Millionaires and billionaires? Not very good at third grade arithmetic, are you?

250,000 DOES NOT equal one million, let alone one billion.

No wonder democrats are spending us into oblivion. They have no comprehension of number values. Anything more than three zeros after a number confuses the heck out of them.

No, but $250,000 equals 2% of the population, and the vast majority of benefits would go to those in the top 1%. Those are the millionaires and billionaires, the wealthy elites that pull all the strings on today's Conservative Movement. Republicans dance on cue anytime those strings are pulled, no matter how much it hurts the average American.

John B.;

Very true and NOJO knows what we are saying. She cannot argue the point that the richest 2% (those with a family taxable Income of more than 250K) are going to get over 50% of the benefits again. And that 2 % does include those I indicated.

NoJo just continues her spin and that is that.

The bottom line is that the divide between the middle class and the richest 2% is growing at record levels. Those at or below poverty level is also growing (increasing). The only group that is declining as a whole is the Middle Class.

NoJo - Grow up

The average salary in the U.S is in the high $40k.

Yes, those making $250k may be small business owners who has structured their business so that they pay less business taxes and would take a hit should their current tax rate change. Again, the percentage is small when looking across the entire country.

Finally, the businesses, should their tax rates rise, they will pass that extra cost onto their customers - which is what all businesses do anyway.

Personally, I vote for just letting the tax cuts expire - isn't the DEFICIT what everyone is worrying about?

US Navy Blind Deaf Demogogue Dude,

... the Republicans continue to show their total lack of corporation in moving this country forward and their total disregard for the American People they continue to claim to support.

The Republicans aren't trying to throw anyone in the street. They simply are just trying to get it paid for with left over/unused money in the left's pocket instead of running up more debt.

They are not trying to keep the country from moving forward as much as they are just trying to keep from holding it back by saddling it with more debt. Nice demagoguery, though.

Yesterday the republican Senators have sent signed letters vowing to filibuster every bill that comes before the Senate unless they get their own way and pay off the millionaires and billionaires that bought them their election win.

What a childish characterization. The Republicans are simply trying to restore some sanity and address priorityissues such as what everyone's taxes will be.

The "tax cuts for the rich" class warfare makes good political sense for the Democrats because it appeals to the morons in their base and the poor, or uninformed. It makes no economic sense. I don't think Obama even wants to risk the damage to the economy of raising taxes on the rich would cause.

Obama will fold, he is just playing the game for the libbies. He cannot afford 9.6% another 2 years and think he has a chance. Even Obama is not that clueless.

About buying the election crap. I have rebutted that many times on your posts and you have never challenged anything one time. Either you are wrong or gutless, or both. Let me know if you want to see union spending, business spending, etc. again.

Blind and deaf, or maybe someone just has their own personal total intellectual gridlock.

BTW - About the gap and the middle class disappearing. Look at California and what liberal agendas do to the middle class. The rich living in their Malibu homes are fine. The poor (30% of the nation's welfare recipients live in California) can'tafford to go anywhere. The middle class is living at a rate of over 100,000 - 150,000 a year.

It' not rocket surgery.

And yet the Republicans like to think of themselves as patriots, true Americans. The fact that they can verbally announce, in public, that they want to take the President down, shows their disdain for democracy.

I did not like George Bush, but I accepted him as my President.

The whole world listens and wonders why we tout democracy as THE from of government. What a joke!

And the biggest joke of all are most of the people posting here who are middle-class and yet do not vote in their best interest.

This country has been dumbed down. Do people understand that eveything is biased? Whether it is a Republican and/or Democratic site, news article, web page, etc. Everything has a bias. It is the job of a citizen to weed through the bias and get to the truth.

Sadly there are groups of people who as Jack said, " you can't handle the truth."

Actually they don't want the truth, wouldn't know the truth if it ran over them, and will never accept the truth.

That's my Navy, Bomb bombs away Repugs can't take any fire without falling down and crying like a little girl!

How's that Ltjg daughter doing? Happy holidays Navy!

Hamletrules:

Thanks for the words and it is great to be home. My LtJG is doing great and we had a super time feeding about 20 of her shipmates a home cooked Turkey Dinner. You would have thought you gave each one a check for $10,000 instead of a home cooked meal. I just love my military folk.

You hit it right on the head. The republicans just lie through their teeth. They consistently say one thing, like they want jobs, but when you look at their deeds, they do just the opposite, vote against virtually every job creation bill, and the list goes on. I call that lying to America. They then have the gall to deny it and blame somebody else for the very repugnant ideas that they developed.

These people just have NO shame or moral compass at all. They get mad and then start the name calling when we remind the American People about how they, the republican party, caused the greatest recession since the great depression, how they, the republicans, have virtually voted against every bill the provided for Jobs and tax cuts to small business, they, the republicans, just denied 2 million people unemployment extensions that are known to stimulate the economy during a recession/depression, they voted against disclosure making it easier for Special Interest Groups to buy their votes with no way of knowing who is funding them or what their agenda is, they are the ones against DADT even though the latest report says 70% of the Military does not have a major problem with it, and about 400 other issues currently being held hostage by the repugnant party or "Obstructionism"

Well, this old Sailor is going to keep reminding people that the republican party stands for Wall Street over Main Street, Big Business over Small Business and the richest 2% over the 98% of Americans. This is who and what the republican party is today. They want us to stop talking about how they are destroying the very fabric of our democracy. I say, do something to help move this country forward and stop their path of self destruction. We all are going to suffer this time around. I say let all the tax cuts expire and then submit a bill just for those with taxable incomes of less than 250K or maybe a little higher. I want the democrats to now force a vote on everything so the American People can see what these people really stand for and it is not the Middle Class. That is our RIGHT.

Retired Navy

I hardly think 2 million people have been thrown out on the street because of their unemployment benefits not being passed yet. I’ve been in their shoes before, yes I understand they are very very worried, but no one went to their houses and threw them out on the street.

“Yesterday the republican Senators have sent signed letters vowing to filibuster every bill that comes before the Senate unless they get their own way and pay off the millionaires and billionaires that bought them their election win.”

IF you had read the article yesterday on this site, you would know that your statement is a complete falsehood. The senators were saying is that the issues to become before the senate the rest of the year must be prioritized and if the bills are not dealing with the economy and taxes they will not be passed until the bills that SHOULD be the highest priority are passed.

Its not an emergency to pass DADT and DREAM ACT, it is an emergency to extend unemployment and tax cuts

Janet: I hardly think 2 million people have been thrown out on the street because of their unemployment benefits not being passed yet.

It's interesting watching the liberals that post here, and they know who they are, that keep posting these little data points of economic success as they attribute each so called success to all the wonderful things Obama has done for the economy of the country. But it's the same liberals that whine and cry the most when unemployment benefits are not extended beyond 99 weeks. So which is it Libs? Is the economy on solid footing now that Obama's job-creation machine has been so successful? Or do we need to continue spending billions on social programs to support the unemployed?

Can't be both. Pick one.

feisty tax tax tax and spend spend spend and what do we always end up with? More debt time to shrink the big ugly monster!

You must realize that almost all of congress will be voting for tax breaks for themselves, just like voting raises for themselves. I do believe many in congress are millionares plus.

Retired---------- Gridlock is just fine with us.

Conservatives campaigned on stopping Obama, now they are doing it, what did you expect?

Oppse anything Obama does, we all know by now that anything Obama wants to do will be bad for the majority of the country.

Obama will not get much done for the next two years.

A leader would know what to do alternatively to ensure the country still finds success but what we see now is the Republican establishment effectively holding their breath until they get what they want. Well if regular people get tired of holding their breath and start coughing up a lung, don't be surprised.

