Great post Louis.

Don't forget the birthers who still won't believe their eyes. The state of hawaii reverse the law for the birther to see and now they put a sign with a caricature of President Obama without a turbin on with the title, “President or Jihad? Birth Certificate. Prove it. Wake Up America! Remember Ft. Hood.”

Now a birth certificate is equivalent to Jihad? What a bunch of hate filled "dopes of nope". The birthes are some scary people!!!

LouisJ -

Thanks for bringing that up!

Lawrence O'Donnell puts his 'money' where his 'mouth' is...

The Glen Beck's - Rush Limbaughs and the rest of the hate merchants, put their 'mouth' where the 'money' is!

Kiss and Tell

Forget what the republicans say in the 21^st century . The American people per House Minority Leader John Boehnor talks about his feelings, while puddling up(tissues please), he is not using all of his senses. It’s nerve-wracking!!! Also, Minority Leader John Boehnor wants the peoplt to use his mind's eye to fall back on 20^th century policies, Tax Cuts for the rich.

Discover how the times haven’t changed. The Koch brothers hate machine is up and ready in California to shape where and how you live. Review the event with intense scrutiny. The Koch-octpuses’ tennacles intened for tea baggers, the media, and journalist are absolutely toxic. The Koch-octpuses are major polluters of the air literally and figuratively. The Koch-octpuses are amoral.

When you hear an attack ad scrutinize it by goggling who are the sponsors. Pressure Congress to do something about Citzen United.

We don’t have to take a “vow of poverty‘ because the Koch Brothers are greedy and consumed with power.

Exclusive: Koch Industries Promises To Double Money Raised This Weekend, 40% Of Donors Will Be New

Last October, ThinkProgress helped break the story about the secretive twice annual meetings convened by Koch Industries owners Charles and David Koch. The meetings — which have been attended by top bankers, oil industry executives, two Supreme Court justices, Republican leaders, conservative fundraisers, and hate talkers like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck — have been forums for election-related coordination and political strategy. In addition to judges, “journalists”

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/01/27/koch-meeting-details/

Egypt

The Iran-contra affair v Egypt

There is no comparison as the righties want to portray with their Islamophobia.The President and secret of State, Hillary Clinton are striking the right Balance, the Al jererazz stremings shows Eyptians supporters chanting: “Mubarak, Mubarak, go, go, all Egyptians hate you!” and “Obama, Obama, stop the drama!”.

http://www.acybernews.com/egypt-revolution/

Why? because Egyptians perceive, imo, the actions taken by getting their and social networks back up as sign that President Obama supports democracy not dictatorship Tunisians overthrow forced their long-serving president to flee in January in the Middle East through people power. The Nobel laureate Mohamed ElBaradei is there to negotiate on behalf of the protesters.

That is what President Obama and SOS Hillary Clinton are advocating the power of the people; democracy.

In the hours before the internet was unplugged, activists used social media inside the country and relayed their messages using contacts in other countries [AFP]

http://english.aljazeera.net/photo_galleries/africa/2011125192646189116.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

The leaders of the U.S. exposed themselves to the possibility of blackmail by Iran or Israel. Third, the events suggest that the arms-for-hostage deal that in the twilight of the Reagan Presidency became known as the Iran-contra affair, instead of being an aberration, was in fact the re-emergence of a policy that began even before the Reagan-Bush Administration took office."

"A top aide to Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat has dropped a new clue about the original 'October Surprise' mystery of 1980: the name of the Republican operative who sought the Palestine Liberation Organization’s help to block President Jimmy Carter’s negotiations to free 52 Americans then being held hostage in Iran.

http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/coupreaganbush.htm

We do need an educated populace cause a change gonna come.

From over the weekend:

Very interesting...

Not only is Comcast dropping the NBC Peacock logo and replacing it with a 'logo' that resembles something a 1st grader could have concocted:

I'm pi$$ed because the peacock was around LONG before I was!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/27/nbc-universals-new-logo-d_n_815212.html

And then there's this:

MSNBC has shelved Ed Schultz' "Psycho Talk" segment, Schultz announced on his radio show Thursday.

The segment, a sort of cousin to Keith Olbermann's "Worst Persons In The World," features Schultz highlighting a statement or action he dubs "psycho talk" every night on his show. But a listener emailed in to Schult'z show and said that the segment seemed to have disappeared since Schultz' switch to 10 P.M. from his previous 6 P.M. slot. (Schultz' move was part of MSNBC's reshuffle in the wake of Olbermann's departure from the network.)

Schultz said that he missed the segment, but that "I work for somebody. I don't call all the shots."

He said that "the decision has been made that Psycho Talk' was better at six o'clock and not at 10 o'clock. Now look, there's probably people in positions that are a helluva lot smarter than I am and have decided that that's what the way it's going to be. So, that's what's happening."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/28/ed-schultz-psycho-talk-axed-msnbc_n_815317.html

Can't tell you how pleased I am to see censorship alive & kicking in 2011! *insert snark*

In the meantime, the right wing hate merchants are doubling down and thriving across the street!

Change is a comin alright - and so far it's NOT for the better!

If they are doing that to Psycho Talk as they did to Worst Persons, does that mean they are about to lose Ed too? I honestly believe that Olbermann and a couple of people may getting ready to run for some kind of office. Who knows.

Don't know when the TeaBaggers will wake up! ...they need to realize that they are bought and paid for by the Koch Brothers (Americans for Prosperity)....yep, the prosperity of the ultra rich. Always under the cover of 'The American People'.

That little meeting held in Southern California for the super rich conservatives to craft out the 'game plan' totally sponsored by the Koch Brothers, no cameras, and all contributors sworn to secrecy, Representative Cantor, et al!...Protestors were forbidden and pushed back (no Constitutional rights for them)!

Where are the jobs!

Actually, Feisty, I wondered why MSNBC allowed Ed Schultz to call that segment "Psycho Talk" even before the Olbermann departure. Things like that make it harder to claim the moral high ground and easier for your detractors to get a toe-hold on you. Schultz can cover the same ground without being inflammatory at that level. At least he has to try.

I don't like censorship, either, but I'm also not sure we should villify MSNBC quite yet. We need those voices right now, and only time will tell.

OK- where's all the ranters decrying the 'death of the first amendment' at the hands of the 'liberal medial'?

I don't like censorship, either, but I'm also not sure we should villify MSNBC quite yet. We need those voices right now, and only time will tell

Morning Anna Molly,

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not vilifying MSNBC (yet). Although, I am growing ever increasingly concerned about the decisions and changes that have been made so far....

Think about it... if MSNBC goes all 'conservative' then the puzzle is complete...

Feisty:

Good points, and remember what Keith did as well with his free clinics. I am also watching where MSNBC goes before I comment. Some of the changes so far are not good and I also am against censorship as well. People have a right to their opinions. We can ignore them or change the channel. Let the people speak as long as it is not promoting violence or hate, that I think crosses the line in my opinion.

@ Feisty ~

Of course, that's true. I've said that here myself. Maybe it would help me if you could tell me what other decisions and changes you're talking about. The prime time hosts, as far as I can tell, have pulled together. Rachel has not changed one iota so far, nor has Lawrence O'Donnell, except that he doesn't yell as much. That seems like a positive change. I suspect that Cenk Uygur would never have gotten Ed's old spot if the idea was to turn conservative, nor would they have shored up the prime time lineup by sending Ed to the 10 p.m. slot. They could have started running re-runs again, or even their celebrated prison shows. Both Cenk and Ed are further left than Olbermann -- about as far left as I am, actually. And as I understand it, the Olbermann deal was in the works months ago, maybe even as early as September, and wasn't specifically tied to Comcast. From what I read of the new CEO of NBC Universal, it seems like he might be open-minded. His job is to save the network, which is otherwise failing badly, and his political leanings, from what I can tell, are pretty centrist.

Jeez people, democracy does not exist here any longer you can call our government oligarchy, plutocracy, corporatism, banana republic, whatever. What you can't call it is a republic where democracy is the controlling factor. You can vote till your face turns blue, it means nothing when the two choices you have are a corporate controlled Democrat candidate and a corporate controlled Republican candidate. Change for the better can not come through our current political system, it is designed to maintain the status quo, that is a fact like it or not, time for something different.

@ Anna Molly:

I guess we're just going to have to wait and see what transpires.

I didn't have a problem with the Psycho Talk segment - I do have a PROBLEM with Ed being TOLD to stop it.

As for Keith, it looks like we're not going to know what really happened for quite some time - bottom line is he's gone!

Chilled,

That little meeting held in Southern California for the super rich conservatives to craft out the 'game plan' totally sponsored by the Koch Brothers, no cameras, and all contributors sworn to secrecy, Representative Cantor, et al!...Protestors were forbidden and pushed back (no Constitutional rights for them)!

