection AND spend more money. Obviously, both of them are stupid and/or crazy. The only thing that reporter needs to investigate is how these guys got out of their asylums and/or the second grade.

Is there a bias when the reporter correctly observes that the people he interviewed are stupid and/or crazy? How does one teach a student to recognize a bias when we know from the right wing that academia is controlled by left-wing liberals and we know from the left that what we hear via the media is the product of a right-wing conspiracy?

Besides, there are more pressing questions. Where are these damned death camps in Kansas that are exterminating blacks people at the behest of President Obama, and how come a very elderly black lady is the only one - besides me - who knows about this?

In the Bush era reporters were censored by the government to cover Bush's behind. If you watched a news report on CNN you would see that Nazi Bush was doing a conflict of interest with oil story and then it was doctored at the top of the hour to make him look good.

Take a look at your home library and see if they have any books that make Bush look bad like all the authors that kept saying that Bush did more damage to country with treason like cutting war veterans benefits, inadequate armored vehicles and other miscellanous charges too numerous to list. What the media should do is call Rush Limbaugh on his radio show and bring out the facts. Conservative radio is one lie after another. You cant listen to it for 5 minutes without a lie being told. Bush tried to censur NPR but they told him to shove it. Listeners should tell Glenn Beck and Limbaugh to back up their facts. They aren't licensed by the FCC so they can get away with anything. I would love to have a debate between the conservative radio and mainstream radio.

Conservatives are scared of the freedom doctrine because that would listeners the chance to shut them up and make them back up their with proof. Limbaugh is the worst and he doesn't even represent the republican party. He has crucified his party for years. The worst is that his party who is supposed to be rich and educated is blindly believing what he says. With FOX it is easier to make up stuff than do facts.

FAIRNESS Doctrine.

Sorry

That's Barack Obama's job And he's not doing his job It's his job to sell his policies He's not doing THAT

Remember when Clinton had a 'quick response' team to answer false charges by Republicans ?

Where's Obama's response ?

FAITH NO MORE in Obama

"FAITH NO MORE in Obama"

You never supported Barack Obama, Sierra.

I don't have "faith" in Obama, I just think he has done an excellent job in office and I am infuriated by our lazy media which fails to simply inform the public of basic facts.

MSierra. And President Obama has time to monitor and dispute every false statement made by every host, journalist, newspaper, news anchor? Get real. It is the responsibility of the hosts, the reporters, the news anchors to challenge false statements made in their newspapers, magazines or on their shows; they are the journalists, it is their job to fact check and challenge.

Related to Jody's question: What is MSNBC's policy or position on reporting false information. Generally speaking, why don't reporters challenge comments that are blatantly false. (both republican and democrat)

OH, will you be open for posts tomorrow morning?

Jody, et al:

It used to be the responsibility of journalist to separate the wheat from the chafe and report the facts/truth.

Now the media creates non-troversies and reports poll results.

Tim Russett, we miss you!

It really infuriates me that these "radio personalies" can get away with it. I see Limbaugh tell his listeners that Obama had 300 ships, spend all kinds of money on journalists and hotel accomodations and it was all a lie.

Limbaugh and Beck who I think are both morons to begin with. I listened to Limbaugh and here was this guy who said there is still no recession even though there are over 2 million people without jobs. The mainstream media should call these conservative superstars and make them back up their facts.

Limbaugh and Beck wont come forth like MSNBC wants them to because that would shut them up. Conservative radio is just hate radio because it doesnt deal with facts just lies. Check out what the newspapers say and what the radio says and you will see that conservative radio only tells 5% of a story that really happened.

I think we should push for the freedom doctrine again to shut conservative radio and FOX news up. FAUX (i spelled it right) TV "investigative" BS is just what it is lies piled on lies. Conservative radio is the same way if they are so biased why not have more mainstream listeners on the shows? Because they cant talk when the listeners give the facts as things really are. Conservative radio doesn't represent any middle class american and it is their job to protect the rich not you.l

The FAIRNESS Doctrine.