Block whatever measures you want Republicans - but at the end of the day please make sure you have offered alternatives that YOU believe will be successful. Our current crisis requires and demands much more than obstructionism - er, I'm sorry, holding your breath.

Republicans can filibuster any bill. All of the tax cuts would then expire on Dec. 31.

Any argument by the GOP to extend Tax Breaks doesn't hold water but, it's what I expect of them and I'm preparing for two more years of No....

Would any one else be on board with this, or am I just plain crazy?

You know I am... and although my household is not at the $250 threshold - WE live VERY comfortably!

Which allows me to help out those less fortunate... and there is no amount of MONEY that can buy that kinda gratification!

Instead of another new pair of shoes... I can feed a family of 4 for a week!

Cut down on trips to the spa and bring Christmas to children who other wise wouldn't have one!

Stay home for dinner on a Saturday night and am able to donate to those two men in AZ who are awaiting transplants - thanks to AZ Governor Jan Brewer literally pulling the plug on their chance to live and be a father to their children and a husband to their wife!

It's not rocket science... but it sure is rewarding!

Between my wife and I, we pull in well above the medium for our region and well below the top two percenters... I suffer no qualms with paying my share, and neither should the rest of them. Whatever it takes to get the wheels turning smoothly is fine with me. If they ended tax cuts for everyone, I would still be comfortable because we live within our means. I have three children and a family that size requires financial maneuvering especially if we enjoy taking mini vacations.

Drive-by. The millionaires and billionaires got an average $103,485 tax break every year for the past ten while the rest of America received an average $500 per year tax break for 10 years.

drive-by observer: I have never minded paying taxes. People are becoming unbelievably selfish.

Great post.

DBO:

I agree with you 100%. I also have a similar family taxable income of around 100K as well, and I will gladly give up the tax cuts if it is used to move this country forward. Loosing a few thousand will not change my lifestyle that much and if it helps those less fortunate, I am for that. I am not for just giving the richest 2% more (over 50% of the total benefits again) just so they can have more money in their savings accounts (Wall Street) while people are being thrown out in the street. This is not the way I was brought up.

No, DBO, you are not crazy.

We are in very serious trouble and 95% of the American People are going to pay the price if the republicans have their way. Once we go down this path, there is no way back. Dark times ahead.

I'm on board. As a relative who was old enough to work the farm during the Great Depression said, "If I have to pay taxes I must have made some money." I'm a little above median for my state, and I'm not fond of taxes, but the expense of having the wealthy get benefits on top of what the rest of us receive is more than the budget can bear.

Wealthy Americans have the price of a BMW convertible riding on the outcome of the Congressional battle over tax cuts set to expire this year.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-10/biggest-earners-lose-cost-of-new-bmw-after-bush-tax-cuts-expire-next-year.html

I'm with you drive by, and I wonder if any of our right wing friends can see why that might be necessary.

Citizens who wish to make a general donation to the U.S. government may send contributions to a specific account called "Gifts to the United States." This account was established in 1843 to accept gifts, such as bequests, from individuals wishing to express their patriotism to the United States. Money deposited into this account is for general use by the federal government and can be available for budget needs. These contributions are considered an unconditional gift to the government. Financial gifts can be made by check or money order payable to the United States Treasury and mailed to the address below.

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782

See http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html for more details.

What's the over/under on the liberals on this thread sending one thin-dime to the above address? Yeah, that's right, that number is about zero. That's because liberals are all okay with spending other peoples money for their causes and not spending one dime of their own.

So while you libs all get a sore arm from patting yourselves on the back for how wonderful and generous you are (with other peoples money) , everyone else knows you're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.

What's interesting is the taxes from the top 2% would help support the
GOPs badly planned wars and also help with our crumbling infrastructure.

They don't want to pay their fair share of taxes (will pay more to attorneys
to find out how not to pay) and yet who will be the first to complain about
the pot holed roads and bridges falling down? The GOP !

They want their cake and for NO ONE ELSE TO GET ANY CAKE !!!!!

No republican Senator, no republican period, can complain about lazy union workers. No union man in history has ever a had a better paying, Cadillac benefits, do nothing, and you can't touch me job than a Republican in the US Senate.

And now comes our favorite Grinch of all JS1, again to tell the rest of us how we think. We are willing to support our government in the tasks that it must fund. That makes us proud Patriots. You are not which makes you-----

Sorry JS1, didn't hear that response.

ltwv: What's interesting is the taxes from the top 2% would help support the
GOPs badly planned wars and also help with our crumbling infrastructure.

You really believe that? Tax increases for the top 2% will bring an estimated $700 billion over 10 years. Of course that number will be much less because those 2%-ers will find a way to shelter it. But $700 billion over 10 years, that's half the deficit number Obama and the Democrats have been spending for ONE year, let alone 10. The estimated $70 billion it would bring in per year would barely cover the unemployment benefits the Democrats want to keep extending.

Do you really beleive Tax cuts for the top 2% will create jobs? I don't because we tried for ten years and there are far less jobs. Where are the jobs Boehner?

Hey, Smithy, that $70 billion covers the unemployment with $9 billion left over. BARELY covers it? Who's your math teacher, Joe Miller?

I'm with you DBO....yesterday I posted a similar response on the Denver Post site. I also put it in relative terms. Our accountant has already done the calculation for us so we already know that allowing tax breaks to expire will cost us about $3000 per year. We're going to pay off our mortgage in next year (2011). The 3K will add one month to our projected payoff date. I have no problem with this at all. We hear so much screaming, but, when you get down to brass tacks the actual impact isn't so great if you generally keep things in check.

Oh..and about that 30 yr mortgage getting paid off in 11 yrs.....YIPPEEEEE

You all are willing to give as much as you want to reduce the deficit, make a contribution. But I have had enough of taxation--our government, national, state, county, & cities already get enough money and cannot balance a budget, I refuse to give them more until they learn to live with what they get, not what the estimate or borrow with. Until we have a tax system that is fair to everyone, from the poorest to the richest we should cut off our funding of a government, especially one that would rather play politics than do their job--on both sides of the aisle.

Thank you for your honesty and your compassion.

It amazed me how many people are still trying to defend this "tax the 2%" bullpucky. You are living a comfortable lifestyle on $100,000. I make under 50K with two adults in the household --the other one lost job, laid off and hasn't found work in two years. No one is in this city (Las Vega) It gives a whole new meaning to the pun Lost Wages...

People forget that this means "taxable income" --most rich people make much of their money in investments which are not taxed the same... capital gains tax is around 15%. Hire a good tax attorney and you can whittle down that taxable income to very little. We on the underside of 100K not so much. All or most of our money is wages. We are also the ones who stiumlate the economy the most simply because we have to spend most if not all of our income on getting by.

It seems that conservatives are drummed into defending anything Republican no matter what--even those who are suffering the most. Go figure.

Liberal Librarian,

Yes, rich people have lots of capital gains investments, and in the past, their low rate was something they could take advantage of. But in 2010 or 2011, a Bush Law that was passed, now taxes capital gains at the same percentage as their income tax rate.

So if they can get themselves into the 15% income tax rate--they will pay 15%, but some so rich, will pay in the 35% bracket.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_gains_tax_in_the_United_States

I agree with you, collectively my wife and I make in the low 100K's and live comfortably. If everyone was made to pay more (not just liberals voluntarily contributing) for the better of the country, I would be ok with that.

This tax argument is ridiculous. The liberal idiots are up in arms over the US government 'giving' the top 2% earners more money than they're 'giving' the rest of us. Let's break that down with some facts.

1.) These aren't gifts, or benefits, or anything. It's a tax, which means the government would actually be taking less (not giving more).

