It’s a safe bet our resident ‘Poll Dancer’ won’t be sharing this ‘news’

So allow me to introduce some interesting poll numbers:

There is no easy way to balance the federal budget, but a new poll shows that of all the hard options before them, Americans favor raising taxes on the rich, above cuts to programs like Medicare and Social Security. According to a 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair poll, 61% of Americans favor raising taxes on the wealthy in order to balance the budget. In contrast, only 20% favor cutting defense spending, only 4% favor cutting Medicare, and only 3% favor cutting Social Security

http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/new-poll-shows-americans-favor-raising-taxes-to-balance-the-budget

WOW 60%...

Now I realize that the righties are taking over the House of Representatives to carry out the ‘Will of the People’ tomorrow… but last time I checked 60% still comprises a MAJORITY!

In other excellent news this morning… President Obama’s approval rating is at 50%!

Feisty – Good morning and yes ….

Monday Gallup Poll has President Obama @ 50% favorable 42% unfavorable.

http://www.gallup.com/Home.aspx

Feisty;

Yep and I heard on the news this AM that another poll claims President Obama's approval rating is now 50%. The Dow closed yesterday at 11,670. Manufacturing was up (for the 17th consecutive month), construction was up as well. In fact all the 10 company groups were up. You won't hear that from the "Poll Dancers" either.

What Navy won't tell you is why the debt ceiling has been reached. It seems Obama and his Democratic friends in Congress managed to spend $1 trillion dollars in deficit spending, in 7 months! Can you image that? Bush was a heavy deficit spender, but it took him 2.5 years to spend that much in deficit spending. The Democrats did it in 7 months!! Between June 1, 2010 and December 31, 2010.

Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20027090-503544.html

The new Congress isn't holding anyone "hostage" Navy, they're just issuing a restraining order.

And the reason we have this new Congress is because people have connected the dots.

Hey Feisty...

The thing I find most interesting about this is it's a poll...by VANITY FAIR and 60 MINUTES!!?? What a strange combo for a poll!? Hope your Tuesday's a good one! :-) (For the record, I honestly don't doubt the results).

60Minutes/VanityFair poll? What happened, couldn't think progress come up with the scratch to do a poll?

There was a poll on November2, 2010. It said that the country wanted the democrats and their costly, perfect world programs OUT, and the Republican agenda IN. That included extending ALL the tax cuts.

Nice try, though.

Monday Gallup Poll has President Obama @ 50% favorable 42% unfavorable.

Unemployment numbers come out this week. 10% unemployment is expected. But at least the most important metric to the Liberals has improved and Obama is becoming popular again.

And a fine 'top of the mornin' to you Dennis - Retired & Grimey!

I agree Grimey about the strange combo... lol

Those kind of numbers put a little extra 'skip' in my step this morning!

Trust the kidlets had a fabulous Christmas! ;o)

Good Morning Feisty and Dennis:

Try as they might, the GOPTP will not be able to repeal healthcare. Try as they might, President Obama remains popular. Try as they might, Sarah Palin is not electable.

The Buckeyes will beat the Razarbacks by a touchdown.

Wake up, this is 2011 not Nov 2, 2010. Same old crap. I stand by by hostage comment. This is exactly what the republican/tea party is doing. They are not going to extend the debt ceiling until they get what they want. This is exactly what they did in 2010 and they are doing it now in 2011. That is a fact. Prove to us that this is not true. Prove to us that the republicans are not on record with the "Debt Ceiling". Graham made a big point on this the other day. They are going to try and put the budget back to 2008 which will unravel everything that President Obama has done. This is their agenda.

I guess for the Liberals, being popular is more important than being competent. And that explains Obama.

Nice to see the 'Bitter Twins' spreading their 'hate-or-aide' around so early this morning!

No one works harder at it then the 'twisted sisters'...

Folks appear to like President Obama with a Republican Congress.

Wasn't that what the midterm blow-out was all about?

I guess that a rising tide really does lift all boats.

Lol.

[Navy: Wake up, this is 2011 not Nov 2, 2010. Same old crap. I stand by by hostage comment.]

Looks like a nerve has been struck.

Obviously the Liberals got a little too comfortable with their massive majorities in Congress and the most liberal President in modern times in the White House. They got a sense of entitlement as it were. The Nov/2010 election though has rattled them badly, and now that new reality has hit them, and they seem a bit, shall we say, testy.

To bad Libs. Learn to deal with it.

JoAnna:

President George W. Bush increased the national debt by 7.1% in his first term and 20% in his second term.

President George H.W. Bush increased the national debt by 15%.

President Ronald Reagan increased the national debt by 11.3% in his first term and 9.3% in his second term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Your feeble attempt to use a defined time period in President Bush's first term to camoflauge the fact that he didn't pay for a damn thing he did, just as his Republican presidential predecessors didn't, is laughable.

Republican policies have run up the deficit. Period. And that is the crap sandwich that President Obama found on the table when he was sworn in.

Happy New Year.

P.S. Note on the link above, that the size of the debt went down under the Democratic Presidents . . . coincidence? I think not.

For the record, that poll only offered the choices of taxing 'the rich', cutting Social Security, cutting Defense spending, or cutting Medicare, as ways to cut the deficit.

Note that cutting the federal budget across the board was not included.

It also had such burning questions as what celebrity would you most like to be?

Real, in depth polling there.

It’s a safe bet our resident ‘Poll Dancer’ won’t be sharing this ‘news’

So allow me to introduce some interesting poll numbers:

There is no easy way to balance the federal budget, but a new poll shows that of all the hard options before them, Americans favor raising taxes on the rich,

So you do a poll and ask people how to balance the budget. The question is would you be willing to accept a reduction in your entitlements or tax someone else to pay for. Shock 60% said tax someone else. How is that a hard option?

What the question should have been "Are YOU willing to have your taxes raised to pay for the current level of entitlements and reduce the debt?" Now that IS a hard option and it's the truth because there just aren't enough "rich" people to go around and pay for everybody's else s entitlements. Even the Democrats know that any tax increase that maintains the current level of spending and attempts to reduce the deficit (never mind the debt) will have to include the middle class.

Ohh, NF is back!!

Tell us again how corporations don't pay taxes Nash! We just can't get enough of that post of yours.

And, will you be watching as Pelosi hands the gavel to Speaker of the House (to be) John Boehner? And do you think they'll chat about this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/30/pelosi-to-boehner-youre-n_n_631024.html

Hand over that gavel Nancy!!

Alan, NJ: The question is would you be willing to accept a reduction in your entitlements or tax someone else to pay for. Shock 60% said tax someone else. How is that a hard option?

And considering 47% of the workforce doesn't pay federal income tax, but get 100% of the entitlements and benefits, it's not hard to predict the outcome of such a poll.

Feisty:

Yep the twins are up early this AM. Lots of rants and not one idea between them. Just the usually rhetoric that has no substance at all. Funny how when the polls say things they like they are great. When they say things that favor President Obama they are somehow flawed so they resort to older polls that support their position. Same old, same old. Nothing is new. Yes this is 2011 but they are still republicans and the party of "Obstructionism". They are not going to do anything to move this country forward in less they also get a pay day out of it. They are holding this country hostage again with the "Debt Ceiling" as their weapon. They are not going to repeal Health Care at least for the next 2 years so they are trying to unfund it through the back door. It really ticks them off, that President Obama is coming back, the CBPP had a very positive report on the Tax Cut Deal that will lower unemployment in 2011, unless of course, the republicans de-rail the funding. But it is OK to do that while spending billions on tax cuts for the richest 2% that will get 50% of the benefits. That is OK. The republicans say tax cuts do not need to be funded and then claim they want to lower the deficit. Hypocrites.

I'm sure when Friday arrives, the unemployment numbers will have dropped by at least 2%....maybe even down to 5% unemployment. Righties will prove that keeping the tax rates for the top has created jobs. Jobs will be everywhere!...Brought back from overseas and created here!

Speaker Boehner where are the jobs!

Yes sir, Obama has loaded the American taxpayers of today, and the next generation, with $4.5 trillion dollars of new debt since taking office. 24 months. $4.5 trillion. That's $187 billion a month in deficit spending Libs! How do you justify that? Where did it go? It certainly didn't create any jobs.

And now the Liberals will whine and complain that the "Evil Republicans Congress" have taken away their checkbook.

Welcome to reality Libs.

JoannaSmith1 -- it gets tiring when you consistently use the word Liberal to define people you don't like. There is no Liberal party at the national level. Liberal comes from Latin and means "freedom-loving," although its use is much expanded. Do you mean to say "liberal" (generous or abundant) vs. stingy or grudging? Or "liberal" (promoting more freedom) as opposed to rigid or censorious? Or "liberal" mores as opposed to prudishness? Could we please agree not to disparage political parties -- to name them as the party wishes itself to be named.

'Bush was a heavy deficit spender, but it took him 2.5 years to spend that much in deficit spending. The Democrats did it in 7 months!! Between June 1, 2010 and December 31, 2010.'

Bush didn't try to head off a major depresson. Which, by the way, Obama did. And I keep hearing the term 'failed stimulus'.

Why is that, anyway, JAS1? I know it makes for a cute talking point, but it doesn't seem to reflect reality in any way. There ISN'T a depression going on right now, is there?

Sorry, NJ and JoAnna; any credibility the two of you might have had is totally gone. NJ: your response to the citation I asked for tells me that your hatred for Obama is purely personal, and there is nothing substantive about it. There are people who post who disagree with Obama on policy, and those are the people worth talking to, our friend Frank "Grimey" Grimes, being the stellar example. Poor JoAnna, you have NO credibility (and really never did) given that diatribe you did on affirmative action. I am sad for both of you. As to what the Republican House might do? I hope they behave exactly as they did in the 90's. People have forgotten what a truly reprehensible group of people they are.

@kate 1855079

I agree Kate. The labels used in politics are ridiculous. I agree with many aims of the Democrats but question how they are planning to finance the multitude of social programs they propose. I personally am fiscally responsible and I don't see that in either party. The Democrats haven't seen a social program that they can say "We just can't afford this right now", and the Republicans seem to think that the military have an unlimited budget (Lindsay Graham is in cloud cuckoo land over permanent bases in Afghanistan). So taking each issue as it comes I think labels are just stupid.

My but there's a lot of work being done here to explain away the poll numbers, as well as excuse the continued Republican obstruction. Buyers remorse rears it's ugly head.

Agree US Navy, people must begin to connect the dots. Why is the deficit and the debt so huge? Go back to 2001 when Bush 43 took office and the GOP slashed taxes and spent trillions on unfunded and mandated programs. Cutting spending will not offset the GOP tax cuts for the rich or everyone else but at least the rest of us will spend it. Even the rich know that; the biggest share of them recognize the need to get the deficit and the debt under control. The GOPTP cannot find enough waste or fraud to cover the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of the population. Darryl Issa promises he'll find $200 billion--seems to me that republicans mocked it as a "drop in the bucket" when the Obama administration in 2009 eliminated about that same amount of money in programs that no longer worked and were no longer needed. Where will the GOPTP find the money to pay for the tax cuts--by cutting funding to states, to the social safety nets, to infrastructure programs, to clean energy programs. Their goal--privatize social security and put it in the hands of Wall Street and big banks, the same institutions that collapsed our economy in 2008; get rid of medicare and medicaid to ensure their "death panels" become reality. Democrats do not have all the answers but republicans have even fewer because their reality is based on fuzzy math.

DBO: There ISN'T a depression going on right now, is there?

My, my, Buzz, you do set the bar low, now don't you?

In 2008, the country needed a hero. It got a Community Organizer.

Or is that too many labels for you kate?

All these depts are caused by both parties.Lets go see what the dems have done with the depts. How much is Obama already added to it in only 2yrs.??

Bush didn't try to head off a major depresson. Which, by the way, Obama did. And I keep hearing the term 'failed stimulus'.

Why is that, anyway, JAS1? I know it makes for a cute talking point, but it doesn't seem to reflect reality in any way. There ISN'T a depression going on right now, is there?

From the authors of the stimulus bill.

Without Stimulus $11,770 133,876,000
With Stimulus $12,203 137,550,000
Effect of Package Increase GDP by 3.7% Increase jobs by 3,675,000

I don't remember an increase in GDP of 3.7% nor 3.6M new jobs. So by their own targets the stimulus bill did not achieve its objectives.

http://otrans.3cdn.net/ee40602f9a7d8172b8_ozm6bt5oi.pdf (Page 4)

John B.

Good point, seems to be the agenda of the day here from the right. The republicans are going to continue with being the "Obstructionist" party and play the hostage game while America suffers and the Middle Class pays the bills.

Nice to know that you missed me JoAnna! :o)

Wish I could say the same.

lol

P.S. So you aren't going to comment about the astronomical rise in our Natioanal debt by Republican Presidents? Still ignoring the inconvenient bits? :o)

P.S.S. You have made me so proud to know that you actually do absorb the stuff I write, even if you pretend you don't . . . thanks for that.

Nice to see the 'Bitter Twins' spreading their 'hate-or-aide' around so early this morning!

Fiesty, you cut a mean comment for anyone who disagrees with you too! You and "cut&paste" do the nasty comments every post.

And Navy, the GOP isn't holding the country hostage as you comment. And they didn't in the 111th congress. To ram their agenda forward, your Prez and the Dem Party control of the House and Senate excluded any talk with the GOP. did you expect them to roll over like the Dems to pass everything proposed by the current leader of this administration?

Now we shall probably see the New Party of NO play the same game. Will you now blame this on the GOP for railroading legislation you disagree with? Should be an interesting year.....and I hope the GOP can identify budget waste; report on the specifics of the item funding, i.e. who benefits from the line items and who initiated the item; and remove it from the budget.

So Obama and his administration want the debt ceiling raised. How different it was though in 2006 when Senator Obama asked that the debt ceiling not be raised, and in fact he voted against it:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256199/obama-not-always-fan-upping-debt-ceiling-katrina-trinko

And the money quote from Obama (just so you Liberals, ehh, Progressives, uhh, Obama supporters, can't tarnish the above source):

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

You got any comment on this quote Navy? How about you Buzz? Nash?

And America does deserve better. But it looks like we'll have to wait until after the 2012 elections to get it.

"60Minutes/VanityFair poll? What happened, couldn't think progress come up with the scratch to do a poll?

There was a poll on November2, 2010. It said that the country wanted the democrats and their costly, perfect world programs OUT, and the Republican agenda IN. That included extending ALL the tax cuts."