It doesn't shut anyone up. As it shouldn't. It lets people know that the falsehoods they would like to use to make their arguments would be challenged and debunked in real time while they sat there with egg on their face. It makes pundits self regulate their rhetoric, since they know if and when they go over the line it will be exposed as hyperbole or lying.

What we need in news journalism is the TRUTH Doctrine. If you spread a falsehood through mass media, you will be held responsible for unringing the bell of untruths you rang. If it takes 100 hours of programming to correct the misperception you created, too bad, you're on the hook for fixing what you broke.

That is a great idea.

Thanks again.

Can you believe Mark and Dom chose Sandy's superficial question? We're on a political blog for questions of greater depth than that to be answered by these supposed political sages, and they choose to go with fluff instead of substance. DISAPPOINTING :(

I was actually hoping they would take a shot at your question. I think you had another good one too. How would implementing the Fairness Doctrine change the political discourse? The Limbaughs and Hannitys of the world like to say that it would be aimed at them in particular to shut them down. Is that true...or would it force more honesty? Could we at long last get both sides of an issue? Mark, Domenico, what say you?

They should have nothing to fear from the FAIRNESS Doctrine. They would be able to rein themselves in to comport with its minimal requirements. They whine because they don't want to have to adjust to any kind of reality. Reality hurts their market share. They are all about the money.

The TRUTH Doctrine would make them lose their audience, for they would soon get bored with hearing how long it takes to get the rest of the ill informed audience to realize, and acknowledge, that what they have been hearing for a decade or more was always largely a group of falsehoods.

Yep, I vote for this question.

Your country and I thank you, for your vote.

I vote for this as well. If you don't mind I like to add another issue here - Why doesn't Reid make the Republicans really fillibuster, not just threaten to fillibuster. Jimmy Stewart in "Mr Smith goes to Washington" comes to mind. If they had to really fillibuster everything they threaten to they would think twice I believe.

The media rarely acknowleges that Reid, as Majority Leader, has that power to force them to stand and filibuster or sit down and vote!?!?!?

The MSM won't ask him what is up with that, and he won't give any kind of intelligible answer, if and when they ever do.

We are being punked by the both of them.

NO !!

That's not a 'Bi-Partisan' response

enough with the bi-partisian stuff, it won't work against a party who says no to everything and main goal is only to make sure obama is not re-elected in 2012. no concern for any of the problems our people are contending with at this time.

like fox is really fair and balanced?? NOT!

LouisJ

Right on! I don't have cable and I don't do Twiiter, so how come I know the names and opinions in DETAIL of every Fox personality, including the opinions of the failed former governor of Alaska? MSNBC does a great job of keeping us informed of Republican talking points, and a not so great job covering reality.

From what I have seen on MSNBC and Fox News MSNBC at least tells the truth about what really happened in a story.

FOX will never disclose stories like Haliburton was also responsible for the oil leakage of 18 oil rigs before they were responsible for the largest oil spill in history. FOX wont ever admit to George Bush trying to censor the media during his presidency. I am very sceptical about his new institute in Dallas and what it really stands for. Here is an ex-president who as far as i can tell has never told the truth on not 1 news broadcast and i defy any out there who can show me 1 time when Bush told the truth about any thing.

Why should it be any different about his new George Bush Presidential Institute? Knowing Bush and his lies (His most recent about waterboarding) and his upseting about not finding any WMD. Yet he made a joke about american casualties at a dinner like who cares? 4000 dead americans who cares? Personally I think america should keep a close tab on his institute the only one who is benefiting is him and not the country. I think it is a smokescreen for undercover activity. Lets do some undercover investigating and find out. Bush is a compulsive liar and anything he did was for his benefit. He said during his presidency he didnt care what people thought why should he do so now. Maybe it is the real reason he is Uraguay not Dallas like the media reported. Black Op soon to be seen.