Doesn't George Soros do the same thing on the left? I don't hear you complaining about that. I guess what is good for the goose, is NOT good for the gander.

Not to defend their motives, but if they rented the entire property, and they don't want intruders, and they pay for it all themselves, then that is their right as an American citizen. Isn't that what the 1st amendment allows--freedom of assembly?

Don't forget, Keith O pulled his "Worse Persons" segment and retooled it after the Stewart/Colbert DC rally; Keith put it back with the Not Really Worse Persons; then eliminated it completely after Tucson. Ed Schultz can still present his message without referring to it as Psycho Talk--he and his producers likely felt the impact of Tucson as well. I don't think it has anything to do with censorship but rather it is an attempt to "change their own tone"; it's a move toward more civility. Ed can still point out the comments of those without giving it a negative label however reasonable that label might be. So far, I have not seen any significant shift in the evening MSNBC lineup; they're still hitting the points and getting out the message but doing it without the labels.

I don't like the idea of eliminating the NBC peacock--that's just silly.

BigBear62

Doesn't George Soros do the same thing on the left? I don't hear you complaining about that. I guess what is good for the goose, is NOT good for the gander.

Not to defend their motives, but if they rented the entire property, and they don't want intruders, and they pay for it all themselves, then that is their right as an American citizen. Isn't that what the 1st amendment allows--freedom of assembly?

Look Crazy Bear

Yes they do have their rights under the 1st amendment.

But' the Koch's are anti-regulation, anti-government, low-tax for the rich

If the republicans are so into free speech and the Constitution, why did they take away voting rights for people in Washington D. C., Puerto Rico, Guam and American Samoa.

Those people pay taxes, serve in the military as well as shedding their blood and dying for America. Now that is taxation without representation"

One more thing, I've seen Soros on TV. I've never seen the Koch Brother's on TV. But I've seen their henchmen, Karl Rove, Justin Phillips, Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin, those 2 , btw, can't stay away from the cameras.

Anna Molly

Actually, Feisty, I wondered why MSNBC allowed Ed Schultz to call that segment "Psycho Talk" even before the Olbermann departure.

When Glenn Beck talks about shooting liberals in the head or murdering Nancy Pelosi, or when Sharron Angle talks about "2nd Amendment remedies" if the elections don't turn out the way teabaggers want them to, that IS psycho talk. And there's a steady supply of it coming from the far right that the public should be made aware of. Why shouldn't it be called what it is?

@Houston ~

No reason. I liked the segment, and unlike some here, I love Ed Schultz. But three weeks ago, we were all complaining about inflammatory rhetoric. Schultz can still call out "psycho talk" without having a segment that, by its its own label, labels people as psychos. That's all I'm saying.

Where does it ever end, Houston, if someone doesn't stop firing first?

"Not to defend their motives, but if they rented the entire property, and they don't want intruders, and they pay for it all themselves, then that is their right as an American citizen. Isn't that what the 1st amendment allows--freedom of assembly? "

You are very correct. BUT- doesn't it all seem a little 'suspect', nonetheless?

Thank you FR lefty liberals for collapsing my post. As I've said before, I consider it a badge of honor and proof that I nailed the point in my post. I only hope that the one that crossed the collapse threshhold was the Nasty Redhead who is always calling the people that flag a post "collapse cowards".

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By the way- I hardly ever agree with Joe, Albany, but- please don't collapse him. It ain't right.

Bev,

I won't change your screen name, since Our President has called for civility.

I will not defend the Koch Brother's motives, but unless that are committing treason, they have their right to freedom of speech.

As for the GOP Changing the rules of the House of Reps, well that is their choice. Those areas that you were talking about, well the people of those territories still get to vote, but their representative in Congress does NOT get to vote in a "Committee of the Whole". This rule only changed in 1992, when the Democrats starting losing members in the House, and it would in turn cut their losses in almost half.

They do in turn get to vote in committees and conference committees. And that is usually where the real work is done.

But you can read the information yourself.

In 1993, the 103rd Congress approved a rule change that allowed the four delegates and the resident commissioner to vote on the floor of the House, but only in the Committee of the Whole. However, if any measure passed or failed in the Committee of the Whole because of a delegate's vote, a second vote—excluding the delegates—would be taken. In other words, delegates were permitted to vote only if their votes had no effect on a measure's ultimate outcome. This change was denounced by Republicans (all five of the delegates either were Democrats or were allied with the Democrats at the time) as a case of partisanship;^{[citation needed]} the Democrats had lost a dozen house seats in the 1992 election, and this change effectively reduced the impact by half. In 1995, this rule change was reversed by the 104th Congress, stripping the delegates of even non-decisive votes. The reversal was in turn denounced by Democrats (all five of the Delegates either were Democrats or were allied with the Democrats at the time) as a case of partisanship;^{[citation needed]} the change was made after Republicans gained control of the House for the first time in 40 years. In January 2007, it was proposed by Democrats in the House that the 1993–1995 procedure be revived.^[2] Delegates had this right during the 110th and 111th Congresses.^[3] Republicans again objected, and when their party gained control of the House during the 112th Congress, the right of delegates to vote in committee of the whole was again removed.^[4][5]

Delegates still retain the right to vote in congressional committees and in conference committees (see House Rule III, 3[b]). Conference committees include representatives from both the House and Senate. These committees work to compromise and reconcile conflicts between House and Senate bills. Conferees often have great influence on the specifics of new federal laws.

And by the way, these are pretty much facts, not opinion:)

DBO,

It is not whether or not I agree with the Koch brothers, but whether or not they have a right to assemble, and have their right to speech.

As long as taxpayer money is not involved with the security, I am fine with all they want to do. It is suspect, but that is their choice. They may just be coming up with a new program and don't want the Dems to use it before they get a chance to use it.

But it really doesn't matter which side of the aisle you are on, does it, an elected person is serving their corporate buddies.

Is the site acting oddly for anyone other than me today?

If I form a secret society, have closed meetings, swear people to silence and our main purpose is to impact public policy and the duly elected government of the United States that's UnAmerican. It's WRONG.

I don't think ANYONE should have the right to conduct secret meetings that may, ultimately, affect me and my family and my country. NO ONE!

What is happening to America? Have you all lost your minds?

If someone has to have a meeting behind closed doors, no press, everyone sworn to secrecy, what does that sound like? It's organized crime! I think it's a violation of the RICO Act and should be duly investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

I'm not kidding, this is a RICO violation. This is what mobsters do EVERY DAY.

GEEEEEZUS folks, are we a nation of gangsters, that we allow secret societies to meet and plot the over-throw of our duly elected government?

This is insane.

If someone has to have a meeting behind closed doors, no press, everyone sworn to secrecy, what does that sound like?

Sounds lke the meetings the president held prior to HCR getting passed.

The ones that Bob Woodward sat in on?

His that the american way government,gets money from corporate buddies gives back in buy off. Then makes sure gets bonus with are money,off the people who do the real work us none. Martha Stewart went to jail for inside trading, when will they never. Banks , Government believe its all their money thats why theirs a rip of interest rate on all investment . ALL their faults for this big fat mess. we the people did nothing wrong we do not get to vote on what they want to do. said American people don,t under stand to high bethel, not for us. you. IN high school government class which his required says the people want a Democratic, not pure. would take to much time to vote and to costly all thats a lie. look at this mess now. we need real change now, not in 5-10 years.

US Navy

Great food for thought. Like Feisty said look out for the Fourth Estate lest we will be an oligarchy if we don't take action.

We ned to scrutinize, and pressure Congress about the Disclosure Law”.

Elections paid for by Special Interest Groups”namely the Koch Brothers since they fund mostly all right wing elections, we will be living under the Koch Brothers oligarchy.

I have a quote too.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
— Abraham Lincoln

We Americans need not take a vow of poverty to the Kochs.

Navy,

Whatever is begun in anger ends in shame. - Benjamin Franklin

Brilliantly stated, USN. The Koch brothers and other wealthy Conservative elites are working overtime to consolidate their power and fundamentally change the America that's existed in the past. The priorities of the GOPTP not only in Washington but in the state capitals have been far different since legislatures all around the country reconvened in January. Suddenly things that are "related to" jobs are far more important than actually getting our economy moving again. Things like expanded gun rights, cutting funding for education and the safety net, and gutting what's left of the regulatory structure.

It isn't that Conservatives learned nothing from crashing the world economy in 2007...they've learned to hide their intentions better and use different language to describe their program.