2.) These are tax cuts that are already in place, meaning it isn't even a change that's being proposed by the Reps, but a lack of change. What's really at issue here is that the Dems want to raise taxes on the rich, not prevent the Reps from lowering those taxes.

3.) The tax cuts that the rich got under Bush (which are now set to expire) went right along with the tax cuts that the poor and middle class got under Bush (which are also now set to expire). Let's take a look at those cuts: Lowest: 15%-10% (5% cut, 33% proportional), next lowest 27%-25% (2% cut, 7.4% proportional), middle 30%-28% (2% cut, 6.66% proportional), second highest 35%-33% (2% cut, 5.7% proportional), highest 39.6%-35% (4.6% cut, 11.6% proportional). So, actually, the poorest tax-payers (who are already middle class, as the poorest Americans don't pay taxes) got the most tax cut, in both direct percentage and proportionally to the percent they pay. The rich only get so much monetarily from their tax cuts because a.) the cuts are cumulative (meaning the rich see all the other cuts, too) and b.) the rich pay so much real cash already (they actually paid 38.02% of all income tax in 2008, totaling $392,149,000,000).

So, all you idiots talking about making the rich pay their 'fair share', since we all use the same services (and if anything the rich are the most likely to pay for their own private services in place of public services), I say you all volunteer to pony up $392,149,000,000 a year. That's only fair, right?

Typical dishonest BS From the Smiff woman. "Sure, y'all- give what you want to this address...."

JoAnna- you missed the part about "making the wealthy have to pay, too" if we let the tax cuts expire for EVERYONE". I'm not crazy enough to just add MY $2 or $3 thousand out of the goodness of my heart. I want the fat cats to have to buy in, too. I'd pay $3,ooo to see one of those ME firsters have to pay, too!

Who wouldn't? (well, except another ME Firster, of course....)

So, C Smith...what get's cut to make up for the $700B reduction in revenue?

John B,

You do mean that estimated $70 billion a year for each year of the budget, if tax rates stayed the same, if everyone made exactly what they make today for the next 10 years.

I'll give you $25 billion right now--foreign aid--suppose to be $41 billion this year. Cut it, let other nations take care of their own. Or cut the entire $41 billion and that is have of this years cuts. I imagine that if you looked at the budget you could get another $10 billion from the state department, and maybe even $20 billion in cuts from the military easily.

And that does not even touch the dreaded SS & Medicare entitlements.

dbo: Joanna - you missed the part about "making the wealthy have to pay, too" if we let the tax cuts expire for EVERYONE".

But the expire for "EVERYONE" is not going to happen. There is a chance that the people making above $250,000 will have their taxes go up, but it's not a very big chance. It's all but assured that the people making $250,000 or below will not see their taxes go up one thin-dime. That's the reality of where this tax issue is at, and maybe it's time you Libs started to face that reality.

So will all you oh so generous $250,000 and below earning Liberals that want so much to pay the goverment more of your hard earned cash be sending in donations to the federal government?

JoAnnaSmith...I LOVED your post above so much that I'm going to repost it, in case anyone missed it:

Citizens who wish to make a general donation to the U.S. government may send contributions to a specific account called "Gifts to the United States." This account was established in 1843 to accept gifts, such as bequests, from individuals wishing to express their patriotism to the United States. Money deposited into this account is for general use by the federal government and can be available for budget needs. These contributions are considered an unconditional gift to the government. Financial gifts can be made by check or money order payable to the United States Treasury and mailed to the address below.

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782

See http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html for more details.

What's the over/under on the liberals on this thread sending one thin-dime to the above address? Yeah, that's right, that number is about zero. That's because liberals are all okay with spending other peoples money for their causes and not spending one dime of their own.

So while you libs all get a sore arm from patting yourselves on the back for how wonderful and generous you are (with other peoples money) , everyone else knows you're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.

JoAnnaSmith...I LOVED your post above so much that I'm going to repost it, in case anyone missed it:

OH Boy Drive-By... I do believe love is in the air! lmao

Like I said they should get a room but we all know JS1 likes to do it in the back seat!

Anything to save a buck with her... lmao!

What's the matter numbnuts...? no one is reading your posts so now you have to post those of your hero's? LMFAO!

Thanks BB, for being honest enough to address the issue.

Are any of the Conservative Republicans in Congress willing to address the issue?

JS1 and TA, you're very proud of yourselves for your attempt to divert the argument instead of addressing it. Your proposal is correct, but in what way does it address the reality of a BUDGET, a document in which both revenue and spending are resolved into a whole. Suggesting that we pass the collection plate if we love the government is dishonest. Congratulations, you came up with AN answer. How about you come up with an answer that actually addresses the problem?

What shall the government do and how shall we pay for it? BB has contributed his position on something he feels isn't worth doing. The two of you have contributed weasel words.

Really, so did you read the beginning of my response to your "you have the floor" challenge?

I started with Mandatory Spending and didn't have time to start the layout for the mounds of cuts to discretionary spending.

Did you read those?

I did, in fact if you'll recall I thanked you for that and countered with a partial answer of my own. Then you chime in with this;

So while you libs all get a sore arm from patting yourselves on the back for how wonderful and generous you are (with other peoples money) , everyone else knows you're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.

So you'll have to forgive me if I see a vague answer like "do something about the mandatory spending", then you turn around and call me a hypocrite. Somehow I'm having trouble seeing much give and take in that.

John B,

In a post listed above, there are the different areas of the federal budget from 2010--mandatory and discretionary spending--a 14.35% increase in the budget--when our government knew we would have less revenue--because of economic conditions. Some things that to me are strange, like cutting the budget for the Corp of Engineers--when they help build lakes, and do actual work. While we increased the state department budget by 40% and the EPA by 34%. I am sure there are lots of other areas that could be cut also--including military--as long as it does not put our troops in harms way.

Fair enough. I agree with you on the Corps of Engineers, their flood control work alone creates construction jobs and saves billions per year through flood damage prevention. Lives saved as well. I can't comment on the state department and EPA increases, I don't know the justification for them, but everything needs to be looked at.

John B,

I was good conversing with you today. Dealing with budgets much of my life, I understand you always want an increase, each and every year, but to get a 40% increase, is unheard of, especially when you cut programs that actually work. It is a sad state of affairs. We'll holler at you tomorrow--I mean that in a good way, not really hollering. Some people take everything seriously on here:)

Ron:

Thank you. Great to be back, vacation was great.

We are in a major downward spiral. We cannot create much needed jobs because the republicans will not let us. They re he!! bent on destroying this economy as they see it as their chance to win the White House ifthey are successful in this. They are holding up legislation that will benefit millions of Americans, claiming they will beso gracious as to give us a bite of the apple if we neal down before them. I am willing ot bet,that if we give in on our side, they will just slap us in the face again and do nothing. Their record of the last 2 years proves this way beyond any reasonable doubt.

They keep hammering this Tax Cut which we have in place now for 10 years as the answer. If so why ae there no jobs now?? We had 10 years of the Bush Tax Cuts and they are not working, why will that be different now??

They rather throw millions of people out of their homes, block DADT, stop virtually every job bill etc, etc, just for their own Power and Greed. This is not a model that will work in the long run. The economic divide between the middle class and the wealthy continues to grow at record pace. Those at or below the poverty level continue to increase as well. The only group in decline is the middle class. Make no bones about it. That is where we are headed.

Navy,

I posted above, but would like to know the answer to these 3 questions. Glad you had a good time in southern California.

1). What should be done first, passing a treaty or keeping our government running?

2). What should be done first, deciding on extension of tax cuts or repealing DADT?

3). Why should American taxpayers pay for illegal immigrants to go to college, or have an easy path to citizenship.

