Yess thanks Harry Reid for shipping the manufacturing of the second largest wind farm in the country to a Chinese company.

Actually it puts more money into the wealthiest pockets because they earn more of course. A neighbor of ours has been out of work for 21 months and receives no U.E. or other benefits such as: food stamps, etc. due to contracting work. Their child works at a small part time job without any benefits, either. The parents don't receive a tax deduction for their child's college education because the child is one year older than the allotted age for the tax deduction. But yet the Govt. won't give the student food stamps even though the student earns far less than $10K because he lives at home due to not being able to get a full time job to support the basic needs. Another excuse given to the student was: the parents have two old cars that were paid off. Since both parents are laid off work, there will be no tax break for them due to the very limited income; nor can they benefit from the less SS taxes paid for work done during the next year when they are both not working, and probably won't since both are just over 50. As a result, there is not one single item in this Bill that benefits those types of families as well as no new jobs in sight for the future regardless of their college degrees and experience. However, wealthy families not needing the money are being given more cash back and more tax exemptions. They certainly don't need the extra assistance as do a couple of our neighbors falling into the above situations. This just doesn't make any sense at all. It has already been proven that new jobs are not created with the tax deductions, and when the wealthy are so busy hording their money in their company coffers with fewer employees doing the work of a larger work force.

The middle class gets sold out once again to earmarks (special projects), wealthy, big businesses, and to fiscal irresponsibility! How are we going to pay for this?? You can bet they'll borrow from other countries and cut even more out of SS and Medicare for the elderly. Oh, but where are the jobs for those unemployed so that they can even pay taxes to support all of these cuts and earmarks?? I sure don't see big businesses spending any of the $2 plus Trillion cash available on hand to hire new workers, and forget about hiring anyone over 50, esp. a male. Big businesses are quietly hiring only current workers away from other businesses and forcing out those over 50. But what about jobs for those highly educated, experienced, unemployed, who never collected any U.E., no food stamps, etc., and will have no Christmas?? Where are the jobs for them?? They are told: To apply for the Wal-Mart Door Greeter minimum wage salaries (who almost LOL saying you're too over qualified); To spend money not available for another degree, or more of those overly inflated, costly certifications; and finally, To do volunteer service work for your community as if that will help pay bills, etc. Where's the help with the mortgage mess, too, because you have been out of work for more than two years, no U.E. , or any other benefits?? The LOL mortgage modifications exist for six months ONLY, and then pop back with even higher interest rates than before along with extra fees for which they refuse to explain what they are for or related to. For those stuck in that mess, they are told to hire an attorney (very expensive) provided you have the spare funds, or take a hike on down the road after the greedy mortgages banks (who helped to create the Recession) take away their homes. So much for the quickly dwindling middle class getting any support for those types of problems. But the Govt. will force cut backs on SS and Medicare. And who would want to gamble with privatizing SS when Wall Street has been so corruptible in a very unstable stock market with speculative rip-off con artists allowed their loopholes, tax exemptions, and enormous bonuses?? It's all about the politicians spending irresponsibly for the wealthy tax exemptions (special deals, etc., etc.), and just a few very restrictive programs for the poor. While the burden of repaying for all of these new cuts are left up to the middle class and older folks (not provided special tax exemptions as do the businesses), who will receive less SS through no COLAs or various other cuts, provided more cut backs in Medicare benefits, and let’s forget-- aren't allowed to use their educational skills and experience in the workforce (unless you have that special family or political connection). Thanks so much for the fiscal irresponsibility!!! The Govt. has not heard one single word from their Constituents. Both parties just keep on going with the same old politics as usual !!!!

The State's earmarks and stimulus jobs almost always go to the politicians' Buddies or Big Businesses without a bidding contract competition (such as: Chaney's Haliburton in Iraq while over charging the Govt. with extremely high fees, etc. All the work in Iraq involved no-bid contracts to Halliburton, Blackwater, etc.). There's nothing like taking our tax dollars to making themselves that much wealthier.

Yes, we certainly do have the BEST GOVERNMENT that money from the wealthy can buy.

Is it only in the liberal mind that keeping the tax rates the same a "Tax Cut"?

Why do we need Obama. If his function is to simply sign the bills, can't we get the chinese to build a little signing robot to do this?? No vacations needed.

Is it only in the conservative mind that keeping tax rates below the amount of expenditures IS DEFICIT SPENDING????

An Independenr Thinker..........

What entitles your unemployed neighbor to tax breaks? When they were avoiding taxes as contract workers they knew the consequences of unemployment and will one day see how they paid no social security so they get none. We wish.

Why does being over 50 mean they are unable to work?

How do they pay for a kid in college with no work?

Why is their excuse making the problem of people that work hard everyday rich or poor or in between?

I would like to put a little counter on a dollar sometime that would tick +1 every time it passed from one tax paying individual to another and see how many transactions it would take for it to be completely swallowed by taxes. For example, I earn a dollar, I pay taxes on that dollar. Lets say I have 85 cents left of it. I go get some gas with that 85 cents ( about a 1/3rd of a gallon) take of lets say 10 cents in Federal gasoline tax, and maybe 5 cents state gasoline tax. Lets say out of the 70 cents the gas station gets of that, he pays expenses of 60 cents, and keeps 10. That 10 is then subject to his personal income tax, and the 60 cents paid to his venders, are also subject to their personal or business income taxes ( and thats just one simple @!$%#ing transaction!!!!!!!!!!!) We are being bamboozled!

The headline proclaims Obama signs tax cut bill into law. This isn't a tax cut. It maintains the status quo at the cost of an 800 billion dollar increase to the deficit/national debt. Where is the outrage from all the angry Americans? There isn't going to be any. Once people realized that they were going to be the ones hit in the pocketbook they caved in even faster than Obama did. We are a society of let the other guy do the sacrifice, I don't want to. That's pathetic.

Another headline proclaims Obama says this will stimulate the economy and create jobs. Horse hooey (I'd say "BS" but then I'd get suspended for a day). These tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 did not create jobs, they made the wealthy even wealthier. If Obama thinks this will stimulate the economy he is a fool who should do all of us a favor and resign. Obviously he's not up to the task.

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

"It's a very good agreement for the people that Democrats care most about," Gibbs said. "We've been very out front in the fact that we got a better deal on this than the other side did. There's more in it from a monetary standpoint of the things that we wanted."