See, now, here's an example of someting that's complete BS that keeps getting repeated over and over as though it's a fact. The people are fed up with unemployment. WHOEVER was in power November 2nd would have gotten the boot and felt the wrath. It's that simple. Consider, too, that a lot of people don't vote in primaires. Consider, too, that no matter WHICH party is in power, they loose seats during primaires. Do people keep repeating THOSE facts? As the weeper of the house would say...HELL NO they DON'T.

"Unemployment numbers come out this week. 10% unemployment is expected..."

WOW. Those tax breaks really work!!

The "J-twins" are busy spinning but never do they post an original thought least of all a solution; they cannot answer a question without accusing the questioner of "misinterpretation" or deflecting to another subject and everything they post contains condescensionand disdain. Their overactive amygdala not only houses fear but also is home to FDD, that's Fact Denial Disorder in case anyone wonders.

Alan, NJ...

Your post above was excellent concerning the wording of a poll. It is amazing how some simple wording change can drastically alter the meaning of the question and the likely answers.

I definitely enjoy reading your posts. Keep it up!

@Frank

Thanks.

LOL The liberal gang patting each other on the back as usual for their posts. I'll try that:

Good morning JoAnna. Nice posts this morning no joe, no bo, nj. Way to start off the day Mixed Bag!

Okay now we got that out of the way, let's talk about those unfunded programs. You liberals like to say unfunded wars. What I have yet to hear is what YOU would have done after 9/11. The "extend a hand" policy of Obama is really working isnt it? Iran is worse than ever. North Korea is a ticking time bomb. Venezuela is putting long range ICBM's from Iran on its soil. Good job! Keep extending that hand. In fact why dont we just invite them over to the White House for a beer summit? We are weak in their eyes. Thanks to the Democrats, their penchant for being weak on national security is glaring right about now.

How about the unfunded Obamacare? Thats 1/6th of the economy. Where is the money coming from to pay for that? What about the unfunded SS issues? Or should I say, soon to be bankrupt? How about all those unfunded programs for foodstamps for the illegals and the subsidized housing as well? How about the unfunded unemployment benefits? The GOP actually wanted to fund those benefits with unused stimulus funds. Sounds logical. I could go on and on about those unfunded programs the liberals have in place. Enough with those "unfunded wars."

SC:

Yes they did and yes they are. The facts are the facts and you can try and make up your own but the truth is that the republicans would not move on 9/11 First Responders Bill, DADT, New Start, Dream Act, etc unless they passed the Tax Cut bill with the majority of the benefits going to the richest 2%. That happened and is fact. They are now trying to change the House Spending Rules that will make these tax cuts virtualy permanant and adding an unprecendented burden on the deficit.

Graham again this morning talks about not raising the Debt Ceiling unless there a spending cuts to Mandatory Spending, like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Unemployment Compensation, Retirement and Disability programs for Civil Servants, Coast Guard and Military and a bevy of other programs that help the Middle Class. NO mention of DOD though.

As far as I am concern this is extortion at best. I stand by my comments as they are based in the facts that are available today. The above is true and in the record books, spin it all you want, it does not change what the Obstructionist Party is doing. What about the 400 bills stalled in the Senate???

Kate: Could we please agree not to disparage political parties -- to name them as the party wishes itself to be named.

Hear, hear!

And could we please also refer to the people involved, the President, the members of congress, by THEIR correct names as well. Not only is it appropriate and mannered, it also makes the posts far easier to understand than trying to decipher all of the coded nicknames.

safecracker....the Democrats are about to become the Party of No. They claim to be all about fiscal responsibility as evidence by their constant drivel about the tax cuts adding to the deficit and the "unfunded wars."

Now that the liberals are penny pinchers all of a sudden, they shouldnt have any qualms about the cuts the incoming tea party Republicans are about to make, right? I wouldnt hold my breath because the liberals are all about cutting, as long as its not their programs. They got that "not-in-my-backyard" syndrome.

Joanna - "...Bush was a heavy deficit spender, but it took him 2.5 years to spend that much in deficit spending..." um...NO.

Said it here before, say it again for those to slow to pick it up:

Never mind the fact that Bush was handed the greatest national economy anywhere in world history... never mind the two completely-off-the-books wars...Ignore the UNPRECEDENTED expansion of the federal government under George the 2nd...JUST THE UNFUNDED MEDICARE PART D added more to the debt than the TARP (Bush's AND Obama's halves), PLUS the stimulus package, PLUS the auto-insdustry bailout, PLUS the Healthcare Reform bill COMBINED. So I'll thank all Rep[ublicans to NEVER imply that you care about your kids and grandkids financial future more (or even as much) as I care about mine!

While the Democrate did the same thing to pass ther Health Care Bill. The Republicans did not have control till after the first of the year. Where have you been, the Deomcrats weren't getting their extras added onto the bills they wanted and that is why nothing got passed. You really need to go read the action of Congress at the website and read what the motions and amendments all are. They used to call them pork barrel amendments but, the Democrats change the name now.....sweetners, add-ons or extras......it smells like pig to me!! I need a bail-out like JP Morgan got too.....how much of a bonus did this Daley get from that??

Feisty,

That's hilarious. I don't remember our tax codes being based on popularity. My bad.....I thought they were to be fair and balanced.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." - Benjamin Franklin.

JoAnna:

I am going to answer your question so you perhaps will get the hint and give it a try yourself . . . ever notice how you always ignore questions you don't wanna answer?

Annoying.

Any who . . . Senator Obama was right . . . we have a tremendous leadership vaccuum in Congress right now.

Folks are more interested in playing political games than solving problems. I find it difficult to believe that the same folks who are all for unfunded tax cuts and wars are now magically transformed into deficit hawks in the interest of America.

This is how I know that all current talk by Republicans about deficit reduction is political theater:

" . . .Republicans in the House of Representatives announced their intention to hold a vote on a the repeal of health care reform on January 12th. The move is seen as purely symbolic by most analysts, as the repeal has virtually no chance of passing through the Senate and an even smaller chance of overcoming a presidential veto. Still, Republicans say the vote is important in order to gain momentum toward repeal. However, Democrats have pointed out that repealing health care would actually involve increasing the deficit. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the health care reform law will save the country $130 billion over the first ten years, and $1.2 trillion over the next ten years. The Republican rules, which will be adopted before the health care repeal vote, require all increases deficit increases to be paid for with accompanying spending cuts. To get around their own rule, the Republicans have created a special rule.

Under the Republican rules every bill must be paid for with spending cuts except a repeal of health care. What this effectively means is that Republicans will vote to repeal a health care law and thereby also vote to increase the federal debt by more than $1 trillion. Any extension of jobless benefits would have to be paid for with cuts to other programs, but the Republicans health care repeal vote will be exempt. It is also worth noting that tax cuts to do not have to be paid for under the Republican rules."

http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/republicans-change-rules-to-allow-raising-deficit-for-health-care-reform-repeal?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

All games and non-reality based thinking. That ain't leadership.

I would like to try an experiment. Take a quick survey of everyone customer in a restaurant and ask them if they would like the wealthiest person who is attending that restaurant to pay for their meal. My guess is nearly everyone would want that. Is it no wonder that most people favor making other people (i.e. the wealthy) pay for their entitlements? That is ridiculous and is nothing more than using the law and government to promote theft and is no different than a mob of people ransacking the homes and bank accounts of those they think don't deserve to keep their own assets.

If you are ticked off because the government has squandered your money you paid into social security and medicare, then get angry at the government and reduce it's size and power as a consequence. Don't take your anger out on the wealthy and vote for more government, more taxes, and more programs. Do you really think the government won't squander your money again? Fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice (or in this case about 100 times) shame on us.

How long do you think a charity would last where those who you give money to suddenly had the power to force the charity to give more and more money at an unsubstanable rate? Is our current situation really that different?

drive-by-observer

"Unemployment numbers come out this week. 10% unemployment is expected..."

WOW. Those tax breaks really work!!

Umm... Didn't someone JUST mention the stock market being up the last few days? You know, since the tax rate situation was finally settled? Call me crazy, but I can't help but believe one had something to do with the other. And the stability that comes with knowing what is happening with the tax rates is likely going to help with that unemployment number.

Hey Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL Like Chris Matthews you should be getting a warm feeling up and down your leg. The Chosen One oops I mean President Obama is going to pick another Slick Willie oops I mean Former Presidnet Clinton alum. And to you it should be better he's from the Chicago Daley machine. Should make a citizen of Ill proud or happy that all the Chicago machine dems are moving to DC. And the Chosen One is going to pretent to be moderate/centrist, seem a far stretch to me. A disgusted dem that has absolutely no use for the far left wing uber liberals that have taken over the dem party. I've been a registered dem since 1971 and I have memories of the 60 Presidential election when the original Mayor Daley held Chicago returns to ensure that Kennedy didn't need them and by state of West Virginia was right up there with Chicago. Of course that was also the time that as many votes came from the cementaries as the voters and the Mantra of Vote Early and Vote Often was taken to heart. I have little use for the repubs except to keep the left wing of the dem party somewhat in check.

it's cute when libs try to act like they understand complex issues like the economy. thanks for the laugh.

on topic, interesting that 'liberals' would have a problem with a centrist, why is that? is it march lock step mit der party line, or else?

Dear gov't is always the answer:

It is interesting to watch all the anti-government types weeping and gnashing their teeth because the government was not fast enough to clean up all the oil that a privately owned foreign company spilled into the Gulf of Mexico.

No the problem was not the privately owned foreign company spilling the oil. The problem was "the guvment".

And the problem isn't private companies selling bad food, ignoring mine safety, not paying a living wage, taking money for health insurance and denying coverage, or using accounting tricks to avoid paying any taxes.

No, the problem is the "guvment".

Yes, the "guvment's" only role is to clean crap up after it explodes I suppose.

Makes perfect sense.

P.S. AZChzhd, "Obamacare" is paid for and reduces the deficit. But don't let the facts get in the way of your rant.

Navy,

Maybe if the current President had stood up to the less than majority 111th congress he would not have to fight the 112th. But he caved on cutting taxes for the rich, and he will cave on anything else they want to do, or he and the democratic senate will inherit the name "obstructionist".

Problem is, you all don't see that the government can't quit spending. You just blame the rich, want to tax them more, while 47% of the people, mostly those who get government handouts, don't pay anything. Just take. That is all you are about. Take from him, take from her.

Navy--are you willing to allow your own taxes to go up over 3-5% to help pay for your entitlement programs and end the national debt?

You didn't answer the question Nash. Here, I'll ask it again.

Senator Obama in 2006 spoke out against raising the debt ceiling. As a Senator, he also voted against it. In the quote I provided, Senator Obama sounds like a fiscal hawk, very similar to what the Republicans are saying today. But today President Obama has his economic team communicate that it would be a disaster if the debt ceiling isn't raised.

What's changed?

JoAnna:

I see you are still a one trick pony. I have given more answer than you deserve and you have still answered nothing.

Onward and upward.

Peace.

Suzy, you would be wrong. My budget was settled in September. Industry economists have been projecting 2011 GDP growth of 3-4% for months, well before the election let alone the tax deal. The economy in fact has been growing for 17 consecutive months, but is jus now starting to really gain some steam. Typical of Conservatives to try to take credit for anything good while deflecting blame for anything bad.

Any reputable economist will tell you that there is a lag time of nearly a YEAR between policy implementation and what you actually see in the day to day economy. Therefore, there is no way possible for Republicans to LEGITIMATELY claim any of the success for growth until sometime in early 2012 at the very earliest. Of course, that won't stop any of them, but hey, why let the truth get in the way of a good talking point which is the primary modus operandi of the GOP anyway.

BigBear2:

To answere your question I would pay the additional 3-5% if it would help this country. I do not have a problem with that as long as the other 2% also pay 3-5% more as well. I would go back to the Tax Structure of President Clinton, again as long as it helps the country as a whole. The richest 2% must also be included in this as well.

Considerthe source of the poll, Vanity Fair?????? How about all the polls ( see the November election resuts) that demonstrate just the opposie results. The left wing wingnuts are simply delusional!!!

Good God, the only reason you're thinking you're being held hostage is because you can't seem to come up with any reasonable, sane answer to correct the debt-ridden State of the Union, unless to resort to your time-honored remedy of printing more money. You progressives are unreal. A Vanity Fair/60 Minutes poll, yikes, talk about grasping at straws. If Obumma's approval rating is up, it's because we didn't have to look at that face or listen to that tripe for 10 days!!!!!

Just a friendly New Year's reminder for all the folks pretending that half of America is "freeloading" off of those paying income taxes - that's simply not true.

Wealth in this country is concentrated in the hands of a very few, and those who are making the money are rightfully paying their "fair share" of taxes . . . since their share is basically the whole damn pie.

You can't horde all the money and then complain that you are the only one paying taxes.

That is called "bullsh!t".

In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4#the-gap-between-the-top-1-and-everyone-else-hasnt-been-this-bad-since-the-roaring-twenties-1#ixzz15kGND0n2

What IS up with the dead blackbirds and the dead fish in Arkansas, anyway? I saw that story on the news last night.

but last time I checked 60% still comprises a MAJORITY!

Just like the majority that didn't want Obamacare, right feisty...

Folks,

It would be great if we could refrain from calling our politicains names, and even better if you didn't call each other names.

Our country is in trouble, WE HAVE NO MONEY. Instead of pointing fingers and playing the blame game everyone needs to think of solutions. Yet there are some that just want to continue spending as if we have a blank checkbook.

Raising taxes alone is NOT the answer, spending must be cut. Here is what I would do.

Raise taxes on everyone making over 10 million per year. That would force a lot of these overpaid athletes and celebrities to finally pay up. It would also ensure that small businesses would not be impacted.

I would then freeze spending levels for all government agencies at 2007 levels. The only exception would be for the salaries of military men and women. Social Security also would not be impacted.

During this freeze I would make each government agency prove that their existence is necessary. Any duplication of any job would be eliminated. There are government agencies out there that certainly can be cut. Granted this would increase unemployement, but paying unemployment benefits is cheaper than paying salaries for job duplication.

After all duplication is eliminated every federal agency with the would have an 15% budget cut. However this would not decrease Social Security payments or again military salaries.

My plan is certainly not complete and I'm sure that there are issues that I haven't thought of. The times of handouts have to be over. Welfare must be reformed. We have to tell food stamp, welfare recipients the days of the free lunch are over. President Clinton did a good job with his welfare reform program, but now the cuts in welfare have to go much deeper. There has to be a more severe limit as to how long someone can draw welfare, it has basically gone back to being a lifetime job in the area in which I live.

I know I covered tax increases, and spending cuts, so I'm sure some of you will find fault. As long as you can criticize my plan without calling me names I can take the criticism with no problem.

janet,

Thanks for having a plan and not just talking points.