US Navy, informative post and great reminder as we watch the Egyptian crisis unfold. Egypt has concentration of wealth in a few, the poor are even poorer than they were 30 years ago. Sooner or later, the population revolts. In the U.S., we still have the power of the vote but for years we have seen the powerful monied interests, lobbyists, having more and more influence on politicians who rely on those monied interests to win elections. Throw in Citizens United and the odds are stacked against the people hearing truth and candidates who are more supportive of the people's interests. The campaign voices on TV and radio, in the newspaper are the voices with the most money and that money is too often not reflective of their real agenda which is anything but pro-people.

Oligarchy? / Cronyism?

Yea, we are pretty much there. As you know, Wall Street supported Obama by a 4-1 in the 2008 election. They were well rewarded with the Obama bailouts and then got to write FinRef. They are doing great. Immelt / GE is Obama's new BFF. Obama kill sthe fossil fuel industry to GE's benefit with their nebulous wind mills, solar panels made in China, light bulbs, etc. Obama takes Immelt around selling GE jet engines to India, China, etc. I wonder who will get rich off the shiny new "electric" trains and "electric" infrastructure .......General "Electric"?

Privileged groups?

Who is more privileged than the unions that got all the bailouts, gets all government stimulus projects funded at "union" wages, made out like bandits during the Gulf spill.......

Now, although they represent just 6.9% of the workforce and have some of the best benefit packages in the country, receive 40% of all the Obamacare waivers?

The left demands that everyone is required to sign up for Obamacare - you have no freedom to not buy something you don't want, well, I guess unless you join a union and get a waiver. Obamacare doesn't apply then.

What is a better example US Navy?

America doesn't want cap and trade. Obama says there is more than one way to skin a cat and goes around the will of the people, the legislative process to do it anyway with his EPA.

On and on .........Yea, we are pretty much there.

Maybe a new term - Obamaligarchy?

Jeez people, democracy does not exist here any longer you can call our government oligarchy, plutocracy, corporatism, banana republic, whatever. What you can't call it is a republic where democracy is the controlling factor. You can vote till your face turns blue, it means nothing when the two choices you have are a corporate controlled Democrat candidate and a corporate controlled Republican candidate. Change for the better can not come through our current political system, it is designed to maintain the status quo, that is a fact like it or not, time for something different.

"Privileged groups?

Who is more privileged than the unions that got all the bailouts, gets all government stimulus projects funded at "union" wages, made out like bandits during the Gulf spill......."

Get a grip Bob, what about the banking and financial industry that got 3 trillion outright and continue getting a backdoor bailout from the fed's quanitive easing scam, you realize we are printing money and giving it to the banks and financial industry for near 0% interest don't you, I would say that's about as privileged as it gets dude, damn Bob what is wrong with someone making "union" wages? I guess you would rather have them work for nothing, that was already tried here once, it was outlawed, but apparently there are people who long for the "good ol days" right bob?

America doesn't want cap and trade. Obama says there is more than one way to skin a cat and goes around the will of the people, the legislative process to do it anyway with his EPA.

You meant "our" EPA didn't you Bob? I don't believe the President owns a government agency.

Maybe a new term - Obamaligarchy?

Nice that one is about as good as those Tea Partiers with the pictures of Obama in a Nazi uniform. You're not one of those Tea Party Memebers are you Bob? Hmmmm...

Oh look, bob's lying again.

This past spring, about two dozen bankers and hedge fund managers gathered at a New York City hotel to meet with a pair of Republican senators, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Texas' John Cornyn, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, left, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., are shown after the Senate Republicans' Policy Committee lunch on March 23, 2010.
(Bill Clark/Getty Images)
More PhotosAccording to media reports, the two powerful GOP leaders had come to let Wall Street know its help would be needed to win back control of the Senate in the upcoming midterm elections.

Apparently, Wall Street got the message.

An ABCNews.com/Center for Responsive Politics analysis of financial industry contributions to senatorial campaign fundraising arms and to candidates in a dozen key races revealed a distinct fiscal alliance between Wall Street and the Republicans.

During the first six months of the year, bankers, brokers and money managers -- individually and by way of Political Action Committees -- have contributed twice as much to GOP Senate candidates than to Democratic ones.

"This is an extension of a larger corporate trend that has become quite dramatic in the past few months," said Doug Weber, a senior researcher at the CRP.

So far this year, through June 30, roughly $7 million in campaign contributions have travelled from the pockets of financial industry members into the NRSC, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and to the candidates in pivotal Senate races in Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio and Pennsylvania. More than two-thirds of that cash went to Republicans.

Among the 10 individual Senatorial candidates who got the most cash from Wall Street, seven were Republicans.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wall-street-opens-wallet-republican-senate-candidates-upcoming/story?id=11359466

w bush,

Get a grip Bob?

Yea, get the number to a Sylvan Learning Center and work on your reading cmprehension. Wall Street was the first thing I mentioned. Yea, I know about all the money Obama is printing and where he dumps it - Wall Street.

So tell me w, why should unions be getting proportionally 7 TIMES the amount of waivers as private sector employees?

Or, if you want, tell us how Obamacare allows for everyone to keep their coverage, is affordable, how it is not a hardship - when 182 union benefits funds, one alone representing more than 135,000 union members, have received Obama waivers due to the fact that they can't afford it, it is a hardship, etc.?

How about a waiver for all Americans, we are all equal right?

Unless this an Obamaligarcy and union members are just more "equal" than the rest of us?

John,

Might want to get with w, he has a number for you.

I specifically mentioned the 2008 election, the last relevant set of numbers that relate to where are right now.

Yea, the Republicans lost out on the Wall Street money big time in the election and would like to improve on that......duh.

Yea, a lot of the people in the business world and Wall Street now realize this guy is a clueless ideologue and want to see improvement/different direction......duh.

BTW - Maybe you should get better at this stuff before calling people a liar.

devie,

cute little name.

get back to me when you have something worth responding to.

Still a lie of omission, bob. You fully meant to imply that Wall Street has the Democratic Party in their pockets with your comments. Two little problems with that;
--The margin was MUCH smaller than the 4 to 1 you claim. http://www.soxfirst.com/50226711/wall_street_backs_obama.php
--Wall Street more than made up for that by spending 2 to 1 on Republicans in the MOST RECENT campaign. You know, the one you say isn't relevant.

Deception is deception. Maybe you should stop getting caught at it on a regular basis.

I specifically state something, I clarify it, and you tell me what I meant to imply.

I realize that is the typical liberal SOP, but really John, how ignorant do have to be to argue it......

especially when your refutal reference is a UK article from JUNE 2008.....the same week Obama had just knocked off Hillary....

five months BEFORE THE ELECTION EVEN HAPPENED! You do not realize how ignorant that is?

Here is an actual number for you Goldman Sachs (ever heard of them John?) - Obama / $994,795; McCain / $230,095.

Have fun looking it all up. Pay special attention to the hedge fund buddies of Barrack.

Irregardless I don't care and don't feel like playing bounce the dumb hammer (tool) anymore over one line a post that wasn't even the point of the comment?

No, as long as you can declare victory in your attempt to use obsolete campaign finance data to "prove" that it is Democrats and not Republicans who are beholden to Wall Street you'll do so.

You can declare victory if you want. It doesn't change the fact that Republicans in office now have an enormous lifetime advantage in Wall Street funding and Republicans in office right now had an astounding 40:1 edge in money from the financial interests in the 2010 cycle. http://corridornews.blogspot.com/2010/10/wall-street-bails-out-republican-party.html

The longer you keep doing this the more info I'll put up proving that Republicans are the party of the wealthy elites, with no interest in the needs of the average American.

Making yourself look like a jerk through incessant name calling is just a bonus.

@US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired = "Are we becoming an oligarchy?"

We are already there! And, if the trend of the midterm continues, we're on our way to a "one-party" rule government. The balance of power will be a thing of the past. Forget about our democracy...this, too, will be a thing of the past.

Honestly look at our politics and governments. With the midterm election, 60% of our states have a Republican governor. The Republicans have control of our Judicial Branch of government. The 5-4 Supreme Court ushered in an oligarchy with its Citizens United decision. With the oligarchy's finance and the 24/7 vitriol coming from the Republican communication media base, Republicans now control one part of the Legislative Branch of government and have a stronger voice in the other part.

The handwriting is on the wall. In addition to some of our Supreme Court Justices attending this closed meeting with the Koch brothers, I also question Eric Cantor's attendance. Is he not the Majority Leader in the House

We need to free ourselves of the noise and pay attention to what is taking place in our country, not only at the federal level, but the state level as well. It's not looking good.

Jump to conclusions? Really?

The government in Lebanon fell to Hezbollah. The government in Tunisia fell. Egypt is under siege, and will probably fall. An Islamist revolution is taking place in Yemen. There are riots in Jordan.

These are all as a result of an uncanny coincidence?