My question to Mr Gibbs is this "WTF have you been smoking?" You sold out, you caved in and now you want us to believe it's a good agreement for the people the Dems care most about. First of all, you should care about ALL Americans. That's who you represent. You sound as disgusting as bush/cheney. I hope you seriously don't expect us to believe your drivel.

President says bill will spur economy, jobs

Of course it will Mr. President.......and that'll be your little secret ;).

(psst psst...hey, I think the president is smoking the funny stuff.....)

".....the president has vowed to fight to end the cuts when they expire again in two years."

"In speaking with reporters at a gaggle this morning, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the deal exceeded "virtually everybody's expectations" of what it would do for the middle class."

Wow, talking out both sides of the mouth.

On one hand, Mr. Obama has praise for everyone to get this legislation through and is taking credit for doing so. And on the other hand, Mr. Obama is "vowing" to end the tax cut (or is that a Tax Raise) in two years.

And, Mr. Gibbs is still playing the puppet...."exceeded virtually everybody's [SP] expectations" and how it will help the middle class. I can expect to hear the opposite when Mr. Obama fights for terminating the tax cuts (or is that a Tax Raise) in two years and uses that "income" as government money to spend anyway they want.

Seems this Administration leads by the way the wind blows, and geeeez, it is like a twister throwing everything around.

It's a very good agreement for the people that Democrats care most about," Gibbs said. This is OUTRAGOUS does not the president work for all the people? 2012 will be a time for change we need a president that will serve ALL THE PEOPLE!

Is it only in the liberal mind that keeping the tax rates the same a "Tax Cut"?

It is keeping the Tax Cuts, set to expire, in place. But I guess it takes a non-thinker's mind not to see that.

I guess Obama's just continuing to prove he's just one of the Boys in the Club, albeit without being vested yet.

It's a very good agreement for the people that Democrats care most about," Gibbs said. This is OUTRAGOUS does not the president work for all the people? 2012 will be a time for change we need a president that will serve ALL THE PEOPLE!

Good luck with that. The president does work for all the people - unfortunately not all the people can be happy. One side of the room yells and the other side sighs.

I'm very skeptical. I don't believe this will help the economy except to stop it from bleeding more. I don't think jobs are coming from this bill. How can jobs come when the president just put a freeze on government spending and hiring? The government is the #1 employer hiring today. I wish the President would make these forecasts about the economy. He doesn't know.

So most libs agree that keeping the tax rates the same won't spur job growth. Somehow raising the taxes of the wealthiest Americans will spur job growth? Someone in DC needs to grow a pair and start cutting some spending. These cuts will be unpopular for everyone, so go ahead and cut everything. Start with defense, head over to education, start chopping entitlements, get rid of the huge glut of public sector jobs, and keep going until the government actually operates within its budget. Someone made the comment that the government is the number one employer hiring today. Does anyone else get really nervous hearing that?

I am certainly no fan of President Obama but........What a disgrace and a show of disrespect that Harry and Nancy weren't front and center at the Bill Signing. The two of them must have been holed up somewhere sulking, drowning their sorrows. I guess they didn't want one of the pens Obama gives out while signing the Bill into Law.

Here is an interesting little tidbit of information under the new income tax laws; A person that has taxable income of $1 Million per year, for a total earned income of $50 Million over 50 years, and who saves 50% of his income and invests it at 5% per year, will pay over $62 Million in income and estate taxes by the time he dies.

This begs the question - How much in taxes should the 'rich' pay?

This begs the question - How much in taxes should the 'rich' pay?

Roy,

After dealing with the libs on here for a couple of years now, I'd say their answer to your question would be:

"Enough that they won't have more than me."

See, I've learned that when it comes to libs their main concern isn't the poor, or wars, or the deficit, or equal rights, or health care...

It's bltching constantly that someone has something they don't have and trying their best to take whatever it is away from that evil "rich" person.

Libs are the most self-centered people on the planet.

bicfj -

Jealousy is not a valid reason to tax the wealthy mor.

What's wrong with working to improve your own life? Granted, you may not be as 'successful' as the next person, but at least you wouldn't need to be jealous of that person's good fortune and work ethic.

Roy. Here's an excellent example of what I mean:

bicfj

The libs as you call them have ONLY themselves to be centered about.

The wealthy have everything else and they want more -- All of everything

Notice how this person's justification has nothing to do with any societal issue. Only that someone else might have more than they do.

I don't think I could have asked for a more perfect example.

I don't get it. If continuing these tax cuts will do such wonders, how come they haven't already performed an economic miracle? As someone who is making 6 figures I can honestly say that I do not need the extra money and will continue to donate it to animal rescue organizations.

Stef,

That is the question which is always avoided by those supporting the tax cuts' preservation.

The words "cut" or "hike" are just spin. This was about legislation being "extended" for two more years.

It is a good question to ask how long it takes for rates to be considered "current" or more importantly, if/when considered current, how can the rates ever be changed without people freaking out? Once you create a program or give out breaks, it's very hard to stop the program or stop giving breaks.

Will there be any tracking of jobs created by keeping the tax rate low for the richest two percent? The Republican talking heads keep claiming we can only get hired by a rich person. I'd like to see them prove it with some real data--now's their chance.

And they should track disparity too. Since breaks on dividends, capital gains, and estate taxes will continue, while at the same time programs like Social Security will be robbed, the rich will continue to get richer while unemployment remains high and more and more people fall into poverty.

During the holiday season, just keep thinking about Pottersville in It's A Wonderful Life.

The Republican talking heads keep claiming we can only get hired by a rich person. I'd like to see them prove it with some real data

I've never heard anyone say "we can only get hired by a rich person."

The phrase is "no one ever got a job from a poor person."

and I would think that phrase would be pretty self-explanatory.

Obama - failed presidency!!!! Obama campaigned on CHANGE, extends the same tax cuts he campaigned against. Obama - NO LEADERSHIP, SOCIALIST, IDEALIST, contributes greatly to the downturn of America. One and DONE!

As a Conservative I love poor people and with the federal government we have there will be more since the one thing they do not teach people is fiscal responsibility. Poor people are never taught how to handle money and this is why they are poor most of the time beside expecting the feds to take care of them and their families. So not all conservative are evil like the liberals who control Wall street and the federal government.

Spin, spin, spin. You're right, not all conservatives are evil so why do you claim all liberals are? Poor people are poor because they don't earn much money, they are often disadvantaged for a whole host of reasons so please, don't try the old "blame the poor for being poor" routine. Also, liberals don't control Wall Street and it isn't democrats who need to learn fiscal responsibility, they're called tax and spenders because they pay for what they legislate in ordinary times (we are not in ordinary times right now)--the GOP lost that ability when Reagan became President, they've not been responsible since that time.