Question for you:

If there are legitimately less jobs than there are people that need jobs, what should happen to all the folks who cannot find a job?

It seems like your plan creates more needy folks with no way to meet their needs.

You say you want to cut welfare and you call these "handouts", does that include corporate welfare, as in tax breaks for industries making billions of dollars (like oil companies) or for-profit companies that feed at the public trough via student loans and the like?

It is amazing that hardcore Democrats think everything would be fine if there were one party rule. For the last 2 years we had exactly that. Republicans were irrelevant. For 38 out of the last 50 years Dems have been in control of the fiscal policies and pursestrings of this nation. Result? 130 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities even though we only take in 3 trillion per year in revenue. The creation of a dependent underclass that believes the government exists to provide them with everything they cannot provide for themselves, in order to garner votes, loyalty and stay in power. All the "Free Stuff" that the parasites of our society receive for doing nothing is beginning to pile up. Do the fuzzy math-no way our current way of rewarding failure nad punishing success is sustainable. I know the rich do not pay enough-if only those evil rich and corporations would pay there fair share-we would all live in a Democratic Utopia. Socialism has failed everywhere it has been implemented-it is a failed paradigm-yet Dems continue to idolize Fidel, Che, Marx and all the other tyrants that killed miliions and accumulated Billions for themselves. America like Europe is just beginning to see the collateral and intangile costs of Socialism and both will have a total economic collapse at some point. "Free Stuff" is not free and we are nearing our fiscal event horizon where almost 50% of the population pays no income tax or receives all taxes back in the form of a refund. No society can have half the population doing nothing but consuming resources while the other 50% pays for everything!

What part of "can't afford" do you not get...we are in DEBT...

Is that the way you run your household...our country is on the verge of financial collaspe...we need to reduced the size and scope of govt....we are AMERICANS...we make our own way...we are turning into a bunch of wimpy entitlists...Europe is moving to the right and cutting...we just keep spending and spending...it will hit the fan ..trust me..

@ Navy

but the truth is that the republicans would not move on 9/11 First Responders Bill, DADT, New Start, Dream Act, etc unless they passed the Tax Cut bill with the majority of the benefits going to the richest 2%.

Your leader wanted to reach out across the aisle to reach a compromise. He achieved it - what is the issue?

As far as Iam concern this is extortion at best.

Navy, it is a matter of perspective. During the past two years or so, your party has had control of the WH, the House and Senate, extorting their programs and policies into law without discussion with the opposing party. Now that the floor has changed, will your party become the New Party of No, obstructing any meaningful changes to move the country forward?

This should be an interesting year in this dysfunctional government we have.

A lot of whining here about the Vanity Fair/60 Minutes poll. Maybe if we look someplace else we'll get different results.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

Nope, Gallup says 50% approval, 42% disapproval. For the record that would be 8 points better than Clinton, 11 points better than Reagan at this point in their terms.

Keep telling yourselves the President has met his "Waterloo", Conservatives.

John B...I have a more favorable outlook on Obama now than the past 2 years. Or even 2 months ago. But thats still not saying much. If you can piss off your own party, then I see more of the centrist that campaigned in 2008.

I reckon we will see the approval ratings increase more with a Republican Congress. He cannot be so one-sided anymore. I am hoping for Clinton part 2...1994 all over again. The Republicans made Clinton a popular president by taming his liberal agenda.

U.S Navy:

Reply to 1.59

YOU do not pay taxes on your disability check. You must think people are damn fools the way you come in here and drivel your BS.

If they take an additional 3-5% out of anyones check; it will be felt. I don't care how much money someone makes, it will be felt.

You can change the tax rate all you want but there will still be accountants and plain ole' tax preparers finding loopholes. If you say at tax time, you do not want to maximum amount of a refund that you can get; you are a frikken LIAR.

If you and Joe from next door makes the same amount of money and he gets back 8,000 as opposed to your 200, then you will have a problem.

BTW: THERE IS NO LAW that stops you from contributing as much as you desire to the government. IF you want to donate half of your check, tear azz and do it.

Fiesty and navey you have got to be complete idiots

May I suggest that before you go calling someone else an idiot you might want to introduce yourself with something called 'spell checker' !

Dude that was painful to read... lmao!

Mark S...Amen, brother. European socialism has always been a model for the liberals in America. The austerity measures Europe is putting into place doesn't seem to sounding any wake-up calls for liberals yet.

To JoannaSmith1:

To put it plain and simple for you to understand: ""There are none so blind as those who won't see!" (Until it is too late!). Apparently, what Regan and Bush brought about did not open your eyes or ears.

joejoe1944:

???????

Feisty: Yes! Lmao - that WAS painful to read - perhaps "Hooked on Phonics" would be helpful for him, as well.

Nashville,

Sure we should cut corporate welfare. Hard decisions have to be made and everyone is going to have to sacrifice. I live in Illinois and completely disagree with most of what my county does. But the one thing they do is when they give a company tax increment financing is they insist that X amount of people must be hired and KEEP their jobs for X amount of time. I don't think business should get tax incentives to open a business, but when they get them and then don't keep up their end of the bargain they should be a punishment. (Which I don't think they do in our county)

My county just gave Boeing about 5 million (tax payer dollars) to move some of their business from St Louis to St Clair County in Illinois. Thats ridiculous, if Boeing wants to move across the mississippi river, they should have to pay for it all themselves. That 5 million is only going to create about 30 jobs at a cost of over 150,000 dollars each. Boeing didn't need that money.

My point is again everyone must sacrifice.

janet,

I agree that everyone must sacrifice, but it seems when it comes to ginning up outrage, it is always the poor people at the bottom who are put in the spotlight, never the greedy folks up top.

Nashville:

Poor people aren't affected because most do not pay FEDERAL tax. Everyone at the top is not GREEDY. Most at the top are there due to hard work. The bottom is put in the SPOTLIGHT because liberal lawmakers use them as a tool constantly.

DrB (post 1.57) - Generally this lag time is true for seeing if an an economic program will actually accomplish what it was promoted to do, except in two areas.

The first is in the stock and commodity market whether global or domestic. Anyone capable of reading, hearing or seeing realizes that the market reacts quite quickly to any news that investors find disturbing/encouraging and will affect their positions on hiring, firing, selling, holding or buying.

The second area is in job growth and business expansion. The lag time here is unlikely to be as quick as the markets but could be only a couple of months. You can bet the last $ in your pocket that businesses have more than one plan for growth and that that growth depends on what they perceive the government will do affecting taxation and regulation. If the government passes legislation increasing regulatory rules and/or taxes then business & most consumers alike will hold off on investments (spending $$$ if you will) until they can analyze how that affects their bottom line. Likewise the opposite is true.

However sweet being able to immediately write off capital expenditures seems, if business doesn't have the potential market for that equipment use it is not likely to happen as the business may find other, more profitable investments.

Rather like a store offering 50% off anything you buy, If you don't need that item, but get it anyways you spent 50% more than you wanted to.

Nashville Fan, I'm going to single you out because your comment on the wealthy hording their money triggered my question but it's really open to any who wish to answer. There has been so much made of what percentage of people in the US control what percentage of the wealth that I find myself asking this- Do you believe wealth a pie where each slice taken out of the pie leaves a finite amount remaining to be divided by everyone else at the party or is it the raw ingredients used to make the pie and anyone with the desire has the opportunity to make their own pie?

It's kind of a silly example but I think the answer drives at a fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives (and this is in blanket terms- I realize there will always be exceptions). Most of the conservatives I know understand wealth to be unlimited- we all have opportunity to increase our share of wealth by the efforts we put into it and by obtaining personal wealth we are not decreasing the capacity of anyone else to earn it for themselves. Most of my liberal friends, however, seem to view wealth as a pie- that each time a piece of the pie is removed by someone in the form of personal gain, it leaves less for everyone else.

independant thinker (1.76) - Apparently you think of yourself, as well as many other liberal FR posters do as well, that this little gem of knowledge you quote doesn't apply to yourself or them. How quaint and condescending you are. Please do remind us about reagan and bush (with citations when appropriate)

BTW - I do find it interesting that oba,ma has taken time to read ronald reagans biography. Got any opinion on this?

american,

In 1980 our manufacturing and export segments were 30% of our GDP today they are only 10%

In 1980 we were on a path to pay off all our debt by the year 2000 but instead by 1992 it had doubled after 35 years of steady pay down.

So, american, what happened during the 80’s that caused our plans and dreams to be flushed down the toilet?

newday (post #1.24) ROTFLMAO!!!

You refuse to give citations yourself, but that can be expected based on the contents of your posts and how you can't prove your own points as anything other than disrespectful and condescending and trying to inflate your own ego and self image.

"Sorry, NJ and JoAnna; any credibility the two of you might have had is totally gone. NJ: your response to the citation I asked for tells me that your hatred for Obama is purely personal, and there is nothing substantive about it."

Really newday, this is your rebuttal? Do you consider yourself to be the judge judy of FR? Where are your citations to prove them wrong?

"Poor JoAnna, you have NO credibility (and really never did) given that diatribe you did on affirmative action. I am sad for both of you. As to what the Republican House might do? I hope they behave exactly as they did in the 90's. People have forgotten what a truly reprehensible group of people they are."

Oh my newday,talk about calling the kettle black and even with the use of cyber bully comments as well. Lmao! impressive and so educational on how you think!

Care to provide a summary of what the republicans did in the 90's that were so "reprehensible" In this case citations will be required and keep in mind that individual foibles can be pointed to just as easily about democrats as well. So keep it on point to legislative actions that you find so reprehensible.

As to my citations on your post you can start by looking up the definitions of condescension and disrespect will do as starters.

Gee Dennis, I guess your facts must have been inconvenient to american -- he's chosen to bypass them and divert attention by criticizing NDD's manners instead.

Johnb (post 1.56) - 3 - 4% GDP growth for months in 2011? Even the variety of economist and business leaders (left leaners and right leaners alike) interviewed on Bloomberg TV haven't and atill don't support this view. Perhaps 3% by the end of 2011 is the best they predict and then it will depend on job growth and the perception that congress is serious about addressing the US debt and economy in general.

Typical of Liberals to spin and take credit for anything potentially good and by deflecting blame to others when things go bad.

Morgan Stanley believes;

Congress has approved the recent tax/fiscal stimulus deal, which will add about 1pp to growth in 2011 relative to our earlier baseline, pushing our forecast to 4% over the four quarters of next year. Implementation of the deal, which could begin on January 1, will shift the mix of stimulus from monetary to fiscal policy, so that the Fed will likely be less inclined to extend the current LSAP program beyond 2Q11. And it suggests that yields will gradually continue to move higher, to 4% by end-2011.

http://www.morganstanley.com/views/gef/index.html

That would be the tax deal that Tea Partiers wanted to reject, by the way.

dennis (post 1.84) - And I brought up your asking points by??? And this relates how to my comments today?? Since you seem to be bursting at the seams with an answer, why don't you give us your opinion. I am sure that you will be able to prove to us all as well as any economist that economic plans are so definitive and guaranteed to work over a long term basis.

This is what you are implying isn't it???

We are coming out of a 30 year period of inflationary economics where demand outreached supply and productivity and into a recessionary or deflationary period where supply and productivity far exceeds demand.

So what does this mean? It implies that unemployment will remain high for a very long time and it changes the model on how we grow the economy in that tax cuts for business and the wealthy are no longer effective. It becomes imperative to prop up the middle class to enable spending. The upper class needs a strong middle class to buy their products because without that demand there is no reason for the rich to invest in domestic businesses.

American:

Also the report of 12/22/2010 by CBPP verifies John B's 4%. Go to my post yesterday on FT about the CBPP Tax Cut Analysis and the URL for the whole report is there. Read it because you are incorrect. It also states that unemployment will go down in 2011 as well.

Johnb - SO?? Why didn't you list the caveats as well from the same article, as relating to...

Continuing housing imbalances, state and local finances, europe's sovereign debt crises, chinas monetary policies, a weakened US $$$ and if a strengthened global economy means more US exports. Seems to be asking quite a bit for all these factors to resolve themselves favorably in 2011

Liked the article of "2011 Outlook: Rebalancing, Reflation and Reconciliation" better. Your same link btw

Boy I am striking a nerve with all kinds of righties today, right? Okay american, how about this for starters? I did have to search to find something simple enough for you, but here it is; Gingrinch Admits to Affair During Clinton Impeachment. Jake Topper, March 9, 2007. Yep, good old family values Newtie, getting some on the side, but pontificating about how the rest of us should live.

Suzy:

I don't want your pie. I want you to stop complaining about having to pay taxes on your pie and accusing me of being lazy because I don't have any.

Hope that helps.

P.S. It is the conservative belief that there is no limit to the amount of pie that is the number one reason why we are in so much debt (i.e. if we continue to cut taxes under the false belief that it will grow the economy). The truth is, there is only so much wealth, and what goes up always comes down eventually. Pretending otherwise leads to our boom/bust economy.

InTheMiddle:

The issue is the tired talking point about half of folks not paying federal income taxes, which of course means they don't earn enough income. So basically, what is the solution? Charge the poor higher taxes? Pay them a higher wage? Or just continue to hide the inequality of our system with the illusion that poor folks get all these services for nothing, which is complete bull.

Navy - reread posts 1.88, 1.87 and 1.92 and then read Johnb's link to morgan-stanley.

Just as I am sure there are websites you choose not to read or broadcasts news sources you won't listen too I have mine as well. Your referenced source is one of them, as I am sure that Fox is one that neither you or I watch as well.

I prefer Bloomberg TV as they interview (left or right leaning) pundits, economists and business leaders on their insights towards the domestic and global economy. I also like listening to Charley rose interviews as time and interest allows and am thinking about catching the "Mclaughlin group" as well. Their end of year commentary was rather interesting.

newday - sounds more like a personal mistep to me (foibal if you will) and your beloved democrats don't?? I do hope that my reply was even simpler for you to understand, as your responce went only to a personal indescretion not to "reprehensible" legislative actions I asked for.

american, the word you are searching for is "foible". And the specific legislative action was impeachment. And since you are SO willing to say that Clinton indulged in a personal indiscretion, riddle me this:

Why did we tie up the United States Government in knots over what you refer to as a "personal indiscretion?" Yep, reprehensible is the only word that fits.

Nash, once again you delivered exactly as expected. You think wealth is limited and the problem with our deficit is people not paying enough taxes on their share of the pie. I'm sure it will not surprise you that I think the problem isn't that those with a lot of pie don't pay enough taxes, it's that the government refuses to live within it's allotted pie budget.

