Couldn't have said it better, IR. Yes, it's right to be outraged, but Congressional Democrats (I realize Sanders is an Independent) directing that outrage at the President is wrong. If they wanted something different they were the ones who should have been working with the President to make it happen. Congressional Republicans who put more money for the wealthy elites at the forefront have earned that outrage. Barack Obama took on their whole team and got a package that isn't too bad. Imagine if he had some team mates to pass to?

IR:

Good points. The House last night passed the Dream Act 216 to 198. It will not got pass the Senate.

Whether we like everthing that is in the Tax Cut Deal or not the issue is that to do nothing would have been an economic disater for this country. There are some good things in this deal for the Middle Class and some good things for the rich and famous. Compromise has a tendency to do that. All the bitching in the world at this point is really not very productive.

Come 2012 we will see if the failed agenda of President Bush gets any better the second time around. I do not think it will. I think it is going to continue to be the same old same old. The republicans are still on record tht they will continue to be the party of NO, so we will have gridlock for the next 2 years as well.

How any of this is going to help the economy get out of the hole it is in remains to be seen.

Well said, IR. Where were these fired up democrats when President Obama urged them to deal with the tax issue BEFORE the election? I respect and admire Bernie Sanders and the others who are angry at the portion which extends tax cuts for 2% of the people when the deficit and the debt are growing; I agree with that sentiment. But as you stated, the time for outrage and action has passed. It should have happend in September and October. Last Saturday's vote where 5 democrats sided with republicans against President Obama and the democrats' plan proved that time had run out.

Democrats in Congress are hurt the President called them out but hey, guys, you failed the President. These outraged Senators should have been taking their case to fellow democrats; should have been shaming republicans about their hypocrisy regarding deficit reduction, no money for the unemployed but plenty for 2% of the wealthiest citizens. The President can't do all the talking or all the selling.

Amen IR. Your right on. I've been screaming about this all week. Shut up Democrats and blame your spineless selves and not our President. You had all year to push reform and get out the votes, but you did nothing. Now you've lost your jobs and what ever strength you had. Shame on you.

Good Morning IR, as John B says couldn't have said it better either. Some of these whiny Dems are beginning to sound like whiny GOPTP, they all love the sound of their own voices.

The President took what he could, all things in life come with a price, so lets move on. Grinding this argument into the dust is unproductive. During this time of year we have other work to do and to be of good cheer.

Bernie Sanders is a self-admitted socialist and a moron and needs to be reminded that, while Vermont may wish it was a communist country, he dosen't represent the old USSR.

So, you think that the problem is that democrats did not bother to vote?

Read here

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/mark-mellman/132553-deflation-or-defection-in-midterms

Please note that this is a DEMOCRATIC strategist.

The problem was that the electorate rejected the agenda. If democrats do not learn that lesson, things will be even worse for them in 2012.

Not that I mind. . .

John B,

Sanders is a Socialist.

"but Congressional Democrats (I realize Sanders is an Independent)"

Nevermind Joe chimmed in first.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....LOL......HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Bernie is willing to stand on his feet for eight hours of expositional oratory as to why you folks are trying to bankrupt this country. Your "starve the beast" strategy is about to get too much exposure to the folks who are struggling to get by.

I wonder what would happen if the dems blocked all legislature until they got their way? Wouldn't the right rip their hair out with whining about doing the job of the people? Why do they get their way as a MINORTY party? We have been held hostage by the do-nothings, so we gave them complete control.

I hope every democrat in the house blocks any republican pet project they can until they fix HCR. Or did you want to go back to majority rules again because you're in charge?

IR,

I will agree with your statements, many people on here should be glad the President got what he could politically, considering that extending the Bush Tax Cuts are only a third of the overall package.

And during the winter months, while waiting to plant that bumper crop, we should fix some of our tools before planting those seeds. Especially the tax code in this country. Then those tax cuts won't matter. Maybe we need to fix the immigration code also. Fixin' those things would do a world of good for the entire country.

Byl, you do not get it.

Democrats did the republicans a huge favor when they labeled them the 'party of no', since the electorate was, in fact, saying NO to the same legislation.

If democrats want to whine and stamp their feet to prevent cutting the deficit, cutting regulations, cutting government spending, and repealing HCR, it will not have the same effect.

Obama was elected because no one had a clue how far left he was. It is difficult to hide your philosophy once you hold the office of president. The left has had its agenda rejected by the overwhelming majority of voters. You need to deal with the fact that your ivory tower, perfect world vision does not work in the real world.

Republicans didn't get elected just by saying no, the got elected by saying no to the radical leftist agenda. If democrats continue to push this agenda against the will of the people by becoming the new party of NO, they will have marched themselves right over the cliff.

If you think your radical agenda is sane, please explain the sanity of taking the biggest shellacking in 70 years yet keeping the same leadership team in place. Not that I'm complaining, Reid and Pelosi will virtually guarantee a republican sweep in 2012. :<)

IR:

That was articulated with such down home clarity that it made me yearn for such plain English from our politicians!

The observation was brilliant and right on!

Keep bringing the truth. You are good at it.

That all sounds great if you don't understand that tax breaks don't cause deficits, overspending does, and jobs going overseas from laws passed in the Clinton administration are causing the gap to grow between the middle and upper class.

Until the left understands you have to spend within your means and that you have to address the issue of jobs leaving the US, you'll always just hear comments like this where they completely avoid the cause and symptoms and just look for reasons to find someone to blame while the titanic sinks with them onboard.

No Joe, no bo, Nj,

A common thread starts to emerge from the liberal left about the world of business. If you read enough posts it becomes clear as it is repeated over and over in various forms.

A company is evil since it "exploits" the poor people by making them work. All so the company can make profits. Since a company is evil, then a corporation (which must be a BIG company), is even more evil. If you own a company, you, by association, must be evil too. To seek forgiveness for these sins, you must give the money back to society until everyone is equal.