Jeff -

The Federal government doesn't teach poor people how to handle money? Are there some special classes out there that the rich get to take to learn how to handle money? And if these classes are only for the rich, then obviously they don't need these "how to handle your money" classes.

Or maybe your argument is totally circular and just doesn't make any sense.

Jeff I'm not sure what idea you're trying to form exactly, but I think you wanted to offer some kind of olive branch and it came off pretty back handed.

"Are there some special classes out there that the rich get to take to learn how to handle money?"

No, but the rich actually paid attention and excelled in school hence the reason they are "rich".

Yeah, people like Paris Hilton...

The schools are a total disaster, they should be teaching personal responsibility from kindergarten on. This is just one symptom of it. Even well to do children rarely know the value of the dollar, the only difference is their families can absorb the mistakes, the poor families can't.

Rich people need far less schooling since they have already figured out how to maintain their wealth. It is the poor that make foolish decisions. Who spends more on lottery tickets? Why do people buy huge expensive trucks instead of investing in a better house? Current disaster aside, cars lose value over time while houses gain value.

Somehow we've lost the value of delayed gratification and self sacrifice for a better future. Personal finance should be every bit as important as math and science. Hats off to all the parents that teach personal responsibility. Those that don't are guilty of child abuse in my book.

From the foregoing comments, I get the impression that some people believe that all rich people were born rich and all poor people were born poor. While I think the latter thought is mostly true, I don't subscribe to the former.

Our country still gives our people the opportunity to rise above their humble beginnings, no matter how humble. I believe that most rich people worked their way to their riches and were not born into the lap of luxury ala Paris Hilton.

James Lee, you are off in a fairy tale land.

James Lee is exactly right!

I personnally know two multi millionaires worth tens of millions of dollars from hard work and they each have in common an 8th grade education.

Education is still the best route to success but hard work seldom fails while blaming others always does.

Special K, if my beliefs are in error, what is the truth in your mind?

It takes a lot of hard work and dedication to raise yourself up from being poor to being at least financially stable or well-to-do. Those who do succeed, never quit trying to better themselves.

No one is going to just hand wealth to you (unless you are born into a wealthy family), you have to work to earn it.

The difference between earning it and inheriting it? If you earn it, you appreciate the work that went into gaining it; if you inherit wealth, you feel like you are owed that silver spoon you were born with.

No, but the rich actually paid attention and excelled in school hence the reason they are "rich".

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

george bush came from a "rich" family but he's dumber than the village idiot.

The amount of posts dedicated to Paris Hilton's inherited wealth is incredible. News flash! She has created a brand and keeps herself in our face both in positive and negative light. She knows how to make money and make it grow. That makes her smarter than me and probably anyone reading this post. I forgot a Hilton family existed. I only knew of the hotel chain until she recreated the brand again. Smart little rich girl! You could always compare her to another brand, Sarah Palin, who uses hatred and political spin to make her money. She is now wealthy also. Both smart woman but one Paris Hilton, I would trust with my wallet. Sarah, I trust, would back stab me if it meant more money and notariety for herself. My wallet would be safer in the hands of a theaf. After all, they would only steal money. Sarah would steal my soul.

imwhitewolf......Ya know, kinda sick of the Bush " dumber than the village idiot." comments. You may not have liked his politics but untill you can claim to have graduated from Yale University and Havard Business School (He is the only U.S. President to have earned an MBA.) , can fly a fighter jet, been Governor of any State and the President of the United States for 2 terms.....then, imwhitewolf, you are no match for Bush. What have you done with your life ???

The amount of posts dedicated to Paris Hilton's inherited wealth is incredible. News flash! She has created a brand and keeps herself in our face both in positive and negative light.

News flash! If her name were Paris Smith instead of Paris Hilton nobody would give a crap about her!

The Estate Tax is the most egregious and unfair tax in existence. What right does the government have to tax a person's earnings A SECOND TIME simply because they have died and decided to leave it to their heirs to provide them with a better life?

Those on here who castigate people like Paris Hilton or anyone one else who inherited their wealth are simply envious.

And they know it.

The money does not belong to you or the government. If someone wishes to leave their wealth to a relative that's their business and no concern of yours and is certainly no excuse for the government to come in a second time after already taxing the money once when is was reported as income and take 55% of what's left because the person who earned it wants to leave it to someone else.

Jealousy. It's a destructive emotion. You liberals should try to control it. It will ultimately cause you nothing but grief.

The question becomes, how long will the voters allow their elected leaders to rob the future for immediate gratification?

At least another 2 years, I'm afraid.

(Yay, Tea Party!)

MtMike,

Well it actually is a tax cut, because not only did they extend those tax cuts from the previous president, but they also cut the SS tax for individuals by 2% for a year. Therefore; the Obama Tax Cuts are in place for at least 1 year:O

Da Noid, you may "tongue-in-cheek" hail the Tea Party movement for delivering the extension of the current tax rates, but more House Democrats voted for the measure than Republicans.

That could wind up being a positive for the Democrats.

This works out great for the republicans! they can wait 2 yrs for the the gov to collapse then blame it on Oboma and there pledge to see him fail comes true. Who cares what the harm to our country is

The truly rich people that I know did not become rich by working for someone else. 100% of them are self employed. They work even when they're not at work. They mix with other successful people and share ideas. They are dynamic, self starters. They see opportunity in everything. It's a developed mindset and continuous optimism that makes them very successful.

The poor people that I know have a simplistic, bumper sticker mentality that never focuses on the details of any situation. They view their bills as some hungry beast that they need to throw some money at once in a while. No budgeting, no planning. Think with emotions instead of facts. This helps to keep them poor for life.

By MtMike:

The question becomes, how long will the voters allow their elected leaders to rob the future for immediate gratification?

Voters ALLOW their elected leaders, Mike? Get your head out of your hiney. ITS THE VOTERS WHO ARE DEMANDING THIS IMMEDIATE GRATIFICATION!!!!!!!!!

I can never understand why people blame "government" or "politicians" or "our elected representatives" for all these perceived financial evils. Our elected representatives are HARD WIRED into us by sophisticated polling, internet surveys, etc. to know what we want. And they give us WHAT WE WANT, because that's how they get reelected. Get it?