BigBear;

Good morning. In response to your questions.

#1 - I think we can do both the START and keep the government running. The government spending does need a major overhaul though and cannot continue on the path it is on. We need to get rid of a lot of the redundant agencies and policies and programs that no longer work or add any benefit to the country as a whole. The pay structure does need to be examined. While in San Diego i had time to do some additional reading and the base pay, in most cases, are in line with the private sector for the most part when comparing apples to apples (education, location, etc). What is out of wack is the benefit structure. I saw an article that claims the benefit structure is 2,3 even 4X more benefical to the employee than in the private sector. They vest earlier in their Pensions and they now use the TOP 5 earning years for the calculations of payout, they get 20 days paid vacation after X years (5 or 10 can't remember) 13 Holidays and 16 Sick Days. Many employees working in the private sector do not see benefits like that even after 20+ years of service. This needs to be brought into line. But there is still way too much waste and duplication of effort in the government and it does need to clean its own house as well to run more efficient.

#2 - I am in favor of letting all the Tax Cuts expire and then the democrats can bring up a new clean bill for discussion and vote. I am not in favor of giving more tax cuts to the richest 2%. Yes, I will have to pay more now but if it helps grow the economy and make us whole again, it gets my vote and I am on board with repealing the DADT NOW. The big report all the naysayers wanted to see is out and it favors repealing DADT by a good majority. Now, McCain and others do not like their own report.

#3 - As far as immigration is concerned I am for a reasonable and equitable plan that will allow the illegal immigrants to move toward full US Citizenship. If they do A, B and C then they can become citizens. If they do not, then they go home. In other words, they all need to follow the rules and get legal or they must leave. I am not in favor of any program that does not take care of American Citizens First. A lot of the garbage out their on the Dream Act are just lies and I posted those before I went on Vacation. You can google the Dream Act Misconceptions and read them in detail.

They have a month. I'm sure they'll pass the legislation to end the tax cuts. They just want the world to see how bad the Republithugs will act like thugs and they are putting on one helluva show.

Rick,

Right on. Just about every republican of note is now on the record saying they are not going to help move this country forward. In fact they are trying to hold what they previously blocked as bargaining chips for their agenda. I hope as you that the Democrats see through this lie and come out swinging and make the republicans go on the record for all Americans to see come 2012.

Jody, I don't think McCain ever got over the fact that he lost to the new kid in town. Choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate showed a real judgment problem with him. He didn't know her. At all. The two camps were never united.

It was a bad move on his part. He talks about President Obama being inexperienced or some word like that.

What's McCain's excuse for his own judgment? It ain't lack of experience. Bitterness is the word I would use. And that bitterness is aimed directly at President Obama. McCain has become almost impossible to listen to. He's not sincere. He's more seeking revenge it sounds like.

Jody,

I will ask you the same 3 questions that I have asked Navy. Especially since you seem to think everything is based on obstruction.

1). What should be done first, passing a treaty or keeping our government running?

2). What should be done first, deciding on extension of tax cuts or repealing DADT?

3). Why should American taxpayers pay for illegal immigrants to go to college, or have an easy path to citizenship.

I'm not Jody... but do you or any other Rightie know how to multi-task?

Why can't you all chew gum and walk at the same time?

Feisty,

I guess I believe a little different that you. I have priorities--I believe that you should get one thing done before starting another project.

That is probably why our government runs so efficiently--because we multi-task so well.

And beside, chewing gum and walking at the same time is easy--having no budget or treaty is not quit that simple.

I don't know who said it--will look it up. "Why is there never enough time to get the job done right the first time, but there is always enough time to do it over"

Maybe we should try to get the job done right the first time.

BigBear....I almost fell off my chair....

you will notice that Feisty will never answer your questions....she will just spue some of her venom at you and move on.

You know, Pat--I was trying to figure out why Senator McCain would be such an obstructionist---I knew it wasn't principal, because he has already demonstrated in so many areas that his principals are flexible. And I can't believe he is looking ahead to his re-election in 6 years. So it has to be bitterness towards President Obama and a desire to see him fail. How sad is that?

Yes BigBear... I understand priorities...

What I don't understand is WHY the righties can't do 2 things at a time...

It's always... WAIT - STALL & OBSTRUCT!

Take DADT for example - dontcha think 17 years is more than enough time to settle it once and for all!

Nope not according the John McCain... we need another study all because this one doesn't fit his agenda and I say bullsh!t ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

Same way with the START treaty it's been debated and reviewed for months - if 5 Republican SOS's being on board is NOT enough to move it ahead - then WHAT is?

You can twist and spin if until your little hearts content - people with TWO functioning neurons KNOW WTF is going on and that is to BREAK this President... and that's the TRUTH!

Feisty,

17 years--and still no passage or open debate on the floor. I am guessing that it is not as big a priority that people want to think it is. I mean Clinton didn't get it passed through. Still hasn't come up for a vote in the Senate after 17 years. Who's agenda is it then? That this is so important to the world.

Personally, I don't care whether our military has gay people in it, as long as they are provided with the best equipment and technology to get them home safely and they protect our country.

I am so sure that START is as important to pass right this minute. Harry--just wants to vote on it, not debate it, shouldn't there be a debate on it. From what I have read--Kyl just wants time to debate the treaty's point--not destroy the whole treaty. I thought that is why we had a congress.

I don't totally agree with all the methods either side of the aisle use right now.

I just want the government to continue working--1st and most important--so I don't have to listen to the complaints of many on here--"The Republicans shut down the government"--well right now--it seems that the democrats are not wanting to do job 1-running the government. That should be their first priority--correct?

Once the government is running--then they can do the other things that need to be done.

Once the government is running--then they can do the other things that need to be done

Well all I can say is you & I have different priorites...

START was presented to the Senate 8 years ago - it contains 17 pages. The Senate Foreign Relations subcommitte has held 12 hearings and passed it by a vote of 14 to 4!

It means the Senate would have had to read approx 2.12 pages per month - is that too much to ask?

5 Republican SOS's support it!

And Senator Kyle & his merry band of misfits STILL NEED MORE TIME!

And you're worried about the government running... lmao!

Pal... that's the least of our worries!

Feisty,

I think I misread your numbers or they were presented differently.

Again, Harry Reid should bring it to the Senate for open debate--which is what Kyl is asking for--then vote on it. Because debating on it is what our congress is suppose to do--pretty sure that is what our forefathers wanted.

But again, I think after they pass a budget, take care of tax cuts, and get the money to pay for more unemployment benefits--if they have to do that.

START has not been a priority for 8 years, so what is a few more months.

I am not sure what the priorities are for Harry Reid and Pelosi Galore--Heard that one on Dennis Miller last night. But DREAM, DADT, & START are not as important as keeping the government running. And if so, then their priorities are as selfish as the GOPs.

Again, Harry Reid should bring it to the Senate for open debate--which is what Kyl is asking for--then vote on it. Because debating on it is what our congress is suppose to do--pretty sure that is what our forefathers wanted.

Either you're not aware of the facts or you're intentionally misleading (which I doubt)...

Listen closely - It is Senator Kyle WHO is BLOCKING it from being brought to the floor... M'kay?

If it doesn't make it to the floor there is NO debate... Got it?

I'm pretty sure THAT'S not what our forefathers had in mind either...

Did you really quote that right wing HACK Dennis Miller?

Senator Kyl is asking for assurances that the US nuclear weapons infrastructure will be modernized even while they cut the arsenal. Negotiations to achieve those assurances, such as the funding to do so, are progressing.

That seems like a valid concern and a valid issue to address. Why do the Liberals have such a problem with it?