No kidding, this is how the libs think. They aren't on the same planet. Maybe they would fit in in North Korea. They call their president the "Dear Leader" there. Actually have a little shrine built to the DEAR LEADER in every house and apartment. I can imagine liberals having an Obama shrine in their little houses and apartments. LOL

I build a shrine to Obama every morning, then I stand up, press the handle and flush it down the sewer.

perchance to dream

They will tell you that the SENATE makes its own rules. Too bad...... I say BULLSH!T !!!!

Actually, it is not "they" who tell you that each house makes its own rules.

It is the Constitution that tells you.

Given the direction and reach of government in the last thirty years, I am quite content to have the energy of the government sapped. I, along with a majority of the electorate, am sick unto death of legislation that is rammed through without even having been read by those who vote for it.

You can spare me the lecture on their staffers having read it. Staffers do not vote on the legislation; staffers are free to interpret the legislative effect of bills in ways that suit their biases. Voters do not put staffers in office. The responsibility to read and understand legislation is the office holder's, not the staffer's.

So, heck, yeah, slow the energy of the government. Slow it to a crawl, and make sure nothing comes out of it that harms the very people who put elected officials in office. This current congress has proven, over and over, that its members have no acquaintance with the law of unintended consequences. Considering the attitude of the few members of one party who will be returning in January, it seems that they have no interest in learning, either.

Find "filibuster" in the Constitution for me. I can't seem to locate it.

No Joe. The filibuster is NOT in the Constitution nor is the rule allowing a senator to place holds on nominees or legislation. The rules are not set in stone and the rules can be changed. The rules are not the issue, the issue is ABUSE of the rules, abuse by the minority who lost. Conservatives keep saying "elections has consequences" but apparently for conservatives that only applies if republicans win. The majority won and should be allowed to Govern as a majority so why haven't democrats been allowed to rule--"elections have consequences" that is the whole point. What we have in the Senate today is the tyranny of the minority and that is unconstitutional regardless of which party is in the majority.

Slow it to a crawl, would you be making that comment if republican legislation was at issue?

"The rules are not set in stone and the rules can be changed."

So, change them. The only problem with that is when the Dems are in the Senate minority in 2013 they will dearly wish they hadn't done it!!!!

LMAO@U!!!!!

Seriously...

Has anyone seen any sustained, determined effort by the Democratic leadership in the Senate to change the filibuster and cloture procedural rules?

In the current Congress, Democrats have had the largest Senate majority enjoyed by either party in recent years, yet despite all the complaints from Democrats about the Republicans' abuse of the rules governing filibuster and cloture, no changes have been made.

In January, 53 Senators will caucus with the Democrats, 47 with the Republicans. In less than two years, Democrats will be defending 23 Senate seats; Republicans only 10.

Do the math. Those numbers make it very likely that Democrats will become the minority party very soon.

That is why it's less likely, not more likely, that Senate Democrats will make an energetic move to weaken the minority party.

It's all kabuki, folks.

The new fake filibuster rule should reflect how many times the old Fake filibuster rule was employed by the Republicans. The disparity should be kept as a score which the Democrats get to even out throughout the future, should they ever find themselves in the minority position. Don't forget now, they get to write their own rules.

"Don't forget now, they get to write their own rules."

Exactly.

And the rules currently in effect are their own rules.

Actually the constitution does allow the filibuster...

article 1 section 5

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."

There is nothing fake about the filibuster. As others have said today if you don't like the senates filibuster rule, lobby the senate to change it or vote for senators who will.

First of all, congressional rules are set at the very beginning of a new Congress. They do not change the rules in mid-session. The Democrats had the majority at the beginning and agreed to these rules. this is written in Article 1.

If they can't govern in the fashion they would like, then achieve a super-majority the next election. If everyone in America love Democrats as some would want you to believe; then it should not be a problem winning at least 60 seats.

ALL POLITICIANS ARE THE SAME......INCLUDING HIS HOLINESS......

I would have to ask here if anyone remembers a time when the Congress was NOT dysfunctional? ;o) That I believe is a foregone conclusion, and something we all have to live with. By extension, we could say that the entire human population is dysfunctional, but then the chance for genuinely thoughtful discussion would be watered down. I am greatly in favor of the tax deal that the President negotiated. It is a lot better than nothing. And I could not agree more with those who are legitimately asking where were these self-righteously indignant Dems when they had the voting clout to make some real changes? They all need to shut up, go home and get their diapers changed and their noses wiped. The entire lot of them are just a herd of jellyfish, nothing more. I'm a very dedicated Dem, BTW but it makes me sick to see these bozos not willing to support the leader of their party. It makes me want to ask, WHAT DO YOU WANT??!! I don't think anyone would disagree with the idea that about 90% of them -- both Dems and Repubs -- don't have a CLUE what they really want!! Other than the very obvious -- face time with the press, sound bytes, personal power and glory, etc. All the fundamental traits of narcissism.

article 1 section 5

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."

Nothing here saying the rules for filibuster can't be modified, or even eliminated.

The constitution does allow the filibuster, and it is actually a very constitutional concept. We are not a democracy, we are a republic. This is to prevent the "tyranny of the masses". The constitution is set up to limit government, not to enable it. That's why there are three branches that must face off against each other.

The filibuster is a useful tool to prevent the tyranny of the masses. Again, the constitution is set up to make it difficult to pass laws, not easy. The filibuster does just that.

The framers were wise beyond their years, even to this day the constituion is doing it's job admirably because it set up a series of concepts and ideals, and those are timeless.

As stated above, there is no way the democrats will change the rules. In 2012 it is they that will want to use it to prevent the tyranny of the masses! :<)

Valhalla Phil:

Actually, the Constitution simply allows the Senate to make its own rules, however it might prove instructive to remember that the method by which Senators found their way to the Senate has changed. Just a point of information.