For the record, I don't object to paying taxes for services that are necessary and can only best be provided by government- infrastructure, defense, public safety, support for the elderly and disabled. All for it- it benefits society as a whole to keep these areas strong. But there are many other areas supported by federal tax dollars that, to me, would be better served either through local level government (state or municipal depending on the service) or through private organizations. And I do have an issue with my tax dollars funding those who choose not to work even though they are fully capable. Again, a hand up benefits society as a whole but hand outs benefit no one in the end.

Suzy - Nash, once again you delivered exactly as expected.

People that engage in class warfare tend to be very predictable.

If federal income taxes were cut across the board, NF would complain that 47% of Americans would not benefit from that tax cut. Basically because those 47% don't pay any federal income taxes.

And Nash, still waiting on that answer for why Senator Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling in 2006, but now as President he wants it raised. Any clues as to what changed in his thinking? No matter if you choose not to answer today, this will certainly be a hot topic in the coming weeks, so I will certainly be asking the Obama-Crowd the very same question. Hopefully someone will be able to give an answer.

Dennis - nice thoughtfull reply. I do understand that unemployment is likely to remain higher than most would wish it to be over the next few years.

I don't agree that the wealthy (upper class, your term) needs a strong middle class as they can buy globally to suit their tastes.

I would say that US small businesses as well as some US based corporations do rely on a strong middle class to support and produce trade goods both domestically and hopefully globally consumption. With regards to other major US corporations and multinationals the US consumer and domestic manufacturing abilities will continue to play a decreasing role in their longterm plans as they focus on the emerging markets.

Not sure where you are going with the "prop up the middle class to enable spending" thingy. Do you mean encouraging private enterprise to step in with jobs or the federal government to fund their lifestyle choices?

As for income tax cuts we will need to do one or more of the following... change the tax brackets for all, eliminate loopholes or go to another system of taxation. No easy or quick solution here as well.

With regards to corporate taxes, corporations never have or will pay taxes, they will just collect $$$ from the end user (re. consumer) to pass thru to the government in order to maintain what they consider to be a viable profit margin.

I do also see your point about how as we have developed into a global marketplace past economic policies will not always work and that either a totally new model be developed or we pick and choose from past models into a combination that does. It does seem likely that such a model will have to address the global market as it would apply to our domestic markets.

BTW - back in october I happened onto an interesting interview on C-span with physicists Michio Kaku While the majority of the interview covered math and sciences he did make an interesting observation on todays economic situation. Not political in nature but rather more of something to ponder over. The following link should get you to the interview and relevant economic observations as a physicist sees it...

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/id/234213

Start at transcript marker 46:30 thru 50:30 as it relates to money.

Start at transcript marker 37:30 thru 46:30 for a general concept on todays world and possible path into the future

Want prosperity? Grow the pie!

Newday, since you so elequently brought it up, a BJ in the white house by someone other than hillary is ok but gingrich's affair is not?? I am sure more than one presidential candidate has been derailed by extra-marital affairs just as many presidents used more discretion in handling their own. Clinton should have taken it to a motel and/or chosen his partner more wisely. The senate decided that impeachment proceedings were warrented. Their decision not yours or mine.

Tie the government up in knots?? Not hardly.

for the purist - house brings up the charges, the senate conducts the trial. with the constitutional notation of impeachment for "...high crimes and misdemeanors."

american: "for the purist" you are a laugh riot. No. It has nothing to do with being a "purist" and you were quite wrong. Bringing the charge of impeachment rests solely with the House. "the Senate decided impeachment proceedings were necessary". Really? Did you sleep through Civics class? This is why I do not waste time with you american. You have no clue what you are talking about. YOUR point was that it "sounds more like a personal mistep (sic) to me." So which is it? A "foibal" (sic) or a high crime warranting impeachment? Now, do go away and study 10th grade Civics, won't you?

newday - May I present (in part) the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

article 1 section 2 para 5 - The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment

article 1 section 3 para 6 - The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.

article 2 section 4 -The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors

In 1970, then-House Minority Leader Gerald R. Ford defined the criterion as he saw it: "An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history

It will give me great pleasure to remind you of this from time to time and to your stupidity of your post #1.103. Keep on posting such drivel and disrespect to myself or any other poster and I will remind people about how you choose stupidity over ignorance and that your knowledge about the US Constitution among other things is ZIP!

Trying to use fancy sounding rhetoric, as in lame attempts at cyber bullying and sarcasm does not make you an intellegent or even respectful poster. There is a difference in calling one on bad disrespectful rhetoric vs using disrespectful rhetoric.

You can take this to your next civics class or psychiatric group session as you see fit.

Quoting you american "the senate (sic) decided that impeachment proceedings were warranted". Ummm, no, the House did. Once the House determines that they will bring charges, the Senate responsibility is to TRY IT. The Senate makes no determination on whether the charges should be brought. They simply hear the evidence. Own it. YOU were the one that gave that power of determining whether charges should be brought to the Senate. You tried to correct it in your post of 1.102, but that horse was already out of the barn. Too late to shut that door. The word "Senate" is a name, and therefore must be capitalized. The HOUSE brings charges, which to use your own words for the sake of clarity. The HOUSE decides if "impeachment proceedings are warranted." Now, do sign up for a class in govt. at your local high school or community college.

nice try newday, trouble owning up to your own mistake I see, by jumping the gun when you failed to read 1.102 before posting 1.103. By your standards, I should have raked you over the coals when you brought up your misdirection away from my comment on gingrich's foible to your implying that I said it was clintons. It looks like your only respect is for politicians or posters when they are of your political persuasion. Not the first time you have shown a blatant double standard, and I am sure it won't be the last. "reprehensible republicans" indeed! Lmao!

Poor american: so tough to get caught out like that isn't it? I have repeated YOUR words to YOU. The double standard is yours. And on top of that you bore me.

Nash:

I do not do talking points.....look it up.

Good for him at least one vote against the Wicked Witch of the West Queen Nancy.

Not a big issue I'm sure, the votes will still be there.

Repealing HCR will boost job creation as it would remove the requirement for a certain size of business to offer health insurance. Even with subsidies offering health care insurance is a cost of employment which would be removed on repeal thus lowering the cost to employ a new worker.

Navy, whether it is true or not (we will see) the HCR is perceived as a job killing piece of legislation. So by repealing or defunding bits and pieces of the bill, the Republicans feel that they are keeping their campaign promises for job creation and helping the economy.

BIg-B 1989609;

True, the operative word is "Perceived". This is what we get when MSM has an agenda to spout misinformation for ratings and political agenda. I think trying to repeal the HCR may finally bring to light all the good things that it does do, and dispell some of the constant lies and misinformation. It may even make the arguement for a single payor system that thedems should have fought harder for.

The Republicans need to restore the competitiveness of American business with the rest of the world. First stop is repealing the job killing ObamaCare bill. Everyone knows it won't get signed into law because both Reid and Obama will block it. What it will do though is force Obama and Reid to explain to the American people that they are making the US businesses less competitive with other countries, and that is why jobs are not being created in the US. Obama will have a hard time explaining that one.

I thought the Republican Party is about getting things done. Instead they're going to start with an entirely symbolic vote that accomplishes nothing.

JOhn B.

It is all part of their agenda, Obstruct baby Obstruct. They know this is going nowhere but instead of looking at ways to really create jobs in this country they are going to play political games hoping to stall the growth of this country so they can use that in the 2012 election. Hopefully the American people will see this and act accordingly come 2012.

I saw a piece on Issa's agenda and the issue being raised is, will this be an open investigation or as many suspect we it be limited in some way, like only looking at the major issues for the last two years giving the Bush Administration a free pass knowing what their hand in all this was. That is a real concern and we have seen it before. At that point it is no longer an investigation, only a political witch hunt. We will see soon.

The republican/tea party is not going to do anythiong that moves this country forward for the next 2 years. They feel if they do, President Obama will be a second term President and McConnell already vosed not to let that happen. SO, nothing gets done to move us forward. In fact they are trying to move us backwards across the board.

"......... and that is why jobs are not being created in the US.."

Jobs are not being created in the US becuse it' cheaper to create them in a land where wages are equivalent to peanuts. God, Smiff- can you be honest about ANYTHING???

The real problem? No other country in the world allows "for profit" health care insurance. America would be so much better if they followed that example. Profiting from someones misery should be illegal.

The T.P.'ers say "you would have a government bureaucrat in your Dr.'s office. Currently we have a for profit corporate greed merchant in there. I would prefer the not for profit bureaucrat...

The only reason HCR is seen as "job killing" is because conservatives have been telling everyone that for the last two years. Those businesses deduct their health care expenses; therefore, just like their tax rate, it has no impact on job creation. The benefit of offering health care to workers is a healthier work force. Just because some politicians say something does not make it true. Just because someone puts something in writing does not make it true. Connect the dots and fact check.

md414... Great point. It is beyond me why a for-profit health care system hedging bets against people's lives, one that is traded on the stock market is considered legal or ethical.

Jody, if all those expenses are deductable, then why have all those companies (including unions) been granted waivers from the program? http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2010-10-07-healthlaw07_ST_N.htm

Surely, all of these companies have accountants that know all the tricks and loopholes to keep the bosses from paying too much for anything. Could it be because the HCR bill was a bloated POS that no one can comprehend?

Jobs are not being created in the US becuse it' cheaper to create them in a land where wages are equivalent to peanuts.

And Obama's solution to that problem is to load up American businesses with more taxes and more regulations. And this makes American businesses more competitive how again?

Jody Iowa: The only reason HCR is seen as "job killing" is because conservatives have been telling everyone that for the last two years.

Well, that and unemployment keeps going up. And careful with that "conservative" label. Kate has a problem with labels.

Jody;

You hit is right on the head. There is no report by any respectable economist of note that says the HCR is a job killing bill. I could not find one that would verify that position. Sites like CBPP, EPI and other think tanks do not say that. In fact Jan 1, has brought in about 20 new programs for the HCR including closing the donut hole etc. I put the site above from the Kaiser Foundation.

This bill is being not opposed because it is a bad bill, not perfect by no means, but not a bad bill. It is being opposed by the republican/tea party because their sugar daddy supporters want it repealed, like the US Chamber of Commerce, The Insurance Industry and Drug Companies that spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying against the HCR and buying political votes. This is also why we got the Insurance Mandate". It was a republican supported position that paid back the insurance companies by giving them 30 million more new customers.

BB: Jody, if all those expenses are deductable, . . . . .

. . . . then who exactly is paying for ObamaCare?

JAS1----I just have to ask you why you have SUCH a problem with the stimulus/TARP--which by the way virtually every reputable economist from either side of the aisle admits helped stave off a depression (and which is where the bulk of the deficit spending you allude to in that 7 mos statement comes from) and yet you have absolutely no seeming problem with the Trillion dollars that just got added as a result of giving into the Republicans on the new tax bill? Do you realize that we just added $700 BILLION to that deficit just so people earning MORE THAN $1M/yr could continue to get their tax cuts? There is absolutely NO WAY on God's green earth that cutting taxes on millionaires produces more jobs. There is NO DATA to support that ridiculous idea and people earning at least $1M/yr are NOT small business owners just to preempt that particular favorite talking point from your side.

So essentially JoAnna, you are screaming against saving the country from a depression because it added to the deficit but it's a really good idea to add nearly $1 TRILLION to put more money in the pockets of millionaires which doesn't add jobs or noticeably stimulate the economy in any real way. Just a clue for you, it's adding money to the middle class's wallets that increases spending, thus increasing demand which is necessary to get jobs moving again.

The only reason HCR is seen as "job killing" is because conservatives have been telling everyone that for the last two years. Those businesses deduct their health care expenses; therefore, just like their tax rate, it has no impact on job creation.

In all honesty I can only speak for the small business I work for but I can say without a doubt in my experience, you are dead wrong Jody. Yes, insurance costs is currently an expense to the business so it helps the bottom line at the end of the year, but I assure you, the nearly $10,000 bill we have to pay each month for the 9 people on staff who take our insurance certainly DOES impact hiring decisions. The tax implications are considered from about mid-November through Dec 31 but the rest of the year it's all about can we afford to add another salary, another thousand dollars to the health insurance bill, etc. And with the premium explosions that have happened since HCR was passed (average of 18% increase for the last 8 years was insane but it wasn't anything compared to the 38% increase this year) it makes it more and more difficult to continue offering the staff a good value in health insurance while still keeping the premiums affordable for the business on an ongoing basis.

JAS1: The Republicans need to restore the competitiveness of American business with the rest of the world. First stop is repealing the job killing ObamaCare bill. Everyone knows it won't get signed into law because both Reid and Obama will block it. What it will do though is force Obama and Reid to explain to the American people that they are making the US businesses less competitive with other countries, and that is why jobs are not being created in the US. Obama will have a hard time explaining that one.

Actually, if you want to look at FACTS, you will see that Obama has put in place MANY tax cuts for businesses of various sizes as well as incentives such as allowing them to deduct for buying equipment, etc. The REAL job killers in the US have to do with continuing to allow corporate welfare (i.e., massive tax cuts and programs) to those companies who continue to run their businesses essentially overseas. There are Progressives calling for doing away with these tax cuts UNLESS the companies are primarily employing Americans IN THE USA and that would create tons of jobs and help reduce the deficit all at once. I'll give you ONE GUESS as to which party will block that plan the quickest. Republicans need to put their money where their mouths are and call on the ending of tax cuts for businesses unless they hire in the US. If only companies with at least 80-90% of their employees based in the US received tax breaks and incentives then we'd have a whole lot more companies doing their business at home.

You ever notice the dramatic difference in time wasting subpoena serving and extraneous investigations between the two parties? When the Dems hold the majority in the House, they don't waste their time, even with the craziness perpetrated by the GWB administration because they have other important jobs to do. The Republicans, on the other hand, think that wasting time and money simply for the purpose of bringing down a sitting Democratic president should be a top priority. (e.g., see all the time, money and person power wasted on the various investigations of Clinton and did that REALLY help the country in any meaningful way? NO)

Thanks Suzy,

That is what happens in the real business world--not the academic business world, where widgets are made and sold easily and everyone cooperates, without government controls:)

US Navy Vet:

I saw a piece on Issa's agenda and the issue being raised is, will this be an open investigation or as many suspect we it be limited in some way, like only looking at the major issues for the last two years giving the Bush Administration a free pass knowing what their hand in all this was. That is a real concern and we have seen it before. At that point it is no longer an investigation, only a political witch hunt. We will see soon.

The republican/tea party is not going to do anythiong that moves this country forward for the next 2 years. They feel if they do, President Obama will be a second term President and McConnell already vosed not to let that happen. SO, nothing gets done to move us forward. In fact they are trying to move us backwards across the board.