So, if you don't like deficits, THEN TELL YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES NO ONE SHOULD GET A TAX CUT BY KEEPING THE RATES LOWER THAN EXPENDITURES.

I don't hear ANYONE telling their representative to do that.

And don't start in on this BS mantra of "cut spending" without saying EXACTLY what you would cut. Lots of people like the idea of cutting spending, as long as its not spending that benefits them or programs they like. Not much of a consensus there, and no real leaders to make that happen. BECAUSE WE THE PEOPLE WON'T LET IT HAPPEN, get it?

Nresq, we sent them a message, okay. You just did not like it.

Yes, revenue is less than expenditures. We told them to CUT THE EXPENDITURES.

We tried the liberal way. It was every bit the disaster many warned it would be.

The rich did not steal their money from you- they earned it. Wanting something that is not yours is called "envy". It is an extremely damaging, negative emotion that warps people's lives. You should try to work to get over it.

Checkmate, Harry Reid, you smug little bastard!

Actually it was McConnell that called the 9 republican turn coats and thumped them into killing the omnibus pork laden spending bill. Hats of to you man!

The old school Republicans are coming around to the desires of the True Americans nicely. Now if they indoctrinate the newly elected leaders in this non-spending mode, we will have a very thrifty 2011, and have a ton of savings to point to in 2012.

What the f*ck are you talking about, Ed?

The tax deal was a $900 BILLION DOLLAR SPENDING BILL.

What f*ing dream land are you in? F*ing retard.

nresq -

How is not collecting revenue spending? Spending, by definition, is an outflow of capital not an inflow. If they are not collecting that revenue, it is a decrease in the inflow of revenue and has the potential of resulting in lower tax receipts (although by the government's own records, tax receipts increase when tax rates decrease). It is the spending that causes deficits and debt, until that is gotten under control debt will continue to increase.

As the tax rates are being kept the same for two additional years, it can be expected that the tax receipts will remain about the same as what they've been running. We need to get more Americans working if we want to get the tax receipts increased at this time. This tax legislation has the potential to help this situation because businesses now know what their tax liability will be for the next couple of years.

I'm not entirely sanguine about the 'tax holiday' on FICA. This seems problematic to me considering that social security is not nearly as stable as it needs to be.

No need to thump the republicans on the back. They have been filling bills with pork for themselves as a delaying tactic and then voting against it, all in the name of making Obama fail. I repeat the republicans are just as guilty about pork. They got everything they wanted in the tax bill, and we got screwed. Only way to REDUCE THE DEFICIT is to CUT SPENDING and INCREASE TAXES. We are still in 2 costly wars and a recession.

Merry Christmas to all who have to pay the $1trillion additional debt!

Say hello to you Communist masters!

Cheers.

we already have to pay the 4 trillion that obuma and the libs added to the debt in just two years and has not done a bit of good exept build a bigger gov.

To Jim 387--- You said a mouthful there...You are so right...Basically the RICH and WEALTHY will

benefit from this more than anyone else...

Fortunately the majority of americans are lucid, so this bill is seen as a big boost for Obama, not a death knell.

You guys are hyper focused on what you don't like about this bill and are ignoring the rest, just like every other far left/right wingnut.

Lucid? Obama squandered a supermajority and the chance to address Republicans abusing the filibuster, yet did absolutely nothing. Your Fox-Newsian argument is a sad joke.

Either Obama defies his base and turns right, as Clinton did, and he's toast or he defies the will of the people and doesn't cooperate with the republicans and he's toast. Either way he's toast.

The radical left lied to get elected, they were exposed and thrown out. Unfortunately that is where the money comes from so Reid and Pelosi are still calling the shots.

What the radicals don't comprehend is Obama didn't lose the liberal vote on Nov 2, he lost the moderate vote. Since the country is 40% conservative and 21% liberal, the left needs the center far more than the right. Without overwhelming moderate support they are unelectable. Obamacare sealed their doom. That will go down in history as one of the worst political calculations of all time.

Jim I detest fox, and your post helped me make my point.

Phil you view the world through rose colored glasses. Health care isn't as unpopular as you've been led to believe, and what the majority of americans want is government that can get work done. The leadership on both sides now understand this and are responding.

If Obama has 2 years of solid bipartisan government, whichis what the indicators point too, he will be fine because the moderates will flock back.

Jim387,

The Dem base is not going anywhere. Seriously Dude, who are you going to vote for that would have a chance?

Obama was/is probably your best radical chance ever. He campaigned as a centrist, fooled the independents, got elected, pulled off the centrist mask and pulled every trick in the Alinsky book to advance the progressive, big government, collectivist agenda.

His only problem was that America does not want progressive, big government collectivism. Despite that Obama got a lot of radical issues/damage done.

Your main complaint should be that he too quickly ignored the will of the majority in pushing his agenda, crippled the economy in pushing his agenda and in general set back the progressive agenda by pushing too hard, too fast. America woke up. He should moved more quietly, slowly and let America doze until 2012, or the 2010 mid terms at minimum.

Thankfully he didn't, but I'm sure you don't understand.

bob, you don't speak for the will of the entire country. You don't speak for the majority of the country. You speak for a a portion of the country, but that's it.

The republicans got a win this past november because the majority of the country was sick of the games being played by both sides and your guys were the alternative. Yes a message was sent, but not the message you think.

Valhalla Phil,

I don't think he is toast, yet. Clinton came back by moving to the center. Obama has made that (intial) move a year earlier than Clinton did! The independents still like him personally too, despite hating his agenda and performance.

He is still a radical. He did take one step to the right and will no doubt at some time, take 3 steps back to the left, but before or after 2012 is the question. I never believed his narcissism would allow him to step to the right. But he is also very thin skinned. In his petulant display earlier in the week, he seemed more angry at the left for turning on him than the Republicans for out maneuvering him and making him swallow the Bush tax "cuts".

You're right, he doesn't need the left - he needs the independents. He might be petulant enough to stay in the center till after 2012.

The 2012 election may comedown to whether his narcissism (inability to admit his agenda was wrong), or his thin skinned petulance prevails.

Just a wierd thought.

No Dosh, Bob pretty much speaks for about 60-61% of the population of the Country.........Obama lost the Independents.........

Gosh dosh,

ignored the will of the majority in pushing his agenda

And from that you get that I think I'm speaking for the whole country?

Nah, pretty much just a stupid blog opinion.

His only problem was that America does not want progressive, big government collectivism.