Indeed you are correct that the filibuster is a tool to thwart the "tyranny of the majority". It provides a brake against rash legislation. It is NOT there simply to make it difficult to pass laws, though. It is there to provide for debate - not to shut if off. Remember, there was a time that the Senate actually was the "Greatest Deliberative Body in the World".

Marching at the direction of Mitch McConnell, who it should be remembered is a life-time denizen of Washington, D.C., hardly speaks to reasoned debate. That sorry jerk has made it clear that this isn't about the welfare of America. It's about the destruction of the Obama Presidency. Period.

And when there's an agreement, like this incredibly ill-advised tax package.....we add almost a trillion-dollars to the deficit. Oh yeah, that deficit was really important. Isn't that what McConnell, et al. told us? Well, as Boehner would say, Hell NO....!!"

Hardly a surprise. McConnell has declared war on the President AND on the fiscal health of this country. You know what they say about war, don't you? The first casualty is the truth.

Thank God for filibuster rules. This is our system of checks and balances so wisely envisioned by our founding fathers. What does this require then. It requires that the elected officials talk things over. It requires compromise. This is healthy for America as a whole. Of course there are certain proposals that are so far out in left field that there can be no compromise. This is where filibuster comes in, and rightly so.

Ed:

Do you understand the difference between the real filibuster and the fake filibuster? I would bet not, or you would have written your post differently.

Our founding fathers came together to write the Constitution in order to strengthen the Federal government. Yes, there are checks and balances in place, but they saw that the Articles of Confederation were weak and didn't give the central government enough power to regulate interstate commerce. They saw a need for something more than a loose confederation of states and sought to create a stronger union of states. In the process, they also saw the need for a universal set of rights to protect the citizenry against the government and the individual states. Study history, the purpose of the Constitution was to STRENGTHEN the central government, not WEAKEN it.

Mixed Bag, they should. They won't.

It is hard to change when you do not believe you have done anything wrong. Look at the rhetoric post bloodbath: they do not believe they "communicated" all they had done well enough. In other words, they still harbor the delusion that the electorate had no clue as to all the wonderful things they had done for us.

That the electorate knew all too well, and rejected the same legislation imposed against it's will is such a foreign concept they have difficulty even considering it.

On a different note, I had quite a laugh this morning over the fact that Obama is claiming that the tax legislation MUST be passed immediately. It is an emergency! The world will fall apart at the seams if it is not done RIGHT THIS MINUTE!!!

I wonder how the democrats are reacting to this tactic being used against them for a change? Not well, I presume.

Conservatives "advising" the Democratic Party on what it should do always brings a cynical smile to my face.

conservatives "advising" the Democratic Party on what it should do always brings a cynical smile to my face

I tend to ROTFLMFAO!!! :o)))

no joe, no bo, nj

On a different note, I had quite a laugh this morning over the fact that Obama is claiming that the tax legislation MUST be passed immediately. It is an emergency! The world will fall apart at the seams if it is not done RIGHT THIS MINUTE!!!

Yes i saw that, but on CNN last night i here Mitch McConnell and bohner also want this passed right away,

Why you ask No Jo, the republicans strategist said last night that the republicans just don't know what the tea party's influence on this would be if they wait till the next congress,

No Jo, the republicans know darn well Rand Paul and the other tea party members would never support this, with out budget cuts to balance it out, and as much as the current republicans are SOOO happy they got the congress back, they know this tax deal would be DOA in the new congress, I'm sure the president, Bohner and McConnell for the first time, agreed on something.

Actually, John B...

I find it a little hard to believe that you're pleased with the way the leadership of the Democratic Party is handling this matter...or, pleased with the way the case for Democrats was made to the voters last month.

Don't doubt my sincerity when I say that I'm pleased on both counts.

Insisting on retaining the same leadership after historic election losses as a show of defiance is too cute by half...more to the point, I'll bet it doesn't get you where you want to go.

Feisty-

If you can laugh at what's occurring in the Democratic Party at the moment, you have an even more perverse sense of humor than I imagined.

Mixed Bag

"Divided Democrats hurled more insults at each other..."

-New York Daily News-

Maybe the Democratic Party should reconsider, and make some serious changes in the leadership after last month's historic midterm losses.

Mixed, have you noticed madam speaker is held in check for the first time in 4 years, i think untill the new congress is sworn in the president will be by-passing the current speaker. For the first time in 4 years, nancy really does not much to say.

Be afraid...be very afraid! When and where have we heard this before!

Who and what is a "conservative? "........ I haven't seen one in decades

Y'all ready for Christmas?

"Be afraid"...

Hmmm...

Isn't that the argument President Obama is using to get Democratic support for his tax cut compromise?

Be afraid, be very afraid of the consequences of allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire at the end of the year?

During the election cycle just passed, President Obama cast aside all traces of the candidate of "Hope and Change"...

He's been all about fear for some time now.

I'm with fiesty on this one... but with a twist..

"liberals "advising" the Conservatives on what it should do always brings a cynical smile to my face"

ROTFLMAO!

Ah yes, remember when they were telling us which republicans should run for president, etc.? Standard liberal line, "Do as I say, not as I do".

In the coming months, you will all see the Democrats dropping to their knees and begging their Republican masters for guidance in both the house and senate. All in a feeble attempt to save their seats in 2012. We may keep a few of the funnier Dems around just for amusement purposes, but there is really no need for any of them anymore. I believe that in fifty years or so, kids will be asking their parents "whats a Democrat"?? like they ask today "whats a record player"??

Just like the last "Permanent Republican Majority", Edward?