You ever notice the dramatic differences between the parties re: subpoena serving and extraneous investigations? When the Dems control the House they don't bother, even with the nefarious activity of GWB's administration, because they know they have other important work to get done. With the Republicans, anything they can do to bring down a sitting Democratic president is their top priority and wastes time, money and person power while not doing anything to really improve the country or help the people in it. Case in point, remember all those Starr investigations of Clinton and to what end? Wasted time and money without any advancement for the people.

Suzy, I'm not part of the insurance carrier negotiations where I am now, but at my last corporate home the carrier gave us consecutive increases of 22% and 35%...BEFORE any negotiations on HCR began. Trying to pin rate increases on HCR is a fun Conservative game but it just doesn't fly in a world where premiums QUADRUPLED during the 8 year GW Bush Administration.

Well said, Dr B. For Republicans it's a fight to the death which can only end in one party rule. Democrats need to figure that out and respond appropriately. I'm not saying to launch their own slate of unending witch hunts, but there are other approaches.

Dr B,

Those tax credits will never offset the cost of the insurance premiums, because instead of regulating the cost of insurance, they want to regulate everything else. Instead of telling companies they cannot increase their insurance more than 3% a year, its up 38% in some areas. But hey, the insurance companies will make more money, because we are going to be mandated to purchase insurance or be fined by the government. That there is freedom of choice.

You hit is right on the head. There is no report by any respectable economist of note that says the HCR is a job killing bill. I could not find one that would verify that position. Sites like CBPP, EPI and other think tanks do not say that. In fact Jan 1, has brought in about 20 new programs for the HCR including closing the donut hole etc. I put the site above from the Kaiser Foundation.

This bill is being not opposed because it is a bad bill, not perfect by no means, but not a bad bill. It is being opposed by the republican/tea party because their sugar daddy supporters want it repealed, like the US Chamber of Commerce, The Insurance Industry and Drug Companies that spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying against the HCR and buying political votes. This is also why we got the Insurance Mandate". It was a republican supported position that paid back the insurance companies by giving them 30 million more new customers.

Closing the donut hole is a giveaway of taxpayers money (medicare) to the pharmaceutical companies. It was one of the first kickbacks that the Administration agreed to for their support of the overall bill. It effectively froze out generics and has forced Medicare to accept branded drugs. Once a recipient is past the donut hole (which a pharma company still receives half their price), the taxpayer is then on the hook for the full retail cost of the drug. (Buy Pfizer stock now).

Secondly, the illogic of your second paragraph is astounding. You start by claiming that HCR is not a bad bill and that the only reason for repeal is that Republicans must pay back their backers in the insurance industry. In your next sentence you claim that the insurance mandate that was passed is pay back to industry again by the Republicans.

How can the republicans pay back the insurance industry by creating a mandate and simultaneously repeal the mandate?

Dr B: The REAL job killers in the US have to do with continuing to allow corporate welfare (i.e., massive tax cuts and programs) to those companies who continue to run their businesses essentially overseas. There are Progressives calling for doing away with these tax cuts

That certainly is the rhetoric put out by the Left. Got any examples to back it up? You would have thought if this was the main problem that Obama and the heavily Democratic Congress would have corrected it during the last two years, but they didn't even bother to address it. Instead, they went on a spending binge like no other in history saying that spending would stimulate the economy and create jobs. Now that that spending binge is complete, and we see no positive results, the Left has switched to blaming the corporate tax strategy.

And now the Democrats want to end these so called "loopholes" for US based businesses and increase taxes on those corporations. And you think this will make them more competitive on the world stage how?

Big Bear,

Well, if they aren't going to bring employees back to the US anyway, why the hell do we keep giving the tax cuts? does that make ANY sense to you? Your answer really only suggests that perhaps the insurance industry needs MORE regulation so they can't keep charging more for premiums while giving their CEOs huge bonuses rather than spending a proportionately bigger chunk on actual provision of health care as a result of those premiums. Sorry, but I've dealt directly with those health insurance companies over and over and they cannot be trusted to do what's right for the average Joe out of the goodness or their hearts which is the real fantasy when people say don't regulate these businesses.

Dr B.:

Excellent posts and you have my vote. Seems to me you have connected the dots just fine. Have a great day and come back to visit often.

Dr B: Case in point, remember all those Starr investigations of Clinton and to what end?

Perjury and obstruction of justice of a grand jury by a sitting President is a serious offense. Or do you believe its only serious for certain people, and not for others?

You're getting incoherent, there US Navy; misspelled words, poor grammar, etc. Not like you at all. Can't take the heat of realizing all your hood-winking friends like Pelosi and Reid are having to face the out-of-tune music they've been peddling for the last 4 years, huh? At least the Repubs are doing exactly what they said they would do, whether it's successful or not, about repealing that disgusting piece of legislature rammed down the throats of the American public while the Annointed One was too busy to do something about the economy and jobs. All Obama cared about was getting his name in the history books for something no one else had done - pass health-care reform. He didn't care a whit about the floundering economy, unemployment, rising deficit, etc., only that he would SUCCEED where others had failed; and spend his way out of any other sticky situations. And if you think otherwise, you are a sad excuse for anything.

Well, JAS, I tend to think that perjury about a blow job is really not anywhere near as important as LYING about WMD to start a massive war. But, I'm guessing that wasn't much of an offense in your eyes since it was a Republican president who did it. Or how about outing an active CIA agent just because her husband ticked off the administration? Again, there was plenty of material with which to go after the GWB administration but ultimately it doesn't help which is why the Dems backed off. Do you have ANY idea how much money was wasted just so we could "prove" Clinton fooled around with an intern in the Oval office? Really? All "crimes" are not equal and somebody's sex life just isn't a "serious offense" unless they are committing pedophilia or sexual assault or something along those lines. Adultery isn't a national concern, it's one for the marital unit only.

Judy 350847;

Yep the republicans are doing exactly what they said they would. NOTHING. They are still the "Obstructionist" Party. Instead of dealing with the job issue they are going after HCR which is going nowhere. Instead of reducing the deficit they increased it. Instead of trying to work with the Democrats on spending they issue an ultimatum basically saying they will shut down the government unless they get the spending cuts THEY WANT.

You are just another republican/tea party hack spouting off talking points with no fact or ideas to back up anything. Tell us what the republicans have done to move this country forward in the last two years? They did block over 400 Bills that are still sitting in the Senate in limbo. They opposed virtually every piece of legislation that President Obama proposed. Only during the lame duck session did a hand full of republicans come forward and put this country first to pass 9/11 First Responder bill, DADT, New Start. Other than that they have routinely blocked or opposed just about everything else.

"..... they went on a spending binge like no other in history."

Hmm I wonder if I keep saying something enough, it will become reality?

Dr B: Well, JAS, I tend to think that perjury about a blow job is really not anywhere near as important as LYING about WMD to start a massive war.

So, we've had a DOJ for the last two years that has yet to bring bring charges up on Bush. Are those charges in the works? They do sound serious, much more serious as you say than a b*** j**. What's the timeline for bringing Bush up on those charges? Haven't heard much about it in the news, but it sure sounds like you're tuned in to it. Some facts please Mr. Dr. B., otherwise I'll start thinking this is a continuation of the left-wing rhetoric/nonsense that you seem to producing today in mass quantities.

Dr B: All "crimes" are not equal and somebody's sex life just isn't a "serious offense" unless they are committing pedophilia or sexual assault or something along those lines. Adultery

You do realize sexual harrassment is frowned upon in the workplace, correct Mr. Dr. B? The position of power over a subordinate (Ms. Monica) by one in charge (Mr. Bill) can be viewed as a threat to gain sexual favors, can it not? Many executives in many private companies have been dismissed for less Mr. Dr. B. Or do you also not care much about women having a safe work environment, one free of harassment by both peers and managers?

But then again we aren't allowed to talk about what happened in the WH before January '09, are we? I keep hearing it has no relevance...unless a Conservative wants to dredge up something to make their own point, I guess.

$200M to prove that Bill Clinton was willing to lie to hide an infidelity...now THAT's fiscally responsible!

Well, the Republicans are the party of "NO" as-well-as "NO Progress". It's all about stagnation unless it is for their financial gain or benefit.

Clinton should have just told everyone to f*ck off, instead of lying about it. It wasn't any else's business who he had sex with, except himself, Hilary and the other sex partner.

Wasting money on investigations because Clinton wanted to keep his private affairs private, was a witch hunt.

How come no one brought up at an investigative level Cheney expanding his VP powers, our government awarding no bid contracts to Haliburton(and other cronies of Cheney) in Iraq/Afghanistan, and the scapegoating/pardoning of Scooter Libby(instead of prosecuting those really responsible)?

It seems that "conservatives" would rather try to bring a Dem down for receiving a BJ(legally), than go after those who hurt taxpayers and economy(their own party members).

Navy, you talk about the GOP moving forward on other issues rather than creating jobs. Now what did the Democratic Party do about creating jobs during the first two years of the Obama administration? The unemployment rate increased under obama, while HC was the major issue, along with TARP, Stumulus spending and that really intelligent: JOBS SAVED that couldn't really be explained.

Now I may be in error, but didn't the House and Senate leadership, along with the President dictate the votes for the above items? Where was the obstructionism from the opposing party? Did they have ANY input prior to a vote?

As for increasing the deficit, didn't Obama generate the increase with his policies? Or was his spending a product of Bush? I think the numbers reflect Obama driving the deficit.

But, we will never agree, so I will agree to disagree. Have to go to Travis VA for my appointment. Have a good liberal day.

So, we've had a DOJ for the last two years that has yet to bring bring charges up on Bush. Are those charges in the works? They do sound serious, much serious as you say than a b*** j**. What's the timeline for bringing Bush up on those charges? Haven't heard much about it in the news, but it sure sounds like you're tuned in to it. Some facts please Mr. Dr. B., otherwise I'll start thinking this is a continuation of the left-wing rhetoric/nonsense that you seem to producing today in mass quantities.

You do realize sexual harrassment is frowned upon in the workplace, correct Mr. Dr. B? The position of power over a subordinate (Ms. Monica) by one in charge (Mr. Bill) can be viewed as a threat to gain sexual favors, can it not? Many executives in many private companies have been dismissed for less Mr. Dr. B. Or do you also not care much about women having a safe work environment, one free of harassment by both peers and managers?

Ok, first there is no "Mr" Dr B. It's Doctor, a title I actually earned through many years of study. And, you are showing your own sexual bias in assuming I am male which I am not.

Second, you are showing your TOTAL and COMPLETE inability to comprehend the actual point I made earlier about the vast difference in the parties with pursuing litigation of the other party. Although there are much more serious offenses which COULD be brought up, the Dems have decided it isn't in the country's best interest or the best way to spend time and money to pursue these matters in court, whereas Republicans think nothing of wasting both to pursue issues that are merely titallating as opposed to substantive.

Thirdly, of course I believe sexual harassment is a serious issue. However, not all sexual interactions between between a subordinate and a superior fall into that category. There is such a thing as two consenting adults.

It is so very ironic that you want to accuse sexual harassment in this case, even though Monica Lewinsky never even remotely claimed it was anything other than completely consensual, and yet, I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that you stand by Justice Clarence Thomas when Anita Hill DID make a strong case for sexual harassment there. Not only was her complaint brushed under the rug but MRS. Thomas thought it appropriate to take her to task nearly 20 yrs later. Total hypocrisy.

I'd say that the primary reason you are so set to accuse me of "left wing rhetoric/nonsense" is because you can't actual counter my points with anything resembling a legitimate comeback or any actual intelligent points of your own.

Although I've already gathered from other posts (yours and others') that this is an exercise in futility to pose a genuine question and expect a real answer from you....I ask, what makes my postings "nonsense" exactly? Is it just that you don't agree or that you don't like the truth in them? What makes your posts, by contrast, so much less nonsensical than mine?

Although I've already gathered from other posts (yours and others') that this is an exercise in futility to pose a genuine question and expect a real answer from you....I ask, what makes my postings "nonsense" exactly?

What makes them nonsense? First, the Bush war crimes rhetoric which you referenced is nothing but eye-candy for left wing loons. No charges will ever be brought against Bush, ever. Second, the constant blaming of corporations for not paying their "fair-share" (what ever that is, it's never defined) of taxes, and for not hiring American workers. Once again, this too is eye-candy for left wing loons because the "fair-share" of taxes is never defined. And lastly, adding additional burdens with additional taxes and regualtions to US businesses will not make them more competitive with foreign businesses, but that truth is never acknowledged by the Left.

But yet, these are things you appear to believe in. Can't say you're a loon yet, but we're getting there.

Well, JAS, that was pretty darn close to a full answer. However, just because no charges were brought against the administration does not mean that there were no wrong doings, it merely shows better restraint on the part of Democrats, but that would take away your tautological argument style wouldn't it. Cheney essentially admitted knowing there were no real WMD at the time they were claiming them. It's already been proven that members of that administration outed an active CIA agent as a direct result of her husband making them mad with his comments. Endangering CIA operatives and their missions, had it been done by a Dem, would have been (rightly) called treason and it would be treasonous under Bush as well. Last I checked that could be classified as a "war crime" even though at no time did I use those words.

Also, I didn't say corporations aren't paying their "fair share". I said that one way to bring back jobs and to help the deficit is to cut the tax breaks (that's not exactly raising taxes, it's stopping a cut) if they aren't doing more to employ Americans. As far as the implication you try to make that corporations ARE hiring Americans...prove it.

If they were doing more hiring, there would be more jobs to be had. You'll of course note the news articles that show US companies are doing plenty of hiring overseas so they clearly have jobs that need doing. This is not "eye candy" it's actual fact. It is a fact that corporations have jobs they are outsourcing and it's an actual fact that they frequently receive huge amounts of money in tax breaks regardless of whether they actually employ Americans. What's wrong with a play or no pay scenario exactly? It's not like Republicans have been bringing back US jobs in hordes. Didn't see it under Bush, not even with all those tax breaks. So, if the carrot isn't working, why not try the stick?

Finally, as far as competitive with foreign businesses, tell me how we're doing so well on that front now when it's nearly impossible to buy American. That fact alone forces the average American to give foreign companies a better advantage. One way to compete is to actual start MAKING things again. Another way to be competitive would be to prioritize education so our future generations don't fall by the wayside re: innovation. Of course, I'm guessing you will discount all the various findings that show conclusively that our students are losing their educational and innovative edge and have been for quite awhile.

So, you can counter my questions with your own form of rhetoric that isn't backed up with anything real and you can also ignore my question about what makes your postings less nonsensical than mine but I know better than to expect a cogent answer based on truth and facts. I'd love to see you try again without twisting my words and backing up your own. But, I guess it's easier to try to call me names when you're losing ground.