Moreover, there is pretty clear evidence that the administration was taken completely by surprise by these events. Carter, at least, helped orchestrate the takeover in Iran- however wrongheaded that was, he was not unprepared for the event, just the aftermath.

All going to prove that Obama is an even worse failure than was CRter.

I agree, Navy---the situation in Egypt is volatile and I think the administration is doing a great job in a very delicate situation---one that has been 30 years in the making.

I was very impressed with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton yesterday--she had a difficult line to walk and I thought she did it well.

I hope all the Americans in Egypt stay safe and the the people there are able to get the reforms they want without violence and the loss of life.

No Joe---what evidence can you cite to support your contention that the administration was taken by surprise by the events in Egypt?

OK, No Jo, this is as bizarre a take on the uprisings in the Middle East as I have ever heard. On Meet The Press Sunday, Sec. Clinton declined to blame Republican administrations for supporting Mubarak, saying the US has urged democratic reforms in Eygpt for thirty years, and Mitch McConnell declined to criticize the Obama administration's handling of the crisis, saying he is in agreement with our stance, and its a time for Americans to stand together. Might we, on First Read, do the same?

No Joe---what evidence can you cite to support your contention that the administration was taken by surprise by the events in Egypt?

Nothing but the little voices in her head broadcasting off her fillings via FM frequencies!

NoJo:

Post your proof the President Obama was not aware of the situation in Egypt. You can't. Again you just keep tossing out unfounded rhetoric. Nobody knows what the President knew or did not know. I suspect he along with Sec. Hilton have been watching Egypt with a concerned eye for a long time. The US has been after Egypt to change their ways for decades through diplomacy.

Hi Feisty

No Joe---what evidence can you cite to support your contention that the administration was taken by surprise by the events in Egypt?

Nothing but the little voices in her head broadcasting off her fillings via FM frequencies!

And you know it!!! It positively is some intense chatter from the smarmy .

NO JO what do you think about Reagan?

Reagan started the Iranian Revolution he so wanted.

There is no comparison there as you the righties claim

Iran-contra affair vs Egypt.

"A top aide to Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat has dropped a new clue about the original 'October Surprise' mystery of 1980: the name of the Republican operative who sought the Palestine Liberation Organization’s help to block President Jimmy Carter’s negotiations to free 52 Americans then being held hostage in Iran.

http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/coupreaganbush.htm

Dr NO as you can see there is more proof the President is not doing you say.

"The government in Lebanon fell to Hezbollah. The government in Tunisia fell. Egypt is under siege, and will probably fall. An Islamist revolution is taking place in Yemen. There are riots in Jordan.

These are all as a result of an uncanny coincidence?"

Uh, no. These are the result of the rich power-holders keeping the middle and lower classes over there under their thumbs for so many years.

Now- let's resume the conversation about the Koch brothers or maybe the Citizen's United ruling....

Evidence? Well, how about the lack of any mention whatsoever in the SOTU?

How about his only mention of Tunisia as- gee, that seems good.

In fact, he only called Mubarak AFTER Gibbs revealed that he had not spoken with him.

Face it - he was caught flatfooted on the developments in the Middle East, when any six grader can tell you who is driving all this violence.

Here is a hint- there is nothing non-secular about any of this.

Remember when Conservatives were working overtime to destabilize the Middle East because "freedom will bloom like wildflowers? No? Well, here it is from the Congressional Record in 2005. http://books.google.com/books?id=XVm35w7gi6QC&pg=PA752&lpg=PA752&dq=freedom+will+bloom+in+the+middle+east&source=bl&ots=pFIrMmrQly&sig=buGBCPQ3uzoUgb5ZSoXi1s73DFI&hl=en&ei=_89GTZbaJcH98AbtlNTUAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=freedom%20will%20bloom%20in%20the%20middle%20east&f=false

Guess what...things that American diplomacy worked so hard to keep stable for decades don't just stop wobbling quickly once you knock them off their axis. Not that "stability" was the be all and end all that our policy insisted upon since the early years of the nuclear era, either. Too often we've backed a despot like the Shah of Iran only to find out just how much the people hated the USA for supporting their dictator.

In order to "stabilize" the Iranian situation our own policies ensured we backed another strong man...Saddam Hussein. Guess what...people who say they're our friends aren't always. So we take him down, increasing hatred of the US within the Middle East. We insist on elections within the Palestinian Authority, ignoring warnings that it would only enable the existing powers to be replaced with others, more Muslim Fundamentalist and less inclined to see the US as an honest broker.

So this situation is complex and evolved over DECADES. It's delicate and could turn either way. Right now I believe the Obama Administration is doing the best with the hand they've been dealt. They can't fully abandon Mubarek in case he should somehow manage to hold power. They can't support him so fully that we automatically become an equal subject of hatred should he lose.

no jo you lie.......as usual.

Well said, dbo. When the oligarchs destroy the opportunity of the masses to advance, when the gap between haves and have-nots becomes intolerable, and when the grip on power starts to choke the dreams of the little guy uprisings happen.

A valid point as our aspiring American oligarchs work to make America more unequal, less egalitarian and democratic, and destroy the dreams of the middle class one day at a time.

NoJo:

You are just __— in the wind. You offer no proof just more rhetoric. President Obama has spoken with the Egyptian leader many times before the civil strife. as have people in his administration. When the internal conflict started he did what I would like a President todo. Examine the situation and consult with his people before he/she opens their mouths.

Nobody here knows the actual facts of what in going on behind closed doors.

It's really touching to see nojonobo's concern for the wellbeing of thug dictators in the Middle East and how President Obama ignored their plight for too long. I guess she thinks that he should have used a little "shock and awe" on those protesters in Egypt by now. Maybe she could get a job at CNN to help them manufacture nontroversies to get at Obama (see post #14).

NJ,

Why would any President talk about growing tension in a region that is not general knowledge? And what should be said? Better yet what would YOU say?

You provide an opinion like it is fact while you have no data to back up your comment other than other opinions.

No Joe. Please explain exactly HOW what is happening in Egypt is President Obama's fault? Are you also an expert in middle eastern affairs? What special knowledge do you have that allows for the conclusions you present?

The middle east problems go back decades, they existed in the Reagan administration and administrations before him. The problems in Egypt and U.S. support of dictators in the region have existed since WWII. It was the U.S. who aided Saddam Hussein to power in Iraq. It seems to me republicans should be cheering afterall, Bush 43 pushed for democracy throughout the region and started a war in Iraq because necons believe it is the US's responsibility to oust every evil dictator in the world--whatever the cost in lives and treasure. As always, No Joe pushes her anti-Obama hate, her negativity to any and all things relating to Obama without ever looking beyond that personal narrow minded belief.

". As always, No Joe pushes her anti-Obama hate, her negativity to any and all things relating to Obama without ever looking beyond that personal narrow minded belief..."

BUT, Jody- in fairness to No Jo- she is FAR from the only one doing this day in and day out. Yes- it gets old as hell after a while, but then again so do all of 'em.

No Joe, lack of mention in the SOTU proves what? Apparently it never occurs to you that President Obama was calling to reach Mubarak prior to being successful--Mubarak was probably a busy dictator trying to cover his backside and deal with a crisis. Pres Obama spoke to him so it doesn't matter when the call took place, it's irrelevant. I've read other nonsensical and factless nitpicking but today, No Joe's comments have reached a new level of petty.

For all the naysayers from the right, Egypt and the crisis in the middle east has absolutely NOTHING to do with personal political ideology. Mitch McConnell and other republicans are supportive of President Obama's efforts. Take a cue and leave politics at the water's edge because this is not about what America wants.

I hear you Drive-by, you're right, it's the same old, same old. Still, she's the one pouncing in this part of Thoughts.

You know? Just got in from the barn and as I was scrolling through these posts (thawing out, it is COLD here) I notice the usual. When asked for a cite, no jo bails. Nothing new to see here.

Anybody above able to say what Obama's foreign policy is, how it relates to Egypt. Anything from the SOTU speech?

Obama on top of things, saw this coming and it wasn't as important as the "smoked salmon" line that made it into the speech?

no joe'e right again - and it absolutely kills you guys. The hole herd is now attacking and no one touches her.

Obama goes to Egypt to do his Muslim outreach speech? Then refused to talk of democracy/reform to Mubarek?

Huh? WTF?

Biden refused to call Mubarek a dictator and seemed to question whether the concerns of the rioters/protestors were legitimate? A month ago, Obama appointed Riccardone as ambassador - said Mubarek was great at the freedoms stuff - "could win elections in the United States as a leader who is a giant on the world stage."

Now where are we headed? First get the guys to start re-writing things, thenwring and hands and hope we get lucky?

Heck who knows, maybe he can blame Bush, afterall Bush did bring democracy to Irag - maybe these guys saw that stuff on You Tube or somewhere?