Yes, the Republicans would like to see 50 separate states, all with their own rules, all without regard to the other. I believe the election was about Democrats not turning out to vote because they were not enthused at the President always compromising before the need to and always compromising way too much. They were tired of the fight never taking place and seeing the promises wither or get watered down. What good is it to have a majority if the minority is still going to dictate what gets done and how it gets done? For three years we have heard from this president that he was going to allow the tax cuts on everyone above $200,000 to $250,000 expire and make the middle class cuts permanent. I would rather see all the cuts expire than to see the upper bracket cuts continue. And I guess if you are fortunate enough to inherent an estate then you won't need to worry about working or paying taxes on the first $5,000,000 of that, but if you happen to get to draw unemployment insurance, then you better belly up at the year end and pay your taxes on that. And now our Democratic leaders are falling to the same scare tactics and fear mongering of the Republican ilk. Why is production per employee up and profits up, even with less employees? It's because the companies and corporations have used the same fear tactics to keep their workers scared and threatened with the prospect of their jobs being sent overseas. I know from personal experience on my last job. Every month we were reminded and every month the companies numbers got better even as the workers received little or no pay increases. The white house has expressed upset that the Democrats didn't take up the issue before the election, but I would like to know how far this idea would have flown, if presented prior to the election? The right seems to have no problem fighting on the basis of principle. Why is not ok for Democrats to fight for their principles?

U know Tyler you constantly berate anyone that says something offensive to these liberals. I thought free speech was the answer in this nation. Liberals say a lot of stuff I dislike but I don't whine about it, I go right back at them. Since you want to be an umpire, keep your strike zone consistant.

Were you eating popcorn when you watched the FOUR engine plane slam into the Pentagon? LIAR.

Watch the Dems in the lame duck Congress pretend that November never happened as they insist on trying to advance their discredited agenda.

Like Republicans spent the last two years pretending that the 2008 election never happened? 2010 did not discredit the Democratic agenda; it was just a reflection of a continually bad economy (that Republican deregulation was partially responsible for in the first place), and a public that is getting increasingly fed up with politics as usual--not to mention the usual midterm election trend of congressional seats lost by the president's party.

Keep whistling past that graveyard, Michael. It's the gift that keeps on giving to the Republicans.

Fairfax Bill -- your rather smug and reckless predicitions just might be a bit premature. I suggest that we all wait to see what is going to happen in 2012. The conservatives might find that all their "predicitons" might boil down to mere "wishful thinking". Oh and BTW, no thank you, I never eat popcorn.

The only problem with the Keynesian stimulus is that it wasn't large enough and not enough directed to infrastructure and things to make our country better while providing jobs - i.e. it got watered down. We've had the supply-side economics of the Bush tax cuts for the last 8 - 10 years and look where we are. It sure didn't spur economic growth and where are all the jobs it produced? Somehow, we are supposed to believe that continuing on doing the same things is supposed to give a different result? I'll believe it when I see it. So far Reagan didn't prove it and neither did George.

Memo to reporters and pundits: Obama is unlikely to receive a serious primary challenge, so let’s stop writing about it (at least until we have some real evidence, OK?)…

Just a thought...

I Must Be Dreaming

The old republician... terror terror terror no longer works with the american people...The people can fix this problem.............. HILLARY 2012 ...join us

Would you please give the right wing scare tacit (Divide and Conquer)a rest? HILLARY did not give US HCR; Barack did. The Clintons gave US deregulation; Barack gave US financial reform. Hillary is a centrist. Barack is more progressive than she is. Republicans love to Divide and Conquer.


Putting any democrat against a sitting democratic president would guarantee a Republican victory. Remember Ted Kennedy helped get rid of President Carter. Remember the Supreme Court!!!

==============================================================
The Independent-2245816

OK .. I follow the links to the thinkprogress.org web site you two (Bev & Feisty) always point to. It says they are fighting for "Social and Economic Justice." What exactly is Social and Economic Justice?

Go to the Sojourners website. You'll find your answers there.

Ozzy is right on that one. If Democrats had the unified sense of purpose to stand united against the Conservatives they wouldn't stand a chance. Instead we fracture into single interest groups or stand on the sidelines hoping someone else will take up the battle. Think of all the strong, Liberal voices who have been taken down ONE BY ONE by the Conservative Movement as leading Democrats watched silently, hoping not to be noticed.

Oh please stop with the "read it before you sign it" line!

I realize you think you are correct, but you are misquoting. I realize you hope it sends the liberal wing into a frenzy, but it just makes you look dumb. I realize you think if you repeat it often enough it will become true, but you are wrong again.

I agree...healthcare reform my ass! My insurance premium starting in Jan went up $160 a month and the benefits got worse. Insurance for everyone??? Add more people who are getting it for free while the working class pay for it....does that really make sense to everyone??? Call me a "grinch" all you want. I work for what I get, I dare ask everyone else to do the same!!

Hillary is not interested in running and wasting money on even trying. She is a has been. She knows it and the country knows it. America has had a large dose of liberal politics and didn't like what it saw. It's a given that a Real President will be elected from the ranks of worthy Republicans. It only remains to determine which one. We have an embarrassment of riches in our possible candidates.

RMil

I agree...healthcare reform my ass! My insurance premium starting in Jan went up $160 a month and the benefits got worse. Insurance for everyone??? Add more people who are getting it for free while the working class pay for it....does that really make sense to everyone??? Call me a "grinch" all you want. I work for what I get, I dare ask everyone else to do the same!!

When does HCR go into effect? I bet you don't know. Of course your premiums went up. The insurance industry wanted to cash in before 2012 by exploiting you.

President Obama let Congress write the plan. Since Hillary's was rejected, his calculation was to let Congress take care of it.

No matter how you cut the dice. The President Obama got it; Hillary didn't.

So if he did not read the plan, how was he able to know what was in and mop the floor with your boys, without the telepromter, (hint hint) when he went to their retreat?