JoAnnaSmith1

Joanna if former president clinton can be impeached because he lied about getting his (you know) on, then many feel that Bush should have been charges with war crimes against the iraqi people.

corporations don't pay there fair share considering the tax breaks they get but still ship jobs over seas.
the additional tax and regualtions most was because of the near melt down on wall street and the oil spill. Joanna if you want to live in a toxic dump move to china, the regulation we have will keep us from living with a acid cloud and tanted drinking water.
lets face it, the reason why US businesses are not as competive, is because of the living wages workers here must have to keep from starving and off the welfare rolls.

4.23

How can the republicans pay back the insurance industry by creating a mandate and simultaneously repeal the mandate?

Because the republican/tea party knows there is no way they are going to repeal Health Care in the next 2 years. It is all republican rhetoric and part of the game they are playing.

jeff - Joanna if former president clinton can be impeached because he lied about getting his (you know) on, then many feel that Bush should have been charges with war crimes against the iraqi people.

Jeff, you can feel what ever you want, it doesn't make it true. Anyone that believes Bush is going up on war crimes of any kind is in fact a loon.

And if you, me, or even the President, lies to a federal grand jury, when under oath (just ask Scooter Libby), you will be punished. That happened to Clinton Jeff. Nothing, nothing at all, will happen to Bush. It's really time Liberals get over their "feelings" and face reality.

jeff - corporations don't pay there fair share considering the tax breaks they get but still ship jobs over seas.

And here we are, back to this again. What is anyones fair-share? What is the so called rich peoples "fair-share"? Obama has been office for 2 years now, the Democrats controlled Congress for the last 4 years, and not once did they put forth an overall tax policy in legislation that tells anyone what businesses/individuals "fair-share" of the tax burden should be to fund the government. This is the problem Jeff, Liberals keep bringing up the "fair-share" argument day in and day out, they use it as propaganda to stir up their base and they use it to demonize hard working people, but they never say what it is. For 4 years a heavily Democratic Congress had a chance to define a comprehensive tax plan to fund the government. And four 4 years they did nothing. In fact, the most comprehensive tax plan the Democrats did bring forward was to extend the Bush (now Obama) tax cuts! The same ones they had demonized for years.

People that keep bringing up the "fair-share" canard without defining what it is are in fact loons.

Navy Disabled - Because the republican/tea party knows there is no way they are going to repeal Health Care in the next 2 years.

Well, then we all certainly have the correct expectations.

What's your prediction on the next 2.1 years? You know, after Obama leaves office.

Of course there is also that federal court case against ObamaCare funding winding it's way to the SC. That Navy Guy is what you call opening up two theaters of operation.

Joanna

I said some people feel that way, not me, i was just answering your post. i know nothing will happen to ther former president, as in his book, he made a call. as much as i was pissed that, that war cost us over 4000 of our men and women i can't judge him, because i don't know what i would have done.

Dr B: Well, JAS, that was pretty darn close to a full answer. However, just because no charges were brought against the administration does not mean that there were no wrong doings, it merely shows better restraint on the part of Democrats,

Or, no evidence. But this is your dream, so do carry on.

Dr B: but I know better than to expect a cogent answer based on truth and facts.

Like the evidence that supports Bush's war crimes? That truth? Those facts? Please present them. Be sure to Cc: eric.holder@whitehouse.gov.

Dr B.: It's not like Republicans have been bringing back US jobs in hordes. Didn't see it under Bush, not even with all those tax breaks. So, if the carrot isn't working, why not try the stick?

Go ahead. Tax them until they scream. Regulate them until the government knows how many rolls of toilet paper they use. Have Congressional hearings every week asking every CEO why they hate America. See where that gets'ya.

The current court cases, most of which havealready been shut down except for two I think, have to do with the Insurance Mandate. You fail to tell the people that this mandate is a republican idea that the dems put in to get the bill passed. The republicans have been yapping about this mandate for about 30 years all the way back to Nixon in the 70's. Google it, it is a fact. The republicans know that the chance of repealing Health Care reform in the 112th Congress is next to none, so they will say they are going to do whatever they want knowing it will not happen. Good political move but symbolic at best, that gig is exposed.

In 2.1 years I plan on continuing my support for President Obama, I have no reason to believe that he will be defeated by a party that believes in an Obstructionist agenda.

Well Jeff, I'm certainly glad we both agree that Bush is not a war criminal.

Feel free to join me in my education of "Dr B", who appears to have arrived in Loon-ville on this very matter.

Navy - In 2.1 years I plan on continuing my support for President Obama,

He'll be on the rubber chicken circuit by that time. Picking up a cool $500,000 for reciting a twenty minute canned speech, all of his expenses paid of course, autographing the books his fans have purchased, you might even get to shake his hand!

JAS!: Like the evidence that supports Bush's war crimes? That truth? Those facts? Feel free to join me in my education of "Dr B", who appears to have arrived in Loon-ville on this very matter.

Ah, JoAnna, previously you said some are so predictable b/c they engage in class warfare. How easy you are to predict based on an inability to make intellectually sound comments and only an ability to ask questions rather than answering any specifically asked of you and to call people names when you simply don't know what the hell you are talking about.

As far as educating, please let me introduce you to the definition of war crime and please note that IF someone did do an in depth investigation into the many questionable actions of the GWB administration, the top two "Common Article 3 violations" would very likely apply, minimally to actions documented at Abu Ghraib. Again, your argument that it hasn't been investigated therefore there aren't any crimes is silly and tautological and holds NO weight whatsoever.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002441----000-.html

d) Common Article 3 Violations.—

(1) Prohibited conduct.— In subsection (c)(3), the term “grave breach of common Article 3” means any conduct (such conduct constituting a grave breach of common Article 3 of the international conventions done at Geneva August 12, 1949), as follows:
(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind.
(B) Cruel or inhuman treatment.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act intended to inflict severe or serious physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions), including serious physical abuse, upon another within his custody or control.

To further your education, please read the definition of treason: (3rd entry of definition) "the betrayal of a trust or confidence, breach of faith, treachery.
"Treason, sedition, means disloyalty or treachery to one's country or it's government. Treason is any attempt to overthrow the government or impair the well being of a state to which one owes allegiance; the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemy's of one's government" (source: Dictionary.com)

So, please tell me how the purposeful outing of an active CIA agent who was undercover was not essentially giving aid to enemy's of our government and a disloyalty to our country/government and at least having the outcome of impairing the well being of the operations of the United States, hindering our relationships with all those also working with Valerie Plame? Sounds like treason to me.

Of course, you don't actually answer questions (since you have no good answers) you just do the typical Republican dance of evade, obfuscate and hope to confuse and when that doesn't work you call names. Please feel free to look up the big words so you can "educate" YOURSELF since you clearly are an inflammatory demagogue (except you are NOT a leader in politics) with no ability to actually converse in an intellectual manner, who cannot answer the tough questions posed to her and who must rely on juvenile tactics to TRY to win points while not actually making any herself.

As someone else said earlier, I've already given you WAY more answers than you deserve and will refrain from trying to engage in civilized dialogue with someone who has so roundly proven incapable to doing so. BTW, I seriously doubt anyone of YOUR ilk has much with which to educate me as I'm guessing you are rather uneducated yourself (see the silly error of "Mr. Dr. B").

Game - Set - Match Dr. B!

You sure got JoAnna's number! lol

Yet another even-handed post from a self-proclaimed "independent".

C'mon man...

I mean...really?

M. Fisher. However over the top the fictional part of your comment, there's a ring of truth in there.

Mixed quater bag and Jody I can wrap up my responses to both of you by quoting Rush Limbaugh,

"I was demonstrating absurdity by being absurd!"

Yea, really, MQB. I know you think anyone who doesn't agree with your paradigm brands them a liberal.

;-)

Actually, M.Fisher-

You've got being absurd down pat.

It's the "independent" thing that needs work.

Bev, see what happens to Obama's popularity when he moves a little closer to the center? He becomes more like Clinton every day...which is a good thing. Now he needs a conservative Congress to help keep him there.

Big B-1989609

Bev, see what happens to Obama's popularity when he moves a little closer to the center? He becomes more like Clinton every day...which is a good thing. Now he needs a conservative Congress to help keep him there.

Call it what what you want. It's true enough Independents are a determining factor. But what you fail to realize is the President isn't shifting . All of his accomplishments, with the exception of the compromise (hostage taking )have been progressive. The public is perking up to the GOP/TEA BAGGER plots and are sick of their obstruction and hate undeniably.

See the latest Gallup poll analysis as well as Bloombergs and AARP polls.

Bev in Chicago, Obie will do anything to preserve his image. If shifting to the center is required, he'll do it. After all, he is an opportunist without any executive ability. And no Bev, he hasn't accomplished much in his administration. HC? For now......jobs? Not a one. Economy? He's lowered expectations. Deficit? Raised it considerability.

Now, cut and paste your comments. And please, comment on this new Tea Bagger party....I don;t seem to recall any official party other than the Dems and GOP.

He is shifting. He flip flopped on the tax cut extension. The extreme left of his (your) own party was extremely upset with him. I heard (can't confirm) that Soros, himself, was moved to speak ill of Obama.

It's OK Beverly, you can disagree with him and still vote for him. He is human and therefore is capable of making mistakes.

Contrary to the right-wing "painting" of President Obama as a far left, socialist, communist, fascist, elitist, liberal dictator from Kenya, he has always been a pragmatist seeking the best solutions from both sides. And he is like many of us, a Heinz 57 variety of ideology, neither all left or all right. He is left of center on social and civil rights issues, on safety net programs, on helping the poor and middle class; he is center right on fiscal responsibility (he did not plan to do a stimulus or bailout of banks or auto--that was dictated by the financial collapse). As for the flip flop on the tax cuts, well, he outmaneuvered the GOPers--they held the Senate hostage in the lame duck, why waste time fighting over 2% when compromise would shove this issue off the table and allow the most legislation productive lame duck in 40 years.

Jody;

And do not forget that major companies had record years in 2010. Just saw a flash on MSNBC that companies are hording 2 trillion dollars that would create 25 Million jobs at $40,000 per. In that several major companies are going to be hiring in 2011. Looks like what CBPP and others have said, the job market is going to improve. Now only time will tell, but there is an indication that we may be slowly coming out of this. Confidence still appears to be an issue but several CEO'S are now rethinking this. Manufacturing was up for the 17th month and so is construction.

safecracker and Big B-1989609

You 2 wouldn't know an accomplishment even if it bites you in @sses.

Bev in Chicago, Obie will do anything to preserve his image. If shifting to the center is required, he'll do it. After all, he is an opportunist without any executive ability. And no Bev, he hasn't accomplished much in his administration. HC? For now......jobs? Not a one. Economy? He's lowered expectations. Deficit? Raised it considerability.

Now, cut and paste your comments. And please, comment on this new Tea Bagger party....I don;t seem to recall any official party other than the Dems and GOP.

safecracker

I wrote Gop/teabagger Party not tea bagger party.

This is for you

Michelle Bachmann: Tea Party And GOP Are 'Merging'

"It's really merging into one single, solitary unit," Bachmann replied. "They have unified

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/08/michelle-bachmann-tea-par_n_530800.html

Now this circus is in Congress.

Congress Now Has a 'Tea Party Caucus'

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/20/congress-now-has-a-tea-party-caucus/

Big B: see what happens to Obama's popularity when he moves a little closer to the center

The reason Obama looks like he is in the center is that the Republicans/Tea Party?Conservatives have moved off the grid to the right...

Why thank you for your cut & paste Bev. I believe you are incorrect in your assumption. The tea party is a movement, not a political party. If there is a conservative leaning to the movement, it is made up on people from both the GOP & Dem associations who are tired of the current elitist movement in gov. along with the policies of the current administration. Look to the recent election to see the change in seats from elitist to realist.

If there is a TP caucus, why not have a discussion group of like beliefs? We have a Dem caucus, a black caucus, a GOP caucus, that also share their thoughts. Should we also critize these groups as you critize the TP? Or, if any group does not agree with your value principals, then they should not be allowed?

"Cut & Paste here"

Oh my - one reason the poll numbers were high is the people didn't have to see this Obama on tv every day and listen to the constant stream of lying rhetoric. What a refreshing break from having to see the Anointed One every day - as well as the First Family and First Dog. No chills running up and down legs makes you forget how annoying it is to listen to his reversals of position and community-organizing mentality.

Judy: you ought to get some help with all that hate you are toting around. It can't be healthy for you. You might start by turning off Fox "News" and reading a book.

Beverly is correct. The tea party is now a part of the republican party. Hell, they even have a caucus, I guess that makes them legit. Simple fact but true. We only have the three parties. Democrats, Republican and Independents so they have to belong to one of them. Nice try at spinning but you failed again.

Good Morning Nash!

Good to see you back (you were missed) hope you had some 'rockin' holidays!

*HUGS*

Thanks Feisty . . . good to see you too! :o)

hi Nashville_fan good to see you back. Happy New Year

" Darrell Issa has positioned himself to be the watchdog on Capitol Hill when it comes to the Obama administration. But can you be both a watchdog and seemingly in bed with K Street and the business community?" - First Read

The answer is no. See the subprime crisis and Wall Street meltdown for further references. Kind of like letting the lawmakers from the states that profit from oil money write oil drilling regulations . . . that worked out well. Not.

Furthermore, Darrel Issa makes the Gop/Tea Bags look even less cooperative and fiscally conservative.

"Question for Chief Justice John Roberts: Is he engaging in what appears to be a somewhat partisan event in swearing in John Boehner’s staff?" - First Read

Here's hoping that the Chief Justice goes with cue cards this time and doesn't rely on his memory . . . geez. To answer the question, Chief Justice Roberts has never been one to pretend to be impartial, he is doing the job he was hired to do, so why stop now? The corporate citizens of the United States say its okay, so its okay, okay?

Here's hoping America people will get the Discloure Act before it's to late.

Hi Nash:

Issa wants 280 congressional hearings. Goal, to slow down the government hoping that he will throw a monkey wrench into President Obama's plan. The agenda keeps on unfolding. So many dots to connect and they all lead to the same place. The demise of the Middle Class as we know it, and the loss of rights and political freedoms.

The republican/tea party complain about the Individual Insurance Mandate but forget to tell the American people that for 30 years this was a position supported by the republicans. It was championed by the Heritage Foundation, is was in Doles 1996 campaign, Nixon talked about it in the 70's and GHW bush kept it alive in the 80's. The "Insurance Mandate" was supported by the likes of John McCain, Mitt Romney, Chuck Grassley, Bob Bennett, Tommy Thompson, Lindsay Graham and a bevy of others.