Feisty,

Here is the quote from Kyl--

When Majority Leader Harry Reid asked me if I thought the treaty could be considered in the lame duck session, I replied I did not think so given the combination of other work Congress must do and the complex and unresolved issues related to START and modernization. I appreciate the recent effort by the Administration to address some of the issues that we have raised and I look forward to continuing to work with Senator Kerry, DOD, and DOE officials.

Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, a key Republican holdout on President Barack ObamasNuclear arms reduction Treaty with Russia, said Sunday that he continues to think the Senate doesnt have time to debate the Treaty before the end of the year.

Of course. Let me reiterate what I said before. Harry Reid, the leader of the Senate, can bring the START treaty up anytime he wants to, but he has a different agenda. He’s made some promises to some political constituencies. He wants to do the Dream Act in order to appeal to certain segments of the Hispanic community. The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy to appeal to the gay and lesbian community. To appeal to the unions, he wants to do the so-called firefighters federal unionization bill. In addition to various political commitments that he’s made to do legislation in the lame duck session, we have to fund the government for the remaining 10 months of the fiscal year. We have to deal with some expiring provisions like…

As I told you, my issue is that you can’t do everything. I was stating it as a matter of reality, not a matter of policy. How can Harry Reid do all of the things we’ve talked about, deal with the expiring tax provisions and, in addition to that, deal with the START treaty, which by itself could probably take at least two weeks?

Here is his counterpart--Dick Durbin

Durbin: Let’s roll up our sleeves and do it. Senator Kyl has raised legitimate issues, but the fact is, we can do all of the things he mentioned, debate them and vote on them in a responsible way before we break for Christmas. To do otherwise is really to create a dangerous situation. I agree with Senator Richard Lugar. It is time for us to step up as a nation and face the reality that we will be safer with the START treaty. And I might say to Senator Kyl, consider the situation in Iran. They just announced yesterday that they were going to fire up their nuclear reactor. If it’s for peaceful domestic purposes, all well and good. But if it’s part of an agenda to build a nuclear weapon, it’s a danger to the world. Russia has helped us in dealing with this threat in Iran. To ignore and push aside the START treaty at this moment does not help our relationship with Russia in this critical issue of an Iranian nuclear program.

http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/dailyloaf/2010/11/29/republicans-smell-another-obama-defeat-with-start-treaty/

Why hasn't Harry Reid brought it to the floor? Isn't that his job? From what has been quoted in newspapers and TV shows, they have told Harry to bring it to the floor, but other things may be more important. But who are we, just the Americans who--according to some on here--are in need of a working government.

PS--I did quote Dennis Miller--first thing I heard about Pelosi that wasn't just outright vulgar, so I thought I would use it. Besides you have to listen to both sides to get a grasp of the reality, therefore I also watch Jon stewart, stephen colbert, and even larry the cable guy occasionally:)

Yeah BB I made the mistake of tuning into MTP Sunday...

Why no mention of Senator Kyle being asked 3 times about what amount of time is needed for the debate and his refusal to answer?

Passed last time in roughly 3 days... last time I checked there are 29 days left this year!

The simple truth is... per Mitch 'the turtle' McConnell is they will do everything in their power to make sure President Obama is defeated in 2012 and it doesn't matter at what cost or who the hell suffers.

Like I said... we have very different priorites...

I want to move FORWARD the your side wants to stall...

Feisty,

This has turned out to be a good discussion, unlike many others on here.

Although I see the GOP trying to stall, I still believe that Reid could and should bring START to the floor for debate. Then we will see how long it takes to debate.

But first, I would get a budget passed, then move on to other business. If they can find time between the he said-she said.

Our government officials have a list of procedures to follow. Follow them, get their job done. That is what I am saying. But put the most important things first--as we both have said--prioritize!

If Harry thinks that the Dream Act is more important than the budget--bring it to the floor--and let's see what happens.

As some have said--do something--see what happens.

I think we both actually agree on that?

This has turned out to be a good discussion, unlike many others on here.

Agreed BigBear! Looking forward to more in the future!

PS: True American - if you're still lurking & sulking out there... pay attention on how to have a debate.

BigBear earned my respect he didn't demand it... get it numbnuts?

What he cow-towed to you?

He proved his point - that the budget is more important right now and that Reid should bring START to the floor for debate?

I don't care to earn your respect, you don't respect anybody else on here unless they coddle you, while you berate them with nasty insults.

I don't care to earn your respect, you don't respect anybody else on here unless they coddle you, while you berate them with nasty insults.

Gee... sounds like you could really use a *HUG*! Where's your new BFF JoAnna Smith when you really need her? lmao

And he didn't prove anything OTHER than we agree to disagree there numbnuts! ;0)

What's wrong feisty..getting a little jealous? ....scared? You haven't been coddled enough today. (sad face)

Jig, Emperor, Fat Lady...any of this ring a bell?

Boy, Feisty: poor "True" American is at it again! He simply cannot help himself, he is jealous of you!

Nicely put, Pat. While the parties posture, the bloggers blog, the pundits pundit, President Obama continues to govern quietly and without fanfare. I applaud his diligence, his determination to get things done and if compromise is required, that's what government is supposed to do anyway--meet in the middle for the good of all.

Hey Pat,

True the president is taking the high road. He has no choice but to maintain that behavior. The legislations that you mentioned will likely be passed before the new Congress begins. The "Do Nothing" Republithugs will continue to whine to the media in order to seem relevent. But once the Republithug "Wiki"leaks are exposed (insider that is acting like the website), they will shift in their stances.

Pat,

Great post . . . thanks for the info and the blackwaterdog link . . . love her! :o)

Nashville_fan: I love her as well. She has this gift of opening up my eyes past the negativity surrounding me. First Read as well this morning gave me a moment to pause and think.

I'm tired I think and need a break from politics and all the negativity. Maybe over the holidays I'll stay away. Unless I see something interesting on CSPAN and want to share it. I have about 11 days off coming soon. My first vacation of the year! Yeah.

Wow Pat . . . 11 days off . . . that sounds like heaven! :o)

Definitely take a break from politics . . . it is a soul sucking business . . . seriously.

(We'll save you a spot here in the mudpit of course . . . lol!)

Pat: Great link to blackwaterdog. Thanks very much.

Interesting, thought provoking words and wonderful pictures!

Enjoy the vacation, Pat---we'll miss you here! I do find it amusing when they talk about all that has to be done before the end of the Congress. It could all get done and more if they spent all their time working and less time posturing for cameras, pundits, etc. That is what happens here in the private sector when we have deadlines!

fielden: You're very welcome. BWD will always have something positive to write about President Obama and D's need to be aware of the work getting done. Also, evidently 85% of liberals are happy with President Obama.

I post there occasionally (using a different name). Nash I see was there a while ago. It's a beautifully done site.

BWD & Nash - Two of the most positive supporters of our President out there. What would we do without them?

Thank you dear Steeler. It won't be for a few weeks yet.

Vacations and no where to go - the best vacations of all. Staying up all night reading history/biographies, with candles burning, quiet stillness, hot cups of tea every hour, checking out CSPAN to see what's going on in the book world.

Can't wait.

Pat,

Pretty good, but I haven't turned liberal either:)

Just liked the part about the President's pictures. When I lived in the Metroplex--DFW-use to go to the 6th street museum all the time. (Where Lee Harvey shot JFK from).

I am not the smartest person in the world, although some think so:), I can't figure out by looking out that window, how he could get all the shots off and hit their targets. Of course that is from a birds eye view, just standing there. Love conspiracies, if you ever get there, you need to visit. Awesome place. Will make you think though.

Have a great vacation.