If that wasn't the message that was sent what was ..... Gee we love, love, love the Republicans?

Yea, right.

No silly I got it from "His only problem was that America does not want progressive, big government collectivism"

You assume that everyone, or even a majority see it as such. I disagree.

See what I think really happened, is people got fed up with what was going as far as the extreme partisan politics. Remeber the GOP was polling at somewhere between 30-40% in job approval rating at the time. So how did they get the upset?

Simple, they were the alternative. The only way the people had to send a message to washingtomn was vote out the incumbent, in many cases the democrats since they had the majority. They held their noses and cast their vote.

But the message was quit the partisan BS and fix our economy.

However the message got hijacked and twisted to fit the bill of a minority. An extremely vocal minority.

Safe,

I have wondered that myself in many blogs, but the left seems to think that your wealth handed down to your family is wrong--it should go to the government so that it can be redistributed to those that sit around and do nothing.

Sorry, your estate is going to lose 35% if you die this year, but lets hope that doesn't happen--we still need a couple of moderate conservatives on here:)

Whenever it happens Bear, the two bucks will always be there so gov'mint can get their sh*^^y fingers on it.

They're not taxing your estate, they're taxing your heirs income. Your estate just happens to be part of their income that year.

If you really want the smallest government possible, and you don't want to pay taxes, I hear Somolia is the place to be.

It is NOT the heirs income, it is their inheritance. Somalia is a stupid reference, the constitution lays out the duties of the government but it has been totally trashed in order to buy votes. We need to get back to the original intent of government which was mush smaller in scope.

The nanny state is killing us. Not only is it destroying our wealth, it is destroying our freedom as well. The only way to kill the beast is to starve it to death.

Good response, dosh!!!

Boohoo, only 60% of your millions will go directly to your children.

OR!!!! you could donate the money upon your death, set up a trust, etc. . . and then no one has to pay on it.

I find it funny that the so called conservatives think there should be an inheritance of money. If you truly believe in capitalism you believe in equal competition. If you truly believed in capitalism you would give your children no money and let them set up their own business.

You love to talk about personal responsibility and how the rich are rich because of their skills. Well then let your children show it. All your children did was be born to you. They don't deserve your money. Just like poor children don't deserve to be poor.

But, as always people don't walk the walk. You don't believe in capitalism. You know that the system isn't fair. So you help your children. You forgo your own believes, because you know they aren't true.

We liberals believe that everyone should have an equal chance. That means that you can't allow dynastic cycles of wealth to start up. Setting up monopolies for the rich to take over more and more of business, causing the death of the middle class. (Notice how after Regan we have seen a death of the middle class?)

It's a matter of perspective Phil. If you look at it as strictly incoming moneys and assets, then yes it's income regardless how they recieved it. That's like saying a lottery winner shouldn't be taxed, it's winnings not income.

And why is Somolia stupid? I mean it's a conservatives wet dream. Absolutely free market, zero taxes, exceedingly small government, no regulatory oversight, no welfare. It's what you want for all of us right? That's the american dream right?

Oh and if the founding fathers had seen the constitution as being an absolutely perfect document tha would guide us forever, they wouldn't have provided allowances to change it.

progressive (or just a communist), Democracy and capitalism are foreign notions to progressives like you. Your pseudo-intellectualism does not impress me. You philosophy would be more suited for life in Cuba than in the U.S. Oh, I forgot, Castro said that communism had failed in Cuba. Well, maybe you could go to ???

Why, because I believe an inheritance is still a windfall?

Is it because I believe adherence to political orthodoxy is ridiculous, and disasterous if implemented?

Here's your mistake, you think I'm a caricature of what your small mind percieves to be a progreessive, or a liberal, or whatever.

I don't think either side has all the answers, but if they come together they have enough. I believe in a centrist government, however we got through a long slog of ultra conservative government 2 years ago. Right now there are some very deep social problems that the country is facing that need to be addressed.

For my part I think things have been going pretty good. Now that we've had 2 years of social correction, we're headed to a centrist position.

The government is functioning perfectly in my eyes.

The Somolia thing is me poking a bit of fun at the nutcases, like yourself. However it is tinged with truth.

Safe......whether a liberal or conservative, anyone should see the truth in your posting. I consider myself an independent voter and I for one think it is terrible for the government to tax an estate. Especially at 45%.

dosh, stspecialk, etal -

Here's an example of why the estate tax is wrong -

The family farm is disappearing because the assets tend to be tied up in land and equipment. Multiple generations work the farm, often from the time kids are old enough to take some responsibility for things like feeding the chickens or weeding the vegetable patch, until they are well past normal retirement age. The farm is in the father's, mother's, or a grandparent's name and is passed down to the next generation. The income it has generated has been taxed throughout the farm's existance and every family member has 'sweat equity' in it. It is a small business, just like the local mom and pop store or restaurant.

It is considered by the government to be new income to those who 'inherit'. From the point of view that many conservatives share on this, it is deferred ownership as they have invested their lives to see the family business succeed. The paperwork is only a formality.

Explain to me how you can justify the double taxation.

HAHAHAHA OMG Tammy you are barking up the wrong tree on that one, I know exactly why the "family farm" is disappearing. I worked in a shop that served every farmer for 3 counties. I've lived almost my entire life in the country.

The reason that the "family farm" is in trouble is because the larger farmers are consolidating all the business into their hands. The small time farmers can't compete. Not only that but crop sales are increasingly moving to contracts with their buyers. If you don't have a contract you can't sell.

And their kids for the most part have no interest in farming. I've seen farmers pass on and the first thing their kid does is either sell the land or rent it to another farmer. I always thought this was a shame because you're talking about alot of land that their parents worked hard for, and they got rid of it as soon as they could.

This came to me repeatedly from farmer after farmer, in conversations I had with them, not an online article.

Oh and the "vegetable patch" and "feeding the chickens"? The weeding is down by s sprayer on the back of a tractor with air conditioing, GPS, and a helluva nice stereo system, and there's about 50,000 chickens for them to feed. Fortunately that's 5 houses in the back yard and a tractor trailer comes by, fills the hopper, and the rest is automated.

Would you believe it only takes 6 weeks to grow a chicken? They pump them fullof an amazing amount of steroids.

Jesus this isn't 1910.

If we accept Speaker Pelosi's numbers, only 6600 "rich" people inherit their wealth- that is the number of families she says will benefit from cutting the estate tax.