Better yet - THE TEA PARTY..... They did this kind of stuff in their town hall meetings and helped change the direction of the US....

Obama will figure it out......

sad part is that it will probably be a couple of years, or at least untill gets in full campaign mode.

"The hole herd..."

Is that the name of the dance group down at the local 'shaker' bar where you live, Bobbins?

Yea, whole herd.

Too funny, no joe responds to US Navy, then 15 out of the next 18 posts specifically mention/refer no joe. John B was the only one to not go directly after no joe, one of post wa a support of driv-by who did.

Feisty talks about and is so proud of her Green Stars like a little first grader.......

Hilarious that on a lib site, with 12 libs saying the same thing - she gets 12 votes.

no joe with no other conservatives until me - gets 12 votes.

In other words - of the people just reading, observing if you will no joe gets votes at over a 10-1 margin over Feisty.

Thanks for bringing that stuff up last might Feisty. Pretty funny for someone who has no credibility or substance, huh?

Bob - the real questions, when it comes to No Joe's posts, are these - are they truthful? Does No Joe argue a point that MAY be palatable to others who may not agree with her ideology? Can we see SOME sort of common ground that we can agree on, even if we do have ideaological differences? What have we learned from No Joe's posts?

I have no problem with your posts, Bob, because you have been consistent in your acceptance/disdain for the items we are discussing. We can understand your point of view, and we can agree, disagree, or agree to disagree.

I personally have caught No Joe in untruths that she has told, and she does nothing to set the record straight or even acknowledge that she made a mistake. Many of us on here have caught her 'spinning' her tales as of they were the 'truth', including stating she has a Ph.D in Economics. From her writings, and from an analysis of her thought processes, many have concluded that this is not true.

The people reading this blog can make up their own minds wether or not they believe No Joe's posts or not. That is their perogative. If they vote for her posts, that's fine. No Joe has no credibility or substance with me and I choose not to respond to her posts any longer.

I agree. I found McConnell and other GOP legislators' response encouraging for a lot of reasons.

I agree, Drive-by---appreciated the measured response by Messrs. McConnell and Boehner. I think we should speak with one voice as much as possible in this situation.

w bush:

The pattern is be woven right in front of our eyes. Sooner or later we will all see the handwriting that is appearing on the wall.

A valid point, w bush. When do we stand up for the middle class? When do we realize that routing more and more wealth to the top doesn't trickle down? When do we recognize that a Supreme Court that legalizes bribery sells our freedoms?

John B:

Right on. You hit it square on the mark. The handwriting is on the wall and we better start reading it or we will follow suit.

Exactly right, w.bush. The similarities should be noted; while we elect our legislators every 2-4 years, the powerful and monied pull the strings against the other 98% of us and too many do not realize that special interest lobbyists, big money buys much that works against the general population.

Who has been proposing Job Bills for the last 2 years? Who has been "Obstructing" virtually every bill the proposes Jobs in this country and Tax Cuts to Small Business? Who has been creating jobs for 12 straight months? Who pulled this country away from Bankruptcy and put this country's economy back on track?

WHO?? Not the GOP.

Uh oh, Navy- you are going to bring out all the 'shiny trains' people again....

DBO:

Yep. Good to see ya, hope you are not in the storm path. Be well and stay safe.

Thanks, Navy. Yes- I'm in the path, and in property management to boot. Should be fun (not). Oh well- I was raised in this stuff, and when I was a kid, made 50 cents a shot shoveling walks and drives for people in the neighborhood. Of course, that's when I was a kid, and hadn't turned into a 'free-loading libbie that won't work for a living'!

HA HA HA Ha.....

DBO:
Too funny. Stay safe, we are supposed to get a touch up here in Vermont. They say maybe 8-16 inches on Wednesday. I will just stay home and off the roads until they are cleared which is pretty quick in Vermont for the major roads, not so much for the back roads though.

Have a great day.

Frank, ( and anybody else interested), here is the link to the college kids who back Obama last time put, who are now behind and effort to draft Daniels

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/01/27/mitch_daniels_draft_group_releases_ad_108687.html

Is it not strange that this site posts every other ad produced, but ignores this one?

Curiouser and curiouser.

no joe, no bo, nj

Can you help me out a little here?

-what evidence can you cite to support your contention that the administration was taken by surprise by the events in Egypt?

Good Morning Frank:

I do read your comments with interest. And the first thing I noticed is you did not mention Romney. Do you think he will be beaten by the Tea Party, or are there enough moderate Republicans living outside the beltway so he can win in the Primaries. Personallly, I believe the latter. My question would be, Will the Tea Party support Romney if he gets the sufficient delegate votes to win the nomination?

With regard to Thune, Huntsman, and Daniels. A member of the house has not been elected to the Presidency since James Garfield. Huntsman would have a better chance in 2016. Some like Daniels. I hope he would get a V-P nod because he has a lot of skeletons and is beatable.

DeMint is a part of the Tea Party. but too far right to make it to the White House.

Hey Ron...

I don't think Romney can pull it off. There might be enough votes for him to capture the nomination, but my gut feeling is that he won't. i think that the Tea Party will likely support the GOP nominee, regardless of who it is. They'll probably come around to realizing that the alternative to the GOP candidate winning is "Four more years", which is clearly something they don't want.

Which of the guys that I mentioned is a house member? I could be wrong but I thought Thune iss a Senator, Huntsman an ambassador and former governor, and Daniels a governor.

As for DeMint...I don't see him winning the White House, but I could see him being formidable in the primaries because of his standing within the Tea Party.

Thanks for the comments as always Ron. Stay safe up there!! :-)

Frank, as one of the adults in the Republican room I wish you and other reasonable Republicans luck in bringing thoughtful, intelligent members of your party to the top.

You might think as a Democrat I wish for the destruction of the GOP but that isn't so. I wish for the liars and crazies to go away and be replaced by the likes of some of the great Republican statesmen from the past. This country grew on the shoulders of TWO strong political parties for too long to believe it a fluke. In reality I don't wish for one party rule by Democrats any more than I wish for one party rule by Republicans. Keep up the good fight.

Fletch2:

She can't. She is just being herself and rattling on looking for somebody who will listen to her. Ignore her until she says something that helps this country instead of degrading it and President Obama all the time.

Frank:

My bad. You are right Thune is a senator. Of the three you mentioned, he could be the GOP's best bet.

I especially enjoy reading your analysis.

Ice storms will arrive in southern Indiana in about 6 hours. By then I'll be home, sittting by the fire, with a glass of wine.

Frank:
I ditto John B. I do not favor a one party rule either as this country was built on the ideas of both republicans and democrats. I just want those that do not want to move the country forward to get out of they way. We have them on both sides of the aisle and we the American people have to just get rid of them. That is why we vote.
Keep up the good posts I enjoy each and every one of them and often times learn something as well.
Be well

Frank and JohnB - nice posts both of you. Your "reasonable-ness" is much appreciated.

I'm with you John....I want our 2 party system to continue and it would be wonderful if the crazies could be filtered out somehow. Legislating for our country is serious business and this has all turned into some kind of parade.

Note - it's icing up here in Denver today. Made a trip to the airport at 6 this morning, really crummy roads coming home. Sounds like this storm is going to pack a wallop in a wide swath across our nation. Good time to get those unused winter clothes out and donate them to those who have none. I'm headed downtown at noon today with a few of our unused items....bitter cold on the way for those on the street.

Everyone....be safe and generous.

John B, USN, Ron...

Thanks for the comments. Very much appreciated. One of the points I made a few months ago is that the extremes of both parties seem to get the biggest microphones. In addition, it tends to be the party that is "out of power" whose extreme factions tend to be the loudest. During the 2000's, that tended to be the fringes of the Democratic party, particularly during the Iraq War. Since 2008, it's been the fringes of the GOP, particularly in relation to HCR. Now, we have split government and HOPEFULLY, we'll hear a little less from the fringes of the parties.

I think there are 2 interesting dynamics that will take place in 2012. The first is that quite a few of the best potential GOP candidates are relatively unknown to the general public. In the lead up to 2008 and the Democratic primaries, President Obama had made a name for himself with his speech at the 2004 Democratic convention. However, when thinking about the GOPers, you don't have that standout speech really. So, the GOP nominee is going to have to do some work to get the public familiar with them. The other dynamic is that in 2008, the GOP was down. We had just lost Congress, approval ratings for President Bush were low, there was fatigue with the Iraq War, etc. Not to mention, the Dems nominated an admittedly exciting candidate. I think that the GOP will be a little more "up" for this election. While the President certainly has the advantage of incumbency (and it's a powerful one), the GOP should be much more motivated this time around than in 2008.