BigBear, I don't know when I will ever get to visit Dallas, as much as I would like to. People who have been to the museum echo what you say - how could Oswald have done it alone?

I maintain that he did. All the bullet casings were found there on the floor on the 6th floor, and the casings matched the bullets found (2) and the rifle. Three shots were actually fired; one bullet never found. Fingerprints on rifle were Oswald's. Lone gunman. Not that unusual throughout history. Oswald was a huge Castro believer. JFK was not. That's the only motive I can come up with. JFK represented capitalism and Oswald hated capitalism. Funny thing is, there is nothing found yet to prove that Oswald hated JFK personally. Nothing.

He got the job at the Depository only a few weeks before the 22nd of November and he got the job through a friend. I see no conspiracy anywhere.

Just theories. Which anyone can come up with. I side with the actual evidence.

btw, you know who Oswald did hate? John Connolly. It was Connolly in his role as Governor who wouldn't allow Oswald to go to Cuba (or back to Russia), I can't remember which. But Oswald definitely hated Connolly.

Pat,

Connolly got shot also. But not quit as bad.

Living there for so many years, and knowing all the stuff that happened under that table with LBJ, just allows the theory to grow in Texas, and you know how those people love to tell a story.

And then Ruby killing Oswald, love to listen to the old timers around the domino table talk about a bunch of those people. Would lead to a million theories.

But as you said, we have to look at the evidence--just like a CSI:)

Only Nicholas Cage knows who killed JFK--The movie "The Rock":)

Again, have a great vacation.

It is the blue dog dems who gum up the efforts.

Jody. The sooner they are gone the better.

Patrick, you said it perfectly!

I have a blue dog dem as my congressman, until Jan 3rd, who gummed up the works so much that he voted lock step with Pelosi 83% of the time.

"....but only when Bush was president.."

Uh, Chalie Farlie- not suppose to mention Bush anymore......

Looks like someone has "issues".

Chuck U,

My honest impression from your rant -- you've got way bigger problems than Manning. You're lucky no one's treating you the way you're treating him.

Actually, the trickle down hasn't worked for the last 30 years since Reagan started the debt snowball rolling down hill in order to give millionaires tax breaks.

Warren Buffett tells us that trickle down doesn't work. But the Republicans insist on tax breaks for the wealthy.

Five former Republican Secretaries of State, foreign policy advisors and others tell us the START treaty must be passed. But Republican Jon Kyl says he needs to read it.

The top Admiral in the Navy, the Secretary of Defense, other military leaders tell us DADT should be repealed. But Republican John McCain needs another study.

It's a pattern.

Excellent comment, newdayDawning. Nearly 18% of Americans in 2010 suffered hunger, went without enough food at some point during the last year, many of them children. America, the breadbasket of the world and we have hungry people. It is not just Congressional republicans who have cold hearts and empty souls, we see the same cold hearts and empty souls daily on First Read. GOPers will fight for extension of tax cuts for people who do not need it adding $70 billion a year to the debt by claiming they do not need to pay for the cuts yet will filibuster, obstruct and deny food for the hungry, aid for the unemployed, nutrition for children.

Jody, you don't know how it gets to me when I hear people like No jo and Joe in Albany worry about the rich and their suffering and exclude any worry about the needy. When are we going to quit letting the Republican Party get away with how holier than thou they are? There is nothing Christian about this bunch.

NDD and Jody:

Afternoon. It just keeps getting worst day by day. All the republicans keep doing is trying to trash the Middle Class day in and day out. They continue to claim to be for the American People but go out of their way to destroy 98% of the population. They have and will continue to block anything that President Obama offers to move this country forward. These people have no shame and just care about themselves and what is in it for them and them alone.

Not a very good strategy for the long run.

I can always count on you Nash... to bring us out of the darkness and into the LIGHT!

Thanks & Hugs!

Awww, thank you Feisty for always calling it like you see it and letting the chips fall where they may! I really admire that.

Ahh, isn't that cute?The libbies are all having a group hug.

They certainly need it after last months elections.

They've become the "huddled masses".

Now, lets watch the big strong Obama get rolled again by the still very much in the minority Republicans.

Nashville_fan: These Republicans are so bad, so incompetent, that it should be easy to deal with them. They're insincere, they hang out in what can only be described as one big "clique"... stay on message (what is their messsage?) The tv hosts welcome them all with open arms as if they actually have something to say. They don't. Yet the pundits love 'em. TV is all the GOP have.

What do Republicans believe in? I have no idea.

Jobs? No. Helping those who are out of work? No. Regulations? No. Safe arms control? No. Health care reform? No.

It's clear what most Democrats believe in. Why are the GOP in Congress? To do what? Lower the deficit?

They created it. They always do. And now they want tax cut extensions for the wealthy. And will pay any price in order to get it. Or rather, we the people will pay the price.

Thank you Nashville, terrific post.

These same people demanding Pres Obama get tough are the same ones who demanded it during the presidential campaign--they were wrong then, they are wrong now. Pres Obama gets done what can be done. There are about 10 democratic senators who have been making noise since October about extending all the tax cuts or increasing the income level; they are the ones who were compromising this legislation as the President spoke and campaigned saying we cannot afford it yet it is Obama who is being criticized.

Pat:

You hit the nail on the head . . . the only reason that the GOP is relevant at all is because they are doing the "corporate people's" bidding. Period.

JoAnna:

If you need a hug, all you have to do is ask. You don't have to show out to get attention.

*BIG HUG!*

P.S. What is the GOP plan to create some jobs? Love to hear all about that.

Now you did it Nash! lol

You went and scared off the little critter with the threat of a *hug*! ;0)

PS: Thanks for the kind words above - they mean a lot coming from you!

LOL

neocons don't know what hugs are like. they were abused as children by liberals apparently. or their own parent figures...beaten over the head by oversized clown shoes. you know, that spare the rod, spoil the child thing.

they obviously don't know how to reach out and hug someone. you can tell by their rants. you can tell by their representatives. you can tell by their preferred pundits.

hug them anyway, it drives them crazy

HUGS all around.

HUGS all around.

Thanks LL - right back atcha!

Funniest post of the day... lmao!

Hugs to all my favorite FR posters!! It just shows we aren't mean-spirited enough to be Republicans!

Seriously--great post, Nash I understand that many Democrats aren't happy with all that has happened but instead of focusing on the good things that have occurred and putting the blame on the blue dogs where it belongs, they misdirect their frustration to the President. A mistake, I think.

they were abused as children by liberals apparently.

So you are saying libbies beat kids? I thought your party line was that conservatives have no family values.

I tried to hug a rightie once, but with one hand, he tried to squeeze my lizzard, and with the other hand, did a reach-around to try to grab my wallet.

So true, busbus.

They are determined to create a one-party rule, autocratic and dictatorial government.

"Elections have consequances, and I won."

"You have to pass the bill to see what's in it."

They, them, we, us....everybody is sounding the same to me.

gives a whole new meaning to "sold down the river"

reality check.

oh that's funny! serious as a heart attack funny! you're defending the people who actually signed a petition saying "we won't vote on anything until we get our way" ??? obstruction is our middle name?

republican's platform is my way or the highway, or we take our marbles and go home, kicking sand in your face as we pass.

babies and bullies the GOP

really--are you guys actually taught how to turn everything upside down and spit it back out, or does it just come naturally?

lol lol lol

Quite simple to explain LL, it's typical Conservative projection. No plan but their own will pass, they'll make sure of it, but Democrats are the ones who won't compromise. Republicans blocked 420 bills in the Senate after they passed the House, but it's Democrats who are obstructionist. Conservative programs serve the very wealthy at the expense of the rest of society, but Liberals are the elitists. It just illustrates that whatever Conservatives accuse the opposition of doing, they're probably doing themselves.