Some country will crucify Bush for war crimes. It is outlawed by the Geneva Convention and I dont know where Bush thinks he is above everyone else. Must be all that drinking he was doing in the white house. Every video I have seen him in conferences he looked like he was totally oblivious of what was going on. No knowledge of Iraq briefs. I am sure every american who lost someone in the war feels better that they lost a relative in war that never should have been fought to begin. 8 years later and still no further when we went to war.

please tell me that u think fox news is not far right slanted?

No, Fox News is far more balanced.

Yeah, about as well balanced as a Mexican space shuttle.

Dragon, some people might say you were a racist for you comments about Mexicans. I thought libs were so damn PC that they would never stoop to racist comments. Oh, I know what it is. Conservatives are fair game for any dirty tricks or derogatory comments and libs don't have to stick to what they preach. Is that it?

Let me tell you something MSNBC is a little left slanted but it also deals with the truth of a story. FOX news and Rush Limbaugh deal with so many told i really doubt they can tell the truth.

Example would be Obama's latest trip to India. According to Rush Obama paid for all press conference had 300 ships and spent over $200 million and countless other items that were not true. You call this journalism?

Conservative radio is being attacked for telling false statements and instigating hatred. I personally find conservatives to be a bunch of hypocrites who say one thing and do another. I havent seen 1 republican who hasnt gone back to the same agenda yet. Every presidential republican has some sort of recession that followed their term. Face it republican agenda dont work and never have.

They talk and say they want to reduce the deficit but wont say how. Giving them more tax cuts hasnt done anything for the middle class but it sure put money in republicans pockets. Republicans dont put money in the economy but in their bank accounts in switzerland. Boehmer even said he wont do what americans want unless it benefits them. Anyone who thinks Sarah Palin is going do anything for middle class can forget. She is nothing but a media whore. Must be a real genius to scribble crib notes on her fingers during a press conference. Look closer and see who she represents and you will see middle class is not and never was included.

Dragon, some people might say you were a racist for you comments about Mexicans. I thought libs were so damn PC that they would never stoop to racist comments. Oh, I know what it is. Conservatives are fair game for any dirty tricks or derogatory comments and libs don't have to stick to what they preach. Is that it?

Nah, you're over-analyzing things. Remember what they taught us in middle school? KISS - Keep It Simple, Stupid. You're just retarded and I'm an @!$%#. That's all.

And while we're at it: @!$%# Mexico! :D

Who would know? Just 10 people and you watch Rachael Mad Cow. Are acidic tone turns most people off.

Rachel Maddow is a hack, that's why.

DBO:

I also applaud Rachel Maddow for providing informative and easy to follow graphics on her show on a variety of subjects.

It reminds me of Ross Perot who many derided and made fun of, but he got his point across and one would have to be a real dummy not to be able to understand what he was saying.

I wish the Dems would take the time to get their successes out there using the same method and message as Rachel.

Happy, healthy and safe holiday for you are your family.

Same to you Lisa! ;0)

Happy Thanksgiving Feisty...

As for the "Grimes" household...

• Turkey is roasted
• Cranberries are jellied
• There is no pumpkin pie, but there is apple pie...adorned with whipped cream.
• And politically, I'm ready for a little R&R! ;-)

In all seriousness...have a great holiday and stay warm up there!

Thanks Grimey...

I agree with everything on your menu but would substitute some cinnamon ice cream instead of the whipped cream. To tell the truth I don't really like pumpkin pie! lol

Weather is fright-full... almost 70 degrees here yesterday and then we had some really severe thunderstorms roll through last night - tornado touched down just outside of Rockford! Luckily no one was seriously injured!

I don't think we've got above freezing here today!

Hope you enjoy your political respite as much as I will!

All the best to your and your family! ;0)

PS: Am I safe to assume some Margaritas will be flowing as well?

Wow...crazy weather...glad no on was hurt.

And yes...what's Thanksgiving without a few margaritas!!! ;-)

And yes...what's Thanksgiving without a few margaritas!!! ;-)

Dontcha know... Cheers! ;0)

Why are the democrats so dead set against people showing identification when voting?

Isn't it true that when taxes go down revenue goes up to the government?