The insurance business is a business. Like any business, they must make a profit to even stay in business. When our fearless leader imposed the new insurance mandates...i.e., they must insure you regardless of a pre-existing condition, they cannot drop you. I believe the CFOs of those companies immediately turned to their actuarial science teams and asked....O.K., how much do we have to charge under these new rules in order to keep making a profit??? They are not going to lose money. Forget that right now. They will close their doors the minute they can't show a profit. This is the new reality brought to you courtesy of Obama and the Democratic party.

Ah, yup!

JuvenBachan

Pleasing to the ears, I mean my ears , not Oblaba's. Dems are insulting each other. I wonder what they are

calling each other? Demons, socialist bastards, freaking commie, Stalinist dog, Nazis, scum of the earth. I'd

love to hear them.

Would you believe none of the above? Although, I've heard hostage takers; have you?

Juven......you eat with that mouth?

Juven. Are you really that full of hate or is this just something you do on FR? My guess is the former and that is sad--a mind is a terrible thing to waste but especially to waste it on hatred and anger.

OMG, I have never seen a more blantant "kettle meet pot" as I've read in posts 10.1, 10.2 and 10.3...

Now this is something fiesty can ROTFLMFAO about!!!

Juven, it's remarkably like listening to the Republicans and the Tea Party...

I'll go with that Bev. No Tater's for the Bobbsey Twins. Being a compasionate Gentlemen I might let them in to set beside the fire long enough to warm up before they continue on to that cold dark place that they apparently live in.

really beverly...

I say we leave the Bobbsey twins McConnell and Bohneor out to freeze.

How magnanimous of you. Lmao!

McConnel and Boehner are backpedalling hard because they broke a couple of key promises they made to their supporters only a month ago. They compromised, and they agreed to programs that had not been paid for.

Fielden, My only response to this would be that I'm surprised it took them a whole month to break their promises. That's totally unlike anyone of their ilk. Another Dream Team for the 2012 presidential ticket -- McConnell and Boehner! They could step in if Gingrich/Palin collapses before the primaries.

Wow! What a choice! (sarcasm)

President Obama is a pragmatist, as was Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton and most of the presidents before them. They were willing to compromise to accomplish what is necessary. That's something I find refreshing considering the last guy we had--"my way or the highway", "you're either with us or against us".

The republicans caved on extending unemployment for 13 months, they relented on raising the inheritance tax from 0% to 35%, they gave in on the one-year payroll tax holidayall greatly benefiting middle and lower income Americans, and in return they got tax breaks for millionaires. Tax breaks for millionaires and they declare victory and send out fund raising letters but didn't they promise to reduce the deficit and the debt during the general election?

"The republicans caved..."

Yes, Jody.

That's why Democrats are screaming and hurling insults at one another.

The social security law is what happened. Raises are determined by the cost of living increase or decrease of the final quarter of the fiscal year. Social security never reduces benefits if it is negative but it could. Democrats want to pass legislation giving another $250 check to all social security recipients, so far republicans are unwilling to do so.

I find your last comment to be thin--you want your money but you're willing to throw families who CANNOT find jobs because there are few jobs out there out on the street, want them to go hungry. Back in 1976 unemployment benefits were extended multiple times with bipartisan support just as they have been during every recession since they were established by law. This is a Great Recession, a near Great Depression and if you were unemployed today, chances are you couldn't find that other job you mention. $7000 in 1976 was a livable wage and many people would have been thrilled to be paid $7000 a year because they were paid a whole lot less; I know because I was one of them.

Seniors built what? Increasing income disparity? Environmental catastrophe? Gender role disintegration? Erosion of liberties? Educational failure? Is that what you're taking credit for, because not a day goes by that I don't lament what your generation saddled the rest of us with. You are the first generation in the history of earth to hand a world to your children that was worse than the one you got. You are owed nothing but ridicule.

Dave in Penna,

So you too have been around the block a few times. Makes you tough doesn't it. I think the politicians only will give us seniors enough lip service to keep our votes for awhile. They know we will be dying off and therefor don't really count.

And you markc are the reason why your daddy or maybe the mailman should have worn a rubber!

And there it is, the usual garbage about "lying about WMD".. Why don't you go check your history instead of repeating the usual liberal lies?

Check a DECADE of Clinton saying there were WMDs. About U.N. inspectors saying there were WMDs. About Senators like Clinton and Kerry saying there were WMDs and DEMANDING that Saddam be taken out. About the United Nations itself saying there were WMDs.

But to people like you, that doesn't matter does it? Nope. To libs it's all about "lying about WMDs".

For a time in IRAQ there were WMDs. We know that because Don Rumsfeld sold them to Saddam to keep the Iranians in check.

They have a shelf life.

BUSH, CHENEY and TENET lied to Colin POWELL and to us. They were told that the YELLOWCAKE from NIGER, please! claim was a fabrication. They didn't care. That's why they attacked Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame.

Bush and Cheney knew very well that the "evidence" for WMD was totally bogus. A high-ranking Iraqi defector from Saddam's government told the CIA that Iraq had no weapons program. And a German intelligence agents warned the US that their star Iraqi informant "Curve Ball," who claimed their was a WMD program, was a a nut case who couldn't be believed. Any normal person of average intelligence would not have committed the country to a horrendous and costly war based on such garbage. If Bush and Cheney weren't lying, then they were morons.

CherylLM, read a book about Bush's wars, you'll be amazed at the truth.

Jody:

Just because some liberal writes a book does not make it true. Most books are full of OPINIONS and authors spin on things anyway. I can read 2 pages into a book and pretty much know where it is going politically.

ITM &duggjr:

That's your problem. You read two pages of a book and put it down. The bias of the author doesn't change the facts cited within. Grow up. Go to the index and footnotes and do some damn research, just once you intellectual indolents.