This provison was added to the HCR bill by the republicans to make sure Insurance Companies got their pay day with a promise of 30 Million new customers. Again, one of the trade offs the democrats made to get HCR passed.

Hi Navy . . . the irony of Republicans demonizing their own policies to gain political advantage is yet another symptom of an uninformed electorate.

They keep moving the goal posts to make sure that only those who pay to play score.

Nash;

Kinda reminds me of the old baseball story where when the visting team was up to bat, they moved the fences back. When the home team was up, they moved the fences in. Saw that story in Copperstown many years ago.

The lies and spins are thick so early.

Happy New Year to you too Bev!

The lies are thick so early in the day Navy. And have you spun some?

Happy New Year, Nash--hope you & the family had a great holiday season.

Rep. Issa asking industry to select the targets it wants him to go after is kind of like asking the fox which hen house it wants to start raiding. At least he isn't hiding who his masters are.

That last line is so true. We missed those excellent debate and rebuttal skills, Nashville.

Nice try SC, that the best you got. I noticed you did not dispute the facts, again. Have a good day.

Steeler Fan, asking industry about the impact of regulations is merely gathering information. There is no question that some regulations are necessary, but some are merely onerous, if not downright ridiculous.

Give you an example- ten years ago, my sister-in-law opened a coffee and muffin shop in the train station near her home. She got up at three a.m. To start the coffee and bake the muffins, has a pretty good, steady clientele. So, she got ambitious, and started selling sandwiches at lunch time, for which she needed to hire a helper.

It did not take too long to discover that she did not have the kind of lunch trade she needed to make that part of the business worthwhile, so she cut it off, meaning she had to let go of the helper.

Who called OSHA.

Now, all this girl was doing was handing wrapped sandwiches and cans of soda or bottles of iced tea or hot coffee or tea to customers. She was not involved in making any of the items, or even pouring the drinks. So, we wondered, what the heck could OSHA possibly find as a violation.

She got a $5000 fine for not labeling the dish detergent hazardous to ingest. I am not kidding.

Her morning business is quite brisk, and her sisters are getting really sick of having to help her with it, but she swears she will shut down rather than hire anyone ever again, which, by the way, I find pretty foolish.

Then again, so is the requirement that dish detergent, which is labeled dish detergent, be labeled 'not for consumption'.

Those are the kind of ridiculous regulations that prevent small businesses from hiring. Larger companies are pretty big sticklers for conforming to these things, as you never know when a disgruntled employee will make a baseless complaint. There is no downside for them, but it sure costs to have to comply.

So, why not look into the situation, and out if there are mutually agreeable solutions?

Thanks for the nice welcome Steeler_fan and Jody . . . I missed you all too . . . took the President's lead and chilled a bit . . . I highly recommend it! :o)

No Joe---if I thought Rep. Issa was engaging in neutral fact-finding and would offer a forum to any side in the interest of compromise, I would agree with you. I just don't trust him enough to believe he is motivated by anything other than a desire to demonize President obama. I hope I am proven to be wrong.

I am sorry to hear of your sister-in-law's experience---regulations are so daunting to small businesses. I think we could all agree that it would be a good goal to for both parties to work together to make it easier to hire people and operate a small business. I'm not optimistic about that either but will hope!

A one time minor OSHA violationis followed by a waring letter. Unless the worker ingested the product and was harmed no penalty would be enforced unless the operator is found to be continuously negligent.

There is no doubt that there are a bevy of stupid regulations and they should be cleaned out. It cost taxpayers money to enforce some of these dumb rules. But, we cannot have a country of no regulations and leave it up to the Wall Street and Big Business to do what is right and safe. That will never work, so the answer has to be in the middle somewhere and that is where dems and reps need to go. Just get is done. Same thing with government waste and redundant programs and programs that are no longer working. Get rid of them too. I think we all agree on that for a starter.

I knew I could count on you for a senseless "Chicago Corrupt Politics" rant.

no joe, no bo, nj

Are you guys really so naive that you did not know that Daley had to be promised SOMETHING in exchange for not running for re election so the path would be clear for Rahm Emmanuel? Really?

The average ten year old knew something was up with that.

There you go speculating again. Rahm is not the only candidate running to replace Da Mayor.

DaNoid;

Typical response.

I think you have the wrong Daley. Bill Daley was not the mayor of Chicago.

no joe, no bo, nj

Are you guys really so naive that you did not know that Daley had to be promised SOMETHING in exchange for not running for re election so the path would be clear for Rahm Emmanuel? Really?

The average ten year old knew something was up with that.

NO, No Jo Not this time, Mayor Daleys Wife Maggie Does not have much time left, God Forbid, Richie only want to ride off into the sunset and be with his Wife, kids and grand children.

To be honest i thought Bill Daley should have been chief of staff in the first place. he has more experince than rahm, and is not a hot head. very quite leader.

No Jo what Funny about the mayors race is that Carol Braun has been picked to be the black candidate to unify the black vote, the only problem with that is, in chicago, No one really likes Carol Braun including esspecially black folks, she went in to hiding after she lost her senate seat and now she thinks she is electable, right.

last week west side rep Danny Davis (former candidate) told former president clinton that he should stay out of the race and not come to chicago and campaign with rahm, he said and i quote, he interference in the race may or will fracture or break his support with the black community, No Jo i'm so sick of old has been black folk politicans running for office as if this were the 50s, back then it was them or us, Now its the best candidate, I was not a fan of rahm, but him or gary chico will be the next mayor, i hope its chico he will be the first hispainc mayor of chicago and close alley to the Daley machine.

Stay with me, people-

Bill Daley is the BROTHER of the mayor.

See the connection?

Come on, you can do it. Pretend Obama is a republican. NOW do you see the connection?

I do.

No Jo,

We see the connection, what did you say when Bill Daley was sec of commerce for bill clinton. we don't have to pretend Obama is a republican, the Daley name is enough. its funny that the daley name sends shivers up consertives spines.

Who cares if a deal was made or which party made it?

no joe, no bo, nj

"Are you guys really so naive that you did not know that Daley had to be promised SOMETHING in exchange for not running for re election so the path would be clear for Rahm Emmanuel? Really?"

Sooo..... then, you were there? How did that converstation unfold, anyway? And thanks for sharing. None of the rest of us could be there.

No Joe, pay attention, you've mixed up the brothers. This isn't Mayor Daley. As for staying with you while you try to explain your first remark when you realized you had the wrong guy, no thanks, life is too short to be miserable.

NoJo;

Nice try. Busted again. Sorry, no walking back false statements.

What about handing out tobacco lobbying money checks in the Congressional lobby? Any Quid Pro Quos there?

Nah, the tobacco companies were just being "friendly."

D-Man D-Man

Not the same Daley, dimwit!

Great retort to the dimwit.

Of course she didn't know Bill Daley was Commerce Secretary. She only know 2 things: Bash President Obama and fake information.

JoAnnaSmith1

It would also show that Obama isn't much for getting out of his comfort zone and being challenged by any kinds of new ideas or new approaches to problems.

Once a Chicago Community Organizer, always a Chicago Community Organizer.

JoAnna

Are you aware of coalitions; young old, left right, gays, and in the middle is what organizing is all about?

Furthermore, President Obama organized the hell out of Americans from Chicago all way to the White House.

In fact, he did so well the Koch Brother copied his organizing skills with fake grassroots. There's only one problem though. They could only get d baggers, who mostly 30% of the electorate and they are old, pale, and white who will fade away into the sunset to replaced by a smarter younger generation.

JAS1...

What exactly do you have against Community Organizers?....Do you not live in a Community?...bet you hate religious leaders, Girl Scout and Boy Scout leaders also!

chilled

JAS1...

What exactly do you have against Community Organizers?....Do you not live in a Community?...bet you hate religious leaders, Girl Scout and Boy Scout leaders also!

Yea chilled, Martin Luther King was a community organizer, organized the civil rights movement. joanna it took alot of guts for Obama to work in altgeld gardens, Joanna if you got lost there you would pee of you self with fear.

Jeff, JAS1 is doing the Silly Sarah method of 'speak'. Talking points strung together trying to make a coherent sentence. FAILED!

chilled

JAS1...

What exactly do you have against Community Organizers?....Do you not live in a Community?...bet you hate religious leaders, Girl Scout and Boy Scout leaders also!

Are you new to these posts, Chilled? She hates EVERYTHING .

Now, now, JAS1 does make a valid point...Community Organizers are horrible people and we must stop them!

Susan B. Anthony - Who the hell did she think she was? I mean, giving women the right to vote? The nerve!

Samuel Gompers, Eugene Debs, Cesar Chavez, "Mother" Jones - Who is anyone to think that workers should have rights? Slaves to the almighty corporation...that's what workers should be!

Lech Walesa - He founded Solidarity in Poland and fought Communism when he should have known his role and shut is mouth.

Damn all these Community Organizers!

When found to be wrong, when President Obama succeeds, and everything else conservatives have tried fails, bring out the "community organizer" or "telepromter" attacks--they make so much sense to conservatives. A mayor is a community organizer so that makes Sarah Palin, former mayor of Wasilla a community organizer--how about that.

Yea chilled, Martin Luther King was a community organizer

So was Al Capone.

DaNoid,

thank you for producing a smile. I really liked that post.

JoAnnaSmith1

Yea chilled, Martin Luther King was a community organizer

So was Al Capone

Joanna you have insulted, belittled and talked sh*t about the president. but to compaire Martin Luther King to Al Capone, i hope god does strick you down.

Martin Luther King, a man of god who gave his life for a movement that changed america, he won the noble peace price for his NON violence stance in the face of the Kaln. he was killed at 39 years young and never had the chance to see his 4 children grown up.

I hope god strickes you down for that.

So, poor JoAnna, it is clear that you did not learn from the smack down you got on your disgraceful affirmative action diatribe. Shame on you. Every time you post something like this, we find out exactly what your problem is with President Obama.

Don't worry JoAnna, I have a premonition, first read will be running a Palin story shortly and all of the nobles, on this blog, will be true to everything they have just hoped for you, right Jeff? I have a feeling not one of them will have a bad thing to say about her, after all she is a COMMUNITY ORGANIZER... And none of you have anything against COMMUNITY ORGANIZERS... (eyes rolling)...

"Live by the words you preach"..

I hope god strickes you down for that.

JoAnnaSmith1

Yea chilled, Martin Luther King was a community organizer

So was Al Capone.

So are a lot of preists, rabbis and other clergy. Give yourself the rest of the day off, Smiff. I think there are some puppies that need to be kicked.

E.M Clampett, and what an accurate nom du plume! No, we don't have problems with community organizers, but stupid people who make their livings as grifters disturb us.

Jeff - Glad you showed up. Here, I have something I want you to read about your wonderful state:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-03/illinois-must-plug-13-billion-deficit-in-days-that-took-years-to-produce.html

Seems Illinois is even worse off financially than California! Can you believe it?

The voters of California, New York, and Illinois decided during the last election that, "Yes things are bad, very bad in our states, but golly gee, if we just re-elect more Democrats and give them enough time, they'll solve all our problems!!".

Michigan on the other hand got a clue and voted in some Republicans.

America is watching (Illinois) Jeff. They want to see if what happens in Illinois is what happened in Greece.

Don't worry JoAnna, I have a premonition, first read will be running a Palin story shortly

I'm surprised we haven't seen a Christine O'Donnell story. You know, where she used $0.25 of her campaign money to put in a parking meter while she was picking up her dry cleaning.

Ellie Mae Clampett

i could give less than 2 craps about sarah, Joanna thinks is funny to compaire Martin Luther King to Al Capone. a man who murdered, to a man of peace. a murder to a man of god, A murder who killed for profit, to a man who gave his life for a cause that changes america, Lets remember we don't have a national Holiday for al capone.

i do hope god strickes her down for that comment. when she get up and patches the lighten strick to her ass maybe she will never do that again.

Jeff calm down. You're scaring the children.

Hey newday, you should probably learn to spell before calling anyone else stupid...

And, please tell me what was wrong with my post?

What's the matter jeff, you can "dish it out" but you can't "take it".. Oh I get it, MLK is the only community organizer that should ever matter in this world, right... MLK is not the only community organizer to die or be murdered for fighting for their beliefs and sadly, he will probably not be the last.

Joanna,

yes i know who bad it is in Illinois i don't need a graph or a link to tell me that, but what illinois does have is the lowest income tax rates in the country. income tax has not been raised in 10 years. a 2% increase over the next 4 years will clear up our mess, even with that increase illinois will still have one of the lowest income tax rates and after the 4 years the rate will go back down. yes it bothers me, but i know as long as the republican Bill Brady did not get in all will be worked out, as i said yesterday, our problem are from republican now in jail George Ryan. just think a republican lawmaker leaving office with deficets, sound like another george.

Really, Ellie? Comparing the work that Dr. King did to Palin? That is pretty sad.

Good Joanna

Tell them to get away from you, the lighten bolt is on its way. i hope you have a big butt, your going to need it.

And Jeff, that wasn't a comparison of Capone to King. I was alluding to the fact that some Community Organizers haven't been the best people in the world, and certainly were popular (as Capone was in Chicago) but may not be the best people to lead a country. It's unfortunate that subtlety eluded you.

On second thought Ellie, having just read your complete response to Jeff, I add my "shame on you " to you as well. What is it with the right wing that they want to minimize the work that Dr. King did? The man DIED. And the work he did changed America forever. Palin is not fit to be mentioned in the same sentence as Dr. King. And for you to defend JoAnna on this tells us exactly who and what YOU are.

Jeff: I completely understand why you are bothered by what was said, but you are talking to people who are unable to comprehend why it was so reprehensible. They both owe you an apology, but you are not going to get one.

Ellie Mae Clampett

when it comes to making fun at the expence of Martin Luther King, No I'm not going to take that, yes i can dish it with the best. play with who ever but leave him alone.

Martin Luther King came along and saved america at a time when it could have been all out race war or peace using non violence. the civil rights movement made it possible for guys like me who are almost 50 to not sit at the back of the american bus of sucess.

It's unfortunate that subtlety eluded you.

NOW that's hysterical - the large mouth a@@ claiming to be of all things...subtle!!! LMFAO!

She's shown her hand as a full blown racist and is now trying to crab walk her comments back YET AGAIN!

I agree with NDD - apology is a foreign concept to right wing nit wits!

Jeff - yes i know who bad it is in Illinois i don't need a graph or a link to tell me that, but what illinois does have is the lowest income tax rates in the country. income tax has not been raised in 10 years. a 2% increase over the next 4 years will clear up our mess,

States with no income tax: Washington, Nevada, Wyoming, Texas, South Dakota, and Florida.