Ron...Hope you are able to get home before that mess hits. (Hey...I live in Florida for a reason!!) :-)

Congratulations, Frank on running a marathon--that's an accomplishment! Hope you heal fast.

You are the first person to suggest the Republican candidate won't be from the field that ran in 08---why do you think that? I thought the Republicans followed a "promote from within" policy.

I have the sense that you agree with me that the Egypt situation isn't really a Republican v. Democrat one---more like how we balance the country's strategic interests with our desire to see the Egyptian people live more freely and prosperously.

Steeler Fan...Thanks! Around mile 20 I was wishing I had brought some roller blades. I'm slowly getting feeling back in my legs. Had to check and make sure they were still there when I woke up this morning! ;-)

It may be more wishful thinking on my part, but my thinking is that in 2008, we got our you know what's handed to us in every way shape or form. We nominated Senator McCain, yet the party, and voters in general, couldn't get excited about him. So, I don't see how we could get excited about someone who couldn't even win that primary. Plus, seeing the success that the Dems had in 2008 with someone "fresh" I would hope that we've learned a bit of a lesson.

As for Egypt...yes...I agree 100%. This isn't a GOP vs. Dem situation. This is a situation where a very delicate balance needs to be maintained and where we need to tread carefully and think before taking any sort of action.

Frank. I echo others in the belief the two party system is critical; and your voice of reason is appreciated here.

I've said it often, for good government we need the best ideas of both parties and we need those parties to work together not against in the name of elections. The problem I see for the GOP is that it is not really united, it has fractured into not one but several elements of TP ideology and most of those are way far right as evidenced by polls showing less and less support for the TP. The TP often sounds too much like the John Birch Society and it is too far right for most non-republicans to support.

In my view, Huntsman would be wise to continue his position in China through 2012, staying out of the political fray for a couple reasons. As the economy improves, the anger we see from the TPers will fade. Someone like Huntsman would have a hard time right now because of TP "purity" ideology simply because he accepted a position working for Pres Obama. He would make a good candidate but he would make a better one in 2016.

Thanks Navy. I really and truly enjoy reading your posts and most of the others. Until "the I hate Obama crew" shows up..... It seems no joe and Js1 walk in lockstep........

They are not. They have no plan for creating Jobs in this Country, They have no plan to replace the HCR Law they are trying to repeal and no plan to continue the growth of the economy. It is just cut spending and put the burden on the Middle Class. We all agree we need to reign in our spending, but not just on the backs of the Middle Class. The other side needs to ave some skin in the game as well.

"we don't need no damn high speed rail"

Dangnabit, if I want to drive a gigantic, gas guzzling SUV, while the Middle East goes up in flames, disruptive oil production, and the earth cooks from CO2 admissions, no panty waist liberal is going to tell me that's not a good idea!

The Liberals love to talk about innovation, but do everything they can to make sure it doesn't happen. Innovation has a nasty way of affecting folks that do the menial and repetitive jobs, jobs that are held mostly by the Lefts unions members. So when the Democrats, who are sold out to the union dollars, try to talk about innovation, they're talking more about a new way to make buggy-whips rather than any thing to do with semi-conductors.

Bill, the problem is, you are looking at things RATIONALLY. That is not the way the left sees things.

They say-" other countries have high speed rail"- they do not say"other countries pour even more money down the rat hole of nineteenth century transportation than we do".

They say "other countries have government health care". They do not say"other countries have healthcare that requires unacceptably long waits for treatment, have higher cancer death rates than do we, have little or no research done by rpivate companies, and even have Ministers coming to this country for lifesaving surgeries! Why would we want to emulate them?"

They say " other countries invest in green jobs! Look at Spain!". They do not say, "Spain had a green jobs initiative that cost the government $500,000 PER JOB, and each one drove SEVEN out of their economy. Spain is also one of the PIIGS- Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain- which threaten to topple the EU economy. Why would we embark on a failed strategy?"

Why are they like this? Well, because they see only what they want to see- never any unforeseen consequence. Heck, they will not admit the the consequences which are extant. They go blithely on their merry, fairy tale way, and heap abuse on those who dare tell them that their fantasies are just that.

We are living with the consequences of putting one of them in office. The Middle East is in flames- and it is no coincidence that the countries under siege are our allies.

We may not survive this experiment in fantasyland, Bill.

"we don't need no damn high speed rail"

Dangnabit, if I want to drive a gigantic, gas guzzling SUV, while the Middle East goes up in flames, disruptive oil production, and the earth cooks from CO2 admissions, no panty waist liberal is going to tell me that's not a good idea!

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

Maybe we could get some lug nuts and attach a windmill or two and some solar panels on top this mythical train. That would make it a Liberals Dream-liner.

Here Libs, you want to impress everyone? Have Amtrak break a profit. Heck, make it break even. That will impress people.

So Bill everything is great here in the U.S.? Spoken like a true well to do Republican that never dare venture outside their ivory tower, and doesn't give a sh!t what goes on outside their gated community, glad to see you are doing well Bill, 10% unemployment with 25% underemployment is just the "new norm" some would say, but some will say that it is simply unacceptable and completly ridulous in the U.S., the concentration of wealth in the top 2% is just fine according to the top 2%, the other 98% beg to differ, change will come Bill it is just a matter of how it comes.

Joanna, it would be very easy for Amtrack to break even- or even turn a profit.

First, all government subsidies would have to be cut. All. As in, zero.

They would then cut every single line they have, with the exception of the Acella lines to Boston and D.C., which actually do break even, because they provide an alternative method of transportation that is superior in terms of time and trouble to flying. Heck, they might even add lines like those- and they would certainly add even more amenities.

I am pretty sure that most of those who call for high speed rail have never traveled enough to have taken trains in the countries they are so fond of citing as shining examples.

I have. In England, France, Italy, and Germany. Mostly because it was the only way to get from point A to point B.

Sometimes it works. Often, it takes three times as long as you were told. It is not in the least the romantic version of train travel one sees in the old movies- which is what I suspect informs the opinions of most of those calling for more choo choos.

Most of the time, it is faster and cheaper to fly. And what, pray tell, do this people have against airlines? Is it because they are privately owned?

Here's a lesson from history: It took that "socialist" Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Democrats in Congress to extend electrical service outside the urban areas. It took a Democratic State House in Maine to get laptop computers in the hands of every 7th grader in our state. It took a Jimmy Carter to first put solar panels on the White House. DSemocrats stand for innovation.

Now no joe is trying to make us believe she's been outside of nj. Sorry no joe we're not buying it.

No jo: I have been in Europe, and my cherubs frequent Europe. Most of them will be there this summer. We all enjoy the trains. Great way to travel.

I agree with you MO.

JoAnna ~

So when the Democrats, who are sold out to the union dollars, try to talk about innovation, they're talking more about a new way to make buggy-whips rather than any thing to do with semi-conductors.

Actually, in my experience, that's just the opposite. Believe it or not, JoAnna, I do have a job, and in my daily life, I work with quite a few start-up high-tech companies, generally in the fields of bio-engineering and bio-medicine, including nuclear bio-medicine. Those who do the actual innovation -- i.e., the scientists -- tend to be quite liberal. It's the paper pushers who tend to be conservative.

What's your experience with that?

I have been on the Eurostar in Italy, and I travelled all over Italy - from Venice to Rome (4 hours), from Rome to Naples (1 hour) from Naples to Bologna (5 hours) - using the high-speed rail. It was easy, convenient, clean, fast and efficient. Travelling by rail is THE way to travel in Europe.

Just for fun, I tried to book a train trip from Ohio to Las Vegas. The trip would take at total of 32 hours each way, since I would have had to DRIVE to Cleveland or Indianapolis to get to an Amtrak train station.

If we had high-speed rail here in the States, that trip would probably take between 8-12 hours each way.

So 'we don't need no stinkin' high-speed rail' here in the US?

I beg to differ.

Tell the millions of Americans whose manufacturing jobs have been shipped overseas that it is an "exaggeration". This citizen would love high speed rail for a quick trip to Chicago or points east and west; moving goods and people faster and cheaper. I'd much rather see the beauty of this great land than fly over it. We wonder what is wrong with America, it is narrow, backward thinking. Want to be competitive in the 21st century, then start with some broader vision. The last republican president to speak of an idea and a vision beyond tax cuts and small government was Richard Nixon.

The jobs numbers come out later this week, that will bring some reality to Obama's poll numbers. Between jobs and Obama's head-in-the-sand and trying-to-catch-up to what's going on in Egypt, it fairly obvious Obama and crew of misfits are still not ready for prime time.

Please try not to gloat too much over those lousy jobs numbers, JoAnna. We're talking about real people, real people who are hurting. This isn't just a game to them.