Now, given that there are many, many more people than that earning over $250k a year, (the democrats cut-off for rich), it stands to reason that the vast majority of the 'rich' EARNED their wealth.

It is, therefore, obvious that the liberal's view of taxing the rich out of existence is, in fact, based on nothing more than envy of those who have made the most of the opportunities provided to everyone in this country.

Then try wonder why their worldview is rejected by the majority. . .

dosh, that is a symptom of what has been happening. To see the reason, you need to look deeper into what is happening and apply reasoning skills.

If you truly believe in capitalism you believe in equal competition. - Quoted by Dosh.....

I do believe in capitalism Dosh, and also in equal competition; however the government, whether State or Federal doesn't offer me that advantage. Equal competition, for example, doesn't exist when competing for a construction contract when your competition is a union. Union specification state the contract MUST be a prevailing wage contract.

Now suppose I have a company that can perform the job faster, with greater quality, and at a more competitive project cost, but it is a union wage project. I must bid the project at a wage scale that is significantly higher than the average rate of hire of the people on the job. Now let's say a project management issue arrises on the project and the union dictates the issue violates union rules. Now we go into negotiation to remedy the issue while the union employees are still being paid union scale. Let's say we have several of these union rule work stoppages. So now I bill the project owner for the additional cost incurred, which I wouldn't have had in the first place because the workers are part of my business.

Who gets the change order for the additional costs - the project owner. And, if it is a government project, it is a union project. So the taxpayers pay the high costs.

Now, do you believe that is fair and competitive?

Seniors ARE NOT getting hit by inflation because there is no inflation, duhhhhh!

The only group that came out of the recession better off than they were before were seniors. Quit whining!

st, I think anyone who reads your post, regardless of political orientation, and providing they didn't come out of a decade long coma sometime in the past week, immediately thought "wtf is he talking about, this guys is a moron."

You are full of emminent and epic fail.

No, stspecialk, inflation does not exist, does it?

Just because prices are increasing on gasoline, inflation doesn't exist, does it? Just because the price of a loaf of bread or a dozen eggs has gone up, inflation doesn't exist, does it? Just because that pair of jeans that used to cost $15.00 now costs $20.00, inflation doesn't exist, does it?

We should all be happy for those earning over the specified amount liberals believe is too much. We all should aspire to earn over that amount.

Profit and riches are sinfull?

In the Liberals perfect world, they'd like to have the "rich" incarcerated, but if they did, they wouldn't have anyone left to tax, or blame, except for themselves.

In the conservatives perfect world the poor would be sent to camps and executed once they couldn't work any longer to pay back the subsidies they recieved, but if they did, they wouldn't have anyone left to exploit or blame except themselves.

No I really don't believe that. I just wanted to try dropping my IQ to about 75 so I could see the world through your eyes joanna.

Strangely when I do, everything becomes black and white....

If people are more likely to vote republican the more wealthy they are and more likely to vote democrat the less wealthy they are, then republicans have an incentive to make everyone more wealthy and democrats have an incentive to make everyone less wealthy, right?

Considering the last four years of democrat control, I think it proves my theory. :<)

In a perfert world the people that don't pay taxes (over 40%) wouldn't get a tax refund. In a perfect world if you don't pay your taxes, you should be allowed to vote. Go ahead a demonize the so called rich, by the way who drew the line at 250K? Can 250K be rich in NYC or SF? Owning a store with 4 employees and getting raped in taxes?

In a perfect world, 40% of a countries population wouldn't be riding so close to the border of poverty they would be exempted from taxes.

That's the first time I thought of it that way. Wow. 40%. Ain't that a bitch?

I'm going on a limb here and assuming should ought to have been shouldn't in yyour second sentence. And in that case you don't get to vote, the IRS has you sent to jail. We're moving closer to a perfect world already.

And why are you demonizing the poor?

If you don't like it Somolia is a country that has all the attributes you want to bring to America. See my post 2 threads above this one.

dosh,

Sorry Bro, I don't understand jibberish, but if paying 32K in taxes last year warrants me to go to jail, arrest me.

"I'm going on a limb here and assuming should ought to have been shouldn't in yyour second sentence. And in that case you don't get to vote, the IRS has you sent to jail. We're moving closer to a perfect world already."

No, not demonizing the poor, not at all, I want them to use their 99 weeks to get a freaking education or a different trade instead of collecting a hand out. Really, 99 weeks and what?

LOL, Somolia??? Sorry dude, it was a Sh*thole in '93 and really don't want to visit it again. Weird, why Somolia? You have some terrorist ties there? Why not Zimbabwe? Kenya? Oops can say that country...............

It was never in doubt it would stimulate the economy, what the dems wanted would also have stimulated the economy, at a smaller cost. Most of the gains in employment and GDP growth come from the middle class tax cut extensions, not the extensions for the rich.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/dec/03/national-association-manufacturers/national-association-manufacturers-cites-cbo-suppo/

When the President was campaigning on this issues, the economy was stalling, but it hadn't DROPPED at that point. Rolling back the tax cuts was a sound strategy....

...at that time.

As the economy has shrunk and not bounced back, the President and a large contingent of Congressional Dems acknowledged that this was NOT the proper time for that fight. Not to mention the very REAL effect of having lights, heat, and water cut off for people who still couldn't find work if/when the unemployment gave out.

I hate the whole "You said this three years ago, why is it different now??" mentality. Life moves on. Politicians are not "flip-flopping" when they change to meet new needs. It's call being an adult (Obama, McConnel) and doing what NEEDS to be done rather than being a baby and just throwing a fit (a whole lot of Dems and some Repubs in this case)!

I work for a small company. Now my boss can have his tax break and "create more jobs" bull. If he saves on taxes why hire a new employee that will cost salary, FICA, Medicare, Disability, w/c, liablity ins, UI insurance and so on and so on, why not just pocket it and pay a small tax bill?

That's pretty braindead thinking mom. Again, only idiots think this is a tax cut. It is the prevention of the biggest tax hike in history. Your boss won't see more money, he just won't see a lot less. It's the same as the last ten years, get it?

In order to have an effect on the economy you need a tax cut. This merely prevents a disaster, it doesn't improve the current situation.

Actually, with Obamacare his costs will go way up so he may have to lay people off if that isn't fixed. The big boys are getting waivers, but small businesses don't have the clout to do so. That's why Boehner & co will do everything possible to kill it.

You got anything other than your own un-substatianted speculation? Or is it just a bad case of projection, Dr. Frued?