States with tax on interest and dividend income only: Tennessee and New Hampshire.

All things being equal, raising taxes would cure all the governments problems. But all things are not equal, and there are consequences for such things. Businesses are moving out of Illinois, California, and New York at an alarming rate. And the people are moving with them, as seen by the recent losses of House representatives in each of those states. Raising taxes will cause that rate of emigration to continue for those states, which in turn reduces the tax base, and reduces the tax revenues.

You see where this is going, correct Jeff?

I think the reference should have been to Martin Kuther King Junior.

I see Lucy and Ethel have shown up. Don't read their posts, but I bet they say something like "WAAAAAAAAAAAA".

Get on the same page newday... I, in no way, shape or form compared Palin to MLK..

Feisty, isn't it sad to realize that the only comeback that poor JoAnna has to us is some childish taunt? Really, JoAnna...that is the best you can do?

Ellie: The post you responded to was about Dr. King. You brought up Palin. Perhaps YOU are the one that should catch up.

Da Noid, all the people you brought up have actually accomplished something because they did it out of genuine interest for the betterment of their communities. Then, there is the other one, the one who used it as a practice arena for honing his persuasion tactics and the visibility as a springboard to get into politics. The others had the character, intelligence and compassion to give to the communities, this one only has the over-sized ego.

Perhaps you should take some reading comprehension courses? Where did I compare Palin to MLK??? I only made the comparison of the fact that both are community organizers.

In my first post, I was pointing out the hypocrisy aimed at JoAnna.. She, in no way, diminished the fact that MLK Jr (for you saltgrass) was a community organizer only that there were other community organizers who were not as eloquent as MLK.. She did not say one thing about the work MLK did or accomplished.

My second post was simply pointing out your misspelled word(s) and to let jeff know that MLK Jr is not the only "community organizer" to die or be murdered for their beliefs. That, in no way, diminishes anything MLK Jr did for this country. I just wanted to make it clear that he was not the only martyr we have ever had...

Go back to sleep, for tomorrow, when you arise, there will be a new day dawning...

Good try walking that back, Ellie, but it won't wash. It is clear what you were conflating. It is also clear and especially since you still try to defend poor JoAnna, who is a step below Palin in insight, what you are. Good to know that you have enough intelligence to TRY to disown it. But you can't.

I'm surprised you didn't accuse me of being a, what's that favorite liberal phrase, oh yeah an "old white racist". Given the time, I'm sure you could twist it in there somehow!!!

Don't worry newday, I hear they're coming out with a new pill to help with your affliction.. Just hold on a little longer there, honey!!! I just wish they would quit putting mixed nuts in the fruit cakes!!!

My goodness, Ellie: I seem to have struck a nerve for you are becoming increasingly frantic. You cannot make yourself right about this, but it is good to know that you are feeling shame.

The only thing racist and bigoted statements made by EMC and JS1 do it negate anything they may have to say. Makes no difference if you have a valid point or not after that, it all becomes tainted. Once you ring the bell you cannot go back and unring it. This I was misunderstood routine is running thin. It was tried on the Affirmative Action thread and it had no legs there and none here. You cannot pass it off as cute or trying to make another point. It is what it is and exposes those people that continue to do this here as racist and bigots and we have no room for people like that in this country anymore. They become part of the problem and never part of any solution.

Sorry Navy, But I need to ask you where exactly did I post anything close to "racist or bigoted" in any of my posts? If you're going to spew your vomit at me and about me, you better back it up... So please, by all means, copy and past any of my posts and prove where I said anything racist or bigoted! And you don't need to stay within this vine, spread out buddy.. Go back through my history on everything I have ever posted.

The same goes for you newday.. Have at it..

BTW, I never feel shame for what I say on this vine or any other vine I post to. I don't lie or twist other peoples posts around to fit my own agenda.

Boy, Ellie, you are wound tightly aren't you? Do you agree with poor JS1 that a proper comparison to the work that Dr. King did as a community organizer is to Al Capone? But, aside from that, no matter where you post, you simply are not that interesting.

JoAnnaSmith1

Yea chilled, Martin Luther King was a community organizer

So was Al Capone.

this is was how all this got started, Joanna, the trouble maker.

NoJo caught again??

Yup Jody, that brain comparison made me LOL last evening. I thought about Christine O'Donnell, and the mouse brain business. The study was quite amusing and sad at the same time, that folks can live their entire life in fear without ever embracing or learning anything.

Navy: no jo is having a REALLY bad week.

Navy: no jo is having a REALLY bad week.

BOY! You can say that again... lmao!

And the other dimwit is not faring much better!

They are both on a run! And not a good one at that.

Any time I have plumbing problems, it is a bad week. I am pretty sure most people feel that way.

Oh, wait- that wasn't what you meant, was it?

You actually think that the fifth grade bullying, and new day's sophistry, have ruined my week?

A new republican congress gets sworn in this week, with plans to cut a hundred billion of new spending. They will vote to repeal Obamacare, investigate Fannie and Freddie, and curb an overreaching federal government.

I am having an excellent week, all things considered.

Then again, I am not a liberal. It is they who are having the bad week. Will continue for some time, too.

Happy New Year, Jody. So the Republicans will hold a vote in the House on a bill to repeal HCR. Assuming it passes, it goes to the Senate and then what? How does it get to the floor of the Senate?

If the Republicans choose to waste their leadership/governing opportunities with publicity stunts that totally lack substance, that is their choice. I wonder if this is the kind of problem solving that those who voted for them expected.

No, NJ, we are referring to your inability to post proper cites when asked, and your absolute inability to be able to know fact from rumor. One would think you would be embarrassed. Or own up to the misinformation in an honest way.

But, that would require honesty and humility right? Apparently not a part of your moral code.

NDD;

Shame is not in their vocab.

More name calling. Yep. I should get right off this site. No point in posting if I cannot be one of the cool kids' clique.

Here is the problem: I got out the fifth grade some time ago, so I am somewhat less than intimidated by the tactics utilized to make those with opinions contrary to the majority on this board feel unwelcome.

You are free to continue to try, though.

Interesting how when NJNB gets cornered by facts or quotes rumors or chooses the wrong Daley, suddenly there's some problem at home or ?? that is to blame--today, it's the plumbing.

Or here is something you might try NJ: "I am wrong about what I posted. You are correct to call me on it."

No Joe, it has nothing to do with having a different opinion--it is that you and JS1 do not express anything except an oversized hatred of President Obama and all things liberal. Everyday you write nothing but the same anti-Obama nonsense. You and JS1 cannot accept when you are proven wrong even when the FR hosts like Mark or Domenico point out your errors; you do not post or quote facts, you run with rumors ($200 million a day for the Asian trip) then try to justify it by spinning and explaining that in England a tabloid is different than what it is here and there just must be some truth to it; you accuse the Obama administration of bribing Mayor Daley not to run so Rahm could maybe win when it isn't even the same guy and then you try to make it appear you knew all along it wasn't the same guy. It isn't the differing views. I read Frank Grimes, and other thoughtful conservative posts and enjoy them, even when I disagree.

Any time I have plumbing problems,

May I suggest more fiber in your diet?

From the sound of you this week it might alleviate some of the pressure!

"May I suggest more fiber in your diet?"

THen, she could sit on the thunddr-mug, and sing "Here I sit, in my flannel nightie- trying to make another Rightie"

I don't care what side of the aisle you are on, drive by, that was really funny!

Funny, how conservatives ignore the fact that the first things done in 2009 related to the economy and the great recession. If the stimulus didn't work, why are their pictures and clips of republicans touting how many jobs the money given their state created, why are their pictures of them with giant checks and at work sites? Presidents, representatives and senators must be able to multi-task.

Funny how the Country decided in Nov that the Spend, Spend, Spend "Government Uber Alles" Policies of the Obama Admin you Socialist Libtards Cling too Have NOT Worked and Will NOT Work and were Historically Rejected all the way down to 15 state houses flipping to Repubs....

There are NINE States out there Teetering over the Financial Abyss and Like California everyone of them have been Run from the top down By Liberal Democrats for a least a Decade....They are all Microcosm's of FAILED Liberal Social and Economic Policies and Union Waste and Excess....

This is the path you would like the rest of the Nation to Follow?????......OH Hell NO

I would sooner have a civil war...

Greatkuzoo. Were you equally upset about the massive unfunded spending by Bush and the GOP? They doubled the national debt and created in 8 years about a million jobs. The problem with all that GOP unfunded spending is this: when the country faces a crisis such as a near depression, the debt hampers the ability of Government to respond. Texas is in a huge financial crisis, as are other red states--they have republican Governors--in case you didn't notice, the country is just pulling out of the worst economic recession in nearly 80 years, that Greatkuzoo, means every state regardless of who is running it lost millions and millions of state revenues because of unemployment. Connect the dots--fewer jobs, fewer tax revenues, less state money, more layoffs causing more unemployment, less state money, more layoffs and it is a never-ending downward spiral (and it has nothing to do with party affiliation).

greatkuzoo:There are NINE States out there Teetering over the Financial Abyss and Like California everyone of them have been Run from the top down By Liberal Democrats for a least a Decade....They are all Microcosm's of FAILED Liberal Social and Economic Policies and Union Waste and Excess....

You mean like that total liberal Democrat Arnold Schwartzenegger? Or how about that really super liberal Jan Brewer (AZ Governor) or her ultra liberal state house and senate? Yep, AZ has been run so effectively by those really liberal REPUBLICANS that they have to partially close down the Grand Canyon (which is revenue producing) because they are so economically in the hole. But hey, that "NO NEW TAXES EVER" idea seems to really be working well for the state of AZ....which is exactly why I got the hell out of there. That state is definitely on the precipice of the abyss and it's totally run by Republicans (with the exception of the awesome period of time Napolitano ran things)

Once a dismissive Lib, always a dismissive Lib.

I have no political offiliation with a party. It is common sense business principals I am refering to. The current administration's policies are not beneficial to the economic recovery. It seems as though too many of your type dont pay attension to history and what works vs. what doesnt. Its not my choice to have democratic ideals be counterproductive to national growth. Any politician who is terrible at providing an environment that allows business growth (i.e. job creation) does not belong in politics. The government's roll is not to consume as much fiscal resource as possible, which has become the goal. Their roll is to provide national security and regulate fraud/abuse, which is most rampent in government. Both sides are guilty of this. Apologies if you are ga-ga over Obama - I could care less who it is, or what party. If your policies detract from growth and security - drag.

Facts are facts, well done Steven.

Steven,

Nice job with the facts but surely you know most Republicans don't let THOSE pesky things deter them from their ill-informed rants, now don't you? (You know, like saying CA is in trouble because of its' Democratic leader...uh, where the [newly departed] Governor is and always has been Republican)

Wish I could help . . . I stopped watching Morning Joe-ke . . . to much BS to process on an empty stomach! :o)

No answer from me other than my own opinion. I used to enjoy the show even when I disagreed with some of it. It used to be pleasant discussion with disagreement but respectful. I rarely watch it now mostly because Joe has become the morning bully and Mika simply smiles and nodds her head or looks at Joe; when Mike or Willey or a guest tries to make a valid point or counterpoint, the bully Joe bullies and Mika smiles. The show it too long. This morning I started to watch the last hour when Joe decided to attack public employee unions as the evil groups who ruined the economy and bankrupt state and city government--you know, those fire fighters and police officers who put their lives on the line everyday, the teachers who educate our children, it is all their fault. I turned off the TV because the mentality of demonizing firefighters, police officers and teachers was ruining my morning coffee.

Whoa: janet, that post was just a little worrisome, and honestly....there was no need to shout! Reduce your font size, what you said was not important nor of any interest whatsoever.

Not important or of interest???? Sorry about the font size I did not intend that - it just happened. But the take over of the USA by the oligarchies is not important and of no interest?????? Where do you come off saying something that dumb? We have been taken over by econmic terroists and you find that not important or of any interest?? Give me a break!

Rejoin us in the real world, won't you Janet?

Janet is the one in the "real world", this country is run by the wealthy to protect the wealthy's wealth and make them wealthier, get it? The facts are quite clear if people would stop living in denial, stupidity whatever the case may be, I think of our country as more closely resembling a Banana Republic as anything which is basically the same thing Janet is saying, one thing for sure it is no longer a Republic Democracy, the people are not represented in D.C. anyone that buys into that farce needs to take a good look at the facts, until more people come to grips with reality like Janet nothing can change.

W.bush: Janet uses Revelations as fact. That is not real nor of this world. It is that I am referring to. People who use apocalyptic verse to make a point are worrisome.

W bush;

I hear you loud and clear.

I agree. The boring batter between the right and left is old and changes no ones mind. It just creates more divisivness and we sure do not need that. We need to take care of the greed gone a muk in this country and we need to bring good paying jobs back on the States side. We need to put regulations and oversight on Wall Street and their bankers and we need to take our government back from oligarchies who control both parties. Until we do this we cannot stop the utter demise of this country.

"The middle of the road is all of the usable surface. The extremes, right and left, are in the gutters." -Dwight D. Eisenhower

Time for centrists to take away the wingnuts' toys and send them back to the nursery before they make a bigger mess of things.

Oblahblah would never do that. He thinks he is God.

After the failure of the current administration to do anything good for the country, The GOP was given a mandate to cut federal spending without loosing more jobs.

Paul. It was the previous administration that failed to do anything good for the country. Can you name the good the Bush and GOP did from 2001 through 2008?

You gotta be kidding!

The mandate was for the GOP/Tea Party/Conservatives to stimulate JOB CREATION! However, the advertised agenda of this group is counter to this mandate. It's agenda is that of continuing its campaigning and power-grabbing strategies. With Issa's planned agenda, the deficit will increase and deflect the attention of reducing the deficit and stimulating JOB CREATION!

The GOP/Tea Party/Conservatives agenda will continue its determination to create a HAVE and HAVE-NOT society with an autocratic government. The anchor was put in place with the 5-4 GOP/Tea Party/Conservatives controlled Supreme Court and its Citizens United decision which opened the door for the Chamber of Commerce to put in place its agenda and now, the institution of a GOP/Tea Party/Conservative one-person Budget Committee in the form of Czar Ryan. Let's not forget how the Chamber of Commerce spent millions of dollars to increase the GOP/Tea Party/Conservatives state governments - notice, as a result of the midterm election, 60% of the states have a GOP/Tea Party/Conservative governor!

The GOP/Tea Party/Conservatives will do NOTHING to reduce the deficit unless the reduction is placed on the backs of the working and middle class!

Jody,

Increased money and support to fight AIDS epidemic in Africa.