The START treaty. Just another example of Obama and the Democrats wanting to pass something without anyone reading it, without anyone verifying what it means in both the short and long term, without anyone taking the time to understand it. Just like with the Stimulus bill from 2009, Obamacare, and the banking regulations, it's vote now, read it later. Pathetic.

Just another example of Obama and the Democrats wanting to pass something without anyone reading it, without anyone verifying what it means in both the short and long term, without anyone taking the time to understand

You're right JoAnna....

Why of course I would take your word OVER the five distinguished men below...

They have a brain and KNOW how to use it... you on the other hand...

In the campaign to pass new START, five GOP former secretaries of state -- Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, James Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger, and Colin L. Powell -- have penned a Washington Post op-ed urging the Senate to ratify the treaty

Better luck next time... lol

You are so right JoAnnaSmith...

It's not just vote now, read it later. It's carefully crafted legislation they don't want anybody to actually read, so they can put this country more at risk. They don't care if anyone ever reads it, as long as they can push it through. Once it's through, they quickly move on to the next carefully crafted piece of legislation to put this country more at risk. While the Reps. that know it was bad to begin with are left trying to figure out a way to repeal the last bad decision.

Hey feisty...where's that proof?.....typical

BTW...I didn't get that buzzword for today...I think it might be that "party of pale male & stale" thing, but I'm not sure.

True American - You'd think the Senate would maybe have a public hearing or two on the START treaty before they vote on it. Maybe ask a few questions, get a few answers. That's kind of their job.

You would think.....but that would be smart and responsible. (you know we are in a lame duck session of Dems on their way out) They don't think they just react! Children really...or should I say angry progressives that know they're OUT OF THERE!!!

The Senate has had the treaty on their desks since April 2010. That's 8 months! The treaty is only 17 pages long. Does it REALLY take the Republicans 8 months to read 17 pages?!

On the surface, the START treaty looks productive. After a proper hearing in the Senate, after debate on the issues has concluded, after the questions have been answered, a vote can be taken and the treaty can rise/fall on it's merits. It's fine a bunch of ex-Secretaries of State have endorsed it, the Senate can get them to testify if they like. That's they way it should be done, but instead the Democrats want to bully it through just like they did the Stimulus bill and Obamacare.

JS1 & True American,

It was presented to the Senate 8 months ago. The Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee has had 12 hearings and passed it out of committee bay a vote of 14 to 4 (78% in favor).

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/11/16-15

http://www.economist.com/node/17581864/

But... but... Dennis...

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! WE NEED MORE TIME!

8 months isn't nearly enough time to read 17 pages! That would mean they would have to read approx 2.12 pages per month!

Who are they Michelle Bachmann?

Pathetic!

Thanks for the back up! ;0)

Sen. Kyl has blocked the bill from being brought to the floor since it was passed out of committee. Remember, in the Senate it only takes one hold to keep a matter from even being debated.

Feisty:

"WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! WE NEED MORE TIME!"

What the Republicans need more time for is to destroy Obama. Then, when there's a Republican in the White House in 2012, they'll just rubber stamp whatever legislation the president wants without bothering to worry much about what's in it, just like they did in the good old Dubya days, that started with a terrorism catastrophe and ended with an economic catastrophe.

fielden: The treaty is 17 pages. The protocol, the real details of the treaty, is 165 pages. As for lack of action on the treaty until now, the Democrats have controlled what gets addressed when on the Senate floor, I suggest you send a letter to Senator Harry Reid asking him why he didn't bring the treaty up sooner.

Looking forward to the watching the Senate hearings on the treaty.

Source for treaty: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/04/08/new-start-treaty-and-protocol

Dennis Columbus Ohio: The Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee has had 12 hearings and passed it out of committee bay a vote of 14 to 4 (78% in favor).

Well, now it's time to have a debate in front of the entire Senate, correct? It's really too bad the Democrats have not done their jobs this year and pushed so many things right until the end and into the lame duck session. If they were in such a hurry, you'd think they would have planned better.

Oh ...I hear you loud and clear Houston!

Hell... Mitch 'the turtle' McConnel has the b@lls to brag about breaking the President!

They're not even attempting to hide their arrogance!

*I got mine FU* - new campaign slogan for the baggers in 2012!

Then Republicans have had plenty of time to do their homework. If they get an "incomplete" on the work now then who was the irresponsible student? Who failed, really?

There it is....the Feisty buzzword(s) of the day ...

*I got mine FU* - new campaign slogan for the baggers in 2012!

How 'bout that proof Feisty??? Still checking with mediamatters or moveon.org

True American-2366567

"You are so right JoAnnaSmith..."

Wellll..... whatta know, Feisty? Looks like I spotted some of those there 'huggers' giving each other a "pat on the back"!

Hey, JoAnna- I think TA wants ya to give him a reach-around!

JS1,

1-You won’t find the Senate “delay tactics” so enjoyable next year when Boehner pushes out hundreds of bills just to watch them gather dust in the Senate holding pen.

2-The Treaty cannot be brought to the floor for a debate or a vote until Kyl releases his hold on it.

Dennis, how the Senate behaves next year is up to the Democrats. If the Senate Democrats want to delay legislation that will reduce the deficit and make the US more competitive in the world, you know - the agenda that got the majority back to the Republicans in the House, they'll have to answer for their position in 2012 elections. So it's not a matter of how I feel about it, it's matter of how the country feels about the obstructionists in the Democratic party.

As far the treaty being brought to the Senate floor, Senator Kyl has valid issues that are being addressed. You have a problem with that?

Wellll..... whatta know, Feisty? Looks like I spotted some of those there 'huggers' giving each other a "pat on the back"!

LOL Buzz! I'd tell them to get a room... but we all know JS1 likes to do it in the back seat!

She'll do anything to save a buck or two... lmao!

JS1,

Please don’t be so naive. It was the Republicans in the Senate using the filibuster that delayed everything and the same will be the case for the next 2 years unless the rules are changed. The only advantage Reid has is that he sets the agenda.

I have no problem with Kyl having issues with the Treaty I just have to wonder why, when it takes 67 votes to ratify it, he won’t allow it to come to the floor to debate all the issues.

Ah, we're back to the Conservative storyline that the Democrats haven't done anything. On just the economy;

• Increased infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants…) (2009) * Note: Bush was the first president since Herbert Hoover to not make infrastructure a priority

• Authorized the US auto industry rescue plan and two GMAC rescue packages (2009)

• Authorized the housing rescue plan and new FHA residential housing guarantees (2009)

• Authorized a $789 billion economic stimulus plan (2009) * Note: 1/3 in tax cuts for working-class families; 1/3 to states for infrastructure projects; 1/3 to states to prevent the layoff of police officers, teachers, etc. at risk of losing their jobs because of state budget shortfalls

• Instituted a new rule allowing the public to meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (in as quickly as one day) a mortgage if they are having trouble paying (2009)

• Authorized a continuation of the US financial and banking rescue plans initiated at the end of the Bush administration and authorized TARP funds to buy “toxic assets” from failing financial institutions (2009)

• Authorized the “Cash for Clunkers” program that stimulated auto sales and removed old, inefficient, polluting cars from the road (2009)

• Convened a “jobs summit” to bring experts together to develop ideas for creating jobs (2009)

• Ordered the FDIC to beef up deposit insurance (2009)

• Ended the Bush-era policy of protecting credit card companies (2009) * Note: In place of the old policy, new consumer protections were instituted and the industry’s predatory practices were banned

• Authorized the federal government to make more loans available to small businesses and ordered lower rates for federal loans to small businesses (2009)

• Placed a 35% tariff on Chinese tires and a few other products such as pipes after China was found to be illegally “dumping” exports below cost (2009) * Note: Clinton, Bush I, and Reagan all refused to “get tough” on China’s predatory trade practices; Bush II refused four times during his presidency

• In November 2009, Obama extended unemployment benefits for one million workers

and expanded coverage for some existing homeowners who are buying again (2009)

• Called on Congress to deliver a “Jobs bill” (2010)

• Credit card companies are prohibited from raising rates without advance notification or arbitrarily if customers are paying bills on time (2010)

• Signed a bill to extend unemployment benefits set to expire (2010)

• Signed historic Wall Street reform bill (2010) * Note: Designed to reregulate and end abusive practices and promote consumer protections

• Signed the HIRE Act to stimulate the economic recovery (2010) * Note: The bill includes: tax cuts for small businesses who hire someone unemployed for at least two months; small businesses can write off their investments in equipment this year; etc.