But while we're at it, let's put the shoe on the other foot this week, shall we? What are your ideas for job creation, now that we've debunked the myth that handing over big sums of cash to corporations will create them? And what role do you see the government playing in that effort, anyway? Isn't that always up to the private sector? Except, of course, when it's more convenient to blame government.

@ Bag Boy ~ Is it just me, or are you actually starting to make sense?

Speaking of Egypt, what's the correct position for the US to take, Smiff? No Jo?? Mr Bill???

AM: Please try not to gloat too much over those lousy jobs numbers, JoAnna.

Gloating? No ones gloating. Everyones waiting for Obama to get it right. It appears he's running out of time.

What are your ideas for job creation

Get the government off of businesses backs. Give businesses some stability in what the government plans to confiscate from them in taxes. Have the government get off this populist notion that they are the protectors of the "middle-class" by constantly threatening businesses with more taxes and more regulation.

You see AM, the government doesn't create jobs, private businesses do. You should have figured it that out from the failed $787 billion stimulus, the failed unemployment benefits that were supposed to stimulate the economy, the failed 400,000 jobs to be created every month, the failed "Recovery Summer", the failed "We've turned the corner", the failed "We see green shoots". Failure after failure of this government to get anything done for jobs.

The correct position would have been to have the intelligence so that this crisis could have been avoided.

Absent that, he is completely helpless now to have any impact whatsoever. We are helpless bystanders in this situation- being forced to watch as on ally after another is brought down by radical islamists.

As Biden might opine, this is a big f**** deal. Too bad Obama was too busy lifting quotes from other people's speeches, defending his failed HCR, and traveling around making the democrats' midterm election chances even worse to pay attention.

So where are the jobs, JoAnna? The so-called job creators have their tax breaks, Obama has promised to reduce regulation, and businesses are sitting on mountains of cash. You tell me that's a legitimate position for them to take, but you also say that only the private sector has the ability to create the jobs. But they won't create any until there's demand, which there won't be until people have jobs. That all sounds like a mighty big Catch 22 to me, JoAnna.

And you've just been caught.

Let me repeat -- all conditions being quite favorable right now in the private sector for job creation, where are the jobs?

Oh, that's right -- they're overseas now, because that's where the demand went when we started sending jobs overseas and sending our interest money to China on the debt we contracted in the last decade to pay for Bush's war.

Or, alternatively, could it be that the greedy have just figured out new and improved ways to make money without the necessity of that nasty "trickle down" that does nothing for them but wreck their crisp white polo shirts?

Either way, JoAnna, where are the jobs?

no joe, no bo, nj

"The correct position would have been to have the intelligence so that this crisis could have been avoided."

Which intell was misisng, and from which time period(s)?

(and how do YOU know so much about the intell from over there- been hanging around with O'Donnell or some other expert?)

Anna Molly-

I've always made sense to those who aren't hard-core ideologues or aren't involved in the blind worship of President Obama.

And, I don't regard most (again, I said "most") of the bloggers here as committed lefties. Most here are primarily engaged in a cult-of-personality celebration of all things Obama...reflecting the stance of our hosts at MSNBC. I mean...isn't that what First Read is really all about?

The real hard-core left wing ideologues are at sites like Firedoglake.com...they're interested in ideas, not personalities. And, they're extremely disillusioned and disappointed in President Obama...for all the wrong reasons.

Anyway...I've been pretty consistent in my views when posting here.

The fact that I'm beginning to make sense to you doesn't alarm me.

You might want to start worrying, though...

lol.

AM: Obama has promised to reduce regulation, and businesses are sitting on mountains of cash.

So few words, but so many lies. Obama has not reduced regulations AM. Not in any form what so ever. You say he promised to reduce regulations? Obama promises so many things AM, but delivers on so few.

And "businesses are sitting on mountains of cash"? This myth was explained to you last week AM, no one is sitting on "mountains of cash". That's just a little talking point liberals like yourself like to bring up to explain your hatred for businesses. And just like last week, where you made it appear that you know better how to invest businesses money, just send you resume to these companies, get an interview, and explain the errors of their ways to them. You'll be laughed out of the building, similar to how people are laughing at you here.

WSJ (6/10/2010): U.S. companies are holding more cash in the bank than at any point on record, underscoring persistent worries about financial markets and about the sustainability of the economic recovery.
The Federal Reserve reported Thursday that nonfinancial companies had socked away $1.84 trillion in cash and other liquid assets as of the end of March, up 26% from a year earlier and the largest-ever increase in records going back to 1952. Cash made up about 7% of all company assets, including factories and financial investments, the highest level since 1963.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704312104575298652567988246.html

Well Dennis, I guess we're going to have to add the Wall Street Journal to the list of places that do nothing but spout Liberal talking points...or maybe facts are facts.

It amazes me how much no joe, mixed bag and js1 hate America. They never have anything good to say about America, and are constantly wishing for America to fail as in js1 post gloating about how bad she hopes the unemployment numbers will be. Is a failed America really what you conservatives hope to take over?

From poor joanna: "get the govt off the back of business." We did, and that is what led to this debacle in the first place.

Joanna ~

And "businesses are sitting on mountains of cash"? This myth was explained to you last week AM, no one is sitting on "mountains of cash". That's just a little talking point liberals like yourself like to bring up to explain your hatred for businesses. And just like last week, where you made it appear that you know better how to invest businesses money, just send you resume to these companies, get an interview, and explain the errors of their ways to them. You'll be laughed out of the building, similar to how people are laughing at you here.

Oh, those sweet little lies, JoAnna. Just me and the Wall Street Journal, which is, of course, published by Rupert Murdoch, and which I did get you to admit you read before I quoted it, if you'll recall. And in case you don't ...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703766704576009501161973480.html

Now, I won't trouble you to read it all, but do notice the secondary headline, JoAnna, especially those words "cautious firms put off investing in growth." It appears that there isn't much of that "investment" you like to talk about going on these days. And, oh, this little bit right here, if you don't mind:

Rather than pouring their money into building plants or hiring workers, nonfinancial companies in the U.S. were sitting on $1.93 trillion in cash and other liquid assets at the end of September, up from $1.8 trillion at the end of June, the Federal Reserve said Thursday. Cash accounted for 7.4% of the companies' total assets—the largest share since 1959.

The cash buildup shows the deep caution many companies feel about investing in expansion while the economic recovery remains painfully slow and high unemployment and battered household finances continue to limit consumers' ability to spend.

The buildup has a big downside for companies, which get little return on their money because interest rates are low, but it reflects the relatively few opportunities they see to deploy their cash more creatively.

Now, as I said last week, JoAnna, companies do have every right to sit on their money. But that's NOT the same as "investment," especially when they're not even earning much return on the money. And even you will have to agree that sitting on their money doesn't create jobs. So, then, if the public sector doesn't help to stimulate jobs, won't you please tell me who's left to do it?

Go ahead and laugh, JoAnna. I guess you've taught Anna Molly a lesson.

But come to think of it, that won't create any jobs, either. See you around.

Our Tea Party governor is a good example of JoanneSmith's ideology in practice. After convening a "Red Tape Forum," this week our new governor has made 36 proposals to make Maine more "business friendly," including recsinding our state's policy against allowing the chemical BHA, which studies show contributes to cancer, obesity and learning disabilities, in articles used by CHILDREN, including, yes sippy cups. Tea Partiers, in practice as well as in ideology, put corporate profits ahead of children's health. Profits are their God.

One more interesting article on this point -- this article discusses the cash positions of the wealthy, i.e., those who are supposed to be the "job creators" --

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2010/12/08/affluent-investors-flee-to-cash/

And creating jobs, they ain't.

Iowa's newly re-elected GOP Branstad told voters he wanted to cut business taxes--now that he won, he's now revised it a bit. He wants to cut business taxes, commercial property taxes EXCEPT for the real Mom & Pop small businesses who need it the most. Branstad campaigned that Culver's policies had resulted in higher homeowner property taxes; his plan as reported by nonpolitical fact checkers will result in less state revenues to send to local governments and those local governments will be forced to raise personal property taxes to offset the lost comericial property revenues in order to have fire, police, city maintenance, education. Gov Branstad has also proposed a gasoline tax hike which will affect not just Iowans but truckers hauling produce and products nationwide. See when you cut income tax levels to unsustainable levels which favor those with the most, it is the rest of us who suffer. Iowa's tax code has been analysed by nonpartisan groups and proved to be unfairly tilted toward those with money and power. Branstad, a previous 4 term failed governor who left Iowa in a mess, was elected and now the details of his plans which he failed to explain to voters are the same plans from 12 years ago--lean backward is the new Branstad slogan.

Anna Molly

Good morning, everyone.

"This Egypt thing sure is tricky"

Not according to No Jo- all we need to do is whack the 'bad guys', and move on.