You might be surprised at the amount of down time some "hard-working capitalists" have. After all, according to you all, isn't it the hard working "boss man" that so abuses and takes advantage of the poor working man that the poor working man just can't get ahead?

In other words -minions are great. Or as my old man used to say "you are never going to get rich working for someone else."

Sorry bud, just got back from the office party. Everybody seemed please with the bonuses, and I'm very pleased by the Captain and eggnogs.

I spend a lot of time here because I made so much money under the Reagan and Bush 2 years that I was able to retire at 55. Because I did things right, (invested, saved, and worked hard), I am now reaping the rewards of a comfortable debt free retirement.

Now that Obama can't get away with stealing what took me a lifetime to build, I'm set.

Phil,

You Bastard!!!! I want your money, how dare you do well for you and your family!!! AKA, Good job, enjoy retirement, you deserve it.

Maybe you should give half of youe money to te people that didn't do what you did? GOD, just thinking that why gave me a headache.........................

So what I retired this year at 50. You should have started saving earlier. If 2% more in taxes hurt you so much you should get a job at wal-mart.

Yeah, neither was that weeping Nancy-boy Boner!

Nancy and Harry didn't like the extension and didn't show up to support their leader. At least we had no clapping Nancy holding up the process.

Harry was probably also sitting around Plucked because his spending bill wasn't enacted.....Nancy was plucked because she had quite alot of San Francisco pork in the bill - have to help the frogs in the coastal wetlands.

Nancy and Harry are coming to the grim realization that things are much different now for them. Harry still has to be seen babbling in front of the cameras. Nancy at least doesn't have to do anything because she's just another back-bencher in Congress. Of course she now has to fly commerical, which will absolutely kill her.

Nancy is getting ready for another face lift, her Christmas present. Perhaps she will return with a beard!

Can't wait until her plane lands at Travis AFB.

They were all 3 at Happy Hour with their Personal Lobbyists!

Hey safe, do you prefer Boner's 'Natural' orange glow?

Well dave-sunn so.cal, never noticed it. it gosure will beat Nancy's beard though. and notsojingo, Nancy doesn't require the political money from the special interest groups, although he does help her husban with the SunKist tuna costs. And the vineyard in the Napa Valley that is staffed by criminal aliens. When your employees can't speak a lick of English, that should be a clue!

what else to u expect from communists

"communists" What an ignorant tool. Not a sharp one either.

closer now to SERFDOM.

yeah hes a plum

Lucky for now but soon the luck will run out as the debt mounts and no one is out there to lend more or to pay the huge debt. Lucky compared to the narco-governments / banana republics south of the border! but fast heading their way.

It all depends on if Boehner can make cut-go stick. His news conference comments and McConnells new backbone to kill the omnibus spending bill are both good signs.

That's a lie. Four years ago, when republicans still ran everything, the unemployment rate was 4.6% and the economy was booming. It only fell apart after the democrats took over congress.

Not extending the cuts would have been a disaster, but extending them only keeps thestatus quo. We need further cuts to start the economy.

Come on!

You can't find a job after 2 years of trying? I don't belive it.

We (the long term unemployed) can't beleive it either...and we're living it.

You can't know it to be true unless you are actually experiencing it. We get that about you. Our roles could very easily be reversed...but that's probably too scary for you to contemplate. Understandable.

Long term unemployed face every type of discrimination in the quest for employment you can imagine.

Age (over 40...you're screwed).

Education (too much, a.k.a. overqualified).

Skills (too high, a.k.a. overqualified).

Prior salary history (too high, a.k.a. overqualified)

Employers choose the "best fit" when filling open positions. A college educated person, regardless of age, with a prior salary history of 30k+ is NOT going to be hired to flip burgers or change the oil in a car or provide housekeeping services. This is true regardless of the economic conditions or the unemployment rate.

We should know....we've applied for jobs like these...for over 2 years now.

Many companies are instituting the practice of interviewing (i) currently employed candidates or (ii) those who have been unemployed for 6 months or less.

You can't know this without having navigated the job market in the past couple years.

Congratulations on keeping your job - sincerely. You are blessed.

Long term unemployed are F*CKED.

This legislation is the latest manifestation of that.

Cheers

While I appreciate your comments and concern, Let me interject the following.

Lone Term Unemployed: I was unemployed in 2004, do you consider that long term ?????

Scary To Contemplate: I seriously doubt it, I've been there and done that, and am still there !

Easily reversed roles, I highly doubt it? I can probably give you a lesson in unemployment discrimination that you wouldn't believe.

Age (over 40.... you're screwed). Let's try 60 years old and then you can say your screwed !

Education (too much, a.k.a. overqualified) Gee, does that mean a petroleum engineer with certification is over qualified, even with continuing education credits ?????

Skills: Does 28 years on the job without a break count. In that time I took a total of 8 weeks off for various reasons over the period due to medical and family reasons.

Prior Salary History Too High: I don't know, I started with a guarantee of $190.00 per month with a sliding scale called FWW, (Fluxuating Work Week) where the more hours you worked the less you made per hour. I ended up with a salary of $1500.00 per day. Does that mean that I can't wash dishes or empty trash cans because I'm over qualified ?

I Can't Know?: Get real, and get in the real world, and by the way I don't have a job, do you ? Other than keep applying for something that is not benieth you which you believe you should have or be worth ?

Cheers, And Come On Yourself !!!!!

While it extends the Bush era tax cuts for another two years and doesn't raise taxes, it also does allow for a total of 155 weeks of unemployment benefits to be given out by the federal government, which should get their nose out of it in the first place.

This is not true! There is still a maximum of 99 weeks unemployment benefits and much less for a lot of states. I knew that the way they are reporting this "13 month extension" was going to make everyone think that. It is not a 13 month extension of benefits. It is actually a 13 month extension of the deadlines dates to qualify for up to the 99 weeks. There is no one that ever has or ever will receive more than 99 weeks. There are currently around 5 million people that have exhausted all of the extensions that still can't find any work, that are not getting helped with this bill. They are now completely destitute and there are still no jobs to be found and there are still mass layoffs occurring every day.

Bruce you really need to get the facts straight. There is no extension beyond the 99 weeks.

In MN you only get 86 weeks, I know I talk to the UE office today and there is NO extesion for myself.