Why did the democrats have to bribe each other to pass the health care bill that the majority of Americans are against? Could that be the reason Americans are turning against them?

The majority of Americans were never against the health care bill, the majority of republicans in the senate were against it because the insurance companies are against it.

Wrongo Forrest - All the polls showed a majority of Americans didn't want Obamacare. The majority DO WANT reform but not in the form it was passed. The majority of Republicans were against it and so were a number of Democrats that had to be bought off. So much for conviction to what is the right thing to do.

The insurance companies helped the Democrats write the bill. The Republicans voted against it.

Wrongo JH - A majority of the voting public/the American people wanted major healthcare reform. With a public option or medicare for all so that there would be true competition. Instead we got a watered down version which is why it is so unpopular. A majority of people vote for President Obama and the Democratic platform. That included healthcare reform. We just wanted it with actual teeth in it. When there was too much crap and screaming going on at the town hall meetings people tired of it, and when the teeth were taken out of it, that's when the public gave it the thumbs down. It is still better than no reform at all. We are hoping that in the future the teeth will be put back into the bill and that the "only for profit, not for your healthcare" insurance companies will have to compete.

No Cathy, the majority of progressives wanted major changes to have somebody else pay for it. The majority of good Americans wanted reform to get costs down. The bill sucks and needs to be torn up and start over. And the majority did not vote for the Obama agenda because nobody had any idea what it really was. Now that we know you can see the rejection from the last election.

Really? They are doing it just now in MN in the Gov's race, and in Alaska too. Then there was that fiasco with the Supreme Court overwhelming the intention of the voters, doing a coup and placing Bush in office. Do you not ever read anything or listen to anything that is not Fox "News".

In MN the puppet master (Pawlenty) is trying to retain influence, he's just pulling Emmer's strings.

Pretty much. We are much happier when Pawlenty is out running for President.

the body scanners were ordered and approved under bushs head of homeland security, not under the obamam admin

Allen:

Another lie on it's way to being believed by uneducated and uninformed "righties". Just like Birthier, Socialist, no College Transcripts, etc.

Truth. The procurement process for the body scanners were not initiated under President Obama.

Search for the truth and you shall find it.

Now there.

Sheila,

You are so right! Try Bush, who began using the process of intensified scanners just as he and Chaney initiated starting war so quickly with Iraq without a full plan for the sole purpose of WMDs that never existed, and then secondly for deposing a bad man. So just how many other countries should the U.S. aggressively fight because the politicians think the other country's leader is a bad man whom they don't like?

The Real Push for Scanners:

Do you know where the push of scanners came from?? Try the former Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, who now represents Rapiscan, which is the very same company selling the scanners to his previous job when he served as the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such a sweet deal for someone, who stands a chance for a possible lucrative kickback, not to mention a conflict of interest between the Govt. and private business. Oh, I forgot, it isn't illegal for the elite to do whatever they desire when it is all in the name of power, greed, and money.

You need to temper that with "when someone not holding her political views says something that is blatantly false..."

Please point out instances where someone who agrees with Rachel's political views, tells a factual falsehood which goes uncorrected, on her show. You can't.

This is just more of the false equivalence argument of comparing FAUX NEWS to MSNBC.

You couldn't make yourself sit through an hour of Rachel's show, so you make stuff up without any corroboration.

Daryl,

I agree with you. I think the reports and commentors doing the interviews are becoming increasingly scared no one will face them if they come across as "too aggressive". Case in point Sarah and Sharon and Christine. The repubs strategy is to avoid anyone who seeks the truth. It is a shame we can't really have good hoest issue oriented debates.

Ray, the so-called news commentators you mentioned are leftest who don't seek the truth but merely want to promote their socialist agenda. They are propagandists, not journalists. That is why!

Ray You have on whole network devoted to the rightwing Republican Tea Party, you have another one (MSNBC) that is two thirds conservative (hosts and guest ratio) and a third CNN that is so afraid of being called progressive, that have twice as many conservatives guests then progressives.