Good Morning Anna Molly:

You are spot-on that the Egyptian crisis is tricky. Responsible Republicans are sitting back, watching, and for the most part supporting our President. President Obama has not blamed previous administrations, showing wisdom and restraint.

I suspect we will see some major transition moves in the days to come. Careful, thoughtful diplomacy is what is needed. It won't be long until the Egyptian people get a new leader.

I too am relieved that McCain/Palin are not in charge. God only knows what they might do.

I agree, Anna Molly. There is nothing easy or one-dimensional about the Middle East and it has been that way as long as I can remember. I agree with you that I have a comfort level with President Obama, VP Biden and Secretary of State Clinton that I would not have under a McCain/Palin administration.

driveby observer ~

Not according to No Jo- all we need to do is whack the 'bad guys', and move on.

Aha!! So No Joe's the one who's got the scorecard. I haven't been able to figure that out yet, myself.

Then maybe we should just put No Joe in charge, and Sarah Palin can advise her.

@ Ron ~ As for whether it will be long before Egypt gets a new leader, I wonder. Did you notice yesterday when they destroyed a big poster of Mubarak? I recall a similar scene in Iraq, just before the "Mission Accomplished" event. As I was watching yesterday, it occurred to me that Iraq still took a while after that to get a government. I'm not holding my breath, and I'm not planning my trip to Egypt, either.

@ Steeler Fan ~ The Middle East is the ultimate in multi-dimensional chess. I just hope we're up to it. But if not this administration, then maybe not anyone.

Anna Molly. Your comment reminded me why elections matter, voters choose the most intelligent and best person to lead us. His choice of Hillary Clinton as Sec of State proves that wisdom, she was the right person for that post.

Over the weekend, I heard a comment that the U.S.'s foreign policy has been stuck in cold war mentality for decades and that Egypt is an example of that narrow focused thinking. I think that is true. President Obama has been trying to change that "mindset" to use his own word.

Jody:

Excellent Post!!!

It is good to see responsible Republicans leaving politics at the water's edge. Our President is doing a fine job and should be commended.

A few minutes ago I posted on Frank's thread about the GOP in 2012. You are right-on that the GOP candidates have appealed to their base, but are on the wrong side of history. Moderate Mitt looks presidential, but he will have to denouce health care. Don't expect him to denounce being a Mormon.

Re: 2012. I don't think you will hear any of the Republicans say it, but I think they are doing the math and figuring that President Obama will win re-election and they are biding their time for 2016. Just an opinion---I have no facts to back it up but it makes sense to me to not want to take on the grueling Presidential run in 2012 and 2016.

Thanks, Ron. I may be a liberal but when republicans respond as they have to the Egyptian crisis, they deserve a cheer for putting aside politics and recognizing the U.S. must speak with one voice in this crisis. How greatful I am that President Obama is CIC.

Steeler Fan. I agree and we see evidence in what you say. Pence isn't running and other serious candidates have yet to announce. As President Obama's numbers improve, the economy improves, it will be harder for the GOP to win. I would not be surprised if Romney drops out depending on who else is running.

Houston:

How true. President Obama knows what is and was going on. He is doing what a good CIC should do. Examine the problem in detail and weigh his decisions carefully instead of the knee jerk reactions of the previous administration. I am sure they are looking for a diplomatic solutions as we speak and NO those talks are not made open to the public nor are they disclosed that they are going on, and we know they are.

Just the crap that we expected form the right. I am surprised they have not blamed President Obama for the snow storms coming to 25 states over the next few days. Or did they???

USN Vet:

I am sure they are looking for a diplomatic solutions as we speak and NO those talks are not made open to the public nor are they disclosed that they are going on, and we know they are.

That apparently doesn't sit well with nojonobo. I think she would like to see the U.S. rush more tear gas canisters to Egypt to help Mubarak crush the popular uprising.

Houston:
Agreed. The GOP would like nothing better than for us to get tangled up in another conflict. More US Military put in harms way, and killed or wounded and the cost that would be associated with it added to guess what, oh the deficit. I will wait to see what our President says, that is the only person I want to hear from.

Houston--I think some of it is the 24/7 cable TV/internet culture we now live in where they need a constant supply of new information to put out. So---in the absence of the administration telling them what it is doing (not a good move when dealing with diplomatic issues), the media speculates and talks endlessly. And all these "rent-a-pundits" have an ax to grind as well.

Steeler Fan

So---in the absence of the administration telling them what it is doing (not a good move when dealing with diplomatic issues), the media speculates and talks endlessly.

Obama may or may not have told Mubarak that it's time to step down gracefully. But it would certainly be a bad move for him to repeat that publicly. Obama did publicly state what he had told Mubarak in a phone conversation about the crisis, and some it was pretty harsh language to use about an ally. But he didn't say he had called for Mubakek to resign even though he may have privately. That kind of open interference in the affairs of another country is not the place of the U.S. anyway.

I agree, Houston----even in the world of Twitter and FaceBook, etc. I just don't think we need to know everything that was said in this situation. I guess it comes down to the fact that I have trust in the administration to handle the situation in the best way it sees fit and those on the right don't have that trust.

Well said, Houston. And "many" said President Obama wasn't responding to the pirate situation in 2009 when they boarded a U.S. ship and took it hostage--only to find that the pirates were eliminated because Pres Obama wasn't telling anyone what he and his team were doing. The talking head wisdom of the John King's of punditry.

wavey, We are currently working on an investment plan of around $800 Billion. This will be split into tax cuts, shovel ready jobs and state and local government bailouts. The tax cuts will put an extra $8 in your paycheck which will stimulate the economy by letting you save the extra $8 over 4 paychecks and take your family to McDonald's and a movie.

The State and local government bailouts will keep the teachers, firefighters and policemen on the payrolls since these are the only employees that state and local governments have and we can't afford to have these people laid off.

The shovel ready jobs will provide employment while upgrading our infrastructure and since the jobs are shovel ready, people can start working tomorrow. We will measure our success by creating a new job category of "jobs saved or created". If some one gets a raise, it is a job saved. If some one works on a project we funded, it will be a job created even if those workers are currently employed. We should have this ready so we can start "the Summer of Recovery" this summer and we will spend millions of dollars in signage to let people know that these employees are a job created by our investment. We expect it to employ over 400,000 people a month.

This spring, we will also plant little green shoots everywhere so we can point to these as an example of the success we are having. These green shoots will grow into live plants and save the environment by fall.

We will start a website where you can keep track of every nickle we spend .We assure you that with this investment, the unemployment rate will not go above 8%. We need to pass this by Wednesday if it is going to work. How about it Democrats, are you on board? Lets get this legislation passed now if we want to save the middle class!! John Boehner

New Wavze --

You should be asking the president where are the jobs... after all, he's had (and made promises) for 2 years and still nothing. He focused like a laser on health care -- the ruling form Florida is just in... Obamacare is void (not my word). The 26 states are no doubt pleased.

Boehner and the crew have had what - 3 weeks to deal with jobs and the WH has had 2 years and your complaining?
Anyway, with all the regulations and the fact that Pres Obama hates business, we shouldn't expect a job policy - unless it is expanding the gov't and all this does is create more blood sucking unions.

While the entire quote is in context of ongoing poverty in small towns, it is clear here that he doesn't hold religion or guns in high esteem.

I think he's OK with religion and guns, just not with the religion where they worship guns. That's basically the religion of the Republican Party.

The context is this. When people dispair because of lost jobs, lost wages, little hope for a better life, they see themselves losing ground in an economy that moves elsewhere and passes by them, it is natural that they cling to their religious beliefs for consoling, reassuring, their faith has and always will guide them; they cling to their guns (for hunting and pleasure) as something they have always done, a connection to a life they understand not the life that seems to be slipping away from them. That, Michael L, is something everyone can relate to; your attempt to paint it as a negative is narrow thinking. Candidate Obama was not demeaning them but rather empathizing with them; how sad it was taken as a "gotcha" by pundits and opponents.

THis might be a good opportunity for you to cite some of the anti-gun legislation being proposed by Mr Obama....I know the effort is not 'all out', but cite us just some of the minor stuff then.

Bev:

Very good point. We do not know what is going on behind the curtain. Why would President Obama come out and say he is talking with Egypt if he is in the middle of talks with them. Our CIC does not need to tell us every phone call he makes or the content of such calls. He is playing this correctly.

Just he usual spin baby spin with no facts to support the rhetoric other than more rhetoric.

Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs you and the teabagers promised?

Agreed, and a lot of the reason why diplomats tend toward promoting stability rather than change. It might be even better if we'd just stay out of the business of meddling in other countries' business, but the Middle East presents something of an oily problem in that regard.