• National Export Initiative established to enhance federal support (technical assistance, training, trade missions, etc.) and coordination efforts to help US businesses export products and services (2010)

• Initiatives to promote a “Wireless Broadband Revolution” (2010) * Note: Among other things, broadband is finally being considered as necessary infrastructure, with efforts to expand use, access, and spectrum…

• Expanded agricultural credit to farmers during current economic crisis (2010)

• Signed bill - US Manufacturing Enhancement Act (2010)

• Signed bill - Single Family Housing Mortgage Insurance (2010)

http://b4bmorenews.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-244-accomplishments-of-president.html

Oh John B....Let's look at this "info" you posted

• Increased infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants…) (2009) * Note: Bush was the first president since Herbert Hoover to not make infrastructure a priority -SPEND!

• Authorized the US auto industry rescue plan and two GMAC rescue packages (2009) - SPEND!

• Authorized the housing rescue plan and new FHA residential housing guarantees (2009) - SPEND and ENTITLEMENTS!

• Authorized a $789 billion economic stimulus plan (2009) * Note: 1/3 in tax cuts for working-class families; 1/3 to states for infrastructure projects; 1/3 to states to prevent the layoff of police officers, teachers, etc. at risk of losing their jobs because of state budget shortfalls - SPEND!

• Instituted a new rule allowing the public to meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (in as quickly as one day) a mortgage if they are having trouble paying (2009) - ENTITLEMENT!

• Authorized a continuation of the US financial and banking rescue plans initiated at the end of the Bush administration and authorized TARP funds to buy “toxic assets” from failing financial institutions (2009) - SPEND!

• Authorized the “Cash for Clunkers” program that stimulated auto sales and removed old, inefficient, polluting cars from the road (2009) - REALLY SPEND!

• Convened a “jobs summit” to bring experts together to develop ideas for creating jobs (2009) - hmm...where are the jons again?

• Ordered the FDIC to beef up deposit insurance (2009) - promises, promises (hard to deliver on when your BROKE!)

• Ended the Bush-era policy of protecting credit card companies (2009) * Note: In place of the old policy, new consumer protections were instituted and the industry’s predatory practices were banned

• Authorized the federal government to make more loans available to small businesses and ordered lower rates for federal loans to small businesses (2009)

• Placed a 35% tariff on Chinese tires and a few other products such as pipes after China was found to be illegally “dumping” exports below cost (2009) * Note: Clinton, Bush I, and Reagan all refused to “get tough” on China’s predatory trade practices; Bush II refused four times during his presidency

• In November 2009, Obama extended unemployment benefits for one million workers and expanded coverage for some existing homeowners who are buying again (2009) - SPEND, SPEND, SPEND!

• Called on Congress to deliver a “Jobs bill” (2010)

• Credit card companies are prohibited from raising rates without advance notification or arbitrarily if customers are paying bills on time (2010)

• Signed a bill to extend unemployment benefits set to expire (2010) - SPEND, SPEND, SPEND!

• Signed historic Wall Street reform bill (2010) * Note: Designed to reregulate and end abusive practices and promote consumer protections

• Signed the HIRE Act to stimulate the economic recovery (2010) * Note: The bill includes: tax cuts for small businesses who hire someone unemployed for at least two months; small businesses can write off their investments in equipment this year; etc.

• National Export Initiative established to enhance federal support (technical assistance, training, trade missions, etc.) and coordination efforts to help US businesses export products and services (2010)

• Initiatives to promote a “Wireless Broadband Revolution” (2010) * Note: Among other things, broadband is finally being considered as necessary infrastructure, with efforts to expand use, access, and spectrum…

• Expanded agricultural credit to farmers during current economic crisis (2010) - SPEND, SPEND, SPEND!

Good luck in your quest to repeal the 20th Century.

That's what you have to say about spending us into oblivion.

Nope, Bush already did that. We are pulling the car out of the ditch, with no help from people like you I might add.

Good luck in your quest to repeal the CONSTITUTION!

Forrest - I think it's time we as taxpayers DEMAND that the Congress do it's work or go join the unemployment line

I also think we should pay them for what they are worth (oops - forgot there are minimum wage laws)....

But let's give them a taste of reality - I think all those Senators and Congress people should work for minimum wage and pay for their health insurance for at least 6 months (maybe all the time they spend not is session) - that surely will help cut expenses and the deficit!

Forget about Senator Scott Brown. His wife IS IN the media. Besides, he said he doesn't want to talk to the media. Unless it's a right wing radio station (from what I've heard). People think they're set ups between Brown and the radio hosts. Brown calls the radio station and says to the GOP host - Golly gee, I just got off the airplane and heard you talking about...whatever.

Pre-planned is what these interviews sound like to a lot of us. He voted against unemployment benefit extensions. Yet the right wing newspaper here in MA didn't have it as front page news. (Although I walked by the newspaper quickly and may have missed it). It would have been huge front page news if it had been John Kerry who voted no.

Talk about things being rigged.

Are you kidding me?...

I write a post, calling on all of us to hold our Reps. (Repub. or Dem) accountable and all you do is make that a partisan issue? If you actually thought about what I said, you would see that I asked each of us to hold our LOCAL MEDIA accountable too!

We are doomed.

where do i sign up for security guard? wackenhut here i come!

i'd get fired though, because i'd open the gates and invite all the poor huddled masses right on in!

viva la revolucion!

RGiles most people pay very little attention to what goes on in Congress, remember most get their political news from cable TV or talk radio and take what they hear as factual without raising a finger to verify anything, the Republicans own the media, those obnoxiously stubborn and belligerently arrogant falsehoods Cantor, McConnell and Boehner spout off daily match what the media pumps out, so the masses believe it. I have given up, people pay no mind to what is going on around them until it's too late, and I for one believe it is too late for any kind of political solution, the rich won and everyone else lost, people just haven't realized it yet, and they won't until they are unemployed and kicked out on the street left with nothing at which point there is not one damn thing they can do about it, legally anyway.

So true. The biggest con job in the history of this great nation is the one that convinced people of ordinary means that Conservatism serves any but the very wealthy.

I see you missed the numbers proving that the national debt would have been erased years ago if not for Republican tax cuts for the rich.

This graph shows what happened since Oct. 1, 1981, the day Reagan started his first budget. First Reagan increased the debt by $1.9 Trillion (see for yourself). Then Bush brought that to $3.4 Trillion. Then all that started collected interest for the next 17 years, and with compounding that grew to $8.2 Trillion by Sept. 30, 2010. Clinton, Bush II and Obama are not to blame for that interest, and without it, Clinton would have paid off most of the $1 Trillion WWII debt that Reagan scared us with to get elected. And Bush II (and his supply siders) would have run up only $3.8 Trillion — not $6.1T, which is what actually happened under Bush II.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html