We'll get over Bush getting his war when Cheney, Bush, Tenet, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Myers, Perle, Rice, Feith, Ashcroft, Gonzalez, and Mukasy, and Zelikow, etc, are all in prison or dead. And when the debt created has been paid back by the Carlyle group and Blackwater and their supporters.

What about Wilson conning us into going to war??? What about FDR conning us into going to war. What about LBJ and Vietnam. 10 years in vietnam. It took a Republican to finally get us out of that mess.

A voice of reason.

What's driving the hate against diversity is that (white) people look around and they see a sea of "colored" faces, from E. Indians, to Blacks to Asians to Hispanics. People unlike them, with different attitudes and cultures. Who don't seem to "assimilate". That's what's driving the fear.

Frankly, the Dream Act was primarily aimed at Hispanics, but people forget there are a lot of Africans, asians, and Europeans who are illegal in this country. Did anybody see the movie the Beautiful Country or Pretty Little things; you need to see it to see how illegals get into this country.

Oh great!!! Another mouth from the "windy" city that thinks we are all racists.. I like how you try to explain about all the hatred on FR by spilling hatred yourself... Can anyone say "hypocrite"...

Just me. There's truth in what you say. I think most of us regulars on FR start out writing posts of our views with facts, quotes or other sources noted, we write what we see wrong or right but it only takes one person making a hateful comment to have the conversation degrade to garbage.

From Chicago. Good points and I see nothing hateful about your comment but I sure see it in Ellie Mae's.

Again last night Lawrence O’Donnell was the voice of reason.

He made one of his guests, soon to be ex-Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida look like a first class fool. Now it is easy to see why he lost his seat. Lawrence asked him about the loud anti-Obama rhetoric coming from the left and Grayson took the bait. After he finished with denigrating the President and the bill and why it should not pass, blah, blah blah, Lawrence asked a simple question…”what will the constituents in your districts do when they wake up on January 1^st 2011 and their taxes have gone up by 50% in some cases? “Of course Grayson tried to apply some fuzzy math and Lawrence cut him off at the knees and kept it moving. It was exquisite.

Grayson and others on the left who have decided to act like Republicans with all this hot air and no foundation to their arguments are pathetic and should get off the stage.

Actually, I think Lawrence went a bit too far. Grayson was not given much of a chance to point out that taxes on dividends were going to double. Lawrence didn't want to let Grayson expound on that so he yelled and filibustered to eat up time when he saw that Grayson was going to undermine his point.

FROM CHICAGO,

Didn't see anyone even mention race till you came along??? WHY??? Are you one of the black racists that frequent these posts???

It's $75 billion for two years, it's $700 billion for 10. If republicans really were serious about reducing the deficit, then they should have extended only the tax cuts for 98% of Americans who will actually spend most of their extra dollars.

Jody iowa - you don't really mean to imply that the 2% will just let their $$$ lie on a table at home do you? No investments, CD's, charitable contributions, etc?

BTW, what is wrong with reducing spending? Doesn't that show fiscal responsibility?

Jody, do you understand that by lowering certain tax rates you broaden the tax base and revenues actually increase? Obama's Debt Commission even stated this as a way to lower the debt. Modern liberals/progressive use the static model to model the effects of tax cuts. Yet most people don't take tax increases or tax cuts standing still. Either a tax increase or tax cut affects what you do, even though you may be unaware of it. Tax rate increases/decreases are dynamic. Tax cuts in the areas affecting work and productive activities in the economy will generate more of those activities. So if work costs less, you get more of it, and people are encouraged to work harder because the government is taking less of it. Think about it ...

Don't you think it's about time to get off of the Bush garbage? After all, he's been gone for two years now, and in that time while Carter rants and raves, Bush has been honorable and respectful enough to keep his mouth shut about Obama.

And by the way on the WMDs...Check a DECADE of Clinton saying there were WMDs. About U.N. inspectors saying there were WMDs. About Senators like Clinton and Kerry saying there were WMDs and DEMANDING that Saddam be taken out. About the United Nations itself saying there were WMDs.

If the tax cuts had been PERMANENT then maybe there would be some recovery, or even a faster recovery. But why should anyone hire a person, knowing that in about 24 months that their taxes are going to go up and they are going to be laying people off to cover those taxes?

But who cares. The small businesses that make up most of the "rich" that you all rail about don't really deserve to make a dime do they? They don't deserve to expand. And the people that you call "rich" don't really deserve the money they EARNED either, do they? And after spending a lifetime of paying taxes on what they have, when they die, they should actually be taxed for dying too, right?

YELLOWcake from NIGER, please!

You pay taxes on profits.

LouisJ

You have to love the media pushing "Scare Tactics" by the White House... Compromise and Doom and Gloom. Well yeah, I guess it does sound right when you factor in the Right. It is pretty scary.

TEA anyone...

LouisJ

That pays for the bills. I'd suggest the media put some Ginkgo in that tea to improve its collective memory loss. Do the terms Communist, anti-Kenyan colonialist, "government take over", soft on terrorism, uncertainty ring a bell?

Not even close William, his predecessor holds that title and will for a long long time.

I could say that George W. Bush was the worst president ever but that doesn't make it true; history says there were others even worse.

But not many.

William, I have hope that Obama can be changed and molded into a good president. This bill he is pushing is a positive sign he is willing to work with republicans. The worst president is a matter of opinion. From reading history, I would put Wilson as the worst, Carter as second worst, followed by FDR. I will say this, Obama has done a good job of dividing the country.

On a closing note. I want to give an award to rep. Weiner as the dumbest person I have ever seen on TV. A communist disguised as a democrat.

All of you on here Bush hating. Name me one thing that Bush personally did to you. None of you are hungry because you're on the internet all day everyday. That is at least 50.00 a month all you self-righteous ......... could be feeding someone with.

NO ONE in this lifetime knows how history will judge Bush. Most will not even be around to know. 2 of my kids are teenagers and frankly they couldn't care less about Bush, Obama, etc...... most Americans feel the same way, hell half of America do not even know there are 3 branches of government.