Try, just try and find a job today is nearly impossible. Overqualified is a very real issue. Target, Best Buy etc would not hire me even for seasonal work. They are affraid I will leave when a good job comes along. I wouldn't be applying for $8 work if there were any good jobs around. That is 1/4 of my old salary. Funny the banks and brokers got bailed out for screwing up so bad, at a cost of Trillions. We can not even get UE for jobs we lost because of those bankers and brokers.

Bruce you really need to wake up and deal in reality.................

Bruce,

The max anywhere is 99 weeks.

That is a concern for some because 2 million people will soon be removed from the unemployment insurance benefits – exceeding the max number of weeks.

Sorry, but I do have my fact's straight regarding the unemployment benefits with possibility of the bill may only give another year and one month to be able to apply for Federal unemployment benefits instead of the 99 weeks that I stated before.

Now in regards to your only receiving 86 weeks of unemployment, I am truly sorry, however maybe you are living in the wrong state and are missing only 13 weeks for some reason ????? Sorry, but there is no state that I know of that gives out even close to that amount of unemployment benefits !!!!! Check your laws !!!!!

Secondly, gee if there was something better around then you wouldn't be trying to apply for the menial $8.00 per hour jobs ? Enough said, and maybe that's why you don't have one of those menial jobs ?????

As for the bankers and brokers getting bailed out, that's the governments problem, that doesn't have a thing to do with the real people who put the idiots there does it ????? As a wise man once said "What ye sow, so shall you reap" !!!!! You put them there, so your the one who has to live with them as well as everyone else.

As far as living waking up and dealing with reality, I do every day, it sure doesn't sound like there are allot of others that want to wake up and understand that the people made the problem, and it's going to take the people to solve it, not a bunch of people who just like to whine because they only got 86.8% of their unemployment benefits instead of 100%.....

By the way, I have never taken a dime of unemployment money in my life, or any of the other give-me programs !!!!!

http://www.wtnh.com/dpps/money/job_news/tax-bill-wont-help-those-who-used-up-jobless-aid-nt10-jgr_3680320

Bruce,

Actually anyone that files for unemployment next week will only be paid for 53 weeks unless unemployment is extended again – the money runs out 12/31/2011. If they apply by 7-1-11 then there is only 26 weeks remaining.

If you were ever laid off then I don’t understand why you wouldn’t file for the benefits since the first 13 weeks is covered by employer paid insurance and paid from those funds by your state.

If your home received extensive storm damage wouldn’t you use the insurance to help pay for the damage? Unemployment insurance is no different.

Bruce, You are simply part of the problem, just keep up the wrong/disinformation. It is only helping the politicians and there lies. Shut up and stop making a fool out of yourself. These blogs should have an IQ test before one can post anything.

Good luck to all the true long term UE that just got the shaft from both sides of the isle.

There is still a maximum of 99 weeks unemployment benefits and much less for a lot of states. I knew that the way they are reporting this "13 month extension" was going to make everyone think that. It is not a 13 month extension of benefits. It is actually a 13 month extension of the deadlines dates to qualify for up to the 99 weeks.

At $275/week in Florida, many will still lose everything long before things turn around, if they do.

True in theory, but in practice, they(Honest Politicians) are knocked out of running for office long before they can get to the Big House.

They all play the Game.

Vote any 3rd party. We must get another party or 2 to vote for. Vote the same old same old and you will get this s--t forever. If you do vote for one of the two current parties, stop your complaining because you are just as responcible as the politicians for putting them into office. Same old just breeds same old.

Hire american. Not someone with a green card who will work for 50 cents an hour less.

Buy american.

We as americans need to pull ourself out of this mess. It is so clear the politicians are unwilling/unable to help us. That is both the Dems/Reps.

The unemployed are not a bunch of lazy jerks looking to get a free ride. Most, like myself are unemployed because some multi million/billionair banker or broker took advantage of loop holes and make huge profits off this depression thru the terible investment decision they made putting us into this mess and now making incredible profits thru the continued tax breaks that our Gov just gave them. I can not justify in my mind how the Feds gave these jerks a bail out when they screwed the first time, then another bailout mid depression and now a third bail out. Maybe I can find work washing one of the rich peoples Rolls Royce.

The true long termed unemployed got nothing from this bill. Long term unemployed are those who have been out of work after all benifits have expired. 99/86 weekers. The short term unemployed got the extension. those under the 1 year mark and being unemployement.

Obama caved in, he did nothing to help those he commited to helping the most. I guess the unemployed do not have the right lobbiest/Bribers in Washington to get the right thing done.

I am so glad the rich got what they needed so badly. Now maybe they can keep that illegal alien working as the 3rd upstairs maid.

Obama and the Democrats can lie all they want to they can blame bush all they want to but the fact is nobody is going to employ anyone if they do not know what their costs are going to be. The last two years have been bazar threats against the employers of this nation with five taxes looming on their horrizon.

Higher taxes to the employers mean less taxable jobs given out to the people.

It hasnt been one tax the democrats have barked about for two years it has been five taxes they have to assess their possible losses.

Higher income taxes, Cap and trade, bank tax, vat tax, Gas tax. Try to figure all of that into your budget. How many jobs must be cut to make up that loss? Since their is no known the worst case senario must be assumed. Cut every job possible and replace everyone with the cheapest labor possible. Thanks to the last two years of the worst case senario Obama administration.

I have to wonder if the people even know the top 5% pay 70% of the taxes in this country. Where is your patriotisum?

Bush would never have let this happen so blaming bush after his eight years of stellar economy seems a bit or more then a bit foolish. Obvious!

And saying 'Bush's stellar economy' shows just how deeply you look at things. Where do you get you myopia drugs?

my·o·pi·a

 /maɪˈoʊpiə/ [mahy-oh-pee-uh]

–noun
1.
Ophthalmology . a condition of the eye in which parallel rays are focused in front of the retina, objects being seen distinctly only when near to the eye; nearsightedness ( opposed to hyperopia).

2.
lack of foresight or discernment; obtuseness.

3.
narrow-mindedness; intolerance.

Can I have the $1,000,000 ? Where can I meet you?

I don't have it. Try the feds.....they can print you your million easy.

Jon Arcy

I suspect that you meant axis and exis right?

And from your tone, does that mean that you think the uber liberals Matthews, Maddow, Olberman and Schulz are in some manner saint like?

You lefties are ridiculously predictable

Like the 'righties' are any different...of course with the exception of all those ivory towers.

Buffet, Gates, Soros, etc. are the uber rich, they are all Obama supporters. We call them limousine liberals. They tell everyone else to suffer as they are driven by with the windows up.