Happy to. Bush's tax plan caused the deficit to explode, thereby making it nearly impossible to have a fiscally responsible budget any time in the near term. As such the level of government services will certainly deteriorate. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html The only folks who actually benefitted from this irresponsibility were the most wealthy, who've accumulated massive wealth based on government borrowing.

Thanks for taking my money and giving it directly to the Koch brothers, George.

John:

Obviously I need to sign this to you. The question was; What did Bush do to YOU personally? You went into a usual tyrade of deficits, hell we have always had deficits. Government services have been deteriorating for decades. You guys come up with all of these "The sky is falling" conclusions about things that have went on my entire lifetime and I'm pushing toward 50.

It does not matter how much you tax the rich, loopholes will be found. You and everyone else in here attempt every year to receive the largets tax refund possible. If you say you don't; you're a LIE!

No one accumulated wealth based on government borrowing unless they were the ones lending it out. That is a stupid statement.

You need to stop repeating all of those MSNBC (Ed, Keith, Rachel) talking points in regards to the Koch brothers. Do you not think ED, KEITH, and RACHEL are not wealthy?????? I guarantee they all have accountants and lawyers that use every loophole possible to continue making money for them.

I haven't heard that ole' Fat Azz Ed Shultze is giving away half of his wealth. Lets see how many rich Democratic Congressmen volunteer to pay half of their wealth to the government. Hold you're breathe on that notion and see how quick you die.

Is it a stupid statement?

The Bush tax cuts were heavily biased toward the top end.

The Bush tax cuts seriously compromised our ability to balance the budget.

Those deficits were finance through borrowing.

Because the burden now falls more severely on people of average means it's beeen a tool to funnel money from the Average American to the wealthy.

John B:

I will try this again.

Tax cuts are just that. It means I KEEP MORE OF MY MONEY....MINE....The government did not send me a check so they cannot say I (taxpayer) caused a deficit. You cannot count money that is not yours.

Nobody's money is channeled to another group of individuals. Bush's cuts were across the board. Do you even know what funneling (laundering) MONEY MEANS?

I get it. You don't care that responsibility for paying off the deficit is now more on the backs of the middle class, less on the wealthy thanks to tax cuts dating all the way back to the Reagan years. They have more money, I have more debt. How is this not funneling money?

Worst Presidents???

I would say Hoover in 3rd place, followed by Carter in 2nd place. Then (drum roll) Barrack Hussain Obama in 1st place. No contest. The other two weren't even that close.

They are rolling the difference in from the "General Fund", that was put out yesterday. Social Security takes no hit.

the general fund is empty.

Make no mistake Steve Social Security and Medicare are in the Republicans cross-hairs, the rich get nothing from either program so to them they are unnecessary expenditures, they could better use that money to invade some country and kill people.

Steve, there was an article on "Money & Quotes" this morning about this very thing. Very interesting read.. That author suggested that you take that 2% payroll cut and put it directly into your 401(k). As far as I understand, this payroll cut is for the employee only, the employer will not be getting a payroll tax cut.

If any FR participant works for the SS Dept could you please answer a question for me? Doesn't SS base your SS amount on the last so many years of your employment history? If this is the case, what does this mean for people who are going to be retiring inside of 2 years?

Yep, you fit right in that 50% category you speak of.

Dave in Redondo Beach

I had (Hodgkins stage 4) cancer and cant get insurance. Give me the option. If you dont want gov health care.. dont take it. I NEED it because nobody else will give it to me... not even for 600.00 a month. If I get sick again.... I'm dead. You people have NO clue what your talking about. You only hear the Fox news propoganda BS.

My heart goes out to you. My brother has cancer and can't retire because he knows no one will insure him. Still I don't trust his employee because you know they may find a way to fire him if his treatments become too costly.

Most western countries take care of their own.

Unless Fox learns how to report NEWS,I wish Fox could lose its license. It does such a disservice to low information voters.

Why dont you and the rest of you lefties donate every dime you make for the betterment of your kind. Until you do that, cut the crap. You are the minority in the USA and most of us are good without the help of "the goverment" !

Sorry, Dave.

It took me five minutes to find out about MRMIP. Since you, apparently, do not know about it, here is the link

http://www.opa.ca.gov/healthcare/health-plan/pre-existing-conditions.aspx

As someone with a birth defect that caused my kidney disease, I know, first hand, that you CAN buy insurance with a pre existing condition. It costs more, sure, but so does car insurance for young drivers, people with a history of accidents or tickets - in othernwords, for people with high risk factors.

I will give you the benefitnof the doubt and believe that you are ignorant of the law that enables you to buy health insurance. Now that you know, stopmspreading the story that you cannot. It simply is not true.

no joe, no bo, nj : We Had a surplus (jobs) before Bush? We did? Where in India? Mexico? Chili?

It wasn't Obama and his policies that broke the country... and the bank. True it was tyhe democraps.

As far as the health care program. It should have been created to help people like you, who couldn't afford or get insurance. It should not have been shoved down people throats.

And as far as obama goes: He is still a B.S. artist. He is turning this country into a socialist country. And americans are letting him. We need to do away with this two party system. IT DOES NOT WORK.

By the way the republicans did not lead us into the last conflict. The american people DEMANDED that Bush do something and he did.

Thoughts and prayers to you in your time of need, Dave. And thanks for your input. If people in need would stand up and tell their stories we'd be a much different country. It's harder to accept the convenient lies when unpleasant reality stares you right in the face.

You realize that there never was a surplus under Clinton, just cowboy accounting. Just look up the facts my friend.

It is harder to accept the convenient lies when unpleasant reality stares you in the face?

You mean like the link I provided that shows that he can, in fact, buy health insurance?

Great point Dave and I'm sorry about your illness. Also, don't listen to the people from the right. We all know that they are full of chicken crap.

Hang in there Dave!

With all of NJNB's pent up anger & hate... it's no wonder her kidneys failed... somethings gotta give!

These right wingers have all the compassion of a cactus!

So, someone posts that he cannot buy health insurance due to a pre-existing condition.

The lefties offer sympathy.

I do the research, and provide a link to a state website that will enable him to buy the insurance he needs.

So, here is the choice: empty words that do not ameliorate his situation.

Action that helps him ameliorate his situation.

I could not possibly have invented a better scenario to show the difference between the left and the right.

I do the research, and provide a link to a state website that will enable him to buy the insurance he needs.

Thanks for admitting there's a need for "Socialized Medicine" in parts of the market.

NJNBNJ:

The difference is:

"We're really sorry to hear that, what can we do to help..."

versus

"Just go to this site, spend the money and stop complaining..."

Apparently you missed the part where a good amount of people do not agree with this so-called healthcare reform. I empathize with your situation, but if the healthcare is so great, why aren't federal employees required to particiapte in it? Why was the whole state of Nebraska granted a waiver from participating? There are all kinds of waivers being granted to certain groups, while my healthcare premiums increase and my benefits decrease. I live in the state of Arizona where they already give away more healthcare that what is being paid for. And you all still want to criticize our need to enforce the immigration laws. It baffles the mind!!!!!!!!!

dave in redondo,

sorry for your illness dave. my prayers will include you. i agree with you that the republicans programs are not going to help middle and working class people. my question is why does Obama continually let them implement their agenda when he has a majority until Jan 2011? Hard ball is the game in washington. he is playing t-ball with a wiffle ball.

Fielden, who exactly, offered help besides me? No one.

no joe, no bo, nj...

Sorry it took you 5 minutes to find that site. I did months ago... but I dont qualify. YOU HAVE TO HAVE HAD INSURANCE WITH NO LAPSES IN COVERAGE FOR 61 DAYS. That kinda stops me right in my tracks. I havent been able to get insurance for over 5 years. And in that time I have incured more than 60k in hospital bills due to the need to wait till im on deaths door (menningitis partially caused by having no spleen because of the cancer) .. and then get myself to the emergency room and then onto the ICU. Guess what? WE ALL PAY FOR ME NOT BEING ABLE TO GET INSURANCE. Thats not fair to the rest of the tax payers... just as its not fair to me that an insurance company can deny me coverage. And the TP and Palins deadbrains love to cry "Death Panel" ... WTF do you think insurance companies are? They decide on who is worth covering... and treating. And CheylLM... you're simply not worth responding to or reading anymore. No substance. No facts. No clue. Have a nice day and enjoy the struggle.

Wow.....just like Pelosi.....unemployment creates jobs!

Unemployment insurance payments go directly into the economy. Economic activity can keep people from losing their jobs, it can stimulate demand, but it can't make business hire.

Paul-977599

Unemployment insurance payments go directly into the economy. Economic activity can keep people from losing their jobs, it can stimulate demand, but it can't make business hire.

Paul it almost like a waste of key strokes to retype facts every day. People who have exhausted every source of their income will spend money because they have too. Money means people buy gas, food, and some bare necessities if the can eek them out.

==========================================

crazy-351712

crazy, You must live in a cave or the woods like tim McVeigh. The United States has a population of 310.2 million. The percentage of Millionaire Households: 4.1%.The 4.7 million U.S. millionaires in 2009 was up by 15.1% over 2008.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/where-the-worlds-millionaires-live-the-top-10-countries/19510242/

Those were the most current numbers I could find. Now if you factor in the economy and the number of employed which has risen. liberals are not in the minority. Neither are the tea baggers. Now you do the math.

The first sign of ignorance is name-calling! I bet you're the kind of person when asked about global warming your response would be Obama is a Muslim!

The tax cuts for the rich that he was forced to agree to alone will cost $700 billion! The unemployment extension cost less than 1/100 of that! It is not Obama that is adding to the deficit but rather this party that you seem to think and do no harm. They rely on ignorant people like yourself that even in the face of objective proof and fact, still believes that Obama is wrong! How much clearer could he make it? He wanted to continue the tax cuts on those making $250,000 a year and less. He wanted to extend unemployment benefits so that people would not be put out of their homes, go hungry, and by removing this money from the economy, the economy would grow even slower.

Simply put, for people as ignorant as you are, there are no jobs! Giving rich people tax cuts has not created jobs in almost the last four years and will not create jobs now! The Republican Party has deluded people like you into thinking that once business and the wealthy know the tax cuts will remain in place they will start to spend money to create jobs. What people like you don't know is that these people even during the height of this recession had made record profits and have been sitting on piles of money in personal accounts until now when they can force the government to give them what they want! They are not now going to take the money out of their accounts and put it in their businesses now either!

If a company in your city, county, or state hires 1000 people immediately after the bill is signed, keep in the back of your mind, that this could have been done a year ago! You have 20 million Americans on record, not to mention another 20 to 40,000,000 not on the record, that were put out of work for no reason of their own, and now ignorant people have turned on these people and are now calling them lazy and refusing to look for work! Again your ignorance will not allow you to understand that in most states anyone receiving unemployment benefits must prove or keep a record of where they have looked for work. And still the unemployment rate went up!

I could go on for days about what you don't know but I don't have training in curing mental disorders. This is no cure for anyone who when asked anything responds by blurting out, "he is a Muslim that truly hates America"!

You're pathetic, Miles. Go away from this forum, you belong on Glenn Beck's site if you continue to post the drivel you bring.

I agree, and as for using "scare tactics" it ,like the race card, is played by those that have no other card to play.

The President is putting politics first, that's the problem. It is his job to lead the democrat party which means corralling the dummy democrats (most of them) in congress.